What is Digg?Sponsored by FUNimation Enertainment
Watch the First 8 Minutes of Evangelion 1.01 Movie -- Anime view!
funimation.com - Available now on DVD. The rebuild of the ground breaking anime Neon Genesis Evangelion.
43 Comments
- trogdor282, on 04/18/2009, -1/+13I am also an Electrical Engineer. You, sir, are the joke. We could power the whole US with a much smaller area of PV than we have already covered with asphalt. And every time production doubles, which is about every two years, the unit cost goes down 10-20%. So in 10 years ( five doublings ) plant sizes will go up 32 times. 48MW * 32 = 1.53 gigawatts.
The ONLY place in the country where there isn't enough roof space to make ALL your own power - is Manhattan.
And don't tell me wah wah shortage of materials because the plastic cells are coming. SOON. Most light is absorbed in only 2 microns of semi. The rest is substrate. - cplusplus, on 04/18/2009, -1/+10Why the negative comments. This is good news.
- MothBoy, on 04/18/2009, -0/+5This is a joke, but GaltShrugged got it wrong.
Sempra is evil.
Sempra owns San Diego Gas & Electric, which is last in California for providing solar for big utilities, even though San Diego is the best situated major population center in Californa for solar. They are last on purpose, because they are pushing to build the $2 billion Sunrise Powerlink into Imperial Valley. The Sunrise Powerlink will guarantee $800 billion in profit to Sempra, paid for entirely by the ratepayers with zero risk to SDG&E or Sempra. They justify building the Sunrise Powerlink because SDG&E can't figure out how else to meet the states renewable mandate. They feed us this line even as SDG&E refuses to buy solar from its own parent company Sempra, from either the El Dorado plant or the wind farm Sempra owns in Northern Mexico, while simultaneously making it difficult for people to cost-effectively put up their own PV arrays in sunny San Diego.
Sempra/SDG&E has lobbied hard, from our pathetic governor all the way down to local civic groups to push for the new Sunrise Powerline. The sales pitch is we must have it to meet the state mandate for renewables, but in fact the Sunrise Powerlink runs right near the Mexican border in a place very convenient to tap into unregulated Mexican powerplants generating power from (among other things) the LNG coming from Indonesia into the new LNG terminal Sempra build in Baja. In fact, Sempra/SDG&E fought (and lobbied) like crazy to remove any obligation to carry renewable power over Sunrise at all, even though the entire sales pitch to justify it was renewable power.
"Greenwashing" at its very worst.
"Clouds on SDG&E’s Sunny Plans" (talks about El Dorado): http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2009/jan/28/cit ...
"Will These Keep The Lights On?" (Sunrise Powerlink); http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2008/may/28/cov ...
If you wan to REALLY want to get disgusted, follow what UCAN has done to fight Sunrise. To justify Sunrise, SDG&E claimed it would have a $400 million annual net benefit to the region. After UCAN identified and corrected various "mistakes" and "inadvertent" omissions from SDG&E's models and reports, the $400 million annual benefit became a $0 annual benefit.
http://www.ucan.org/energy/electricity/sunrise_pow ... - Paranor01, on 04/18/2009, -4/+9Your truth, not real honest truth.
The real joke is you saying that solar energy, isn't worth it cause it doesn't give you the "bigger bang for your buck". Still a step in a good direction cause there's 0 left overs. No carbon dioxide, no spent fuel rods that take 100's of years to become safe. - inactive, on 04/18/2009, -1/+5Well I would rather pay for this than pay to support oil dictatorships all over the world.
- MothBoy, on 04/19/2009, -0/+4You are right that 48MW is no big deal, but you are wrong in general about solar.
In fact, it is getting cheaper all the time and is already competitive in cost.
Southern California Edison (SCE) in LA just installed the first set of PV panels as part of their 250MW project at a projected cost of $3 per watt installed. The only problem with that program (and others proposed by big utilities) is that the big utilities are trying to rig the system so that any solar generated in their areas is generated by them and sold by them, rather than letting homeowners and businesses become a generators. The size of privately owned arrays (residential or commercial) is artificially limited because excess capacity is currently not allowed to be sold back to the grid.
A study of rooftops in San Diego showed that the theoretical solar potential to be about 4,100 MW currently (8947 GWh), and is projected to be about 4691 MW by 2020. capacity to (10224 GWh)
From the following article: "To put these results into perspective, in 2005 SDG&E had a peak demand of 4,058 MW and total sales of 19,214 GWh. Therefore the technical solar potential represents over 100% of peak demand and 53% of total energy needs."
http://www.sandiego.edu/epic/publications/document ...
