Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Expand Messages
  • burner_22
    hi i wanted to attend this Sunday s meeting at TSU School of Technology and was wondering what room number do you have your meetings? thanks, David A.
    Message 1 of 18 , Jan 4, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      hi

      i wanted to attend this Sunday's meeting at TSU School of Technology
      and was wondering what room number do you have your meetings?


      thanks,
      David A.



      __________________________________
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
      http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
    • Mike Ewert
      The next HREG meeting will be Sunday January 30 from 2-4pm at TSU School of Technology room 225. We will send an agenda closer to the date. ... From:
      Message 2 of 18 , Jan 5, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        The next HREG meeting will be Sunday January 30 from 2-4pm at TSU School of
        Technology room 225. We will send an agenda closer to the date.

        -----Original Message-----
        From: burner_22 [mailto:burner_22@...]
        Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 11:00 PM
        To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [hreg] (unknown)



        hi

        i wanted to attend this Sunday's meeting at TSU School of Technology
        and was wondering what room number do you have your meetings?


        thanks,
        David A.



        __________________________________
        Do you Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
        http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



        Yahoo! Groups Links
      • Mike Ewert
        2 points: Note the land area required for solar energy in Richard Smalley s presentation. http://smalley.rice.edu/emplibrary/columbia09232003.ppt#1 I like PV
        Message 3 of 18 , Jan 6, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          2 points:
          Note the land area required for solar energy in Richard Smalley's presentation.
           
          I like PV too, but solar thermal is even farther along in terms of cost competitiveness (large scale).   It is one of the most cost-effective renewable power technologies, with present power generation costs of US¢12-20/kWh and long-term costs of US¢5-10/kWh. Source: Renewable Energy World
          -----Original Message-----
          From: Roxanne Boyer [mailto:rox1@...]
          Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 10:20 PM
          To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

          Mr. Malone,
          I quite dissagree with you on many of these issues, and so do most scientists.  Read any of the articles today on energy in Scientific American, Physics Today, Discovery, Science, .... and you will find that our current oil consumption trends can only be sustained to about 2050, plus or minus 20 years.  Renewable energy is growing exponencially.  Europe is aiming for 20% renewables by 2020.  I believe many of the US States already have similar goals and many more will join in as time goes on.  There will be a change within the next lifespan.
           
          Even the "Oil" companies realize this and have published reports that say so.  They are starting to call themselves "Energy" companies and investing quite heavily in renewable energy.  See Shell Solar, Shell Wind, Shell Renewables, BP Solar, GE Solar, GE Wind, for example.  And if the oil companies don't lead, the electronics companies will.  Sharp is already the leading manufacturer of solar cells.
           
          I don't know how you did your math about not enough solar energy in New Jersey (is that the state with the highest energy to land ratio and the least sunny state?).  But the math I have done shows that I can supply all of my Houston household electrical needs (averaged) by covering half of my roof with solar panels.  No breakthrough technology needed; it already exists.  If you trend retail electric prices and solar PV prices, you will see the cost cross in the year 2025 - then it will be more economical to buy PV than grid electricity!
           
          If you read up on the technical progress of photoelectrics, you will see incredible breakthroughs in the last 10 years.  Right now, solar cells are expensive because production can not keep up with demand.  And new record breaking production facillities are being opened each year.
           
          If you want a "heart felt" change, read the July-August issue of Renewable Energy World each year and see the growth of RE for yourself.  It is amazing.  Maybe we can discuss some of the facts at the next HREG meeting, Sunday, 2:00pm, Jan 30th at TSU.
          Sincerely,
          Chris
           
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:43 PM
          Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

           

          All this discussion is interesting and heart felt.  The following is not intended as a rant, but to put our problem in perspective.

           

          Our government, both parties, is so tied to big oil money, .

          It would take solar panels covering every square inch of the state of New Jersey just to equal the energy used in New Jersey.  So the size of the oil dependency is almost beyond our reason.

           

          A breakthrough, one not foreseeable by current science is most likely the only hope in the US.  Outside the US there may be some help because of the different mind set of the non US-Oil cartel.

