Solar cheaper than nuclear

An average fridge uses less than 1kW-hr of electricity per day, so a

cheers, Jamie

Can you provide any basis to that claim? For example, can you demonstrate that grant proposals that question AGW are refused funding in significantly greater numbers than grant proposals that "promise to detect AGW" and for invalid reasons? And are you aware that a study that, for example, tries to "detect AGW" is also quite capable of not detecting it and therefore provide a basis for AGW denialists?

In order to arrive to that conclusion a person must have absolutely no clue regarding how the peer review process works. Studies are published and then analysed by whoever is interested and whoever finds holes in those papers is perfectly free to post their own findings.

Can you provide a basis for that claim? Your claim goes perfectly against the scientific community's conclusions. It would be great if someone could back up such a statement in order to make it credible instead of a crazy person's baseless conspiracy theory that rivals the ones created by other loonies regarding the September 11th attacks.

Rui Maciel

Hi,

There are many cheap, good and plentiful things, they just may be ignored or taken for granted because being so common. With the new current methods being used to make lithium iron phosphate batteries and thin film solar, good and plentiful is becoming more of a reality. Cheap will take awhile but it will happen too I think.

Lithium batteries don't need maintenance, just proper electrical interfacing, like max current limits, undervoltage cutoff, and max charging voltage. All of those are done automatically by the battery interface electronics. Lithium iron phosphate batteries are able to undergo 2000 charge/discharge cycles with a 10year lifespan IF they are used properly, and also only charge/discharge 50% of their capacity. This is what they are doing with the Chevy Volt lithium iron phosphate battery. ~80% to 30% state of charge operation seems to make most economic sense.

Yes or maybe they will still be worth installing into another larger array, just like the used Chevy Volt batteries may be purchased by power companies for grid load balancing. Otherwise they can be recycled or tossed, 20years of useful life is pretty good.

I dont think most hailstorms or heavy rains will be able to ruin a CSA or UL certified roofmount solar panel. Cleaning them seems to be the biggest issue for them.

cheers, Jamie

The mine opened in 1972 and the truck transport ceased in 2006. That's a weird definition of "transient".

That's odd. The only over-generalization was made by Michael A. Terrell, by claiming that:

The only thing that I did was point out that claiming that all coal plants rely on "rail lines to haul to coal" is obviously false, and that there are people in "their right mind" that "truck it in".

If you wish to complain about over-generalizations then, as it has been demonstrated, you should reply to Michael A. Terrell.

Rui Maciel

spewing.

are desperately trying

moron or at least try

the latter then I

Since you, Rui, have not posted any electronics why are you posting in s.e.d at all?

Alas, you are on to something here. Classic casses; Love Canal, Bhopal, Thalidomide, Asbestos, Exxon-Valdez, and now Deepwater Horizon.

Thus negating some of the advantage of adding a new line by putting it in an existing corridor where a single event (say a lightning storm) could take out the new line and one of the existing lines.

Or maybe a good product not only for making profit. But it's obvious, you are a nuclear fundamentalist, you just look with your eyes shut. It's time to wake-up buddy, the world is changing, we're gonna be more durable. Sorry!

Jamie Morken wrote in news:V5sao.17068$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe09.iad:

that assumes 100% conversion from the battery's DC output to 120VAC,and that the battery can supply all it's stored energy to the load. then there's the startup surge the compressor motor draws.

than account for daytime partial-sun periods(clouds),bird crap,dust,tree sap reducing solar output even more. a few days of overcast will undercharge your storage,perhaps enough that the battery will drain too far to power the load. Possibly damaging the battery. Refrigerators don't like undervoltage,either.

Koning Betweter wrote in news:2010081715171023022-Koning@Stumpernl:

"nuclear fundamentalist"..heh. One might say you are a Utopian dreamer.

I see nuclear as the MOST PRACTICAL and most suitable for most people's energy needs,while keeping energy plentiful and cheap enough that one doesn't have to lower their standard of living. I don't see that changing in the near future.

