10 dollar a gallon gas?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Saturn_Fan
Originally Posted By: bob_ninja
Thanks
I am now using my fireplace a lot more these days.


My parents bought one of those pellet stoves a couple years ago for about 2000 bucks. They swear by it and their heating bills are much lower with it. I had to help them move it and I must say those things are [censored] heavy.
crazy2.gif



I don't have it, but my neighbour has it. The crazy s.... was last winter 2006/2007 when corn was so cheap that he actually burned corn instead of wood pellets!!!!! I guess that was a strong omen for the present food crisis (when people start burning food there is certainly a problem of some sort)
 
Originally Posted By: Saturn_Fan
Sure enough. I googled the "lifespan of a solar panel" and every site i found said 20 years with substantial loss of output over that time.


Well that is rather odd. There are several larger solar panel "farms" (at least one in Spain, another bigger one planned for California)

Now when someone invests millions to setup hundreds and thousands of panels then they must expect more than just 20 years of service. I just don't see how anyone can be spending millions every 20 years to replace so many panels.

I am guessing that there are different types and case qualities. I bet you that stronger cases are available that can protect a panel for many more decades.
 
Regarding solar panels, while they are not perfect you need to consider them not in absolute terms, but rather relative to the alternatives.

Today we use much more energy from oil than from solar panels because it is a much better alternative. It takes much less input power to get much more output power from oil. However, even that is changing. Consider oil sands. Energy input there is *MUCH* higher to extract the same barrel as opposed to from Saudi Arabian deserts. So even for gasoline the ratio of input/output energy is getting worse every day.

Another way to look at it ....

I actually already have a huge number of panels on my property. They have a much lower efficiency, something like 5% or so. However my total cost was maybe $1,000 total. Well no more than $2,000. Good deal, eh :):):)

My system is very simple. It is called ... TREES
wink.gif

Leaves perform the same function as solar panels. They bind water, CO2 and solar energy into fiber - wood. When it dies, such as now in spring, I go around with a chainsaw and cut them down, stack em, then in the fall split for fireplace (in the future a stove likely).

So these "panels" have many advantages, like almost zero maintenance, almost zero input costs (I planted over 1000 trees), etc. To compensate for lower efficiency we have quantity - there is a bunch of trees, much more than I would install solar panels.

Of course, there is some labor going into processing wood (cutting, splitting, etc), some transport (a simple small tractor with trailer). Total energy input for "processing" is tiny because trees are close to the plant - my house :)

However, the main problem is that energy recovery from wood (burning) produces a lot of CO2 (and whatever other stuff imperfect burning produces, not sure)

So I could say that "my solar panels" (trees) are far cheaper and better choice, healthy (produce oxygen) etc. However they also pollute a lot. Solar panels, besides the original production process, don't pollute. What is more, once installed there is not energy input for processing. The current travels directly to consuming devices and batteries.

There is not question that the current production methods are not good enough. Absolutely they have to improve to use less energy, simpler input materials, etc. However, compared to pollution from burning wood I would say that solar panels are *MUCH* better. So in comaprison to the alternatives (wood, coal, nuclear) solar panels are fantastic, even when you consider the challanges.
 
Last edited:
It hasn't actually been done yet. There'll be thermal leakage from the hot to the cold side, so no 60% efficiency, but it's nice to try new ideas, especially if it has no moving parts. If the hydrogen leaks out, just top it up using an electrolyzer.

There's another idea called thermophotovoltaic that converts infrared into electricity. This might have promise, if the researchers try using nanowires on the emitter side to generate a narrow band emission, and tune the TPV cells to receive at that wavelength.
 
I thought the trick to solar farms was not photovoltaic cells but a bunch of movable mirrors that focus the sun on a fixed point, heating water to a boil and creating steam to turn a turbine.

Or am I missing something?
 
I read an article this past week, a wall street financial guy estimated in the next 2 years, gas will go up $2 a gallon, and in 6 years, $7 to $8 a gallon, another financial guy estimated $8 to $10 a gallon.
Dunno about you all, but im gunna be changing my spark plugs more often,lol. Maybe use of Lucas gas treatment might benefit and save a little too.
 
Originally Posted By: MGregoir
I thought the trick to solar farms was not photovoltaic cells but a bunch of movable mirrors that focus the sun on a fixed point, heating water to a boil and creating steam to turn a turbine.

Or am I missing something?


Because there is no single "best" formula today, different systems are built, including mirrors. Others are using solar panels.

I think at the moment a lot of companies/organizations are experimenting using different tek, hence no single magic setup.
Not sure when mirrors are used and when panels. I supposed panels work at different angles so you can use solar panels without positioning gear. In fact, the big farm for California proposal wants to use cheaper panels without positioning gear - lower cost.
 
It's not good for young people making minimum wage and going to school, or young couples just getting started. Or people on fixed incomes.

It's not good to see record oil company profits at the expense of those who can least afford it.
 
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
It hasn't actually been done yet. There'll be thermal leakage from the hot to the cold side, so no 60% efficiency, but it's nice to try new ideas, especially if it has no moving parts. If the hydrogen leaks out, just top it up using an electrolyzer.

There's another idea called thermophotovoltaic that converts infrared into electricity. This might have promise, if the researchers try using nanowires on the emitter side to generate a narrow band emission, and tune the TPV cells to receive at that wavelength.


- the parasitic heat loss was calculated in the 60% efficiency calculations if you go read the guys white papers.

- infrared photovoltaics are just existing technology tuned to higher wavelength/lower frequency light. Infrared is the same as visible light with the only difference being wavelength. That is not a new concept.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Intersting Article on Gas Detergent Quanity
2 3
Replies
56
Views
29K
Drew2000
1
  • Locked
why ethanol blended gas sucks
2 3
Replies
43
Views
19K
satterfi
B
  • Locked
Running Hyvee gas for first time...
Replies
9
Views
29K
badtlc
N
  • Locked
Road trip roundup
Replies
4
Views
2K
NMBurb02
C
  • Locked
Buy American Mention of the Week
2
Replies
38
Views
12K
cousincletus
Back
Top Bottom