           

          China is graduating more engineers & scientists each year than the US graduates all college students of all degree fields.  China has a massive energy problem.  They also have a growing economy that it partly controlled & partly free market.  As they inevitably pass the US number of educated citizens (check out our schools systems if you doubt this) and the controlling government forces capital & research in to alternative energy research because of their vast needs and lack of resources they may turn this thing around.

           

          I hope I live long enough to see the beginning.

          In the interim, conservation, voting, getting activity in politics may be the only drop in the bucket we have. I hope I’m wrong.

           

           

          J. Patrick Malone

           

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Robert Johnston [mailto:junk1@...]
          Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:36 PM
          To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

           

           

        • Gary Beck
          Incredible breakthoughs or not, one thing I have to point out is that solar cells should not be thought of as free or even renewable. The energy they capture
          Message 4 of 18 , Jan 6, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Message
            Incredible breakthoughs or not, one thing I have to point out is that solar cells should not be thought of as free or even renewable. The energy they capture is not free. They make electricity by capturing energy that is otherwise reflected back into space. All this captured energy will be released as sensable heat. 
             
            The other point is that every solar cell I have ever seen is very dark color and that on a sunny day I assume you can fry and egg on them during operation.  And they would remain warm for a few extra hours each night.  Sounds like a hot city that has 1/2 of the area of every roof covered in in solar cells. 
             
            This vision of a 'solar roof on every house' is the opposite of significant eco design efforts to try to cool cities by adopting building specifications changing commercial roof colors to white and residential roofs to very light shingles (plus a cooler roof means cooler living working space). Or better yet like USGBC-LEED and other efforts that support 'green' garden roof on new commerical buildings. 
             
            What is the best approach to satisfy both concerns? Is there a light colored solar cell? Any one have a design for a solar cell garden roof?
             
            Gary Beck
            Eco-Holdings LLC
             
            I read ocasionally Scientific American, Discovery, Science etc. - they are great for 'what if' and 'think about this' , but not very good predictors at all. What were they saying about fuel cells 10 or 20 years ago? My son get Popular Science - a recent article is called "Hydrogen's Bomb - Decoding the Hype".  My favorite recent new science release? The spinach plant that is designed to generate electricity (no joke) (here's a joke: It is a good thing since will require more candle lit dinners - cause after you finish your salad it's light out!) 
            -----Original Message-----
            From: Roxanne Boyer [mailto:rox1@...]
            Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 10:20 PM
            To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

            Mr. Malone,
            I quite dissagree with you on many of these issues, and so do most scientists.  Read any of the articles today on energy in Scientific American, Physics Today, Discovery, Science, .... and you will find that our current oil consumption trends can only be sustained to about 2050, plus or minus 20 years.  Renewable energy is growing exponencially.  Europe is aiming for 20% renewables by 2020.  I believe many of the US States already have similar goals and many more will join in as time goes on.  There will be a change within the next lifespan.
             
            Even the "Oil" companies realize this and have published reports that say so.  They are starting to call themselves "Energy" companies and investing quite heavily in renewable energy.  See Shell Solar, Shell Wind, Shell Renewables, BP Solar, GE Solar, GE Wind, for example.  And if the oil companies don't lead, the electronics companies will.  Sharp is already the leading manufacturer of solar cells.
             
            I don't know how you did your math about not enough solar energy in New Jersey (is that the state with the highest energy to land ratio and the least sunny state?).  But the math I have done shows that I can supply all of my Houston household electrical needs (averaged) by covering half of my roof with solar panels.  No breakthrough technology needed; it already exists.  If you trend retail electric prices and solar PV prices, you will see the cost cross in the year 2025 - then it will be more economical to buy PV than grid electricity!
             
            If you read up on the technical progress of photoelectrics, you will see incredible breakthroughs in the last 10 years.  Right now, solar cells are expensive because production can not keep up with demand.  And new record breaking production facillities are being opened each year.
             
            If you want a "heart felt" change, read the July-August issue of Renewable Energy World each year and see the growth of RE for yourself.  It is amazing.  Maybe we can discuss some of the facts at the next HREG meeting, Sunday, 2:00pm, Jan 30th at TSU.
            Sincerely,
            Chris
             
             
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:43 PM
            Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

             

            All this discussion is interesting and heart felt.  The following is not intended as a rant, but to put our problem in perspective.

