Free Solar Panels worth 12k

[supra_aero]

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.

 

 

 

Nah, Matt_H is spot on (so far )

 

Funny this is my area of research in the bank, albeit in a financial analytical sense. Is it your area of research too Martini?

 

You are pretty much right with your summary. They are very expensive to make and thus questions the viability of them. BUT goverment regulation are pushing renewable energy (meaning energy created with pretty much zero co2 emissions) as a focal point of policy in order to reduce CO2 output for their respective economy. Generally this is very high on the agenda of most developed countries economic growth targets. And some government give tax concessions to firms who meet lower co2 emission targets so there is an incentive for firms too (like lower road tax for even us road users).

 

The example highlighted in this thread is a perfect example of our government seeking to lower co2 emissions by subsidising the cost of the solar panels.

 

 

 

In the financial sense of the stock market, the long and short of it is as oil/coal sources deplete commodity prices inevitably rise, making renewable energy sources more attractive as an alternative energy source (stock prices should thus see an increase, which we have seen very recently after the oil spill with BP for instance).

 

However we are still some time away yet until the attractiveness of renewable energy creation becomes a serious threat to current traditional energy sources. And the other issue is as oil/coal depletes, so do the supply of metals, meaning we get rising capital costs for buliding wind turbines which in turn equally makes them less attractive.

 

Then there is biomass to look at (energy created from waste sources - recycling for example), as another potentially viable energy source. Will this in the long term be more efficient then wind energy and solar energy?

 

And whatever else is developed in the future as another potential rival.

 

All these have a big impact on the viability of solar energy and the stock prices of solar companies.

 

And there you have it.

[martini]

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

 

OK, again I was completely unclear and misunderstood what you were saying earlier. Specifically, this sentence was incorrect: "because radiation emitted from the surface cannot leave the atmosphere, only that which is reflected can leave" as more radiation actually leaves the atmosphere after processing than is immediately reflected. Sorry, got my facts muddled.

 

The Earth's radiative budget exactly cancels, through reflectivity and processed energy leaving the atmosphere. I was wrong to say that all longwave radiation does not leave the atmosphere, because a significant fraction does. I was getting my answer muddled with the solar-cell argument, sorry.

 

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

 

I'll rephrase; how do you know it's spinning?

[tbourner]

I'll rephrase; how do you know it's spinning?

 

Saw it on national geographic?

[martini]

Funny this is my area of research in the bank, albeit in a financial analytical sense. Is it your area of research too Martini?[/Quote]

 

Certainly is! Just writing my Ph.D on it.

 

You are pretty much right with your summary. They are very expensive to make and thus questions the viability of them. BUT goverment regulation are pushing renewable energy (meaning energy created with pretty much zero co2 emissions) as a focal point of policy in order to reduce CO2 output for their respective economy. Generally this is very high on the agenda of most developed countries economic growth targets. And some government give tax concessions to firms who meet lower co2 emission targets so there is an incentive for firms too (like lower road tax for even us road users).

 

The example highlighted in this thread is a perfect example of our government seeking to lower co2 emissions by subsidising the cost of the solar panels.

 

The problem is - nothing is CO2 neutral. The cells have to be manufactured. 100% efficient solar cells would reduce the current CO2 output, but because they were at one point manufactured, which required energy. The ones being built today are being assembled in factories running from the main electricity grid, which makes use of fossil fuels, thus outputting CO2.

 

I'm PMing you

 

What is clear, is that fossil fuels are running out. At the moment, there is no completely [financially] viable renewable energy source, else we'd all have them. People are working on something, and a group of people will no doubt get very rich from it.

 

I'm hoping I can be involved somewhere in that!

[Max Headroom]

Back on topic, I have put my name down for it. Waiting for the call If Isis make money out of it and I get free energy. Happy days.

[martini]

Saw it on national geographic?

 

Touché

[supra_aero]

Certainly is! Just writing my Ph.D on it.

 

 

 

The problem is - nothing is CO2 neutral. The cells have to be manufactured. 100% efficient solar cells would reduce the current CO2 output, but because they were at one point manufactured, that cost some energy. The ones being built today are being assembled in factories running main electricity grid, which makes use of fossil fuels.

 

I'm PMing you

 

I agree, which was the argument against hybrid cars. BUT in the long term, once the wind plants/solar plants are established they'll still use far less CO2.

[tbourner]

Back on topic, I have put my name down for it. Waiting for the call If Isis make money out of it and I get free energy. Happy days.

 

Let us know how it goes, would be interesting to see how smooth the process is.

 

And let us know if your loft feels cooler afterwards.

[martini]

I agree, which was the argument against hybrid cars. BUT in the long term, once the wind plants/solar plants are established they'll still use far less CO2.

 

Correct. It will use less CO2

 

My thesis is specifically addressing aerosol particles (dust) in the atmosphere.

 

Not sure if people know this, but particulate matter in the atmosphere, whilst detrimental to human health, offsets a significant fraction of the masses of CO2 we pump out...

[supra_aero]

Correct. It will use less CO2

 

My thesis is specifically addressing aerosol particles (dust) in the atmosphere.

 

Not sure if people know this, but particulate matter in the atmosphere, whilst detrimental to human health, offsets a significant fraction of the masses of CO2 we pump out...

 

Didn't know that martini. Hmmm..interesting.

[martini]

Didn't know that martini. Hmmm..interesting.

 

http://img.skitch.com/20100804-cer8x6h1pxxjunfp4s69dqjuwq.jpg

 

Red = global warming

 

Blue = global cooling

 

We currently have a net warming, hence global warming. My Ph.D is specifically aimed at reducing the error bars in the "Total Aerosol" cooling effects.

