What is Digg?147 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+69Turn off the Internet? This might be the worst place to advocate that.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+65On March 21, 2007, I will be enjoying a nice fast internet, unclogged by those idiots who are boycotting for a day.
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -3/+50Best is to combine wind and solar, then you can kill the birds for pooping on your solar panels.
- thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+33Sweet. Now that's the type of product I've been looking for. I only hope it lives up the the hype. I'd love to make an investment when I buy a house and then not have to worry about electricity bills ever again!
- HamsterOfDeath, on 10/12/2007, -7/+39Good luck convincing all the factories and other serious carbon emitters to shut down, they love throwing away money. Voluntary one day conservation efforts are totally pointless in the scheme of things. Long term, permanent changes will be required if we want to make any sort of progress on this issue.
- SteelChicken, on 10/12/2007, -18/+43this sounds like one of those moronic don't buy gas for a day things.
- Arachnivore, on 10/12/2007, -5/+28so you're going to cut your carbon footprint by (at most) 1/365th? That's your plan to send a message to the government? Good luck man, I don't think they're listening.
- iDragonFly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23I'm looking to install solar on my greenhouse, so the film described would seem ideal for this application.
Even if it's comparatively pricey, I'd only require a small amount.
Right? - Massif, on 10/12/2007, -5/+24"do not use any public transport"
Buses run regardless of whether there's people on them or not... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23Who's going to shovel snow off my roof when the solar panels (or film in this case) are covered?
This film better come with trained monkeys. - cfazzini, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16This stuff sounds incredibly interesting. A solar film would be ideal for lots of places.
- wbeavis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Some times you don't want "the Man" seeing what you are growing, dude.
- dvddesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12They need a transparent film, and then peddle that to every window manufacturer in the world.
That's your step 2 to profit.
They already push the "energy saving" double paned windows hard, think of the money to be made off of "energy-creating" window treatments.
Hell, I'd almost take solar enabled shades and keep the windows drawn closed during the day. - jordanday, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14I'm not a horticulturist, nor a solar-cell-ologist, but don't you want the sunlight to actually make it into the greenhouse? Solar cells are going to be opaque, aren't they? They would either absorb or reflect the sunlight that struck them, which I imagine would hurt your plants growing ability.
- dvddesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11You can still get a sunburn on a cloudy day as well. Unless cloud cover has it pitch black outside there is generally ALWAYS some sunlight to be had from solar panels.
- Langford, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I wonder how close we are to having solar film efficient enough that I can skin an electric car with it and not worry about refueling.
- meshman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11"The "tipping point" will arrive when the capital cost of solar power falls below $1 (51p) per watt, roughly the cost of carbon power. We are not there yet. The best options today vary from $3 to $4 per watt - down from $100 in the late 1970s."
That's a factor but not a major one. The real factor is the cost of installation and how long it will take you to pay for it. The other facor is that in places that support it, people that generate their own power via solar can feed any excess back into the main power grid and get paid for it. I would do this in an instant except the payback period is a bit high still. But with innovations like this that make solar power collection cheaper and more efficient, it would be worth sinking say, $10,000 into a system that would pay for itself and actually make you money in 5-10 years. It's getting there. - Spelvin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I was just looking at what is involved with a grid tie photo voltaic system and it really is not that bad. With a MTB of 25 years on the currently available panels, you can work it into a mortgage and end up paying a lot less for power plus the cost of the system than you would for just grid power on a monthly basis. Not to mention that over the years the price or grid power will continue to rise...Unless cold fusion happens...
Found this site to be very informative about the technology: www.solarhouse.com, and it is in my neck of the woods... - KyferEz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Or Natural Gas bills!
- zcreem, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17Don't drive you say, well I would have to start driving again after 7 years without a regular car, to give up for a day. I live in Berlin and a car here is a pain in the arse, when I need a car I rent, so up yours and your one day enviromentathon.
As for turning off me appliances I use only low energy bulbs, to compensate for my heavy computer use, it is my work tool! - DearSergio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Wait! The sun has energy....that we can HARNESS?! Amazing.
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10It's unfortunate that the first comment derailed the importance of this story.
- grinding, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Video of the technology used:
http://www.nanosolar.com/cache/CNNvideo.wmv
Google is also an investor and "IBM's top manufacturing executive" has joined their team. Doesn't seem to be a scam. - drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@h00paj00
Ever hear of batteries?
