OT: Solar city in China

[r-carpenter]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...a_Green_Energy

I found this very interesting

[Woodfiend]

It is interesting and probably less expensive for them to do with their labor and material costs. I like the idea of wind and hydro power......solar I am not completely sold on.... the maintenance and constant cleaning...... Couple that with the fact that the sun actually degrades the panels over time and they become less efficient than they were to start with. I do think the trombe walls talked about in another thread would be nice to have.

[Paul Ebert]

Good to see some country taking the situation seriously and starting to benefit from it. Too bad it's not us.

[philiparcario]

well the sun is burning so why not use the energy?

[r-carpenter]

it would be interesting to see if they can make it cost efficient and will get more energy out VS invested.
As far as environmental impact, it is also not a clear cut case. Panels have to be manufactured.

[Pete Schumacher ®]

well the sun is burning so why not use the energy?

That's what coal is for. The sun created that energy long ago, so might as well use it. Way less expensive than solar and wind.

[arlis_1957@yahoo.com]

perhaps a company in the u.s will give it a go. perhaps the goverment will give them a hand.

[dwigle]

perhaps a company in the u.s will give it a go. perhaps the goverment will give them a hand.

We did give them a hand - it was called Solyndra

http://www.solyndra.com/2011/09/soly...ation-options/

[r-carpenter]

That's what coal is for. The sun created that energy long ago, so might as well use it. Way less expensive than solar and wind.

it's less expensive for now if you disregard environmental impacts (good example would be mercury in the fish), units of land rendered unusable and so on. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...mpacts_of_coal
Also, transporting coal will become more and more expensive as the price of oil will raise. Same applies to the manufacturing of solar panels and wind mills. The law of entropy is the same for all energy producing sources. Interestingly, Chinese are more effective in the experimenting stage. Anti Corruption laws are probably much more harsher then in US as well. Solyndra is not the only example. Pretty much all major American corporations were evolved in criminal investigations and found guilty.

[dwigle]

Pretty much all major American corporations were evolved in criminal investigations and found guilty.

Uh, what?

[Pete Schumacher ®]

it's less expensive for now if you disregard environmental impacts (good example would be mercury in the fish), units of land rendered unusable and so on. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...mpacts_of_coal
Also, transporting coal will become more and more expensive as the price of oil will raise. Same applies to the manufacturing of solar panels and wind mills. The law of entropy is the same for all energy producing sources. Interestingly, Chinese are more effective in the experimenting stage. Anti Corruption laws are probably much more harsher then in US as well. Solyndra is not the only example. Pretty much all major American corporations were evolved in criminal investigations and found guilty.

Coal mining is not a permanent scar if you don't want it to be, as you can see below.

Energy abundance for the masses is the way to spread freedom and opportunity. The Chinese have no problem turning on a new coal fired power plant every couple weeks, nor do they mind pumping more pollutants into the air than any other nation on earth (real pollutants, not CO2).

If solar/green energy made economic sense, it would not require government aid/favoritism to survive. Besides, in case anyone doesn't know already, our government is borrowing money at the rate of $1.5T annually. They have no money to put into wasteful projects.

[philiparcario]

That's what coal is for. The sun created that energy long ago, so might as well use it. Way less expensive than solar and wind.

yeah you happen to be correct except that most of the older plants are grandfathered for pollution and you are not counting the lung damage they cause by burning dirty coal legally.

As a 54 year old asthma sufferer I have done a lot of research on the cost of coal. If the old plants were shut down and all new clean air coal plants were built I have no problem with coal.

I am not even getting into carbon dioxide pollution as i happen to think that it is overrated. My complaint is fine particulates and all old tech coal plants dump tens of thousand of tons into the air each year. Figure the cost of meds in with your cheap coal or in my case figure the cost of 4 swiss made air filters running around the clock on bad air days. As i refuse to do the steroids for my lungs.


An amazing fact is I live in New Jersey and If I draw a straight line west from my house towards the heartland 11 of the worst polluting coal plants in america line up to my home. So each year all that pollution from old grandfathered coal plants in PA Ohio and Indiana dump their fine particles into the air. causing lung issues to the North East. Fact not imagination. So pete while you may think it is cheap it is not. While you may like that you live out of this particular line of fire and f NJ or NY I do not appreciate your defense of coal as cheap.


BTW the real issue is too many people and not enough space. I would like to see the politicians solve that without killing off half the world one way or another.

[daryl]

Yeah China, India and Pakistan should all adopt Coal power right now and become industrialized.

It wouldn't hurt anything and is way better than anything else.

I guess if you watch Fox News and believe everything they say it all makes perfect sense.

[MagicO309d]

If anyone is running a residential steam/oil heating system there's a very practical way to go green and save a lot of cash. 3 Years ago I gutted out my old oil system and gravity steam radiators and replaced it all with a gas modulating condensing boiler/hydronic baseboard system. My highest gas bill so far was $225 with typical costs around $100 a month over the 6-month heating system. Previously, I was spending $250 a month year round for a budgeted oil purchase plan even though my house already had a high efficiency oil burner.

There's so much that can be done now like expanding gas service without waiting for Solar to go widespread.

[carlspeak]

I was a bit amused by all the Huff post pics. I guess at least some of the Walmart & Christmas Tree shops receipts China gets goes into subsidizing solar power. Wish the US had that kind of cash flow....


Then again, I wonder how efficient the solar panels are with the sun trying to penetrate all that smog.

