Global Warming. Here's the thing.

[myself]

I dont know how this easy fact eludes you but solar panels dont work "day and night". You just blew off the fact that they dont even work "all day".. That their output is down by 50% about 2 hours BEFORE sunset and 2 hours AFTER sunrise.. You also blew off the fact that you would need say a fully redundant PRIMARY RELIABLE generator to be paid for, maintained and sit idle whenever the solar power was ABLE to peak the grid.. They ARE A SUPPLEMENT.. NOT a primary generator.

Also that map representation is childish.. That estimate probably based on the MAX POWER output of the panels multiplied by "day and night" output (as you put it) when in REALITY the ENERGY they provide actually is only about 33% of their specified POWER at best.. (Go educate about the diff between POWER ratings and ENERGY ratings. So in REALITY, you'd be covering the totally of N. Mexico, Arizona and Southern Cali with them to even THEORETICALLY obtain the power.

COMPLICATED by the fact that you CANNOT TRANSPORT that much power to rest of 48 without significant losses if at all.

Also need to point out that solar panels ON ROADS is a true "no-go" from engineering standpoint. ANY solar installation needs to POINT SOUTH.. It COULD be on gimbals and track the sun or STATIONARY and face the best possible sun angle.. But pointing STRAIGHT UP AT THE SKY will cut efficiency dramatically... And from an installation standpoint when govt can't keep potholes from breaking axles on vehicles, solar panels are NOT up the wear and tear. Not only that but ice or water on TOP OF THEM would kill people and crush vehicles together..


Dont know if I can get an actual convo going on this with you because you have a victim of media/corporate happy talk about solar and wind. But there's no engineering solutions to MAKING wind and solar go from SUPPLEMENTS to ALTERNATIVES without CATASTROPHIC ecological and economic side effects.. (for the record I'm a scientist with degrees in both science and engineering).

How can you be a mod and be so full of shit. People who actually create solar panels don't make up what their power output is. In all likelihood they take them out into direct sunlight, face them squarely towards the sun and measure what their output is with a voltmeter. Next, you would need double the amount of solar panels it would take to power your house during the day. That is with either your house running an air conditioner or heating the house. The rest you would store for night time use. If your house's roof and possibly your garage's roof isn't enough for that, then the extra would have to come from solar farms elsewhere.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

First, the U.S. has a LOT more in natural resources than any of those countries. That has a lot to do with the cost of electricity. Next, nuclear plants are too dangerous. Things with them may not go bad with them often. But when they do, they do so in a big way. A way in which there isn't enough money in the world to fix. Just ask anybody who lives around Chernobyl, Fukushima or Kyshtyn. Next, I figure that the end happening by 2050 seems about right.

First, the U.S. has a LOT more in natural resources than any of those countries. That has a lot to do with the cost of electricity.

Not as much as replacing useful coal and nuclear with more expensive, less reliable "green energy".

Next, nuclear plants are too dangerous.

Not if CO2 will kill us in the next 30 years.

A way in which there isn't enough money in the world to fix. Just ask anybody who lives around Chernobyl,

Yeah, commies suck. Shouldn't be trusted with nukes.

Next, I figure that the end happening by 2050 seems about right.

Yeah, you're not very bright. You must be a green.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Impressive stupidity. Nothing can be achieved if you leave it up to individuals to do. It is something everybody must do. What's next. You going to tell me recycling works? The plastics industry has been trying to sell that bullshit for decades.

Man Made Global Warming is a fear tool used to control dumb people.
None of the hysterical left wing crackpot global warming predictions have come true.
Al Gore predicted that the polar ice capes would have melted by 2013 and that NYC would be under 9 feet of water.
They gave that idiot a Nobel Prize and a Oscar for that.

 

[myself]

like the Toddster just told you, we could cut fossil fuels, undam the salmon and maybe have a small effect on GW with COMPLETELY CO2 free technology TOMORROW. The problem is that most folks like YOU are more afraid of commercial nuclear power than GWarming catastrophies. That's telling..

Let me bow out of this with a clue for you.. James Hansen (doubt you know about him) is the "godfather of GW theory. He has repeatedly said to the effect ---- and signed papers with many leading American environmentalists ---

""If you believe we can counter the effects of GW with just wind and solar -- You probably still believe in the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy" .. Well DO YA ??? LOL... BTW: Hansen and his enviro buddies ARE pushing for nuclear energy.. THEY KNOW we aint gonna solve a thing with just wind and solar. You'd be SHOCKED how many TRUE and respected environmentalists are now nuclear advocates.

No doubt you saw the picture of the U.S. that I posted somewhere that has an area in yellow showing the total amount of solar panels it would take to power the U.S. both day and night. And with them only lasting about 25 years, they may have to be continually be getting replaced. It may not be easy to do, but it can be done. It isn't anything near as difficult as building the pyramids was for Egypt or building the great wall was for China. If Mr Hansen thinks it can't be done, he's an idiot.

 

[elektra]

face them squarely towards the sun and measure what their output is with a voltmeter.

