Free Solar Panels worth 12k

[Charlotte]

I'm constantly amazed by the information I learn from this here Supra forum. Honestly, no where else on line can I find this stuff.

[Matt H]

You can't create or destroy energy but you can change it, and changing it from the suns rays (heat radiation) into electricity (electromagnetic) means it's not heating up the planet any more, it's running your fridge and your toaster. There will be a net loss of heat on the planet surface, and it could be a significant loss if EVERY single building in the world was absorbing energy.

 

And where does this energy go after that? The majority of it turns back to heat energy. Even the stuff that comes out as sound will find it's way back to heat.

 

I can't believe you think that.

[Gaz6002]

 

http://www.raymond.cc/images/piracy-global-warming.jpg

[martini]

You can't create or destroy energy but you can change it, and changing it from the suns rays (heat radiation) into electricity (electromagnetic) means it's not heating up the planet any more, it's running your fridge and your toaster. There will be a net loss of heat on the planet surface, and it could be a significant loss if EVERY single building in the world was absorbing energy.

 

It's not actually heat that is absorbed by solar panels, but the photons (light) directly. They're called photovoltaic cells because they make use of the photovoltaic effect (similar to the photoelectric effect discovered by Hertz).

 

You're right, energy can be converted - this is the very cause of the increase in CO2 seen since the beginning of the industrial revolution, due to the increased use of the internal combustion engine.

 

The problem is, manufacturing these cells takes a lot of energy. I don't know about your weather right now, but in York it's rather overcast. I couldn't boil water using an array of photovoltaics right now - I'd need a backup powerstation.

 

There's a reason that wind turbines and solar panels are not ubiquitous across the country, atop every roof. Though renewable and, excluding manufacturing, they are dependent on a constant fuel source be it solar radiation or wind - neither are constants in the atmosphere.

 

Over the next 50 years, there will be a scientific breakthrough in the technology used to give power to the things we use every day. At the time of writing, it is not wind turbines nor solar cells.

 

We both must be, as Trev seems to know something we don't.

 

Nah, Matt_H is spot on (so far )

[Matt H]

This reminds me....

 

http://www.upgradetravelbetter.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/plane-on-treadmill.jpg

[Whitesupraboy2]

I think the biggest difference is, the fact coal power stations turn over would drop, polluting far less.

 

It is a good idea and obviously southern facing for most of the sun.

 

the company is clever and it is for free, because they take back the extra you dont use as they dont put any storage inbetween. Because you cant store any within your home, during the summer hot sunny days, when we are working with minimal applicances on, they rake it in. You come home in evening and start to use whats avaliable.

 

Clever company, clever idea and lucky people who get it if you dont mind about the contract part. Everyone saves money as sunlight is free.

 

I signed up for another company to see if i was eligable, but i still had to pay £2000 I think but I got to keep the money i made from feeding back the grid.

[tbourner]

And where does this energy go after that? The majority of it turns back to heat energy. Even the stuff that comes out as sound will find it's way back to heat.

 

I can't believe you think that.

 

My first comment was meant primarily as a joke, it's a car forum after all, I don't know what proportion of energy goes back to heat and what gets lost in other forms, or indeed as Marti said the energy cost of manufacturing them etc. Never the less if every single building had a sun blocker on top of it the heat caused by sunlight would be less.

[Whitesupraboy2]

This reminds me....

 

http://www.upgradetravelbetter.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/plane-on-treadmill.jpg

 

it takes off....alright!!

[Matt H]

Clever company, clever idea and lucky people who get it if you dont mind about the contract part. Everyone saves money as sunlight is free.

 

Very clever idea. Altough we're actually paying for it ourselves in a round about kind of way if the government are providing grants - ultimately it's coming from our collective pockets. The people that take the deal win, and everyone else pays for it... but... we all save the planet.

[martini]

My first comment was meant primarily as a joke, it's a car forum after all, I don't know what proportion of energy goes back to heat and what gets lost in other forms, or indeed as Marti said the energy cost of manufacturing them etc. Never the less if every single building had a sun blocker on top of it the heat caused by sunlight would be less.

 

That's not actually true; I'm literally writing my thesis on this right now

 

The Earth's radiative budget is far more complex. If you covered the Earth in a dark blanket, the surface would absorb more, but before the solar radiation reaches the surface, it must pass through clouds, dust and particle free air (gases). These all absorb and scatter.

 

http://img.skitch.com/20100804-xh6gqjy2p4qft4ifc97aadu4ah.jpg

 

Figure: The Earth’s annual global mean energy budget. Units are Wm-2. Taken from Kiehl and Trenberth (1997).

 

I'm planning on writing a 'state of the science' global warming post in a month or so when I finish - I suppose some people might be interested?

