The Entire Planet Can Go Solar Right Now!

Maybe build roads with solar panels.. that way they can steadily grow them and replace all the old tarmac bit by bit.
They would be perfect for a grid as they would be spread out. You could also put led's in them to mark lanes, one way, no entry etc..
Just a thought. ..

We have to get off fossil fuels. Until we do so all this global warming talk is just hot air.

Until the alternative energy sector can begin to offer politicians kickbacks and bribes on the order of magnitude that the fossil fuel industry has been doing for the past century, you will never see it take hold in our corner of the world.

I have absolutely no doubt that we've had the technology to go 100% green with our energy production and consumption for the past few decades, let alone the past few years. But without the political will to change, it won't.

a reply to: nOraKat

Such ideas are best achieved ,when people locally start projects with the town counsels.

Setup a crowd fund project and buy a field nearby full with panels and everybody pays monthly kind of maintenance tax and you got your own town running on solar energy. .
The excess energy can be sold and your tax payments will be reduced..

a reply to: Misterlondon

solar roadways = utter twaddle

a reply to: nOraKat

no the " entire planet " cannot ` go solar `

the UK - certainly cannot

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I agree.
After conversing with my scientists at the M.I.R.B they told me that the area needed would be the size of Wales just to power Manchester.
Oh the gloom

I bought a solar panel for camping what you strap to your back...
4 days and it charged up my phone 3 %.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: nOraKat

While i agree with the concept , it has quite a few failings for now . When they have solar powered 747s for instance i might tend to agree .

Such argument is null and void.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The technology exists to replace fossil fuels and in the case of jet fuel they say it can be done at the cost as half what it costs to produce a gallon of gas.

It's not solar.

Drawbacks? Only one, it seems: researchers warn it will be at least a decade before US ships are able to produce their own fuel on board.

So that's not today.

The predicted cost of jet fuel using the technology is in the range of three to six dollars per gallon,

That's not half of today's jet fuel cost.

That is amazing tech though, and shows the "solar only" thinking is flawed.

That is an old thread on it and the technology exists today. The ten year thing is to outfit the NAVY.

To make the fuel it can be powerd by solar. And as far as cost right now if the US didn't subsidise the cost of oil a gallon of gass would come in at $12.75 so $6 is better than half.

Gass is only affordable to us now because of the subsdising. We still pay for it, but just don't feel it that way.

a reply to: nOraKat

I still think solar thermal is the best way......power, desalination, heat storage bi-product and farming bi-product, and the real estate isnt that bad either.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Thorium and fusion are most likely far better options as far as price goes. Why we are not building far safer thorium reactors is beyond me.

a reply to: chr0naut

The thing is, it is still inefficient, expensive and fragile (solar panels, both passive & PV, despite their major cost, don't last forever and you find you have to buy everything all over again, periodically (Few energy companies mention that little caveat).

Which, playing Devil's advocate, is exactly what current power generation requires too...except they have to buy their fuel all over again, continually..and that's whether the fuel is gas, coal, oil or even nuclear.

The major difference with Solar of course, is once the environmental cost is expended to produce and install the PV's and associated ancillaries, there is no more continually buying everything all over again, for at least 20 - 25 years..and the single major factor or the USP if you like, is zero pollution from Solar.

Solar is the intelligent choice, and still would be the intelligent choice, even if they had to be replaced once a decade instead of once every two and one half decades as it actually is.

a reply to: nOraKat

Intelligent logic accepted nOraKat It also helps to re balance the EA*RTH fauna - flora life with the "current" humanoid governing sapiens sapiens species. Georgia Guide stones comes to mind ...

Perhaps as a CREATOR Creations species develops more AWARENESS & INTELLIGENCE as a Whole* these types of mature responses to global energy become more of a reality...

NAMASTE*******

We have to ask ourselves why don't we just take a piece of land and try it out ,we'll overcome the problems when building this thing...

a reply to: nOraKat

OK.
Here is a challange for those out there who are really in favour of generating as much power as we on earth could use.
Calculate the answers to a few questions:
How much would it cost?
Also how much would it save so long as it operates?
How much energy and resourses would it require to build?
Also how much of our environment would it save as long as it operates?
How much energy would it generate?
Also how much of our current energy resourses could be better used elsewhere?

I am speaking about a solar generator, solar cells and/or light reflector systems, which would be ten miles wide and encircle the earth's equator.
I figure, if we are going to go solar, why not go big.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: nOraKat

I like Elon, he seems a fairly down to earth sort of guy. I like his quote on how to make a small fortune investing in 'space technologies', he said "First you start with a large fortune..."

If I had a few billion, I'd probably spend a bit on solar, too.

The thing is, it is still inefficient, expensive and fragile (solar panels, both passive & PV, despite their major cost, don't last forever and you find you have to buy everything all over again, periodically (Few energy companies mention that little caveat).

You could say the same with gas, coal and nuclear power stations. You have to keep replacing replacing the gas, coal and fuel rods because they keep getting burnt up.

originally posted by: Misterlondon
Maybe build roads with solar panels.. that way they can steadily grow them and replace all the old tarmac bit by bit.
They would be perfect for a grid as they would be spread out. You could also put led's in them to mark lanes, one way, no entry etc..
Just a thought. ..

Long lasting solar panels on roofs are a very good idea. The occasional rain will wash the dust off.

Why the heck would you put them in roads where leaking oil etc will block the sunlight and because the oil repels water it won't easily wash off when it rains like panels on roofs? That's just the tip of the iceburg about why it's a bad idea. These videos explain more of the pitfalls:

Solar Roadways: Busted!


Solar Roadways Are BULL#!

a reply to: nOraKat

nice idea and it may work in fact...
just few things are wrong in your post.

"fusion reactor in the sky called the sun" is false... the Sun is not burning anything and it is not fusion reactor

CO2 is not a problem and never was. it is LIFE giving gas and is not casing climate change. The Sun is changing climate in this part of Solar system the same like all other parts xx

I been saying for about 10 years that batteries is the future. I have worked with some rather advance ones that just 5 years ago were impossible.

originally posted by: ZakOlongapo
a reply to: nOraKat

nice idea and it may work in fact...
just few things are wrong in your post.

"fusion reactor in the sky called the sun" is false... the Sun is not burning anything and it is not fusion reactor

CO2 is not a problem and never was. it is LIFE giving gas and is not casing climate change. The Sun is changing climate in this part of Solar system the same like all other parts xx

The primary action that produces energy in the sun is the thermonuclear fusion of four Hydrogen atoms into two Helium atoms. As you go deeper into the sun and pressures increase, heavier elements (like Carbon and Oxygen) are fused. As such, there is a natural path of nucleosynthesis towards successively heavier elements. As it fuses elements, it converts them permanently. At some future stage, the primary energy production of the sun (H->He) will cease because all Hydrogen will be consumed by the process.

The sun is most definitely a fusion reactor, bound not by magnetic fields like a Tokomac, but gravitationally bound. It is also 'burning' its fuel, just at a slow rate.