issues....:
1. large start up cost
2. unstable power supply
3. energy storage problem
4. efficiency issue
Science Solar energy as an alternative source, ... Why not?
|
|
 May 19 2010, 12:49 PM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
 
Senior Member
6,914 posts Joined: Apr 2007 
|
|
Quote|
|
May 19 2010, 03:11 PM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member
6,914 posts Joined: Apr 2007
|
QUOTE(Beastboy @ May 19 2010, 01:10 PM) Start up cost much higher....since the technology for it is new....hence the materials for it is expensive since there's no large scale production of it...How much more expensive is it than setting up a regular diesel-powered station? Or is the real issue return on investment?  also, investors are more willing to put their money on more proven systems than a relatively new system QUOTE Unstable power supply Yes, foreseeable if bad weather or 4 seasons... but isn't tropical weather is predictable and the heat pretty much uniform all year round? nope.....the sun still don't shine at night... also there's cloudy days....rain all leading to unstable power supply and hence it is hard to calculate how many solar power stations are needed to power a certain industry or population. unlike fossil fuel based you can increase or decrease output at will. QUOTE Energy storage problem energy is not stored....it is just sent to the grid as it is produced..... Is it any different than storing wind power energy which is big in Europe and soon, China? very bad if we cannot store energy and use a unstable power supply QUOTE Efficiency issue no need to compare with fossil fuel based actually...If its loss due to conversion from heat to electricity, how high is it compared with burning diesel to run steam turbines to generate electricity? efficiency not high enough to balance the high startup cost and deliver cheap electricity at the same time.....hence the attractiveness of this system to investors is low attractiveness will increase when the fossil fuel price increase and government incentive is given to develop it. Added on May 19, 2010, 3:16 pm QUOTE(faceless @ May 19 2010, 01:17 PM) I am also not an expert. I just hope some expert could give some ideas. If the entire roof is made of solar cells would that be sufficient to 1) light up you house, 2) Refridgerate your food 24 hours daily 3)give power to TV and PC from 19:00-23:59 4) Provide hot water shower for typical family of 4 people 5) Power air cond while you sleep. that's some seriously high power demand you are talking about..... efficiency and storage issues apply here.....most likely you will need more power from external sources...but...no doubt that installing that could lower the electricity bills..... as for attractiveness to put solar cells on the roof...depends on how much time is needed to offset its initial cost and the mentality of the people and the cost of electricity per unit... This post has been edited by slimey: May 19 2010, 03:16 PM |
|
|
May 20 2010, 07:47 PM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member
6,914 posts Joined: Apr 2007
|
QUOTE(Beastboy @ May 20 2010, 06:19 PM) Dude, thx for the link. This is what it referred to: does not really matter actually..... you can output as much as you want as long as you build them as big as you need it... Some critique: It is like saying the amount of rice eaten in Africa in one month barely rivals the amount of rice eaten by 2 towns in China. While it may be factual, it doesn't necessarily mean Chinese towns have superior eating habits. It may mean that there's not enough rice to go around in Africa. Invalid comparison. No indication if the "real world" includes installations in the tropics or just those in the northern hemisphere where sunlight duration and intensity is seasonal. This is one problem I often find in US publications. When the world in "World Series Baseball" is defined as all the US states between Florida and Michigan, you start to take their version of "real world" with a pinch of salt. The figure of 20% is questionable if the data is derived from northern hemisphere pv installations and furthermore, "all the pv installations in the world" may be an irrelevant figure, like the rice consumed in Africa thing. let's assume we have 1 coal fired plant and 1 solar plant of equal size..... the coal power plant will win easily in competition of power output.... no point talking about efficiency when there's no stability.... kinda like counting one's heart rate when the heart rate is not stable.... the sun does not shine at night....that is a fact.... now unless we develop a reliable method of storing excess energy while there is sunlight in the day time then you will have no power at night. chances are you'll still be seeing coal fired plants around to provide that stable energy which is required... no doubt that building solar power plant will reduce the need for power from fossil based sources..... but if we build these 2 systems together it is very hard to estimate the proper ratio of fossil fuel based energy to alternative energy thus leading to big wastage of funds.....just to create that extra "safety zone" of energy output... country developers don't like that........ try putting yourself in their shoes and weight all the options available to them.... and get your conclusion yourself |
| Change to: |  0.0189sec
 0.97
 6 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 28th November 2025 - 02:35 PM |
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025 IPS, Inc.