             

            Our government, both parties, is so tied to big oil money, .

            It would take solar panels covering every square inch of the state of New Jersey just to equal the energy used in New Jersey.  So the size of the oil dependency is almost beyond our reason.

             

            A breakthrough, one not foreseeable by current science is most likely the only hope in the US.  Outside the US there may be some help because of the different mind set of the non US-Oil cartel.

             

            China is graduating more engineers & scientists each year than the US graduates all college students of all degree fields.  China has a massive energy problem.  They also have a growing economy that it partly controlled & partly free market.  As they inevitably pass the US number of educated citizens (check out our schools systems if you doubt this) and the controlling government forces capital & research in to alternative energy research because of their vast needs and lack of resources they may turn this thing around.

             

            I hope I live long enough to see the beginning.

            In the interim, conservation, voting, getting activity in politics may be the only drop in the bucket we have. I hope I’m wrong.

             

             

            J. Patrick Malone

             

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Robert Johnston [mailto:junk1@...]
            Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:36 PM
            To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

             

             

          • Ooi, Han
            Well, In my solar engineering textbook, it states that a solar cell will get hot IF the electricity generated by it is not used. This makes sense since energy
            Message 5 of 18 , Jan 6, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Message
              Well,
                  In my solar engineering textbook, it states that a solar cell will get hot IF the electricity generated by it is not used.  This makes sense since energy can neither be created nor destroyed.  If the power doesn't take the form of electrical energy, then it will take to form of thermal energy.  So as solar cells get more and more efficient, they will run cooler and cooler.
               
              Han Ooi
              -----Original Message-----
              From: Gary Beck [mailto:eco@...]
              Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 9:55 AM
              To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

              Incredible breakthoughs or not, one thing I have to point out is that solar cells should not be thought of as free or even renewable. The energy they capture is not free. They make electricity by capturing energy that is otherwise reflected back into space. All this captured energy will be released as sensable heat. 
               
              The other point is that every solar cell I have ever seen is very dark color and that on a sunny day I assume you can fry and egg on them during operation.  And they would remain warm for a few extra hours each night.  Sounds like a hot city that has 1/2 of the area of every roof covered in in solar cells. 
               
              This vision of a 'solar roof on every house' is the opposite of significant eco design efforts to try to cool cities by adopting building specifications changing commercial roof colors to white and residential roofs to very light shingles (plus a cooler roof means cooler living working space). Or better yet like USGBC-LEED and other efforts that support 'green' garden roof on new commerical buildings. 
               
              What is the best approach to satisfy both concerns? Is there a light colored solar cell? Any one have a design for a solar cell garden roof?
               
              Gary Beck
              Eco-Holdings LLC
               
              I read ocasionally Scientific American, Discovery, Science etc. - they are great for 'what if' and 'think about this' , but not very good predictors at all. What were they saying about fuel cells 10 or 20 years ago? My son get Popular Science - a recent article is called "Hydrogen's Bomb - Decoding the Hype".  My favorite recent new science release? The spinach plant that is designed to generate electricity (no joke) (here's a joke: It is a good thing since will require more candle lit dinners - cause after you finish your salad it's light out!) 
              -----Original Message-----
              From: Roxanne Boyer [mailto:rox1@...]
              Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 10:20 PM
              To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

              Mr. Malone,
              I quite dissagree with you on many of these issues, and so do most scientists.  Read any of the articles today on energy in Scientific American, Physics Today, Discovery, Science, .... and you will find that our current oil consumption trends can only be sustained to about 2050, plus or minus 20 years.  Renewable energy is growing exponencially.  Europe is aiming for 20% renewables by 2020.  I believe many of the US States already have similar goals and many more will join in as time goes on.  There will be a change within the next lifespan.
               
