Solar Power is here. Use it! 100% Sustainable!
We've lived in a PV Solar house since 1997.THe panels and system cost only $9750 for a three bedroom house. Solar is pratical NOW! So go solar! . Anyway, if you can't afford the $15,000 start up costs(what it cost in 2007 for our new house) in cash, use a firm that puts the system in, and then lets you have 10 years to pay it off---WHILE NOT PAYING AN ELECTRIC BILL. AFTER a few years you get your energy for free! FIguring the utility bill s I did not have to pay, at our high rates here in Hawaii County, it took just 4 years and 3 months for payback for my household, and that is NOT counting government rebates.
Stop the talk about NUCLEAR WHAT DO YOU THINK IS POWERING MY COMPUTER AS WE SPEAK? Because Halliburton and Chevron are unable to OWN THE SUN, they cannot corner the market and profit from it. So they will be fighting us on this for decades yet. Ignore them. Trust those of us who are veteran SOLAR POWER USERS. Just do it. Yes, there are ways to finance the photovoltaic installation, too. This is not futuristic thinking. SOLAR PANELS ARE AVAILABLE NOW AND THEY WORK. .They are guaranteed for 25 years, and may well last 50 years!
Please note, this discussion has been a magnate for those uclear afficionados who are simply foaming at the mouth because of the widespread application of photo voltaic panels for getting sum power from your own south facing roof. Like Halliburtion, these dudes, A-1, DD, DE, etc are enraged that somehow everyman may be able to slip out from under his obligations to the mega industrial complex. And somehow, they oppose any attempt at going back to American values of pulling your own weight, independence, and self-sufficiency. And oh yes, in our very wet climate, we get more days of rain than days of full sun, so naturally we have a full on rain catchment system with water storage tanks for household and llivestock water supply. Look up, and you may find a long term solution that will even, in a couple of years,charge up your electric car for you during the day, at home or in the downtown parking garage.
Stop the talk about NUCLEAR WHAT DO YOU THINK IS POWERING MY COMPUTER AS WE SPEAK? Because Halliburton and Chevron are unable to OWN THE SUN, they cannot corner the market and profit from it. So they will be fighting us on this for decades yet. Ignore them. Trust those of us who are veteran SOLAR POWER USERS. Just do it. Yes, there are ways to finance the photovoltaic installation, too. This is not futuristic thinking. SOLAR PANELS ARE AVAILABLE NOW AND THEY WORK. .They are guaranteed for 25 years, and may well last 50 years!
Please note, this discussion has been a magnate for those uclear afficionados who are simply foaming at the mouth because of the widespread application of photo voltaic panels for getting sum power from your own south facing roof. Like Halliburtion, these dudes, A-1, DD, DE, etc are enraged that somehow everyman may be able to slip out from under his obligations to the mega industrial complex. And somehow, they oppose any attempt at going back to American values of pulling your own weight, independence, and self-sufficiency. And oh yes, in our very wet climate, we get more days of rain than days of full sun, so naturally we have a full on rain catchment system with water storage tanks for household and llivestock water supply. Look up, and you may find a long term solution that will even, in a couple of years,charge up your electric car for you during the day, at home or in the downtown parking garage.
Tags: 100%, Hawaii, P, PV, Sustainable, panel, photovoltaic, solar, wind
Views: 13
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Auntie Tutu on -
It depends upon how heavy the gate is. We have one here in my neighborhood, and it works well, but the gate is about 600 lbs, and the darned thing cost $3500 installed!
TO check for parts and solar panels for solar hot fencing, and maybe gate stuff, go online to Jeffers. I dont use the online, but their phone number is 1-800-JeffeRS.
oR FIND the nearest ranch supplier in your area. Lots of people like these gates and you can get lightweight ones that need less panel power.
-
Permalink Reply by Ida-Russkie on -
Build nuclear power plants.
It should not take10 years and cost 2.2 billion to build a light water nuke plant.
There are more reactor types then just LWR. Checkout http://thoriumenergy.blogspot.com/ Learn about LFTR reactors( liquid fluoride thorium reactor)
It is a simple concept using a liquid fuel consisting of a uranium 233 dissolved in a fluoride salt with a thorium blanket. Which breeds U 233 from this thorium blanket. Most of the safety systems are not required because the reactor cannot melt down. It already is melted. it burns more of the fuel because the fission products are removed and reprocessed as you go along. this leaves you with waste that have a half life of a few hundred years. Thorium is cheap in fact we have enough already stockpiled in Nevada to fuel the world with electricity for 3 years. You use the thorium as it comes form the mine.( no enrichment). In some designs you can burn some spend nuclear fuel by just dissolving it in some fluoride fuel salt. Trans mutates that bad old plutonium and other so called waste into energy. If it is transmuted it can not be used to make a bomb.
