Re: Destroy this argument....
- From: "theCase" <TomCase@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 28 Mar 2007 17:21:38 -0700
1) The sun is not available 24 hours. Even the "sunny" location cited
has sun 1/3 of the time needed (3300 / 24 x 365)
2) Electricity is a relatively "local" use item. Meaning it's
generally uneconomical to transport over 500 miles or so.
3) Weather systems can produce cloudily conditions that span over
large areas (e.g. all of Europe can have a cloudy period lasting
days).
4) People want their electricity 24 x 7.
Combine the above points one can see the need to provide a backup
capability for solar almost equal to the base load, hence one is
almost creating two systems, a solar one and a backup conventional
one. Not very economical.
I'm all for solar, but the reality is powering a whole country/region
via solar generated electricity only works as long as one has a
conventional turbine ready to pick up the full load when the sun is
not available.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Destroy this argument....
- From: R.H. Allen
- Re: Destroy this argument....
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Destroy this argument....
- Prev by Date: Re: "Nuclear energy 'not the solution to global warming"
- Next by Date: Re: Destroy this argument....
- Previous by thread: Compressed Air Engine
- Next by thread: Re: Destroy this argument....
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|