Re: 30% efficient solar plastic cells !
jimp_at_specsol-spam-sux.com
Date: 02/03/05
- Next message: msadkins04_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Previous message: Ken S. Tucker: "Re: Van Flandern & Rethinking Relativity?"
- In reply to: Lazarus Cain: "Re: 30% efficient solar plastic cells !"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 23:55:43 +0000 (UTC)
In sci.physics Lazarus Cain <rspeaking@aol.com> wrote:
> kamath wrote:
> > "...Last I heard they were able to get over 36%..
> > The ringer; this is with concentrators and the cost is a bit
> > high......"
> > It is good beginning. There are many technical problems need to be
> > solved before a workable system can be designed. What works in a lab
> > does not mean it will be out tomorrow. The plastic on which the
> > junctions are "etched" is useless unless the material withstands
> > external environmental conditions of extreme temperatures, moisture,
> > contamination etc. in tropical countries. It will be patented for
> the
> > next 20 years and bottled up from further use and manufacture for the
> > good of humanity. Profits and greed will prevent it from becoming a
> > everyday use. So the real price will be way sky high.I am very
> > pessimistic about this.
> > But thyen who knows where this might lead!
> Combine the free electricity from solar power with a shift towards low
> power technology to do the same things we have been doing with high
> power years ago.
Electricity from solar power is free just as is electricity from
natural gas, coal, hydro, etc. All you have to do is build and
maintain the collection, conversion and distribution facilities.
> Microelectronics and naoelectronics have greatly expanded low power
> electronic technology.
Which does nothing for making aluminum, air conditioning, running motors
in factories, etc. Electronics has never been a big percentage of
electricity usage
> The monster drain for our energy demand is transportation, and we can
> expect to see a futuer where transportation costs are reduced by
> restructuring our social customs.
Transportation has nothing to do with electricity.
Which dictator is going to do this restructuring?
> I am pessimistic about the future of private individaul ownership of
> motor vehicles. With this in mind, transportaion will become more and
> more of a problem.
Har.
Even the PRC, which is probably the most controlled of the developed
nations is increasing private ownership of motor vehicles.
> The ringer is the fact that 90% of my transportation involves getting
> to and from work, so it is more of a general economic problem which is
> the responsibility of the government or general community to solve, and
> is not something which should be considered an individual problem to be
> solved at an individual level...plus it requires capital investment
> which is the responsibility of government since it is of general
> economic concern which afects us all equally.
Public transportation only works for the masses where you have beehive
societies.
Try spouting this nonsense in Texas.
> To put it another way, a good working national transportation system
> will be needed inorder to sustain the economy when it is no longer
> economical for everyone to rely on oil derivative burning engines for
> transportaion. This transportation system is needed to get everyone to
> and from work without wasting manhours.
What happens to the trucks, boats, and airplanes that deliver your food
and other goods?
-- Jim Pennino Remove -spam-sux to reply.
- Next message: msadkins04_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Previous message: Ken S. Tucker: "Re: Van Flandern & Rethinking Relativity?"
- In reply to: Lazarus Cain: "Re: 30% efficient solar plastic cells !"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