What if the surplus energy from the film was used to produce hydrogen by electrolysis? The hydrogen could then be used to power a generator.
just because you can use this as *A* power source doesn't mean it has to be your *ONLY* power source. - Rodzirra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8" "We don't need subsidies, we just need governments to get out of the way and do no harm. ...," [Sethi] said."
I like this guy. I gotta figure out how to invest in his company. - Arachnivore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8There's a company called Nanosolar that's opening its first thinfilm production plant this year. They claim their cells will go for about $0.50/Watt.
http://www.nanosolar.com/ - gamerage, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12If it was more cost effective than other forms of power then people would do it. People want to be green, it just costs too much for too little right now.
- Altotus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I'm not sure that's true any more. I looked into it for my house with a grid-tied system (sell power back to the grid when you've got it, take power from the grid when you need it), and it the square-footage required to break-even (produce in 1 year what my electric bill claims I use in that same time) was very definitely doable. Actually, with the size of my roof, I could produce about 4x the energy we use and we're not all that conservative (lots of lights, just recently converted many to CFL).
No, I think if you are willing to lay out the investment for it today (for me, I think it was $14K USD), you could definitely power a house filled with gadgets (in my case, all the usual trappings plus a server and several laptops). However, I'm going to hold off just a little longer. I'm definitely sold though... - buckrogers1965, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I agree. With reservations.
The reason that I agree with you is because an energy policy is part of a National Security Policy and because global warming and dependence on foreign energy supplies are real threats to our nation. These threats to society require that sometimes people have to make some sacrifices. Sure it's not as romantic as going off to fight a war in the middle east and coming back with post traumatic stress syndrome, but it is a lot less harmful to society to have a sane energy policy than to fight wars for energy all over the world.
However I do not think that the technology is there yet. What I would like to see is a system that will pay back the house owner inside of 10 years. The cost of building and maintaining the system must be paid off by the energy the system creates inside of 10 years.
Once we get to that point then I fully support requiring all new houses to be equipped with a tested and certified solar power system.
I think that the pay back is already there for a hot water heater system and would really like to see a nation wide requirement for all new houses to have a solar water heater scaled to the geographic region and the number of occupants the house is designed for, along with the waste water heat re-claimers that rewarms the incoming cold water to showers. - emfb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7You can buy this stuff* now from United Solar Ovoinc:
http://www.uni-solar.com/interior.asp?id=102
* solar roof shingles and plastic rolls of solar cells - vuke69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7If I could get a system that could break even in even 10-15 years, I would do it in a heartbeat.
But as of about 6 months ago (las time I did all the calculations) ROI was still on the order of 25-30 years. And this was using the panels with the greatest $/watt ratio I could find, assuming a 2%/year increase in power costs, counting every possible tax break, and doing all the work myself. Even then I had to fudge the numbers a little bit to get it down that low. Using "honest" numbers (you know, the ones I would hide from my wife when trying to sell her on the idea), it was more like 35+ years.
I have been casually looking at some of the newer wind options lately, and hopefully in the next 5 years or so I will be able to do a solar/wind setup that will break even in 10-15 years, or even less. But I really have to do some more research, and run the numbers on that. - PaulC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7h00paj00,
Just because you have solar panels doesn't mean you have to be completely off the grid. You would use the solar panels during the day when sunlight is available, and then buy power off the grid at night. Or perhaps they will be efficient enough to charge batteries during the day, which could be used during the night for heating and lights. - zweben, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11"I'm not a horticulturist, nor a solar-cell-ologist, but don't you want the sunlight to actually make it into the greenhouse? Solar cells are going to be opaque, aren't they? They would either absorb or reflect the sunlight that struck them, which I imagine would hurt your plants growing ability."
He's going to use the solar panels to run flood lights, duh. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@h00paj00:
If only we had some way to store the energy captured by the solar panels, like in your flashlight. - hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7>The deed restrictions on your land give the other land owners in your subdivision
Talk about projecting your circumstances onto others. Not everyone has deed restrictions or live in subdivisions quite or any one near yours. - aveyuen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@jordanday
You can coat glass with this technology because it is 'semi-transparent'. For the case of an office building, it makes sense because not only does it act as a partial shade, reducing the need for A/C, it also provides power. I am in the similarly marketed polymer solar cell research area, and we use 'semi-transparent' as a selling feature, when in reality it is actually a sign of a crappy cell that doesn't absorb all the light. Just don't tell the silicon solar cell guys our dirty little secret.
