Cost-efficient solar electricity

[Humpty]

Keep reading about these you beaut energy producing systems but never see them in reality.

 

Australia has an abundance of "Hot Rocks" that can be utilised for power generation that will last for hundreds of years and is much cheaper and safer than nuclear but as is the norm, our politicians are pushing for nuclear.Flippin drongos!

 

Anyway, over my little foot stomping rant now.

The Nanosolar company was founded in 2002 and is working to build the world?s largest solar cell factory in California and the world?s largest panel-assembly factory in Germany. They have successfully created a solar coating that is the most cost-efficient solar energy source ever. Their PowerSheet cells contrast the current solar technology systems by reducing the cost of production from $3 a watt to a mere 30 cents per watt. This makes, for the first time in history, solar power cheaper than burning coal.

 

These coatings are as thin as a layer of paint and can transfer sunlight to power at amazing efficiency. Although the underlying technology has been around for years, Nanosolar has created the actual technology to manufacture and mass produce the solar sheets. The Nanosolar plant in San Jose, once in full production in 2008, will be capable of producing 430 megawatts per year. This is more than the combined total of every other solar manufacturer in the U.S.

Solar Article

[Andavari]

I wish we had our own independent electricity production that could be so efficently produced and even stored in perhaps batteries, etc., that the extra unused power generated could actually be sold to the power company. Imagine if blackouts were a thing of the past!

 

As I think back to all the storms, especially after that ice storm earlier this year that knocked out the power for longer than ever before (at least from what I remember), it's just one of those things mother nature throws upon us like a mighty hammer that makes one wish there was a cost effective and very reliable alternative that doesn't rely upon a line feeding the residence its power.

[DennisD]

I watched a thing on TV a while back about people buying Home Wind Turbines.

 

These things cost a small fortune, and the unlucky buyers were not getting anything near the claims made by the company in way of power. Just not cost effective.

 

The likely output of a micro-wind turbine on a pitched roof house in a large city such as Manchester would be less than 150kWh a year; 2% of the energy consumption of an average house.

 

Domestic Turbines:

 

[Andavari]

It was stated on a T.V. program recently about a Hollywood actor living in California that's into all the environmental stuff "green" that supposedly only has a $10 USD or lower electric bill each month due to him producing his own household power.

 

I'd like to see that done as a test project in some weather extremes from blazing hot to a full blown winter to find out how much is actually saved.

[CTskifreak]

Interesting stuff....Here in CT, we don't have our own plant, and the rates seem to keep going up. I wish they were able to build a new plant so that electricity would be cheaper....and greener.

 

AJ