 

It's taken from the IPCC report, the summary for policy makers is here. My supervisor (amongst many others) helped write this report, which the governments from all over the world have read and made their policies on (regarding CO2 emissions and targets etc).

[supra_aero]

Surely we'd want to increase the aerosol usage then to stop global warming? Or would we require so much it'd impact world flights again like that volcano.

[martini]

Surely we'd want to increase the aerosol usage then to stop global warming? Or would we require so much it'd impact world flights again like that volcano.

 

Well, it depends where the aerosol is. If you put it above cloud, then it actually darkens the earth as viewed from space, thus absorbing more than a white cloud top (or snow/ice at poles) would do.

 

Worth noting that diesels pump out more particulate matter than petrol engines (more CO2) but I don't want a diesel Supra.

 

It's all very complicated I'll put my thesis up when I am done and you can have a butchers.

 

Suffice to say, there's no quick fix* otherwise I would have sold it to the highest bidder!

 

*yet

[Matt H]

Back on topic, I have put my name down for it. Waiting for the call If Isis make money out of it and I get free energy. Happy days.

 

Ah, very good. Make sure you post up about it if you end up going ahead; I'd be very interested to know how it goes.

[caseys]

Nothing is free.....

 

Death? Taxes? Get plenty of that for nowt...

 

Looks like an interesting scheme, I may take it up when I buy a new house

[tbourner]

Death? Taxes? Get plenty of that for nowt...

 

Looks like an interesting scheme, I may take it up when I buy a new house

 

Death is far from free!! Bloody expensive for even the cheapest funerals, and it's illegal to bury them in your garden apparently.

[Ian C]

I don't know much about the heat cycles of the Earth but I do know a bit about the waves - they are caused by the gravitational pull of the Moon as it wangs around the planet. What you do with the energy once it's in the water as kinetic energy doesn't matter - trap it in duck generators or let it erode the coastline. The energy is given to the Earth and lost from the Moon. It's getting closer to us by a couple of centimeters a year because of this *cue Jaws music*

[ivan]

My old Mum came to see me tonight to see if it was worth her getting these panels (there's an article in the Express and she does love a bargain). Apparently my Sister has told her it's a good idea.

 

So I asked her if she was OK with having to enter into a 25 year contract bearing in mind she's 77.

[SupraDan24]

I studied this quite alot when i was at college taking Environmental Science, i cant remember most of it though lol. I'm pretty sure i was taught that global warming and subsequent cooling was inevitable and that all were doing is speeding up a natural process. I think it was called the positive feedback system?? where as the earth heats up, subsequent effects ie polar melts and de-salinity of the ocean (which interestingly can effect the direction of wind currents) eventually leads to an ice age (i realise there's a gazillion other factors lol). Then as the Earth warms up again the whole process starts over, hence the fact that we've had more than one ice age. I also seem to remember something about CFC's (chloroflurocarbons or something) breaking down Ozone into O2 and free radicals which are violently unstable and go on to combine with more Ozone creating a snow ball effect. I thought it was very interesting at the time, Kudos for doing your thesis on it, the sheer volume of factors involved is mind boggling

 

 

 

http://img.skitch.com/20100804-cer8x6h1pxxjunfp4s69dqjuwq.jpg

 

Red = global warming

 

Blue = global cooling

 

We currently have a net warming, hence global warming. My Ph.D is specifically aimed at reducing the error bars in the "Total Aerosol" cooling effects.

 

It's taken from the IPCC report, the summary for policy makers is here. My supervisor (amongst many others) helped write this report, which the governments from all over the world have read and made their policies on (regarding CO2 emissions and targets etc).

[SupraDan24]

My old Mum

 

Do you have a new one?

[martini]

I don't know much about the heat cycles of the Earth but I do know a bit about the waves - they are caused by the gravitational pull of the Moon as it wangs around the planet. What you do with the energy once it's in the water as kinetic energy doesn't matter - trap it in duck generators or let it erode the coastline. The energy is given to the Earth and lost from the Moon. It's getting closer to us by a couple of centimeters a year because of this *cue Jaws music*

 

Actually, waves are caused by the wind and the tides by the moon

[martini]

I studied this quite alot when i was at college taking Environmental Science, i cant remember most of it though lol. I'm pretty sure i was taught that global warming and subsequent cooling was inevitable and that all were doing is speeding up a natural process. I think it was called the positive feedback system?? where as the earth heats up, subsequent effects ie polar melts and de-salinity of the ocean (which interestingly can effect the direction of wind currents) eventually leads to an ice age (i realise there's a gazillion other factors lol). ... I thought it was very interesting at the time, Kudos for doing your thesis on it, the sheer volume of factors involved is mind boggling

 

That's all very true, but the issue is trying to quantify exactly what will happen due to the unprecedented amounts of CO2 we're pumping out - which are completely off the natural scale.

 

Thanks for the kudos

[SupraDan24]

That's all very true, but the issue is trying to quantify exactly what will happen due to the unprecedented amounts of CO2 we're pumping out - which are completely off the natural scale.

 

Thanks for the kudos

 

When you say natural scale, are you talking time scale or volume?

[martini]

When you say natural scale, are you talking time scale or volume?

 

Total amount of CO2

 

http://www.southwestclimatechange.org/files/cc/figures/icecore_records.jpg

[Chris Wilson]

Death is far from free!! Bloody expensive for even the cheapest funerals, and it's illegal to bury them in your garden apparently.

 

No it's not, my mother's in the garden.