The waste it generates is more in the order of 300 years that you have to sequester it because you have transmuted everything down to lead that you possibly can.
-
Permalink Reply by Auntie Tutu on
-
Having been married at one time to a nuclear power plant design engineer, and having his inside info on what the radiation dangers are (he is dead now, of failed heart and kidney systems, himself) and having protested (in the 1960's and 70's and 80's)the expansion of nuclear power plants, and being apprised of the deposition of nuclear waste in MY neighboring pacific ocean (100 feet away from my office) by Japan even as we argue, I seriously dispute the wisdom of once again putting money and attention on this nuclear solution. We are provided with HUGE unused quantities of solar energy every day across this country, and HUGE quanitities of untapped WIND resources (that are not owned by EXXON or PICKENS or BP) , it is obvious that if we put our minds to it we can bail ourselves out of this energy crisis with PV panels, PV film, wind generators, wave power generation, and lots and lots of passive solar solutions, so I would like to suggest that you promote the nuclear power solution on another planet, and lets keep earth as clean as possible so that we do not contaminate all life as we know it within 50 years.
So, go check out Mars or Neptune with your experioment. THanks.
-
Permalink Reply by Ida-Russkie on
-
Auntie Tutu
It takes a lot of energy to melt sand to make silicon for PV. Where do you think that electricity is coming from to produce those PV? If you buy them from China its dirty filthy coal plants which emit tons of uranium, thorium and other heavy metals straight into the air without regulation. So, climb down off your high horse and know that Nuclear plants gives you less radiation not more than coal. Wind is nice but they use a hell of a lot of steel and concrete. Where does that come from? You guessed it dirty filthy coal.
Be smart and use the sun where you can and reduce where possible. But realize that the Terrawatts of power needed for industry will not be able to be produced by PV on peoples houses.
-
Permalink Reply by neil cox on -
Sand is silicon dioxide, so the oxygen must be removed first, then the silicon processed to extreme purity. I agree, a lot of dirty filthy coal burned to make solar panels. The panels will be even more costly if we keep the chemicals used in purifying out of our environment. Neil
-
Permalink Reply by Auntie Tutu on
-
I just reiterate what I said on November 10th. I cannot say it any better now, and if you read in that statement that I think that Photo voltaic panels on peoples' houses is going to power industry, then I have a nice piece of oceanfront property in Kansas to sell you, and i will use all the profits to put solar panels on top of Wal Marts across America.
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Geer on -
Upon examining what Mr. Epps has pointed out I feel he is on to something.
You know Auntie, we all don't live on an island in the middle of the Pacific, or possibly live in grass hut,
where the sunshine is present high percentage the time. As for where I live we had snow and no sun shine for two days.
But I like it the seasons. We had a PV company( rep) that is manufactured in Greenville, MI crunch the numbers on PV for our
modest shack and found that I would have 90 years before our payback would be realized.
I will grow more corn, plant and manage a forest. Hope to get our township to allow wind generators.
But what the heck, Obama will tax us to happiness. Ask Michigan how taxes has made us one of the most prosperous states in the country. lol
Keep cool Auntie, But keep us in mind when you need fresh water in the future.
Ruth
A message from david epps to all members of Michiganians for Energy Independence on PickensPlan!
I can no longer support the Pickens Plan when a vast majority of the people support todays PV
The Tenants of the Pickens plan are:
Stop importing energy
Stop exporting wealth
Promote made in the USA wind mills
and the corollary
promote other made in America energy.
You are not supporting the Pickens Plan If you buy and/otherrwise support todays imported Chinese and other countries PV.
The US imported 175,000 KW of PV in 2006
The US exported 130,000 KW of PV in 2006
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/FTPROOT/renewables/017406.pdf">http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/FTPROOT/renewables/017406.pdf
Net imports were 45,000 KW at $7 per watt = $315 million trade deficit.
Both candidates did not have a plan that was satisfactory to what was desired by the people on Pickens plan.
But the people on Pickens plan elected Obama. Obama said he was going to bankrupt the coal industry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hdi4onAQBWQ
Bankrupting the coal industry means your electrical rates are going to easily double in cost, bankrupting you.
Coal is the source of the 2nd least expensive electrical power on the planet.
Hydro is first least expensive
but the environmentalists don't want any more damns built in the US either.
But PV manufactures (silicon ingots) like to locate their plants close to cheap hydro electricity
so increasing capacity of manufacture of todays PV (ingots and other) in the US
is impossible (not competitive) due to no cheap source of electricity.
