Is Green Energy Viable?

[macsen rufus]

Thank you, Vladimir.

Current solar energy is a foolish investment because it only converts energy from the infrared portion of the EM spectrum into electricity. The new layered solar cells will absorb light from more of the spectrum dramatically increasing it's efficiency. The problem is getting the hexagonal structure of these materials to line up perfectly to improve efficiency. Only then will solar cells become an efficient source of energy.

THAT makes sense.

Solar is not going to be practical for a while. Not until they can figure out how to make all the little hexes line up a row.

but that was so vague as to not really convey any sense. It implies firstly that ALL solar power is photovoltaic, which it isn't, and that multi-layered PVs are the only PVs, which they aren't, and you don't really specify what you mean by "practical". To my mind "practical" means it works - which current technology does, and there are applications where it outperforms grid-connected supplies from conventional sources. It's a matter of appropriateness.

But you cannot dismiss an entire field of endeavour based on the difficulties of only one branch of research.

Commercial PVs to date can vary from 1-15+% efficiency, and improvements would be highly welcome, but there are plenty of existing systems using current technology making significant contributions, with or without their little hexes lined up

[russia almighty]

Solar panels have gotten better, much better. The thing is, the more efficient they are, the more you will pay for them.


We were looking into buying some 40's for our house, uh, it'd of been expensive, lets put it that way.

Nuclear, ah that issue. 3 mile is not a good example of a reactor failure, but anything of western safety standards and operator training being better than their USSR counter parts. I'm tempted to say, the nation-states that would use nuclear power as a core energy source, already have nuclear weaponry, making the point of breeding moot. There are other options for fuel, thorium is one. It is much more abundant then Uranium, and India and the U.S are the KSA of the stuff (basically, no dealing with unstable states). Only problem is though, while it's uranium isotope doesn't have a long half life, it's even nastier than the stuff current Uranium reactors produce. There is also the issue of water cooling; it's cool to put them in say the Mississippi states, where water is widely available, but what about the south west, where droughts are a big problem?

I wouldn't even waste time with alternate fuels for cars. The electric motor would be easier to transition to than something a chemical or bioengineer cooked up.

[rory_20_uk]

First off, I think that the viability depends on the country where it is being instigated and the electricity network in the country. Green energy has less need for a centralised system than say nuclear, where small reactors are not a great idea.

If countries such as the UAE / Saudi invested in the technology they would be able to reduce their need for other forms of power; such places have the double bonus of not only producing electricity, but reducing the need for air conditioning which uses masses of electricity.

The cost is great at the moment, but with increased research and volume of production this will decrease. This of course is true of all forms of green energy.

Reducing the need for energy supplies from areas of the world that is energy rich is of course another important factor to bear in mind.

[Old Geezer]

Windmills kill 500 million birds every month in the USA and that means there are so many bugs that will will be smothered by 100-foot-high tide of the litlle buggers before the year 2012. Solar power will be destroyed by solar flares soon after 2012 so even if we build bird-friendly windmills, we are all doomed to die in the dark.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Windmills kill 500 million birds every month in the USA and that means there are so many bugs that will will be smothered by 100-foot-high tide of the litlle buggers before the year 2012. Solar power will be destroyed by solar flares soon after 2012 so even if we build bird-friendly windmills, we are all doomed to die in the dark.

500 million every month? 6 billion every year? Just in the U.S.? You must be credible, you don't even need to site sources!

[PershsNhpios]

I have told you a hundred trillion times not to exaggerate!

[PershsNhpios]

Green energy?

Ba ha ha ha ha!

And I had my thread locked about Super Galatic Robots! Green energy!
I bet you want to live in a land where the sky is always blue, too!

[Avicenna]

Simply improving energy generation won't do.

The underlying problem is that the human population is skyrocketing, and Earth simply cannot support it.

In addition to improving/revolutionising our ways of getting energy, we have to manage to cut the human population, or our planet will do so for us. It's happening either way.

[Ramses II CP]

Simply improving energy generation won't do.

The underlying problem is that the human population is skyrocketing, and Earth simply cannot support it.

In addition to improving/revolutionising our ways of getting energy, we have to manage to cut the human population, or our planet will do so for us. It's happening either way.

Precisely right. Population control is at the heart of all the 'green' movements. If we don't figure that out everything is a short term solution.

[Centurion1]

green energy has to be the future. I personally dont care about the ozone. But we will eventually run out of oil.
Solar power- Nope
Wind Power- nope
Water power- less of a nope but still nope
Hydrogen- that's where its at baby, figure a way to produce hydrogen without using petro-chemicals and you've got the invention of the century.

[Moros]

green energy has to be the future. I personally dont care about the ozone. But we will eventually run out of oil.
Solar power- Nope
Wind Power- nope
Water power- less of a nope but still nope
Hydrogen- that's where its at baby, figure a way to produce hydrogen without using petro-chemicals and you've got the invention of the century.

You don't care about the ozone? So you don't mind getting cancer then?