[Matt H]

My first comment was meant primarily as a joke

 

I thought you were joking, but then you said you weren't. Anyway, the plane takes off

[Gaz6002]

I'm planning on writing a 'state of the science' global warming post in a month or so when I finish - I suppose some people might be interested?

 

I'll look out for that. Fascinating stuff.

[tbourner]

I thought you were joking, but then you said you weren't. Anyway, the plane takes off

 

I was, but it was based on facts so I thought it odd that you replied the way you did.

Anyway! I wish I hadn't got involved. It was a joke, I wasn't actually trying to open debate on what percentage of sunlight gets turned back into heat in relation to the percentage that gets beamed to nearby stars by SETI.

I always wonder about these 'free' energy things though like people wanting wave power generators around the entire world, I've seen the videos where there are no waves at all coming out the back, how does this affect the Earths gravity balance with the moon and rotation etc. You'd think not a lot but it must be doing something because as you say you can't create energy from nothing, so if you take enough energy out of the sea to power 7 billion people what has to give up it's energy for it! Anyway, I'm no physicist, I'll give up making automobile related energy jokes in future.

[martini]

I'll look out for that. Fascinating stuff.

 

Cheers, Gaz.

 

I can also send my thesis to anyone that wants to die of boredom rather than global warming...

[tbourner]

That's not actually true; I'm literally writing my thesis on this right now

 

The Earth's radiative budget is far more complex. If you covered the Earth in a dark blanket, the surface would absorb more, but before the solar radiation reaches the surface, it must pass through clouds, dust and particle free air (gases). These all absorb and scatter.

Fitting a dark blanket over the world is slightly different from fitting an energy absorbing blanket though. The dark blanket holds the energy so it stays as heat, the PV cells turn it from heat into something else. I'm sure they are hot to the touch though, so like I said I don't know the figures.

 

I'm planning on writing a 'state of the science' global warming post in a month or so when I finish - I suppose some people might be interested?

Yeah why not.

[martini]

Fitting a dark blanket over the world is slightly different from fitting an energy absorbing blanket though. The dark blanket holds the energy so it stays as heat, the PV cells turn it from heat into something else. I'm sure they are hot to the touch though, so like I said I don't know the figures.

 

Actually, it depends on how you're approaching the maths. By its very design, the PV cell has a low albedo (reflectivity) so it has high absorbance. What's actually done with this energy is irrelevant in terms of real global warming potential... as I've said - backup powerstations are required for solar cells due to their efficiency, so CO2 is still released somewhere. It's a very complex web, part of which I am trying to unravel with my thesis.

 

It's always much better to think in terms of the Earth's radiative budget, rather than "which is better for reducing global warming" as the arguments are almost entirely cyclic.

 

Yeah why not.

 

[Matt H]

I've seen the videos where there are no waves at all coming out the back, how does this affect the Earths gravity balance with the moon and rotation etc. You'd think not a lot but it must be doing something because as you say you can't create energy from nothing, so if you take enough energy out of the sea to power 7 billion people what has to give up it's energy for it! Anyway, I'm no physicist, I'll give up making automobile related energy jokes in future.

 

We've just interceping the energy transfer when it's in its kinetic form and making use of it by adding a few extra steps into the transfer process.

 

To change the gravity pulls that keep up in place in our orbit, you'd have to change the mass of the planet. That's not what is happening here.

[tbourner]

because radiation emitted from the surface cannot leave the atmosphere, only that which is reflected can leave.

 

Really? What about radio and TV waves? Lasers?

 

Yeah yeah I know they're probably picowatts, but still....

[The Raven]

Back on topic, this is going to make me rich......................rich i tell ya!

[tbourner]

We've just interceping the energy transfer when it's in its kinetic form and making use of it by adding a few extra steps into the transfer process.

 

To change the gravity pulls that keep up in place in our orbit, you'd have to change the mass of the planet. That's not what is happening here.

 

I would think there's some momentum involved?

[martini]

Really? What about radio and TV waves? Lasers?

 

Yeah yeah I know they're probably picowatts, but still....

 

Sorry, I perhaps wasn't clear, I'll explain

 

We receive shortwave energy from the Sun, which can be reflected back (see previous figure) or passes through the atmosphere. If the radiation is absorbed by the surface, then emitted by the surface, it is now longwave (infrared, or heat).

 

You're right; TV, lasers, and radio waves can and do leave the atmosphere on a continual basis.

[martini]

I would think there's some momentum involved?

 

Can you feel the Earth spinning at 1000 mph?

[Matt H]

I would think there's some momentum involved?

 

The kinetic energy / movement of the waves.

[tbourner]

You're right; TV, lasers, and radio waves can and do leave the atmosphere on a continual basis.

 

So we don't 'keep' all the suns energy regardless of how it's transferred? Some of it is transferred and sent off planet?

[tbourner]

Can you feel the Earth spinning at 1000 mph?

 

Yes (as in, I'd definitely feel it if it stopped).