Here in San Antonio, the source of fuel is a mix of coal, natural gas, nuclear, and now some wind. .If the demand for electricity is there, they will provide the power.
Our Buddies
- Thread starter srercrcr
- Start date
- Status
It'll take baby steps to get off the oil, but there are ways to get power to the plants, wind, hydro, etc. Bottom line is the cost and consumption is ALOT less than a gas powered engine.
Hell, driving past a gas station would be the best. The first thing I'd do, is to drive up to someone, perferably filling up a Hummer, and ask them if they know where an outlet is. :lol:
Hell, driving past a gas station would be the best. The first thing I'd do, is to drive up to someone, perferably filling up a Hummer, and ask them if they know where an outlet is. :lol:
What I don't get is why Solar has not caught on. You could do it without dedicated solar farms by leasing out rooftop space in large urban and commercial areas to carry the arrays instead of using land solely dedicated to solar panels. While I'm on the subject, why not use tall buildings as masts for wind power generators too? Again, why dedicate land to these green energy alternatives that then takes that land out of circulation for agriculture or wilderness space? I may believe global climate change is not mainly caused by man made elements, but I still believe in energy independence as an essential element in ensuring our national security.
Solar just isn't cost or energy efficient when it comes down to it. Even on a grand scale, the ends dont justify the means. We as a country need to invest in more wind/hydro and nuclear power.
Solar is not that expensive nowadays. It is now only slightly more expensive than normal grid power in many parts of the country, and with lower cost alternatives to silicon, like CIGSS, it should be cheaper than grid within 5-10 years. CIGSS, for example, allows you to use your windows as solar collectors while not looking any different than a normal window. This may not mean much in a residential application, but for tall city buildings with huge glass areas the benefits could be huge. Also, I ran an estimate for how much it would cost me to go solar for 100% of the energy needs of my house. Spread out over 25 years, I think the total difference at today's prices for grid power was around $2,000. When taking the inevitable increase in prices into account, it is possible that the system would make me money in the long term by keeping prices at today's levels. Now, I don't have the money to actually pay for a solar system up front, nor do I plan to keep my house for 25 years, but it does show that an economy exists for this technology and it is not too far from being a cheaper alternative to what exists today.
Exactly, no one has the money to plop down up front, only to hope it pays for itself in the years to come. Plus, the market is slim for solar tech being that only a handful of states would really benefit due to the climate. It's just not feasible on many levels.
- Status