That is 4 gigawatts of power, which replaces 4 of your nuclear plants. I am not against nuclear, btw, and think it should make up the bulk of the difference. With solar, nuke and clean coal (someday in the future, when we all trade in our hybrids for unicorns) to power our electric cars, the middle east and Venezuela become irrelevant again, our national security is strengthened even as our security costs go down. An added bonus is that we could actually breath again in our major cities. - kaiwai, on 04/18/2009, -0/+4Renewables without energy efficiency improvements in the home will never fix the energy situation. The current situation is firstly a matter of fixing the energy supply but at the same time making homes more energy efficient so that it takes less energy to heat them, less energy to power the appliances. Nothing to do with being a miser and more to do with appliance manufacturers and home designers using better technology.
- Arkyll, on 07/16/2009, -3/+7The only way to get off our addiction to fossil fuels is alternative energy!!!....and perhaps some cold turkey...
- trogdor282, on 04/18/2009, -0/+3@FreckleEars: My projection curve is based on the last 50 years. And it's accelerating, not falling off. Long Island Power Authority just ordered a PV plant at 17 cents per kWh. During peak hours they pay 23 cents for gas. So depending where you live, grid parity is ALREADY HERE.
@banshee90: Right. But there's still enough roof to go around. Some people will just end up buying their power off the roof of a Cosco. - trencadis, on 04/18/2009, -1/+3Photovoltaics power still needs many years of technological development and infraestructure deployment that other more established energy sources already have. That will make photovoltaics more efficient and price competitive. 48 MW may seem small, but it's nothing but starting a road to a better future.
Info on other facilities worldwide in http://www.pvresources.com/en/top50pv.php - lostmessiah, on 04/18/2009, -0/+248,000 homes? I mean, it's not a great amount. And you are absolutely right, it probably would be grossly more expensive, if it were left to just solar energy. But this, I imagine, is merely designed to be supplemental energy. Solar power alone cannot do the trick, but at least it's a step in a decent direction.
- theOster, on 04/19/2009, -0/+2*****' a
- badbyte80, on 04/19/2009, -0/+2The first computer filled a room and took a much longer time to finish calculations than what you have in front of you right now. What controlled the tin can our astronauts when sent to the moon in had less processing power than your cell phone. Processors are doubling in speed and efficiency in only a few months.
Progress starts in baby steps. Solar power will snowball and evolve with the right attention and funding. - P5ycHo, on 04/18/2009, -0/+2The keyword here is 'Plans'.
- inactive, on 04/18/2009, -1/+3I'm sorry i thought i was talking to a sane person. Keep your idiotic opinions for fellow conservatives.
- Zomgondo, on 04/18/2009, -1/+3I don't know about the others, but I buried you simply because you're an Ayn Rand nut and you have zero interest in talking about the pros and cons of solar power, you're just here to tell the rest of us that we're brainwashed slaves for not being in love with nuclear. Take your whiny ***** somewhere else.
- Zomgondo, on 04/18/2009, -0/+1@SaperKain: I buried you so I could digg you up twice.
- Nudar, on 04/19/2009, -0/+1Living near a Tesla coil wouldn't give anyone cancer.... sure.
- HunterGathers, on 04/18/2009, -1/+2zeropoint energy is the work of the Spaghetti Monster SHUN SHUN
- Zomgondo, on 04/18/2009, -0/+1Ever heard of the laws of thermodynamics?
- spaceenergy, on 04/18/2009, -1/+2Any one ever heard of Nikola Tesla, the man who wanted to provide everyone with free energy via the air, but was stymied by the greed of J. Pierpont Morgan? I think it's time to rediscover this man and his works. We need to find an alternative to the alternatives, namely zeropoint energy. Ever heard of it? Google Breakthrough Power by Manning and Garbon.
- HunterGathers, on 04/18/2009, -4/+5Yep 0 leftovers EXCEPT for the stuff it takes to produce them and maintain them and replace them... solar is a nice theory but it is not there yet not even close.
- Charmill1974, on 04/18/2009, -1/+2Solar energy will be the only one way to live soon
- MothBoy, on 04/19/2009, -0/+1I should have been more clear.
You are absolutely not wrong when you said that "48 MW is a *****' joke". The article was a self promotion puff piece by Sempra touting an insignificant project.
Saying that solar = joke, however, shows you haven't been paying attention to the advances in solar over the 30 years or so that have elapsed since the numbers you sited for nuclear. - inactive, on 04/18/2009, -1/+2What kind of faculty?
- Wackoman, on 04/19/2009, -0/+1Not sure how 48 megawatts will be bigger than Hillsboro's Solarworld that will be making 500 megawatts soon, but I'm always happy to see the solar headlines
http://www.solaroregon.org/about/news_folder/solar ... - banshee90, on 04/18/2009, -0/+1How does a Solar cell in New Mexico Help me in Indiana (gets most of its energy via coal powerplants)
- rif42, on 04/21/2009, -0/+1You are mixing up solar cell production with power plant installations. The article is a power plant installation, for solar PV 50MW is very large.
