Another fail for thje renewable Energy promoters

Irony anyone? seems like these green energy guys can't get it up

[video=youtube;2Fs5v6NHTHg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Fs5v6NHTHg[/video]

 

LOL...

I wonder if they learned a lesson?

 

That would be "t-h-e". Fail.

 

Well forgetting the wind contribution apparently 8 of those solar panels plugged into the batteries and it would have stayed blown up during most of the day. You got your yuck but what other point did you make?

For something more robust check out this little solar powered train.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__bikqRuzN4

 

Seems to me the real problem wasn't enough power in the first place. If the blow up power plant was a 1000 watts but the solar panel was 110, then was it providing enough power in the first place?

 

as long as the sun is shining of course. First part of the video says 100 sq feet f solar panels which would produce appx 900 watts in optimum conditions. Also of note is that the solar powered rail car not "train" relies on batteries not the solar panels.

The rail car uses 2 7kW microprocessor-controlled asynchronous electric motors source - http://www.solarpowertoday.com.au/blog/solar-powered-railcar-launched-in-hungary/

that would require 155.5 sq feet of solar panels using the 9 w per sq foot the average solar panel can produce under optimum conditions

batteries and we all know how ecological friendly batteries are and just a guess here but I would bet those batteries are made with carbon energy sources. If the blower required 1000 watts you would need a little over 110 sq feet. I suppose the point the protestors were trying to make would be moot if the solar panel array was larger that the fake coal plant they were atempting to inflate and then if a cloud came over the sun the plant would deflate lol.

Solar is a overpriced joke at our present technological level, natural gas and possibly in the future hydrogen. People need 24 and 7 reliable power sources, not expensive unreliable high school science projects.

 

Wow simple math would have saved some face here. Solar and battery tech had a long way to go.

 

one day solar will be a viable energy source, that day is not today...and probably not tommorrow

 

When they develop a small scale system that can capture 40% or more of the solar energy, it might be viable for widespread usage.

 

You have to define "viable" in a strict manner. I've got no beef with my non-viable solar system fueling the car to the tune of some 20% of its fuel. Better than 0% by far, and pretty viable and trouble free to boot!

 

I have a system that is viable for it's purpose. Lights a shed that's not connected to commercial power.

Solar panel + 12V car battery + RV light bulbs.

 

my definition of viable = cost effective. Either in savings monetarily or savings carbon footprint wise or in some cases combined. I drive less than 5000 miles per year in my auto so for me a electric vehicle makes no sense either in gas savings or initial cost. I also keep my vehicles of ten years on average so I would have to factor in battery replacement. As far as carbon footprint I am not convinced manufacturing and recycling lithium batteries is any better for the environment than extracting and refining gasoline is.

If you really want to help the environment petition the federal government to do away with all the red tape surrounding natural gas powered cars. NG is the most environment and cost effective fuel available at our present technological level.

 

You are leaving out the solar feed-in to the batteries during nonuse.

A real good laugh is down the road if the ghg's from all the fossil fuel sources cause the biosphere to deflate and we can all have a good yuck with our last gasp. lol

People need a liveable planet and that is not really in the cards without getting population growth checked and turned around. Everything else is an add-on.

 

Natural gas is hardly a great solution to human caused climate change. What applies to generating electricity would apply to auto fuel.

http://www.ucsusa.org/climate-risks-overreliance-natural-gas-electricity-2013#.VEVRVBbivIU

 

I also did not factor in solar insolence which for Hungary would be appx 3.0 kWh/(m squared) if you want to split hairs

might want to talk with developing countries on that. Modern western nations are doing pretty good however countries such as China and India seem to think that bringing their citizens up to 21st century standards of living using cheap and reliable energy is more important than computer models which are notoriously inaccurate. Solar and wind are neither cheap nor reliable. 5 bucks says the computer you use to make your posts was manufactured and powered by a carbon energy source.

 

And yet no proof of a climate issue. Zip!!!! Coal is the future.

 

I respectfully disagree. It is natural gas. Cheap and abundant energy that of course is being vilified by the left simply because it goes against their policy of making energy as expensive as possible.

here is a nature article

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature13837.html

to sum the paper up it up natural gas is bad because when energy prices go down people will use more of it and there will be no decline in CO2 production. That is a shame when there are millions of people who do not have clean water or food that cheap energy that we in more developed countries take for granted.