              Even the "Oil" companies realize this and have published reports that say so.  They are starting to call themselves "Energy" companies and investing quite heavily in renewable energy.  See Shell Solar, Shell Wind, Shell Renewables, BP Solar, GE Solar, GE Wind, for example.  And if the oil companies don't lead, the electronics companies will.  Sharp is already the leading manufacturer of solar cells.
               
              I don't know how you did your math about not enough solar energy in New Jersey (is that the state with the highest energy to land ratio and the least sunny state?).  But the math I have done shows that I can supply all of my Houston household electrical needs (averaged) by covering half of my roof with solar panels.  No breakthrough technology needed; it already exists.  If you trend retail electric prices and solar PV prices, you will see the cost cross in the year 2025 - then it will be more economical to buy PV than grid electricity!
               
              If you read up on the technical progress of photoelectrics, you will see incredible breakthroughs in the last 10 years.  Right now, solar cells are expensive because production can not keep up with demand.  And new record breaking production facillities are being opened each year.
               
              If you want a "heart felt" change, read the July-August issue of Renewable Energy World each year and see the growth of RE for yourself.  It is amazing.  Maybe we can discuss some of the facts at the next HREG meeting, Sunday, 2:00pm, Jan 30th at TSU.
              Sincerely,
              Chris
               
               
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:43 PM
              Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

               

              All this discussion is interesting and heart felt.  The following is not intended as a rant, but to put our problem in perspective.

               

              Our government, both parties, is so tied to big oil money, .

              It would take solar panels covering every square inch of the state of New Jersey just to equal the energy used in New Jersey.  So the size of the oil dependency is almost beyond our reason.

               

              A breakthrough, one not foreseeable by current science is most likely the only hope in the US.  Outside the US there may be some help because of the different mind set of the non US-Oil cartel.

               

              China is graduating more engineers & scientists each year than the US graduates all college students of all degree fields.  China has a massive energy problem.  They also have a growing economy that it partly controlled & partly free market.  As they inevitably pass the US number of educated citizens (check out our schools systems if you doubt this) and the controlling government forces capital & research in to alternative energy research because of their vast needs and lack of resources they may turn this thing around.

               

              I hope I live long enough to see the beginning.

              In the interim, conservation, voting, getting activity in politics may be the only drop in the bucket we have. I hope I’m wrong.

               

               

              J. Patrick Malone

               

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Robert Johnston [mailto:junk1@...]
              Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:36 PM
              To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

               

               

            • Jim & Janet
              Message Gary Beck Eco-Holdings LLC Wrote: Is there a light colored solar cell? Well, the reason the cells surface is dark is to help it absorb as much light
              Message 6 of 18 , Jan 6, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Message
                 
                Gary Beck
                Eco-Holdings LLC
                 
                Wrote:    Is there a light colored solar cell?
                 
                Well, the reason the cells surface is dark is to help it absorb as much light energy as possible. A light colored cell would reflect more photons reducing the cells output significantly. If you looked at the cell surface under magnification, you would see the surface is jagged and rough to increase the surface receiving sunlight. The heat is just an unwanted byproduct.
                Possibly the quickest way to improve module efficiency by 1 to 2 % is to figure how to eliminate resistance at the interconnections between individual cells. No one has yet figured how to effectively 'solder' wires to silicon. This is why most PV manufacturers advertise the individual cell efficiency as slightly higher than the overall module efficiency. That's driving the industry away from silicon and toward other methods of electrical production; spinach for example.
                Jim Duncan
              • Robert Johnston
                Am I missing something, or is this much to do about nothing? Sure, any radiant energy captured by a solar cell is not reflected back into space immediately.
                Message 7 of 18 , Jan 7, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Message

                  Am I missing something, or is this much to do about nothing?

                   

                  Sure, any radiant energy captured by a solar cell is not reflected back into space immediately.  But:  (a) even if you had a perfect mirror there instead, not all reflected light would make it back to space [light scattering, greenhouse effect, etc.]; (b) surely one can coat the cell with a reflective surface that transmits UV (or whatever wavelengths the solar cell optimally uses) and reflects others; (c) if the solar cell weren’t there, it is unlikely that the surface that would be there instead would reflect light back perfectly either.  It would absorb at least a portion of it and the radiant energy would be converted to heat.  Even biomass merely stores it as potential energy that is later released as heat by burning, digestion, etc.  And, (d) some of the absorbed radiation that is converted into heat will eventually be emitted back to space.  Ever notice how much the earth cools on a clear night with no cloud cover?  That is heat loss by a relatively cool substrate, e.g., the earth at 15-30°C.

