OUR SUNS REALLY ONLY HOTTEST ON EARTH WHEN DIRECTLY OVERHEAD. THAT LEAVES 22 HOURS DAILY WITH LITTLE OR NO SOLAR ENERGY. WIND POWER PROABLY MUCH BETTER SOLUTION AS WIND VIRTUALLY NEVER CEASES.SIGNED:PHYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART VON DRASHEK M.D.
Indeed in many areas Solar would not be as productive Wind. However you must customize the solution to fit the environment. In arid regions you would get a lot more power out of a solar system than a wind system due to long periods of intense heat and little wind. In areas far from the equator that get little direct exposure to the sun, but due to geographical features endure nearly constant wind, then that energy source would be best. Lets not forget hydro or tidal as well as alternatives to fossil fuels for energy production. The world must wake up, peak oil has come and gone, the end of the petro age is very near. We need to make this a greater priority than any war or technological advance we have ever dealt with as global strategy.
Unfortunately the world is being run by vested interests rather then sane decision making. We must factor in the cost to the environment on existing ways of making electicity and of course "new ways" won't be as cheap in the beginning without mass production!
Will the electric power companies let the price come down enough so that everyone can afford one of these units once they are engineered enough to have them sit on a corner of the house roof?
Power companies will be benefactors of the technology by using the excess electricity (or at least by being able to provide electricity without the massive rolling blackouts now seen in California).
Other companies (not the electric companies) will pop up to sell house-top units, but electric companies may offer deiscounts to customers that use the devices in high-demand areas.
Electric companies must already purchase any excess energy from persons generating their own electricity - no matter the means of generation.
The problem for most homes are the surrounding trees that will severly limit the amount of sun available during the day and the average annual sunlight (which is not sufficient in most areas of the US) needed to break even on the technological purchase.
The most use of these units will be seen in city buildings and in homes with few trees nearby (like the midwest states Texas and Florida).
This technology makes for some interesting possibilities including delivering electrictity needed to drive wells, purify water, cook food and offer basic health services in the desert regions of South Africa and other remote regions.
It seems to be the best all-around replacement for fossil fuels that I've seen so far. The combination of solar concentrators and stirling engine can be used to produce clean electricity. The uses for that electrical power, and the advantages over fossil fuel consumption, are many. Peak solar electrical production coincides nicely with peak electrical demand. If fully utilized, eliminating the need for further construction of fossil fuel based power plants. Excess electrical production can also be used to produce hydrgen from electrolysis and H2O, providing the fuel necessary for fuel cell vehicles. Whenever hydrogen is consumed as a fuel source, the question must be asked - was it produced cleanly? The importance of distributed power generation replacing our current system of large, centralized power plants isn't getting enough attention. The advantages of producing the energy nearer the location of it's consumption not only minimizes wasteful distribution losses, but hardens our energy infrastructure to attack from man and nature. If we add to the mix other technologies, especially wind, that are sited based on the geographical advantage of the particular technology, we get a real-world solution that can convert the US from a energy consuming nation to a world leader in energy production. The naysayers point to individual weaknesses of each energy generation method as if they stand alone, and as if technology doesn't get refined with widespread use. We have to use all of the options available to us, including the shorter-term fixes of gas-electric hybrid vehicles and clean diesel engines if we are to fully realize the benefits of technology as applied to our world's energy and environmental challenges. This is the energy future that we should strive to bequeath to our children.
However you must customize the solution to fit the environment.
In arid regions you would get a lot more power out of a solar system than a wind system due to long periods of intense heat and little wind.
In areas far from the equator that get little direct exposure to the sun, but due to geographical features endure nearly constant wind, then that energy source would be best.
Lets not forget hydro or tidal as well as alternatives to fossil fuels for energy production.
The world must wake up, peak oil has come and gone, the end of the petro age is very near.
We need to make this a greater priority than any war or technological advance we have ever dealt with as global strategy.
Unfortunately the world is being run by vested interests rather then sane decision making. We must factor in the cost to the environment on existing ways of making electicity and of course "new ways" won't be as cheap in the beginning without mass production!
Other companies (not the electric companies) will pop up to sell house-top units, but electric companies may offer deiscounts to customers that use the devices in high-demand areas.
Electric companies must already purchase any excess energy from persons generating their own electricity - no matter the means of generation.
The problem for most homes are the surrounding trees that will severly limit the amount of sun available during the day and the average annual sunlight (which is not sufficient in most areas of the US) needed to break even on the technological purchase.
The most use of these units will be seen in city buildings and in homes with few trees nearby (like the midwest states Texas and Florida).
This technology makes for some interesting possibilities including delivering electrictity needed to drive wells, purify water, cook food and offer basic health services in the desert regions of South Africa and other remote regions.
that I've seen so far. The combination of solar concentrators and
stirling engine can be used to produce clean electricity. The uses
for that electrical power, and the advantages over fossil fuel
consumption, are many. Peak solar electrical production
coincides nicely with peak electrical demand. If fully utilized,
eliminating the need for further construction of fossil fuel based
power plants. Excess electrical production can also be used to
produce hydrgen from electrolysis and H2O, providing the fuel
necessary for fuel cell vehicles. Whenever hydrogen is consumed
as a fuel source, the question must be asked - was it produced
cleanly? The importance of distributed power generation
replacing our current system of large, centralized power plants
isn't getting enough attention. The advantages of producing the
energy nearer the location of it's consumption not only
minimizes wasteful distribution losses, but hardens our energy
infrastructure to attack from man and nature. If we add to the
mix other technologies, especially wind, that are sited based on
the geographical advantage of the particular technology, we get
a real-world solution that can convert the US from a energy
consuming nation to a world leader in energy production. The
naysayers point to individual weaknesses of each energy
generation method as if they stand alone, and as if technology
doesn't get refined with widespread use. We have to use all of
the options available to us, including the shorter-term fixes of
gas-electric hybrid vehicles and clean diesel engines if we are to
fully realize the benefits of technology as applied to our world's
energy and environmental challenges. This is the energy future
that we should strive to bequeath to our children.