You dont anything about power. As you have stated the output is going to be zero.

 

[elektra]

No doubt you saw the picture of the U.S. that I posted somewhere that has an area in yellow showing the total amount of solar panels it would take to power the U.S. both day and night. And with them only lasting about 25 years, they may have to be continually be getting replaced. It may not be easy to do, but it can be done. It isn't anything near as difficult as building the pyramids was for Egypt or building the great wall was for China. If Mr Hansen thinks it can't be done, he's an idiot.

solar panels on a solar farm do not last 25 years, where do you get that figure, you made it up, didnt you.

 

[myself]

The parking lot and the building wouldnt be enough for a steel plant. Also steel plants dont usually completely shut down after the 9 to 5 shift since it would take HOURS to come back up to the temperatures required. And please dont embarrass yourself and claim batteries are the answer..

It's hard to say. I'm not an electrical engineer. But I do know ti takes a lot of electricity to power an aluminum smelting plant. A lot more than any steel plant. Let's say that either kind of factory had around of 10 acres of combined rooftop and parking lot solar panels. That should put out a pretty good amount of electricity. Enough to make doing so worth the effort. By far. Next, for home use you could use batteries. Or you could use capacitors. Or using the excess energy to spin up a large perfectly balanced disk. On a larger scale, using excess energy to heat sodium sounds like a pretty good idea.

 

[myself]

Solar can not power the industry needed to build solar panels as well as a solar farm.

In anywhere from 1 to 4 years, solar panels create enough energy to equal the amount of energy it took to create them. That is from mining the materials they are made of to the finished product.

 

[elektra]

In anywhere from 1 to 4 years, solar panels create enough energy to equal the amount of energy it took to create them. That is from mining the materials they are made of to the finished product.

that is not related to what I stated, but that aside, you can not comprehend what you read.

Solar panels can not create the energy needed to manufacture solar panels.

 

[myself]

We have the most nuclear plants in the world, that have been operating longer than all the others in the world, so why have we not had one of those, "too dangerous" accidents? "myself", you really dont know anything about producing power. Not one of your posts has any information other than your opinion based on zero knowledge of what you speak.

I don't exactly remember the details, but there was a nuclear plant in California when they first started to experiment with nuclear energy. It caused a pretty big mess. Also, when one of the control rods shot out of the reactor, it skewered one of the workers and pinned him to the ceiling. Then there was Three Mile Island. They were able to contain that to a large degree. After they were finally able to get into the reactor a few years later they found that half the core had melted down. At Chernobyl, all of the core had melted down. It left a radioactive mass they call the elephant's foot. Because that is kind of what it resembled. It is expected to remain dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years. Next, if you don't find my posts informative enough, stop reading them.

 

[elektra]

In anywhere from 1 to 4 years, solar panels create enough energy to equal the amount of energy it took to create them. That is from mining the materials they are made of to the finished product.

But you need that energy in the space of a few hours? It will take 4 years of storing energy from a solar farm so that we can replace the solar panels?

You just made the argument that you can not use solar panels to run industry.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't exactly remember the details, but there was a nuclear plant in California when they first started to experiment with nuclear energy. It caused a pretty big mess. Also, when one of the control rods shot out of the reactor, it skewered one of the workers and pinned him to the ceiling. Then there was Three Mile Island. They were able to contain that to a large degree. After they were finally able to get into the reactor a few years later they found that half the core had melted down. At Chernobyl, all of the core had melted down. It left a radioactive mass they call the elephant's foot. Because that is kind of what it resembled. It is expected to remain dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years. Next, if you don't find my posts informative enough, stop reading them.

Then there was Three Mile Island. They were able to contain that to a large degree. After they were finally able to get into the reactor a few years later they found that half the core had melted down.

That was awful!! It must have killed........nobody. Weird.

At Chernobyl, all of the core had melted down. It left a radioactive mass they call the elephant's foot. Because that is kind of what it resembled. It is expected to remain dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years

You're so full of shit.

Next, if you don't find my posts informative enough,

Your think your posts have information? All you post are feelings.

 

[myself]

First, the U.S. has a LOT more in natural resources than any of those countries. That has a lot to do with the cost of electricity.

Not as much as replacing useful coal and nuclear with more expensive, less reliable "green energy".

Next, nuclear plants are too dangerous.

Not if CO2 will kill us in the next 30 years.

A way in which there isn't enough money in the world to fix. Just ask anybody who lives around Chernobyl,

Yeah, commies suck. Shouldn't be trusted with nukes.

Next, I figure that the end happening by 2050 seems about right.

Yeah, you're not very bright. You must be a green.

The end of the world would be more expensive. And if you ever checked, nuclear plants are expensive. Not only that, they produce radioactive byproducts that will remain dangerous for far longer than humans have even existed. Next, we don't need to go nuclear to change things. You could go out right now and buy as many solar panels as you want. There are also government programs that will help you buy them. Also, as with anything, as the demand increases, the cost is likely to come down. Next, I will tell you of a program you probably haven't seen. It is by Bill Nye and is called "Global Meltdown." In it he interviews an ex-professor of some college or university who had been studying the problem for about 15 years. He decided to quit his tenured professorship and start preparing for doomsday. Which according to him will happen before 2050. The main cluprit will be ever increasing methane release due to human caused global warming. Which is definitely on the rise.