[generic]

If solar/green energy made economic sense, it would not require government aid/favoritism to survive. Besides, in case anyone doesn't know already, our government is borrowing money at the rate of $1.5T annually. They have no money to put into wasteful projects.

The same could easily be said about GM and Chrysler. Without government projects we wouldn't have the highway system we have today. It isn't all bad, and it isn't all good either. What about subsidized corn in America? Everyone cries about bio fuels using all our food, but no one cares that corn us used to force feed cows when they should be grazing in fields, or that corn sugar is used in our food instead of natural sugar.

[Pete Schumacher ®]

yeah you happen to be correct except that most of the older plants are grandfathered for pollution and you are not counting the lung damage they cause by burning dirty coal legally.

As a 54 year old asthma sufferer I have done a lot of research on the cost of coal. If the old plants were shut down and all new clean air coal plants were built I have no problem with coal.

I am not even getting into carbon dioxide pollution as i happen to think that it is overrated. My complaint is fine particulates and all old tech coal plants dump tens of thousand of tons into the air each year. Figure the cost of meds in with your cheap coal or in my case figure the cost of 4 swiss made air filters running around the clock on bad air days. As i refuse to do the steroids for my lungs.


An amazing fact is I live in New Jersey and If I draw a straight line west from my house towards the heartland 11 of the worst polluting coal plants in america line up to my home. So each year all that pollution from old grandfathered coal plants in PA Ohio and Indiana dump their fine particles into the air. causing lung issues to the North East. Fact not imagination. So pete while you may think it is cheap it is not. While you may like that you live out of this particular line of fire and f NJ or NY I do not appreciate your defense of coal as cheap.


BTW the real issue is too many people and not enough space. I would like to see the politicians solve that without killing off half the world one way or another.

No one "likes" air pollution. But the skies over America are cleaner now than 50 years ago. I'm all for reducing the nasties that hit the air when burning coal. Even "clean coal" technology is still cheaper than solar and wind.

Overpopulation isn't a problem. Too little freedom is. If you think there are too many people, there's only one solution my friend, and you already said you wouldn't like it. And politicians rarely, if ever, fix anything. In most cases, they make things much worse. (Like grandfathering in the old coal plants. Equal protection clause anyone?) And don't forget, when people see their electric rates go up, they ain't too happy about that either.

I'm all for efficiency, getting the most bang for the buck, all that stuff. But when you sit down and crunch the numbers, if something costs more in energy than it is saving (think Prius), its nothing but platitudes and hypocrisy. Look at the Chevy Volt . . . recalled for unexplained battery fires. You know what it takes to make those batteries, how absolutely "non-green" they really are? There's so much wrong with the "green" movement and its illogical approach to resource management.

[Pete Schumacher ®]

Yeah China, India and Pakistan should all adopt Coal power right now and become industrialized.

It wouldn't hurt anything and is way better than anything else.

I guess if you watch Fox News and believe everything they say it all makes perfect sense.

Too late. China has committed to coal big time. India and Pakistan don't need coaxing . . . they're already doing it. There is no putitng the Genie back in the bottle. Why should those nations put their economic development on hold? To satisfy the paranoia of the greenies in the West?

Fox has news?

[Paul Ebert]

perhaps a company in the u.s will give it a go. perhaps the goverment will give them a hand.

Not a chance. The fossil fuel industry is too powerful, second only to the financial industry.

We did give them a hand - it was called Solyndra

http://www.solyndra.com/2011/09/soly...ation-options/

What was given to Solyndra was a tiny pittance compared to the subsidies the fossil fuel industry enjoys year after year. It was a (misguided) token action.

Coal mining is not a permanent scar if you don't want it to be, as you can see below.

Energy abundance for the masses is the way to spread freedom and opportunity. The Chinese have no problem turning on a new coal fired power plant every couple weeks, nor do they mind pumping more pollutants into the air than any other nation on earth (real pollutants, not CO2).

If solar/green energy made economic sense, it would not require government aid/favoritism to survive. Besides, in case anyone doesn't know already, our government is borrowing money at the rate of $1.5T annually. They have no money to put into wasteful projects.

The fact that the fossil fuel industry gets huge subsidies is well-known and undisputed, best I can tell. If this isn't favoritism, what is? It seems to be a common and, sadly, effective tactic of those in power to accuse their opponents of a behavior they are actively engaged in; favoritism and class warfare being good current examples.

Get rid of the subsidies and remove corporate influence via lobbying from the equation and only then can economic comparisons be meaningfully made.

[johnnyrichards]

Pete, just going to point out that population of any one creature is the result of food supply.

If you really believe that too many people isn't a problem, I suggest you ground yourself in basic biology, specifically the concept of "carrying capacity".

I really hope that uncontrolled expansion of a top tier predator really doesn't come crashing down around us, but it will. It has nothing to do with "greenies" (very insulting usage of the term, like saying "libertardian"), or the mistaken assumptions of those who do not understand it is about sustainability first and foremost. The biomass of humans and human food will eventually reach a critical turning point (and it may well already have done so), at which point the persistent eradication of bio-diversity will lead to extinction events. This is how these things work, and people can politicize it all they want, stick their heads in the sand and point at all the freedom a Playstation brings - but it will happen. Nearly unlimited energy will only serve to expedite that process.

I highly recommend expanding reading selections to include some basic anthropology and biology textbooks. The answers are all there.

I now bid this thread a hearty "adieu".