                   

                  I don’t think we are talking about a big deal here.  Even if 1% of the U.S. land mass were covered with solar cells, that would not absorb as much radiant energy as our forests do today.

                   

                  Why not just do a radiant energy balance on the planet?  Smalley’s presentation says in 2003 we used 14 terawatts (TW) of energy per day.  This compares to 165,000 TW of sunlight striking the planet per day.  Even at the 50 TW he projects we’ll need in 2050, that is only 0.03% of the sun’s radiant energy being needed.  If we have perfectly absorbent solar cells that absorb all the solar spectrum, and if they operate at only 10% solar efficiency, that means that the solar cells necessary to supply our energy needs in 2050 (assuming we go 100% solar cells for energy needs) would absorb just 0.3% of the sun’s radiant flux on earth.  Do you think we’d even notice that?  Remember, a significant fraction of that 0.3% is already absorbed by whatever substrate is there today.  We’re talking about an extremely small effect here!

                   

                  There remains a debate about whether global warming is real or not.  But if we assume it is, I think most scientists would argue that the cause of global warming is not the heat we are emitting but rather the greenhouse effect, e.g., the heat we are trapping.  If we quit using fossil fuels and drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, any additional heat absorbed by solar cells would be more than compensated for by the increased emission to space.  In other words, we can afford to convert more energy into sensable heat so long as we have less greenhouse effect.

                   

                  If you are concerned about localized effects, such as in cities, there would be ways to mitigate it.  For instance, you could make covered parking lots, with the cells on the roof; this would merely absorb what would have otherwise been absorbed by the asphalt.  There are indeed efforts to convert roofing membranes from black rubber sheeting or asphalt to white TPO roofing membranes.  However, as happened at MinuteMaid Park, mold and mildew can quickly stain a white roof to a dark color, so it is not a very robust approach today, and I’m not sure what the long term contribution to urban micro-climates is.  Personally, I’d prefer a dark roof since it is more UV stable and should last longer.  That makes sense from an economic and sustainability standpoint.  If I were a roofing membrane installer, though, I’d sure rather work on a white roof!  (At least in Houston in the summer)!

                   

                  Robert Johnston

                   

                   

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Gary Beck [mailto:eco@...]
                  Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 9:55 AM
                  To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

                   

                  Incredible breakthoughs or not, one thing I have to point out is that solar cells should not be thought of as free or even renewable. The energy they capture is not free. They make electricity by capturing energy that is otherwise reflected back into space. All this captured energy will be released as sensable heat. 

                   

                  The other point is that every solar cell I have ever seen is very dark color and that on a sunny day I assume you can fry and egg on them during operation.  And they would remain warm for a few extra hours each night.  Sounds like a hot city that has 1/2 of the area of every roof covered in in solar cells. 

                   

                  This vision of a 'solar roof on every house' is the opposite of significant eco design efforts to try to cool cities by adopting building specifications changing commercial roof colors to white and residential roofs to very light shingles (plus a cooler roof means cooler living working space). Or better yet like USGBC-LEED and other efforts that support 'green' garden roof on new commerical buildings. 

                   

                  What is the best approach to satisfy both concerns? Is there a light colored solar cell? Any one have a design for a solar cell garden roof?

                   

                  Gary Beck

                  Eco-Holdings LLC

                   

                  I read ocasionally Scientific American, Discovery, Science etc. - they are great for 'what if' and 'think about this' , but not very good predictors at all. What were they saying about fuel cells 10 or 20 years ago? My son get Popular Science - a recent article is called "Hydrogen's Bomb - Decoding the Hype".  My favorite recent new science release? The spinach plant that is designed to generate electricity (no joke) (here's a joke: It is a good thing since will require more candle lit dinners - cause after you finish your salad it's light out!) 