 

[myself]

You dont anything about power. As you have stated the output is going to be zero.

Where did I state that the output of solar panels would be zero. The only way the output could be zero is if they were in the dark and as cold as it is possible for humans to make it. And even then it probably wouldn't be completely zero. Because any amount of infrared radiation would probably produce some electrons.

 

[elektra]

I don't exactly remember the details, but there was a nuclear plant in California when they first started to experiment with nuclear energy. It caused a pretty big mess. Also, when one of the control rods shot out of the reactor, it skewered one of the workers and pinned him to the ceiling. Then there was Three Mile Island. They were able to contain that to a large degree. After they were finally able to get into the reactor a few years later they found that half the core had melted down. At Chernobyl, all of the core had melted down. It left a radioactive mass they call the elephant's foot. Because that is kind of what it resembled. It is expected to remain dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years. Next, if you don't find my posts informative enough, stop reading them.

No accident in california as you describe or even close. Of course there was a fictional movie so I can see your confusion.

Three Mile Island, your claim was that nuclear reactors are extremely dangerous. If I play along, you are stating Three Mile Island melted down with zero injuries. That is not even slightly dangerous.
Chernobyl was in Russia? I asked why has the USA not experienced any of the danger you have claimed.

Your posts are not informative, they are your idiotic opinion. I enjoy pointing this out. It would be a little more interesting if you were able to engage intellectually, but you are not capable. A few have tried, like crick and old crock, but they are quickly proven wrong.

At best, you will have to ignore everything I state because I only state facts. At the worst you will have to be a troll and insult or simply post your garbage and be ridiculed for posting opinion with no substance.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The end of the world would be more expensive. And if you ever checked, nuclear plants are expensive. Not only that, they produce radioactive byproducts that will remain dangerous for far longer than humans have even existed. Next, we don't need to go nuclear to change things. You could go out right now and buy as many solar panels as you want. There are also government programs that will help you buy them. Also, as with anything, as the demand increases, the cost is likely to come down. Next, I will tell you of a program you probably haven't seen. It is by Bill Nye and is called "Global Meltdown." In it he interviews an ex-professor of some college or university who had been studying the problem for about 15 years. He decided to quit his tenured professorship and start preparing for doomsday. Which according to him will happen before 2050. The main cluprit will be ever increasing methane release due to human caused global warming. Which is definitely on the rise.

Not only that, they produce radioactive byproducts that will remain dangerous for far longer than humans have even existed.

A lot less than 4.5 billion years.

Next, we don't need to go nuclear to change things.

We do, if your 30 year claim wasn't total BS.

You could go out right now and buy as many solar panels as you want.

I live in Chicago. That would make no sense.

There are also government programs that will help you buy them.

Because they don't make economic sense.

It is by Bill Nye and is called "Global Meltdown."

Damn. He's a whiney twat.

 

[myself]

solar panels on a solar farm do not last 25 years, where do you get that figure, you made it up, didnt you.

I looked it up before. Though I just did so again. Maybe you should too. According to one website, they last anywhere from 25 to 30 years. Solar panel technology is improving all the time.

 

[myself]

that is not related to what I stated, but that aside, you can not comprehend what you read.

Solar panels can not create the energy needed to manufacture solar panels.

Do me a favor. Stop replying to me. You're not worth listening to.

 

[myself]

Then there was Three Mile Island. They were able to contain that to a large degree. After they were finally able to get into the reactor a few years later they found that half the core had melted down.

That was awful!! It must have killed........nobody. Weird.

At Chernobyl, all of the core had melted down. It left a radioactive mass they call the elephant's foot. Because that is kind of what it resembled. It is expected to remain dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years

You're so full of shit.

Next, if you don't find my posts informative enough,

Your think your posts have information? All you post are feelings.

I don't know how many people Three Mile Island killed. Nobody was killed right away. But enough radiation was released that no doubt caused problems farther down the road. Next, if you don't believe what I say, look it up yourself. Fool.

 

[myself]

No accident in california as you describe or even close. Of course there was a fictional movie so I can see your confusion.

Three Mile Island, your claim was that nuclear reactors are extremely dangerous. If I play along, you are stating Three Mile Island melted down with zero injuries. That is not even slightly dangerous.
Chernobyl was in Russia? I asked why has the USA not experienced any of the danger you have claimed.

Your posts are not informative, they are your idiotic opinion. I enjoy pointing this out. It would be a little more interesting if you were able to engage intellectually, but you are not capable. A few have tried, like crick and old crock, but they are quickly proven wrong.

At best, you will have to ignore everything I state because I only state facts. At the worst you will have to be a troll and insult or simply post your garbage and be ridiculed for posting opinion with no substance.

You can stop trying to prove to me what an idiot you are at any time.