NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, no, not really. But if this works out it could happen...

Source (http://www.physorg.com/news103997338.html)
“The process is simple,” said lead researcher and author Somenath Mitra, PhD, professor and acting chair of NJIT’s Department of Chemistry and Environmental Sciences. “Someday homeowners will even be able to print sheets of these solar cells with inexpensive home-based inkjet printers. Consumers can then slap the finished product on a wall, roof or billboard to create their own power stations.”

So if this works, all those billboards all along the highways and road could be turned into power stations.

So, this is the thing with renewable energy. The thing I hear the most often is that it will destroy the economy and will have us all gathering our belongings and moving to Hoover Towns.

But somebody is going to be making money like crazy, and isn't that something you little capitalists say is all that matters? It seems to me that there is money to be made and money to be saved in renewable energy. The only ones who stand to lose are those who insist on staying behind.

Seriously, going to Mars-no problem. Shifting to renewable, cleaner ways to generate power, "Oh my god, you're crazy!!! Why don't you just ask us to turn you invisible!...What, we think we might be able to do that, too? Yeah, well...renewable energy is still crazy...for...whatever reason..."

If I could afford a house, one of the first things I would do is go solar as much as possible, and get off the grid. That's the long term solution--clean and renewable.

If I could afford a house, one of the first things I would do is go solar as much as possible, and get off the grid. That's the long term solution--clean and renewable.

Hamsters on wheels army?

Because if you have the hamsters you can simply rob a bank with them, THEN buy the house and have a clean, renewable, felonious energy source.

Yeah, yeah. When can we print our own nuclear power plants?

Going to Mars no problem? Thank God, considering how badly Congress bungles everything else...

But this is good news. By the time I own a house, solar will be far cheaper, more powerful, and even more reliable than it is now. Living off the grid has some big advantages that go beyond reliance on centralized power supplies and nonrenewable energy...it's better for the planet and can even make money if the sun shines brightly.

So, this is the thing with renewable energy. The thing I hear the most often is that it will destroy the economy and will have us all gathering our belongings and moving to Hoover Towns.
How the FUCK would no one paying energy bills destroy our economy? I know you weren't necessarily advocating it, but how could it possibly do anything to the economy?

How the FUCK would no one paying energy bills destroy our economy? I know you weren't necessarily advocating it, but how could it possibly do anything to the economy?

1. Renewable energy
2. ???
3. deficeit

;)

1. Renewable energy
2. ???
3. Deficit!!!

;)

Wait, so are those people claiming that energy providers make up the whole economy?

Also, good work! Edited for further awesomeness.

Wait, so are those people claiming that energy providers make up the whole economy?

Also, good work! Edited for further awesomeness.

Spelling? Oh crap...

Spelling? Oh crap...

More importantly, you forgot the !!! and the CAPITALIZATION.

More importantly, you forgot the !!! and the CAPITALIZATION.

Hm, how about extra credit? I'll shine you a nice apple.

*Snort** Ptoo!**Rub rub*

Here ya go!!!

Hm, how about extra credit? I'll shine you a nice apple.

*Snort** Ptoo!**Rub rub*

Here ya go!!!
Granted!

Merriam-Webster Online
Main Entry: Ludd·ite
Pronunciation: 'l&-"dIt
Function: noun
Etymology: perhaps from Ned Ludd, 18th century Leicestershire workman who destroyed a knitting frame
: one of a group of early 19th century English workmen destroying laborsaving machinery as a protest; broadly : one who is opposed to especially technological change

A serviceable description of those who yell so loudly that a new technology is so impossible, and if it isn't impossible, will be so horrible for all of humanity, that there's no point in even trying to develop it, and that anyone who suggests otherwise is crazy/stupid/an anarchist/naive (check one per occasion).

Of course, let's leave aside all the economic benefits of developing a new technology, such as job creation, education and training expansion, and new markets.

Slice me off some of that green tech, please. I don't care if it's only enough to power a cell phone for 12 hours - if it works and it's cheap and non-polluting, I'll use it.

How the FUCK would no one paying energy bills destroy our economy? I know you weren't necessarily advocating it, but how could it possibly do anything to the economy?

I've never understood it, that's just what is said, that going green will destroy the economy. Or something. Obviously I'm not giving the best representation of the argument because I don't understand it. Maybe someone will clarify.

I've never understood it, that's just what is said, that going green will destroy the economy. Or something. Obviously I'm not giving the best representation of the argument because I don't understand it. Maybe someone will clarify.

It won't destroy the economy; in fact, it will help it immensely just like every other energy innovation in the history of mankind. Anyone who says that green technology will damage the economy in any way is dangerously ignorant about all aspects of economics and should be absolutely nowhere near any economic policymaking in any way, shape, or form.