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Roxanne Boyer [mailto:rox1@...]
                  Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 10:20 PM
                  To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

                  Mr. Malone,

                  I quite dissagree with you on many of these issues, and so do most scientists.  Read any of the articles today on energy in Scientific American, Physics Today, Discovery, Science, .... and you will find that our current oil consumption trends can only be sustained to about 2050, plus or minus 20 years.  Renewable energy is growing exponencially.  Europe is aiming for 20% renewables by 2020.  I believe many of the US States already have similar goals and many more will join in as time goes on.  There will be a change within the next lifespan.

                   

                  Even the "Oil" companies realize this and have published reports that say so.  They are starting to call themselves "Energy" companies and investing quite heavily in renewable energy.  See Shell Solar, Shell Wind, Shell Renewables, BP Solar, GE Solar, GE Wind, for example.  And if the oil companies don't lead, the electronics companies will.  Sharp is already the leading manufacturer of solar cells.

                   

                  I don't know how you did your math about not enough solar energy in New Jersey (is that the state with the highest energy to land ratio and the least sunny state?).  But the math I have done shows that I can supply all of my Houston household electrical needs (averaged) by covering half of my roof with solar panels.  No breakthrough technology needed; it already exists.  If you trend retail electric prices and solar PV prices, you will see the cost cross in the year 2025 - then it will be more economical to buy PV than grid electricity!

                   

                  If you read up on the technical progress of photoelectrics, you will see incredible breakthroughs in the last 10 years.  Right now, solar cells are expensive because production can not keep up with demand.  And new record breaking production facillities are being opened each year.

                   

                  If you want a "heart felt" change, read the July-August issue of Renewable Energy World each year and see the growth of RE for yourself.  It is amazing.  Maybe we can discuss some of the facts at the next HREG meeting, Sunday, 2:00pm, Jan 30th at TSU.

                  Sincerely,

                  Chris

                   

                   

                  ----- Original Message -----

                  Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:43 PM

                  Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

                   

                   

                  All this discussion is interesting and heart felt.  The following is not intended as a rant, but to put our problem in perspective.

                   

                  Our government, both parties, is so tied to big oil money, .

                  It would take solar panels covering every square inch of the state of New Jersey just to equal the energy used in New Jersey.  So the size of the oil dependency is almost beyond our reason.

                   

                  A breakthrough, one not foreseeable by current science is most likely the only hope in the US.  Outside the US there may be some help because of the different mind set of the non US-Oil cartel.

                   

                  China is graduating more engineers & scientists each year than the US graduates all college students of all degree fields.  China has a massive energy problem.  They also have a growing economy that it partly controlled & partly free market.  As they inevitably pass the US number of educated citizens (check out our schools systems if you doubt this) and the controlling government forces capital & research in to alternative energy research because of their vast needs and lack of resources they may turn this thing around.

                   

                  I hope I live long enough to see the beginning.

                  In the interim, conservation, voting, getting activity in politics may be the only drop in the bucket we have. I hope I’m wrong.

                   

                   

                  J. Patrick Malone

                   

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Robert Johnston [mailto:junk1@...]
                  Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:36 PM
                  To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

                   

                   

                • Richard D. Kelley
                  Mountains out a molehill? Buy some panels a put that Texas cooker to work. ... From: Robert Johnston [SMTP:junk1@plastability.com] Sent: Friday, January 07,
                  Message 8 of 18 , Jan 7, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Mountains out a molehill? Buy some panels a put that Texas cooker to work.


                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Robert Johnston [SMTP:junk1@...]
                    Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 4:57 PM
                    To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation

                    << File: ATT00029.htm >> Am I missing something, or is this much to do about nothing?



