Posted on 12/27/2010 4:58:32 PM PST by Dominic L. Fottfoy
California is easy to spot from space: It’s the place on the far left of the U.S., the area seemingly teetering on the edge of the Pacific. But, if there were any doubt, astronauts could nail down their geography these days by the reflection emanating from the Golden State — not the glitter of gold, but the glare from hundreds of thousands of solar panels generating electric power. California is the solar capital of the U.S., if not the world. There are now more than 72,000 systems in the state, generating an estimated 724 megawatts of power.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernfarmpress.com ...
Well, Brer Fottfoy..
It appears you signed up a couple of weeks ago, have posted NO comments, and only threads from a single source.
Does that suggest anything to anyone?
These types of cells tend to last 7-10 years at best, not 25 years.
Only in California is the power industry so pathetic that it’s cost efficient to use solar.
I wonder why you can see the glare of solar panels from space. It seems that it does not do a good job of absorbing sunlight.
A typical 1000-MWe nuclear reactor produces approximately 20 cubic meters (about 27 tonnes) of spent nuclear fuel each year (but only 3 cubic meters of vitrified volume if reprocessed).[60][61] All the spent fuel produced to date by all commercial nuclear power plants in the US would cover a football field to the depth of about one meter.[62]
Or in other words ONE nuclear plant equals more than the entire state of Kalifornia. Gee solar is really smart huh?
You mean the state with sky high electric prices, rationing & rolling blackouts? LOL!
IBTZ
Wow they have solar power, but they won’t allow any of the fields to be watered because of the delta smelt.
Idiots.
Let’s talk frigid East coast and TODAY .............no sun, too much wind, yet a HUGE demand for power to keep warm.
California dreaming won’t help Boston, New York, Baltimore, etc.....They need heat\power and lots of it, cause the sun ain’t shining and the wind ain’t blowing smoke, like the Californicators are blowing smoke, at the real solutions to energy demands.....Coal powered electricity......Energy stored up for the cold Winter.
In the future, please place content from your blog into our bloggers forum.
Thanks,
Troll with no opinion, only an agenda?
pat back = pay back
Well, sure. Only the agricultural industry has enough land to hold enough solar panels to light a flashlight. And, what with labor prices skyrocketing, employment and other regulation, not to mention water politics, making farming economically impossible, who wouldn’t think it seems like the proverbial light at the and of the tunnel?
“Wow they have solar power, but they won’t allow any of the fields to be watered because of the delta smelt.”
Silly conservative. Solar power can be used to make water! Where is your hope and change?
Hmmmm...solar power, plus CO^2, plus hydrogen, plus grant money (and a whole buch of stuff not yet worked out) = water plus charcoal briquets!
We WILL be energy independent! Yes We Will! Barak Solar Obama, hmmm-mmm-mmm!
“Hmmmm...solar power, plus CO^2, plus hydrogen, plus grant money (and a whole buch of stuff not yet worked out) = water plus charcoal briquets!”
Nope won’t work. We have to get rid of CO2.
More unintended consequences.
But that DOES get rid of CO^2! Replace the C in the CO^2 to get H^2O, using solar power to provide the driving nergy, leaving charcoal briquets and water.
Artificial photosythesis.
Sure, he's another freakin' blogpimp. However, IF he posted the thread in "Bloggers" initially (i.e. Mods didn't have to move it there from "News"), I'll cut him some slack. Not much slack, as that was an awfully short excerpt, and there was no need to excerpt it at all.
“Hmmmm...solar power, plus CO^2, plus hydrogen, plus grant money (and a whole buch of stuff not yet worked out) = water plus charcoal briquets!
“We WILL be energy independent! Yes We Will! Barak Solar Obama, hmmm-mmm-mmm!”
That’s the spirit.
Hold it, I just reread your post. You use the words “charcoal briquets.” Unless used decoratively, I’m pretty sure they emit carbon dioxide (and they are icky black things used by icky suburban-types). So you would just be converting CO2 into CO2 with OUR grant money.
I’m sure you did not intend that; so this is your chance to retract you statement (dare I say thought crime) before we are forced to assign you to a reeducation camp. Change that equation so there is no hidden CO2 on the right hand side, please.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.