Anthony Matonak wrote:
Watson A.Name \"Watt Sun - the Dark Remover\" wrote:

Last nite (Tue, 9pm) I watched a prog on PBS that was about getting
people to use more renewable resources, hosted by Cameron Diaz (hot
blonde movie star), who drives a Prius. They talked about getting
every home to have a solar panel, and selling power back to the
utility co. She also said that if everyone in the U.S. drove a hybrid
vehicle, we could completely eliminate oil shipments from the middle
east. Well, I'd go out and buy a Prius, but one of the guys at work
has had his new Prius since xmas and it took him 4 months or so to get
it after submitting a $500 earnest check to several dealerships to get
on their waiting list. They say they're trying to make more of them,
but I think they really don't want the prices to fall, since they're
expensive to make. In any case I'd like more solar power, but the
initial outlay is _not_ cheap.


While I'm all for using more renewable resources, and especially
ones that are environmentally friendly,

I once read that it takes more energy to make, deliver, install a solar
panel than the total energy you get out of it over it's 20 year
lifetime. If that's true, (small scale PV) solar makes little sense
from an environmental standpoint.

mike



it doesn't make sense to
cause yourself financial pain doing so. It makes sense to buy the
must fuel efficient vehicle that fits your needs but not to overspend
simply because it's a little better on the gas mileage.

That said, there are many things you can do that are quite affordable.
First, you could conserve energy. Replace old appliances with more
efficient ones, insulate your home better, weather-strip, storm windows,
compact fluorescent lights, activate the power saving on your computer,
use xeriscaping and all that lot. If you are a typical homeowners then
conservation alone could be as effective as putting up a $30,000 solar
panel setup.

Then you could buy more affordable renewable energy equipment such as
solar water heaters, air heaters, ovens, stoves and the like. You could
also change your diet to include less animal products. Raising animals
to produce food takes many times more resources (which often means
energy) as plants alone require.

There are also many alternatives to a Prius. One option would be to
get a diesel powered car and use biodiesel or get it converted to
run on straight vegetable oil. Another option is to buy an electric
car. Currently the only ones available are "city cars" which turn
out to be glorified golf carts but they are suitable for very local
driving and can sometimes work as a second car. Some folks have even
had great success with bicycles of various flavors. If you simply
must have a hybrid vehicle then a much wider selection of them should
be available within the next 10 to 15 years.

Anthony




--
Return address is VALID.
Bunch of stuff For Sale and Wanted at the link below.
Toshiba & Compaq LiIon Batteries, Test Equipment
Honda CB-125S $800 in PDX
Yaesu FTV901R Transverter, 30pS pulser
Tektronix Concept Books, spot welding head...
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Monitor/4710/

mike wrote:
I once read that it takes more energy to make, deliver, install a solar
panel than the total energy you get out of it over it's 20 year
lifetime. If that's true, (small scale PV) solar makes little sense
from an environmental standpoint.

My understanding is that improvements in the efficiency of the panels has no
longer made that true... although of course to some degree it depends on
where you end up installing the panels!

An easy way to determine whether or not the statement could be true is to
see whether or not the cost of the energy produced by the panel over its
life -- using regular market rates -- exceeds its cost. If so, obviously
the panel must be producing more energy than was requried to build it, since
all the labor and materials the manufacturer put into the panel weren't
free!

In article , "Joel Kolstad"
writes:

mike wrote:
I once read that it takes more energy to make, deliver, install a solar
panel than the total energy you get out of it over it's 20 year
lifetime. If that's true, (small scale PV) solar makes little sense
from an environmental standpoint.

My understanding is that improvements in the efficiency of the panels has no
longer made that true... although of course to some degree it depends on
where you end up installing the panels!

An easy way to determine whether or not the statement could be true is to
see whether or not the cost of the energy produced by the panel over its
life -- using regular market rates -- exceeds its cost. If so, obviously
the panel must be producing more energy than was requried to build it, since
all the labor and materials the manufacturer put into the panel weren't
free!

Actually, solar panels DO - under circumstances, but that seems
beside the point in this particular thread. We all get a migration
from the original thread question to automobile economy (!) and a
lot of polarized opinions. :-)

It seems that the higher the polarization level, the more they
become like electrolytic capacitors. Put them in the wrong way
and they blow up...