Nevertheless thank for the pointer that the German SolarWorld is building/upgrading a solar cell factory in US. Perhaps this will lead to more solar PV power plant installations in US.
http://www.pvresources.com/en/top50pv.php - CarlT, on 07/26/2009, -0/+1I love hearing about new greener energy projects.
http://www.uwpays.com - banshee90, on 04/18/2009, -0/+1Yeah JP Morgan Didn't want to pay to build a Giant tower that in theory was supposed to transfer electricity through the ground. Does anyone know how good of a conductor soil is well let me tell you it isn't even close to Copper or any other metal
- banshee90, on 04/18/2009, -0/+1tell that to the people in Seattle
http://www.thudscave.com/petroglyphs/pdf/us_sunshi ...
for solar viability needs to be at least a 2 - Zomgondo, on 04/18/2009, -0/+1A true statement can't be slanderous, thanks for trying though.
Also, your link is just a list of the radioactive decay series, with half-lives. It proves nothing other than that most of the heavy radioactive elements will eventually decay into lead. FUN FACT: just because something's radioactive, that doesn't mean it's fissionable, and just because something's fissionable, that doesn't mean you can reasonably use it as nuclear fuel. See, the nice thing about actually doing research instead of just blowing smoke up your own ass about how wonderfully smart you are and how stupid everyone else is, is that you learn interesting things like this. - inactive, on 04/18/2009, -0/+1I'm not wrong, that's not to say what you wrote is wrong either.
- Zomgondo, on 04/18/2009, -1/+1If you're an Ayn Rand fiend like GaltShrugged you're going to reply that the Free Market will take care of finding a way to dispose of nuclear waste...
...which it would, by shipping it to the poorest, most uneducated regions of the world and not asking too many questions about where it goes from there. The Totally Free Market: serving the very rich at the expense of everyone else since time immemorial. - inactive, on 04/18/2009, -1/+1dirtboy.... you use it. The great thing about majoring in power systems is that I know this *****. *Peter Griffin laugh*
See... http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/curriculum/unit2/images/d ...
You can break down nuclear waste. Science FTW. FEAR and environmental misinformation loses.
When you start using that thing in your skull (it's called a brain), you'll learn that science is your friend and fear is just stupidity. Sort of like that Zomgondo guy and his slanderous attempt. - partrow, on 04/18/2009, -2/+2PVs are not yet cost effective, except when the government forces us to subsidize them.
Notice that he declined to reveal any costs of the project, and exactly how that breaks down as to who pays what. That is because you and I are paying for much of it.
Green, green, green. Our green. - arpad, on 04/18/2009, -3/+3"Although he declined to disclose the cost of the proposed solar project..."
Too bad the story didn't lead off with that quote. Of course it might be a little tough to sell solar power if the people who are expected to pay for it had an idea how much it cost. Best they be kept ignorant. - FreckleEars, on 04/18/2009, -2/+2I like the insight from another engineer on the same topic and I will digg you up. There is one fundamental flaw in your logic. Technologies projected development rates decrease due to limitations, over time. This has held true with most technologies. In theory we should have that style of solar power but it probably won't happen. Think of projections that have fell through over time due to mainstream mass production etc such as being in space stations orbiting the moon by 2010 and computers being 20 times as powerful as they are now, right now.
http://www.wright.edu/~gordon.welty/Prediction_70. ... - dirtboy, on 04/18/2009, -2/+1The problem I have with nuclear, GaltShurgged, is what do we do with the nuclear waste? Yucca Mountain? Really? How about we bury it in your basement for oh, the next few million years. There's already wayyy too much industrial nuclear waste on this planet.
You may be an Electrical Engineer, but your are no nuclear expert. Nor am I. - banshee90, on 04/18/2009, -2/+1Hum the problem with thinking that there actually isn't enough roof space to produce your own power for most people in the US, 1 most people live in Urban areas where they live in high rise buildings, and 2 maybe enough if it is in ideal conditions but most of the time atleast in Indiana it is not Ideal for solar energy. It will take a lot of engineering before Renewable fuels are viable.
- partrow, on 04/18/2009, -4/+1You have a choice of whether to pay money to overseas dictatorships.
We do not have the choice of whether to pay money to these "feel good" projects.
If PVs or wind or any other technology were cost effective, I would be the first to install them, but they are not. I hope they will be some day. These are projects trotted out by those who see the money and are taking advantage of it. It is redistribution of weatlh, plain and simple. - inactive, on 04/18/2009, -18/+1448 MW? This is a joke right? What's the point? I noticed the article doesn't give prices because it's probably a disgusting high amount for only 48 MW. What's the *****' point at 48 MW? Someone tell me.
48 MW is a *****' joke.
Nuclear Power Plants 30 years ago could produce 1 GW (that's gigawatt) of electricity per reactor. Jam 8 into a faculty and you got a nice place to generate power.
Solar panels = joke... and that's coming from an electrical engineer.
Yeah, I know I'll get buried for speaking the truth. - inactive, on 04/18/2009, -6/+2buried. . . for speaking the truth . . .
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 