                    Sure, any radiant energy captured by a solar cell is not reflected back
                    into space immediately. But: (a) even if you had a perfect mirror
                    there instead, not all reflected light would make it back to space
                    [light scattering, greenhouse effect, etc.]; (b) surely one can coat the
                    cell with a reflective surface that transmits UV (or whatever
                    wavelengths the solar cell optimally uses) and reflects others; (c) if
                    the solar cell weren't there, it is unlikely that the surface that would
                    be there instead would reflect light back perfectly either. It would
                    absorb at least a portion of it and the radiant energy would be
                    converted to heat. Even biomass merely stores it as potential energy
                    that is later released as heat by burning, digestion, etc. And, (d)
                    some of the absorbed radiation that is converted into heat will
                    eventually be emitted back to space. Ever notice how much the earth
                    cools on a clear night with no cloud cover? That is heat loss by a
                    relatively cool substrate, e.g., the earth at 15-30°C.



                    I don't think we are talking about a big deal here. Even if 1% of the
                    U.S. land mass were covered with solar cells, that would not absorb as
                    much radiant energy as our forests do today.



                    Why not just do a radiant energy balance on the planet? Smalley's
                    presentation says in 2003 we used 14 terawatts (TW) of energy per day.
                    This compares to 165,000 TW of sunlight striking the planet per day.
                    Even at the 50 TW he projects we'll need in 2050, that is only 0.03% of
                    the sun's radiant energy being needed. If we have perfectly absorbent
                    solar cells that absorb all the solar spectrum, and if they operate at
                    only 10% solar efficiency, that means that the solar cells necessary to
                    supply our energy needs in 2050 (assuming we go 100% solar cells for
                    energy needs) would absorb just 0.3% of the sun's radiant flux on earth.
                    Do you think we'd even notice that? Remember, a significant fraction of
                    that 0.3% is already absorbed by whatever substrate is there today.
                    We're talking about an extremely small effect here!



                    There remains a debate about whether global warming is real or not. But
                    if we assume it is, I think most scientists would argue that the cause
                    of global warming is not the heat we are emitting but rather the
                    greenhouse effect, e.g., the heat we are trapping. If we quit using
                    fossil fuels and drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, any
                    additional heat absorbed by solar cells would be more than compensated
                    for by the increased emission to space. In other words, we can afford
                    to convert more energy into sensable heat so long as we have less
                    greenhouse effect.



                    If you are concerned about localized effects, such as in cities, there
                    would be ways to mitigate it. For instance, you could make covered
                    parking lots, with the cells on the roof; this would merely absorb what
                    would have otherwise been absorbed by the asphalt. There are indeed
                    efforts to convert roofing membranes from black rubber sheeting or
                    asphalt to white TPO roofing membranes. However, as happened at
                    MinuteMaid Park, mold and mildew can quickly stain a white roof to a
                    dark color, so it is not a very robust approach today, and I'm not sure
                    what the long term contribution to urban micro-climates is. Personally,
                    I'd prefer a dark roof since it is more UV stable and should last
                    longer. That makes sense from an economic and sustainability
                    standpoint. If I were a roofing membrane installer, though, I'd sure
                    rather work on a white roof! (At least in Houston in the summer)!



                    Robert Johnston





                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Gary Beck [mailto:eco@...]
                    Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 9:55 AM
                    To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for
                    alternative energy and conservation



                    Incredible breakthoughs or not, one thing I have to point out is that
                    solar cells should not be thought of as free or even renewable. The
                    energy they capture is not free. They make electricity by capturing
                    energy that is otherwise reflected back into space. All this captured
                    energy will be released as sensable heat.



                    The other point is that every solar cell I have ever seen is very dark
                    color and that on a sunny day I assume you can fry and egg on them
                    during operation. And they would remain warm for a few extra hours each
                    night. Sounds like a hot city that has 1/2 of the area of every roof
                    covered in in solar cells.



                    This vision of a 'solar roof on every house' is the opposite of
                    significant eco design efforts to try to cool cities by adopting
                    building specifications changing commercial roof colors to white and
                    residential roofs to very light shingles (plus a cooler roof means
                    cooler living working space). Or better yet like USGBC-LEED and other
                    efforts that support 'green' garden roof on new commerical buildings.



                    What is the best approach to satisfy both concerns? Is there a light
                    colored solar cell? Any one have a design for a solar cell garden roof?