In fact, that's dangerously, even pathologically ignorant...

If I could afford a house, one of the first things I would do is go solar as much as possible, and get off the grid. That's the long term solution--clean and renewable.

You could go wind powered. Apparently it only costs about $20,000 to set up a personal wind mill that will power your needs completely.

Of course, depending on where you live, it may not be viable.

Really, we need to focus not on one single method, but many.

Oh, and screw the oil companies.

Well, no, not really. But if this works out it could happen...

Source (http://www.physorg.com/news103997338.html)


So if this works, all those billboards all along the highways and road could be turned into power stations.

So, this is the thing with renewable energy. The thing I hear the most often is that it will destroy the economy and will have us all gathering our belongings and moving to Hoover Towns.

But somebody is going to be making money like crazy, and isn't that something you little capitalists say is all that matters? It seems to me that there is money to be made and money to be saved in renewable energy. The only ones who stand to lose are those who insist on staying behind.

Seriously, going to Mars-no problem. Shifting to renewable, cleaner ways to generate power, "Oh my god, you're crazy!!! Why don't you just ask us to turn you invisible!...What, we think we might be able to do that, too? Yeah, well...renewable energy is still crazy...for...whatever reason..."
I think that doctor has no concept of how inkjets work nor the manufacturing process that is likely still going to be the part of solar cell manufacture, more likely then not they will still be industrially manufactured, just much much cheaper

You could go wind powered. Apparently it only costs about $20,000 to set up a personal wind mill that will power your needs completely.

Of course, depending on where you live, it may not be viable.

Really, we need to focus not on one single method, but many.

Oh, and screw the oil companies.
Bolded truth.
I think that doctor has no concept of how inkjets work nor the manufacturing process that is likely still going to be the part of solar cell manufacture, more likely then not they will still be industrially manufactured, just much much cheaper

He did start to get a little fanciful there at the end of it. He's still in the "...and it cures cancer!!!" phase of things. But I've read several articles on this so far and there are things that are consistent. Cheaper and cleaner to produce and the 'paint on' aspect of it. This is just the first one where they made a passing mention of billboards and yet another new revenue stream for green technologies came through.

Wow...talk about suddenly much cheaper solar.

Any predictions from the more scientifically-inclined as to how long it will take for this method to filter into production and lower costs dramatically for solar panels?

You could go wind powered. Apparently it only costs about $20,000 to set up a personal wind mill that will power your needs completely.

Of course, depending on where you live, it may not be viable.

Really, we need to focus not on one single method, but many.

I know!

A windmill generator that is covered in solar panels and has a small geothermal plant in the tower!

Oh, it also has to be able to play mp3s. Everything has to be able to play mp3s.

I know!

A windmill generator that is covered in solar panels and has a small geothermal plant in the tower!

Oh, it also has to be able to play mp3s. Everything has to be able to play mp3s.

Pfft... mp3s are SO last half a decade ago.

It's the iMill, with attached iSol, and a handy iPod charger/speaker attachment.

I actually entertain the idea of having a house that is completely solar powered, and not only that, there is a way for you to have your own Hydrogen pump (that is also solar powered) for your Hydrogen fueld or Hybrid cars!

I've never understood it, that's just what is said, that going green will destroy the economy. Or something. Obviously I'm not giving the best representation of the argument because I don't understand it. Maybe someone will clarify.

Maybe they mean it will destroy the economy of the people who own energy companies and don't adapt. ;)

Wouldn't it actually be cheaper to have your house have solar power than to live on the grid? Someone should crunch some numbers.

Maybe they mean it will destroy the economy of the people who own energy companies and don't adapt. ;)

Dammable! I was actually going to say that. Yet I forgot. You win this time The Nazz... you win this time...

*plots diabolical plan involving cheetos and a pink leotard*

Mwahahaha... it's all coming together...

Wouldn't it actually be cheaper to have your house have solar power than to live on the grid? Someone should crunch some numbers.

Long run, probably. Especially with the increasing cost of energy, inflation, and other fun little things that increase the cost of providing energy to your house.

It's a bit of a large investment, but will pay off in the end.

Long run, probably. Especially with the increasing cost of energy, inflation, and other fun little things that increase the cost of providing energy to your house.

It's a bit of a large investment, but will pay off in the end.

Hmmm...I do like to save money.....espically with my expensive aviation obsession.....I mean hobby.

Wouldn't it actually be cheaper to have your house have solar power than to live on the grid? Someone should crunch some numbers.

A colleague of mine just put a solar roof on her house. There will be times when it will completely power the home and she can actually sell power back to the grid, and others where she'll be buying some power. The good news for her is that after hurricanes, she'll likely be sitting pretty, and here in Florida, that's a big deal.

