Connect with us

Crystal ball time...

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by Don Lancaster, Dec 12, 2006.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Joel Kolstad

    Joel Kolstad Guest

    "the web is near
    certain to totally choke on its own vomit within a
    very few weeks" ???

    I think I'd be putting bets a little further out, Don. :)
     
  2. http://www.susps.org/why/lily.html

    --
    Many thanks,

    Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
    Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
    rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email:

    Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
     
  3. Chris Carlen

    Chris Carlen Guest


    Serious question:

    Don, why do you continuously discredit PV and other alternative energy
    sources based on economic cost of energy rather than net energy yield
    arguments? Money is just a unit of measure for a non-physical thing.
    "Market value" if you will. Energy is a real physical entity that obeys
    the laws of nature.

    It would seem, and a lot of folks into the subject of the rising energy
    problems, peak oil, etc. think that the primary issue determining the
    viability of any energy producing technology is net energy yield or EROEI.

    If the EROEI of PV is reasonably greater than unity, then they are a net
    energy producer regardless of whether the economic calculations indicate
    otherwise.

    Thus, it would be the economics and financial accounting that needs to
    be adjusted.


    Your thoughts about this would be of interest.



    --
    Good day!

    ________________________________________
    Christopher R. Carlen
    Principal Laser&Electronics Technologist
    Sandia National Laboratories CA USA

    NOTE, delete texts: "RemoveThis" and
    "BOGUS" from email address to reply.
     
  4. I continue to discredit because net energy yield is an OUTRIGHT LIE.

    There is ALWAYS a direct correspondence betwen dollars and energy.

    When you enter into a net metering agreement with your local utility you
    CONTRACTUALLY AGREE that a present dime IS a present kilowatt hour and
    vice versa.

    You can thus measure EXACTLY the same thing using EITHER dimes or
    kilowatt hours.

    The FULLY BURDENED ECONOMIC COST of any alternate energy scheme is all
    that matters in the long run.

    If your installation costs three cents per day and only generates two
    cents per day, you have a net energy sink. The longer you run it, the
    more energy you destroy. (There is, of course, a two position switch on
    the panel. In position #1 you destroy a lot of energy. In position #2,
    you destroy even more.)

    "Time to energy breakeven" or "Net energy yield" is a COMPLETELY BOGUS
    wet dream by proponents who refuse to admit they have gotten suckered
    into a gasoline destroying net energy sink when properly full burden
    accounted.

    The true energy cost of nearly all subsidies and tax breaks, of course,
    is something like TRIPLE their face value in net energy destruction.

    At present, on a conventional silicon pv home installation, the cost of
    the synchronous inverter ALONE often consumes more than ALL of the
    electricity fed through it in amortization costs.

    Absolute proof of this is that not one utility anyplace anywhere is
    capable of using conventional silicon pv solar for avoided cost peaking
    totally free of subsidies, credits, or greenniePR.

    See http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf for a detailed tutorial.

    --
    Many thanks,

    Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
    Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
    rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email:

    Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
     
  5. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    Don't waste your time, Don.

    Tree hugging leftist weenyism is a religion, not a science.

    ...Jim Thompson
     
  6. Chris Carlen

    Chris Carlen Guest


    What is wrong with you? Do you think you can dismiss a question simply
    because of the *assumed* political inclinations of a participant?

    This has nothing to do with that. And you are a liberal according to my
    definition.

    But if you want to talk about the physics, and you think with your
    superior knowledge of engineering which you think makes you have
    superior knowledge of all things, then tell me this:

    Petroleum -- you know, the black gooey politically rough and tumble
    manly "let's kill 'em all" conservative energy source...

    Tell me if EROEI matters or not? If we spend 1.5 barrels of energy
    equivalent, ie 8.85*10^9 J to produce 1 barrel ie 5.9*10^9 J (1), but
    that barrel is produced for a profit, does that serve as a source of
    energy or not?


    Note 1: I am not saying that is presently the case, though it will be
    soon enough.



    --
    Good day!

    ________________________________________
    Christopher R. Carlen
    Principal Laser&Electronics Technologist
    Sandia National Laboratories CA USA

    NOTE, delete texts: "RemoveThis" and
    "BOGUS" from email address to reply.
     
  7. J.A. Legris

    J.A. Legris Guest

    But if Don's really a Guru, we can likewise discount his sermons.

    Anyway, his analysis of the economics of PV is based on a short-sighted
    assumption of energy prices fixed at today's unrealistically low levels
    and on stalled technological progress in PV. When the oil runs out (or
    when global environmental catastrophe hits) and energy costs head for
    the stratosphere, the up-front costs of planning for solar PV will look
    like a good investment.
     
  8. Joel Kolstad

    Joel Kolstad Guest

    Since that investment probably won't happen, I have a suspicion that some
    centuries from now there's going to be an awful lot of nuclear reactors back
    in the U.S...
     
  9. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    Whether you like it or not, Don Lancaster is dead-on factual.

    Wannabees can't defy the laws of physics AND economics.

    ...Jim Thompson
     
  10. An overdose of neocon brain soap. ;-)

    Cheers!
    Rich
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-