                    Gary Beck

                    Eco-Holdings LLC



                    I read ocasionally Scientific American, Discovery, Science etc. - they
                    are great for 'what if' and 'think about this' , but not very good
                    predictors at all. What were they saying about fuel cells 10 or 20 years
                    ago? My son get Popular Science - a recent article is called "Hydrogen's
                    Bomb - Decoding the Hype". My favorite recent new science release? The
                    spinach plant that is designed to generate electricity (no joke) (here's
                    a joke: It is a good thing since will require more candle lit dinners -
                    cause after you finish your salad it's light out!)

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Roxanne Boyer [mailto:rox1@...]
                    Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 10:20 PM
                    To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for
                    alternative energy and conservation

                    Mr. Malone,

                    I quite dissagree with you on many of these issues, and so do most
                    scientists. Read any of the articles today on energy in Scientific
                    American, Physics Today, Discovery, Science, .... and you will find that
                    our current oil consumption trends can only be sustained to about 2050,
                    plus or minus 20 years. Renewable energy is growing exponencially.
                    Europe is aiming for 20% renewables by 2020. I believe many of the US
                    States already have similar goals and many more will join in as time
                    goes on. There will be a change within the next lifespan.



                    Even the "Oil" companies realize this and have published reports that
                    say so. They are starting to call themselves "Energy" companies and
                    investing quite heavily in renewable energy. See Shell Solar, Shell
                    Wind, Shell Renewables, BP Solar, GE Solar, GE Wind, for example. And
                    if the oil companies don't lead, the electronics companies will. Sharp
                    is already the leading manufacturer of solar cells.



                    I don't know how you did your math about not enough solar energy in New
                    Jersey (is that the state with the highest energy to land ratio and the
                    least sunny state?). But the math I have done shows that I can supply
                    all of my Houston household electrical needs (averaged) by covering half
                    of my roof with solar panels. No breakthrough technology needed; it
                    already exists. If you trend retail electric prices and solar PV
                    prices, you will see the cost cross in the year 2025 - then it will be
                    more economical to buy PV than grid electricity!



                    If you read up on the technical progress of photoelectrics, you will see
                    incredible breakthroughs in the last 10 years. Right now, solar cells
                    are expensive because production can not keep up with demand. And new
                    record breaking production facillities are being opened each year.



                    If you want a "heart felt" change, read the July-August issue of
                    Renewable Energy World each year and see the growth of RE for yourself.
                    It is amazing. Maybe we can discuss some of the facts at the next HREG
                    meeting, Sunday, 2:00pm, Jan 30th at TSU.

                    Sincerely,

                    Chris





                    ----- Original Message -----

                    From: J. <mailto:JPMALONE@...> P. Malone

                    To: hreg@yahoogroups.com

                    Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:43 PM

                    Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for
                    alternative energy and conservation





                    All this discussion is interesting and heart felt. The following is not
                    intended as a rant, but to put our problem in perspective.



                    Our government, both parties, is so tied to big oil money, .

                    It would take solar panels covering every square inch of the state of
                    New Jersey just to equal the energy used in New Jersey. So the size of
                    the oil dependency is almost beyond our reason.



                    A breakthrough, one not foreseeable by current science is most likely
                    the only hope in the US. Outside the US there may be some help because
                    of the different mind set of the non US-Oil cartel.



                    China is graduating more engineers & scientists each year than the US
                    graduates all college students of all degree fields. China has a
                    massive energy problem. They also have a growing economy that it partly
                    controlled & partly free market. As they inevitably pass the US number
                    of educated citizens (check out our schools systems if you doubt this)
                    and the controlling government forces capital & research in to
                    alternative energy research because of their vast needs and lack of
                    resources they may turn this thing around.



                    I hope I live long enough to see the beginning.

                    In the interim, conservation, voting, getting activity in politics may
                    be the only drop in the bucket we have. I hope I'm wrong.





                    J. Patrick Malone



                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Robert Johnston [mailto:junk1@...]
                    Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:36 PM
                    To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: RE: Oh Politics! RE: [hreg] crash science initiative for
                    alternative energy and conservation








                    _____


                    Yahoo! Groups Links

                    * To visit your group on the web, go to:
                    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hreg/

                    * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    hreg-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    <mailto:hreg-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

                    * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                    Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.