However, that being said, it makes no sense for a greenhouse because you want ALL the light to go in. Shade makes no sense in a greenhouse... - iDragonFly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@ jordanday "They would either absorb or reflect the sunlight that struck them, which I imagine would hurt your plants growing ability."
You bring up a valid point. I think I confused my point by say "install ON my greenhouse." Sorry about that.
Traditional solar panels are normally placed on a roof, and as you’ve stated, this might not be the best thing for structures such as a greenhouses.
But since I need to run an exhaust fan in there, (it gets entirely too hot without one) I’m seriously looking at small solar systems.
And as for the house I’m building right now, I’ve decided against installing panels roof.
First of all, I have a metal roof with an 8/12 pitch, so it would be quite difficult to install, especially on the second floor level.
And secondly, I want to minimize putting holes in the metal.
So for me, the assets of this product is in its versatility.
This film can work more effectively in more locations than it's predecessor.
Therefore, I would be more inclined to invest in it, as I’d hope others would as well. - RealHyperX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7These types of articles give me wood. I spend close to $300 a month in electricity bills. Having 8 servers, a hot tub, 2 big fish tanks doesn't help - but I would love to off set some of these costs.
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I live in Arizona. If I could knock 400 watts of energy consumption off that AC refrigeration monster in my back yard on a typical 107 degree summer day, even just during the daylight hours, I'd jump at the chance. So would a few million of my neighbors.
- diggsIt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Next we'll read that Exxon has patented the sun.
- johnhummel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@hoopooj: There is a technology called a "battery". That would suffice for some part of the night time. The goal in most areas (unless you are so rural you don't have plumbing) is to live off the grid as much as possible. If the US was 50% solar (I know - pipe dream, but work with me) with the majority of day-to-day cars on electricity powered by solar, then we would reduce carbon emissions, frustrate most of the terrorist funding nations, and have cleaner air.
So yes, at night, you might have a problem if you are totally disconnected from the grid. But I imagine that is a very small part of the populace. Personally, I look forward to a time when my electrical bill is only $50 instead of $150. - aveyuen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This article smacks of unbridled and somewhat unjustified optimism. They've been talking about CIGS technology for years (if not decades), and the main problem is that CIGS stands for Copper Indium Gallium Selenide. Other than copper, do you know how we get the other 3 elements? Indium comes from zinc mining (and is required in making thin displays, causing the price of both metals to skyrocket in the last few years), and I believe gallium and selenium come from precipitators from coal fired power plants. The base material is very, very expensive, which is why I believe that organic solar cells (nanocarbon-conductive polymer nanocomposites) are the way to go for low efficiency, ultra low cost large area applications, and crystalline solar (Si, GaAs) is the way to go for tight area, high efficiency applications (satellites, concentrators).
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5These panels can be made attractive enough to shut down the complaints of even the most restrictive of HOA's.
This isn't about completely replacing conventional energy sources. It's about augmenting what we already have and improving our current methods of energy production and consumption. - Hubris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5There have been studies posted on Digg that show a lot less birds are injured by wind power than many seem to think. Wind turbines are a lot closer to the windmills we imagine....and a lot less like a jet engine sucking things through it.
- davidg11, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I trade the stock market for a living....I find it interesting that all these revolutionary commercial applications are always...ALWAYS 2-3 years away. Then once the release is out, you never hear about it again for another 5 years. I think the candidate that should win the presidency should pledge to pump obscene amount of money into research labs for alternative energy (and nuclear). Solve energy and no one is going to give a rats ass about the middle east...everything in the world becomes cheaper for the consumer..there is no reason this needs to wait till 2010, 2015, 2020 to get the cost of scale down. PUMP MONEY INTO IT!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6My house runs on a Solar !!!!!...so I cant turn it off :(
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The story behind this article is one of the most important developments of our lifetimes.
If only we could get the energy interests (who have a lot to lose) to stay/get out of the way. - Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5That's a pretty amazing statement, when you look at it.
- vuke69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I should also note, that not only does my power company buy back surplus power, they do so at a HIGHER rate than they sell it for. If I remember right they pay like $.21/kwh, but to buy costs like $.13/kwh.
BUT... You have to be at a net surplus for the year, otherwise you are just trading a kwh now, for a kwh later. Like a free storage system. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Well, the jet packs are supposed to be solar powered. You can see the problem.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 145 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is