ChiDS
Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote:
ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Unlike infinitely renewable free solar energy, nuclear plants have a life span of less than 40 years. . Nonsense. Sunlight is free, solar energy is far from it. Actually, the cost to generate solar energy is free. However, the extensive land area required for a solar power generating plant is prohibitive. The largest photovoltaic plant in the world is in Canada, covers 950 acres and produces 80mwh. Now, lets take LA, the average peak usage per day is 6,165 MWh, so a solar photovoltaic plant to supply that would cover 73209 acres. By the way, that is JUST the city of LA, it does not cover the power demand for the entire LA basin. Where do you propose to put the generating plant? In theory, and I repeat, IN THEORY, you could put photovoltaic cells on every building in an urban area, but the efficiency leaves a lot to be desired, less than 14% of the power of sunlight is turned into electricity. The most efficient solar panels are on the space station and they convert 22% of sunlight to electricity. Until photovoltaic cells are produced that are better than 50% efficient, solar power is cost prohibitive. In fact, most alternative power generation system suppliers for homes suggest a combination of solar and wind. Again, I stress geothermal energy as the cheapest and most efficient means of gathering energy from a nearly limitless source.
< Message edited by ChiDS -- 3/16/2011 3:56:23 PM >
_____________________________
"O Oysters," said the Carpenter, "You've had a pleasant run! Shall we be trotting home again?' But answer came there none-- And this was scarcely odd, because They'd eaten every one.
|