At the current rate of world production of 4GW PV per year it will take 250 years to build the PV to replace US 1000GW current generating capacity.
I will stick to my principals and Pickens principals.
-
Permalink Reply by Auntie Tutu on
-
Y ou are doing an excellent job in your role as a rep from the Powers That Be Corporations of America.
And all the people who care more about the PV sob stories fo folks who haev never lived with purely solar power for their home, over the opinions of those of us who adfe happily emopowered by 12 year old PV panels, will continue to be swayed by your diatribes.
The peoople who think it will take decades to pay off, foreget that if we all turn more to god given free energy like solar wind and wave, we will automatically decrease dependence on opil, foreign or domestic. AND THAT COUNTS>.
I am sorry that you do not like the President that we bought and paid for with our $5 donations. I hope he will pelasantly surprise you as he helps US guide ourselves to a futre that does not lightheatedly kill hundreds of thousands of Iraq citizens in an effort to persuade them to become a Western Style democracy,
And by the way, my grass shack has a metal roof that catches the rain, and supplies me with household and livestock water from the catchment system, and it is well supplied, because I get 165 inches of precipitation a year---which comes in the form of rain with much cloud cover.
I am sorry to hear that you live where the sun don't shine, but then, that is probably appropriate.
-
Permalink Reply by Konrad Roeder on -
However, the growth rate of PV has been 50% per year since 2002. And the 4GW of PV per year you quote was in 2007. At that rate of growth, it won't take long to build the PV to replace US generating capacity.
http://www.earthpolicy.org/Indicators/Solar/2007.htm
In 2006, solar thermal systems for water and building heating with an overall capacity of 105 GW were installed worldwide. Solar-thermal is also being used to produce electricity. At 15% per year growth, how long will it take to remove the need for coal as well as nuclear power?
http://www.renewables-made-in-germany.com/en/solarthermie/
"The Tenants of the Pickens plan are:
Stop importing energy"
Then you should be against nuclear power. The US produces only 2,000 metric tonnes a year of uranium domestically, but consumes 19,000 tonnes. The remainder comes from downblended Highly Enriched Uranium from Soviet nuclear weapons and uranium imports. When the HEU runs out in 2012, the amount of uranium imported will increase. 15,000 tonnes of uranium = 2.7 Billion per year trade deficit. (Uranium is $70 per pound, a tonne is 2,540 pounds.)
See wikipedia article "Peak Uranium"
-
Permalink Reply by Auntie Tutu on
-
Anybody doubt that I am totally opposed to Nuclear Power development? I have been protesting it since ten years before half of you were born. Dirty, Dangerous, Dubiously practical, Disaster for the near future.
That said, lets applaud Obama and anyone else who is turning more and more toward the FREE energy supply from the sky. SUN AND WIND. When Karl ROve figures out how to tcorner the market in that, then the Saudiws and the Bushes will be for it.
Meanwhile, Hawaii is turning a bit in the right direcdtion See West Hawaii TOday, cover story, nOvember 13 2008.
-
Permalink Reply by neil cox on
-
Hi konrad: Most of that seems correct. As you inferred, there are multiple grades of uranium. The price for power plant grade has likely changed in recent months, and will change again in 2009. Perhaps most or all of the 15,000 tons is HEU = weapons grade from Russia as a result of a purchase agreement. This may be depressing the world price of mined uranium ore, causing many mines to shut down or cut back. Where is the down blending being done?
Mining is a dangerous pollution activity, so it is good mining is reduced from previous years. When and if the price of Uranium increases faster than inflation, USA may mine several times the present 2000 metric tones per year. How many metric tones do USA's 105 nuclear plants need per year? I would think less than 2000 tons: So USA may be exporting a high percentage of the 15,000 tones imported? Neil
-
Permalink Reply by Auntie Tutu on
-
To say that PV power potential is here for use where it is practical, does not in any way say that ALL eneergy production for the US should come from just that quarter.
But to lump NUCLEAR, the dirtiest and most expensive in terms of destroying useable earthly settings and in actuall developmet costs (which is why ONLY governments ever build plants in any country anywhere) with truly clean truly reneeewable resources, like sun wind wave and falling water, is just buying into the propaganda of the modern day devil..........the military industrial complex. Nuclear is the way to go if you want to spend half your GNP on starwars , anti missle operations, and making bombs.
Most of us came to the Pickens site with higher ideals than that.
© 2013 Created by PickensPlan.
Powered by
Badges | Community Guidelines | Report an Issue | Terms of Service