I see solar as a special case app to be used where nuclear is not practical or cost effective,and low power is acceptable.

it's called "using common sense" or "Practicality".

sure,you can probably use solar in the manner you envision,but it will cost you more in the long run and lowers your standard of living. extra work for less benefit. Unwise.

I really don;t care if YOU want to lower your standard of living,but blocking PRACTICAL energy sources(nuclear) does lower mine,by reducing supply and raising energy costs.

for those who advocate electric autos,supporting nuclear is the only practical,clean manner of having enough electric capacity for the added load on the system. Wind,solar,and geothermal are not going to do it,practically and reliably.

Solar power plants an distributed PV systems will compete with peak power pants in hot sunny countries, not with base load nuclear energy.

The peak power units are typically simple gas turbines, with low total efficiency fired by natural gas or oil.

Also true, at just a few percent efficiency, which is enough to confer a survival advantage. There are also economic and technology reasonableness requirements, something the politicians and other nutters are quite immmune to.

Nope, the fridge would only use maybe 500watt-hours overnight average (1kW-hr per day).

Inverters have a surge rating, often at least twice the operating current rating.

Yes you probably would need a solar array rated for at least 500watts peak output to ensure the fridge operates year round reliably (worst case scenario overcast skies all day). That should be able to give

perhaps enough that the battery will drain too far

Input undervoltage cutoff is built-in to inverters to prevent over-draining the battery, so if the battery can't maintain its voltage, the inverter won't overdrain the battery and also won't send low voltage AC to the fridge.

The sky isnt falling its just the sunlight coming down.

cheers, Jamie

Nope, the fridge would only use maybe 500watt-hours overnight average (1kW-hr per day).

Inverters have a surge rating, often at least twice the operating current rating.

Yes you probably would need a solar array rated for at least 500watts peak output to ensure the fridge operates year round reliably (worst case scenario overcast skies all day). That should be able to give

perhaps enough that the battery will drain too far > to power the load. Possibly damaging the battery. Refrigerators don't like > undervoltage,either. >

Input undervoltage cutoff is built-in to inverters to prevent over-draining the battery, so if the battery can't maintain its voltage, the inverter won't overdrain the battery and also won't send low voltage AC to the fridge.

The sky isnt falling its just the sunlight coming down.

cheers, Jamie

Jamie Morken wrote in news:3Pyao.56888$f snipped-for-privacy@newsfe17.iad:

my smaller-sized fridge draws 6.5 amps/120VAC,and it's run-time is spec'd at ~35% to 60%,depending on temp settings and ambient temp.

I think the average refrigerator is going to use more power than you believe.

It's odd that you suggest that others should "learn better" when you tried to counter my point by claiming that the taxes you pay are used to maintain public projects which are made possible thanks to public infrastructure and public equipment projects. But anyway thanks for inadvertently making my point.

Rui Maciel

Please explain why do you believe that a power plant, including solar, shouldn't be considered infrastructure.

Good for you. So instead of trying to play the authority card why don't you try to make a case?

Rui Maciel

I hope you're telling me about fridges of "usual sizes". If so, please cite one that consumes so little, preferably also with price and where to get such things.

OK, I take that back somewhat, since:

says that some units consume as little as .5 KWH per day.

However, that is still low for even modern ones, maybe low for ones that qualify for "Energy Star", especially since that is noted for "smaller units". And qualifying for "Energy Star" requires consuming half or less of what pre-1993 units (many of which are still running) consume.

Top-freezer units without through-the-dor ice units are the most efficient. Bottom-freezer units without through-the-door ice units are second place. Side-by-side is worse, as well as having a through-the-door ice unit.

This cite mentions as high as 4 KWH per day. I have even experienced

I don't think we ever put it all in one place at the time. All the grant stuff I saw second hand, as my wife was attending a series of seminars at UCI's Earth Sciences dept. back in the mid-90's. She would attend a lecture showing flaws in GW models, and meet the professors and students. The next semester, those students and professors would be gone, having lost their scholarships, fellowships and grants. Those who did support AGW were still there though...

And now were heading the department!

Charlie