 

It would be strange if the only solar source was the roof of the train. No doubt fixed sources are also employed.

More by reputation than by fact. I checked out a source dividing the world up into 6 different regions. Every single one is increasing and the US quite rapidly. Much of the 3rd world is providing the cheap workers for 1st world production which gives the lie to the developed nations really taking the lead on population control.

They work where they work. Everyone I know who has pvs on their roof has ceased paying a utility bill other than a minimal maintenance fee. But I agree you are not going to run a major industrial society on just renewables. Changes are going to have to be radical and a lower population is going to have to lead the way.

Presently it is a bet you would at least partially win. The future hopefully will be a different story. I'm guessing a computer with its various components requires considerably less energy to manufacture than say it would have 10 years ago and requires considerably more than will the computer 10 years in the future.

 

Weird, destroy the biosphere to save the poor. But that has become the last gasp argument of the fighters for the status quo.

 

with the low solar insolence rating in Hungary those solar panels might light the light and blow the horn on that train depending on how many shade trees are along that route. I can assure you that the batteries are charged off fossil fuel between trips.

Population control? What I was referring to was the rejection of China and India of any pollution restrictions. Beijing air pollution makes the US air pollution of the 50's and 60's look like fresh mountain air. They gonna get population control all right because all the people in those cities will die of lung cancer or worse.

Solar is real cheap as long as the federal government pays for it.Incentives of $10,000 a year from the federal government to help pay for the 50,000 to 100,000 eyesore on their roof goes a long way. http://www.hgtvremodels.com/home-systems/the-true-cost-of-solar-power/index.html



http://www.hgtvremodels.com/home-systems/the-true-cost-of-solar-power/index.html

true ecology minded people would use one of these


http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15219383/...ya-buy-laptops-all-nations-kids/#.VEWcLBbziPY

I heard you can buy one in Libya, just make sure all you immunizations are up to date

 

You brought that up but your immediate response followed my population comment. As far as pollution, the western industrial countries have up until recently set the standard and supply much of the coal for instance which causes the pollution not to mention all the investments in and purchases from that are helping to drive that pollution. And of course I already mentioned the population influence.

Trying to chuck all the problem on others is just running away.

 

First off all there is no real problem or problems. For 25 years now the Goreites have preached doom and gloom and made hundreds of false predictions none of which came to pass.

Now as far as putting the problem off onto others use the search engine of you choice with the search terms "Beijing pollution" ,"Beijing pollution from space", "India pollution from space", or "India pollution" and pull up some images.

here is a picture of the US at night from space, see all those pretty lights courtesy of carbon power. Thanks to the rejection of liberal politics they will just grow more dense in the future years




You need to learn Mandarin and move to Chinese forums if your agenda is really about ecology not a political agenda as I suspect it is. Can't till November and Reid will be out of a job and the EPA will be reined in by congress

 

Clearly you're a denialist.

Yes, and whose providing them the fossil fuel? In fairness to China they are leading the way now with alternatives. I've made the point many times that it is probably too little too late which is why I think we have come to a crossroads that requires we deal seriously with overpopulation or spiral inevitably into disaster.

You need to learn critical thinking skills and stop employing your limited English to merely pushing a Rush Dumbo ideology.

 

Solar at some point will be useful for residential homes. So long as they are the organic and not the conventional kind which are horrible for the environment when you consider the materials used to build them. Solar and wind will NEVER provide enough power to even begin enough reliable power for commercial uses. In our ever evolving world technology is becoming more and more prevalent and as such so are power requirements.

The Germans spent nearly $300 billion over the last few years on solar power and the best they could produce was 50% for one hour on two very sunny days. They also have extremely high energy rates right now. Compare that to Finland which just finished a nuclear plant that went way over budget and it still costs far less than the solar energy in Germany.

 

Wow. You are really a tool. How much are you paid to spout your stuff?

China is not leading the way in anything but coal use and polluting the skies.

Your other two... denialist... Rush Dumbo...

Do you listen to Rush? I don't. I guess you must if you know when to and not to compare someone to him.