The original thread question (maybe) was about using solar
cells for battery charging. In that case there needs to be
identification with two major application areas:

1. The characteristics necessary to charge a particular battery.

2. The range of input voltage and current sufficient to operate
the charging circuit as obtained from solar cells.

Nobody seems to have addressed item (1) which would seem
to drive the whole task. Item (2) could have been satisfied with
actual measurements in a 48-hour time period, one day to set
it up, a second day to take the measurements, noting time of
day, cloud cover, etc.

Please excuse me for thinking linearly... :-)

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

In article , "Joel Kolstad"
writes:

mike wrote:
I once read that it takes more energy to make, deliver, install a solar
panel than the total energy you get out of it over it's 20 year
lifetime. If that's true, (small scale PV) solar makes little sense
from an environmental standpoint.

My understanding is that improvements in the efficiency of the panels has no
longer made that true... although of course to some degree it depends on
where you end up installing the panels!

An easy way to determine whether or not the statement could be true is to
see whether or not the cost of the energy produced by the panel over its
life -- using regular market rates -- exceeds its cost. If so, obviously
the panel must be producing more energy than was requried to build it, since
all the labor and materials the manufacturer put into the panel weren't
free!

Actually, solar panels DO - under circumstances, but that seems
beside the point in this particular thread. We all get a migration
from the original thread question to automobile economy (!) and a
lot of polarized opinions. :-)

It seems that the higher the polarization level, the more they
become like electrolytic capacitors. Put them in the wrong way
and they blow up...

The original thread question (maybe) was about using solar
cells for battery charging. In that case there needs to be
identification with two major application areas:

1. The characteristics necessary to charge a particular battery.

2. The range of input voltage and current sufficient to operate
the charging circuit as obtained from solar cells.

Nobody seems to have addressed item (1) which would seem
to drive the whole task. Item (2) could have been satisfied with
actual measurements in a 48-hour time period, one day to set
it up, a second day to take the measurements, noting time of
day, cloud cover, etc.

Please excuse me for thinking linearly... :-)

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

The current issue of home power magazine directly answers this ...
www.home-power.com

It is a myth (your understanding) , panels recoup there cost in about 2-3
years and will last much longer than 25 years. The 25 years , is the
manufactures warranty for 80% power generation .... The panels will last
until they suffer physically damage, the silicon will deliver power well
past our or our children's life times ...


"mike" wrote in message ...
I once read that it takes more energy to make, deliver, install a solar
panel than the total energy you get out of it over it's 20 year
lifetime. If that's true, (small scale PV) solar makes little sense
from an environmental standpoint.

mike

"Solar Guppy" wrote:
The current issue of home power magazine directly answers this ...
www.home-power.com

That's http://www.homepower.com/ (the other one is a WWWeb interface
to one of these newsgroups.

--
William Smith
ComputerSmiths Consulting, Inc. www.compusmiths.com

"Solar Guppy" wrote:
The current issue of home power magazine directly answers this ...
www.home-power.com

That's http://www.homepower.com/ (the other one is a WWWeb interface
to one of these newsgroups.

--
William Smith
ComputerSmiths Consulting, Inc. www.compusmiths.com

mike wrote:
I once read that it takes more energy to make, deliver, install a solar
panel than the total energy you get out of it over it's 20 year
lifetime. If that's true, (small scale PV) solar makes little sense
from an environmental standpoint.

My understanding is that improvements in the efficiency of the panels has no
longer made that true... although of course to some degree it depends on
where you end up installing the panels!

An easy way to determine whether or not the statement could be true is to
see whether or not the cost of the energy produced by the panel over its
life -- using regular market rates -- exceeds its cost. If so, obviously
the panel must be producing more energy than was requried to build it, since
all the labor and materials the manufacturer put into the panel weren't
free!

The current issue of home power magazine directly answers this ...
www.home-power.com

It is a myth (your understanding) , panels recoup there cost in about 2-3
years and will last much longer than 25 years. The 25 years , is the
manufactures warranty for 80% power generation .... The panels will last
until they suffer physically damage, the silicon will deliver power well
past our or our children's life times ...


"mike" wrote in message ...
I once read that it takes more energy to make, deliver, install a solar
panel than the total energy you get out of it over it's 20 year
lifetime. If that's true, (small scale PV) solar makes little sense
from an environmental standpoint.

mike