But it's expensive--like $18K. She's the #2 person in the department and her husband is wealthy, so it's not a big deal in terms of money, but they figure they won't make their money back in energy savings for 10-12 years.

sell power back to the grid

Isn't that horrendously, errr, impractical to implement on a large scale?

Isn't that horrendously, errr, impractical to implement on a large scale?

Impractical for who? The energy companies? Maybe, but I can't really be bothered by their problems. They're doing everything they can to maintain the status quo. Well fuck that.

Impractical for who? The energy companies? Maybe, but I can't really be bothered by their problems. They're doing everything they can to maintain the status quo. Well fuck that.

I'm becoming a bigger and bigger fan for microgrids as time goes on.

Alright, math time(Then bed time, as I am now 21, and need my rest for tommorrow):

1 square meter of good solar panels produce 150 watts of energy per hour, optimally. Of course, optimal is the key word. Let's cut that by two thirds just to be on the safe side.

50 watts per square meter, per hour.

Now then, the average household uses 888 kilowatts per months. That's 888,000 watts.

Now then, to find how much a *good* solar panel produces in a month, simply multiply

50x24x30=36,000 watts per panel per month.

Divide 888 by 36, and you get 24 2/3 square meters of panel.

1 square meter of 20% efficient paneling costs about $1000. Thus, you would need $25,000 for said panels(Not including installation and conversion). Of course, these are far more efficient than the ones I used in my example, so the cost could be reduced by quite a bit(As I was using around 10% conversion panels, as well I shot low for wattage output due to several unknown variables, such as cloud cover, distance from the equator, and climate), as well as how much power a specific house hold uses.

Basically, for a system that would power the normal home would cost, around $20,000-$30,000 after all is said and done. Now then, the life expectancy of these panels is 30 years.

Now then, depending on where you live, cost of energy is different. This is due to type of energy source used, infrastucture in place, amount of power being generated, amount of customers, etc.

Not then, the national average is somewhere around 8 cents per kilowatt hour, give or take.

888x.08=71 dollars, give or take, a month, depending on the area and time of year, on average.

71x12=852 dollars a year.

20,000/852=23 years.

So basically, after around 25 years you will break even, at a decent rate of conversion. That means that for 5 years, you have essentially free energy, more or less, and save around 4,000-5,000 dollars.

Of course, this is not taking into account inflation, decrease in cost of production, and I guesstimated a couple of the numbers, so really the amount you save should be quite a bit higher than that.

Impractical for who? The energy companies? Maybe, but I can't really be bothered by their problems. They're doing everything they can to maintain the status quo. Well fuck that.

No, just feeding it back up into the grid in general. TG was around, he explained it, I really should've saved that. Or learned it.

snip

And then after that albeit modest gain there is also that your energy was cleaner. And thats by the older tech, this, should it pan out, will be cheaper even. Plus if you combine systems that would complement each other.

And then after that albeit modest gain there is also that your energy was cleaner. And thats by the older tech, this, should it pan out, will be cheaper even. Plus if you combine systems that would complement each other.

Even so, my math was solely considering the costs today. As you said, this new tech will produce it cheaper, replace easier, and even in the future it will likely get cheaper.

When you consider inflation, you may be saving much, much more as your energy needs won't be dependent on how much it costs in the future. Other problems would include whether or not energy uses fossil fuels, which will get more expensive in the future(Such as natural gas and oil based) which will dramatically increase the cost for energy. So, really, my numbers were based on what a person would save if prices remain constant, however that is not going to be the case, and it is not going to occur as such. I wouldn't doubt, when all is said and down 25 or 30 years down the line, you could save upwards of ten to fifteen thousand dollars, easily.

And yes, being green is a very good thing, but unfortunately when encouraging people to switch over to green methods it is very difficult to convince them unless you involve the line "It saves money". Unfortunate, but true.

The major problem with this, however, is a high initial cost ($20,000 is going to put people off). Problem is, people just don't seem to understand "long term investment".

The major problem with this, however, is a high initial cost ($20,000 is going to put people off). Problem is, people just don't seem to understand "long term investment".

The best thing about adaptation is that things get cheaper, because that's a barrier for me (and I rent, which one could argue is an even bigger barrier.

The best thing about adaptation is that things get cheaper, because that's a barrier for me (and I rent, which one could argue is an even bigger barrier.

I can see it becoming a premium for rentals, though, especially in places that are more environmentally aware.

I can see it becoming a premium for rentals, though, especially in places that are more environmentally aware.

Definitely, especially if you're in an area where you can sell back energy. You're tenants don't have, or have very little, energy bills and in some cases the landlords can actually make extra income.

Well, no, not really. But if this works out it could happen...

Source (http://www.physorg.com/news103997338.html)


So if this works, all those billboards all along the highways and road could be turned into power stations.

So, this is the thing with renewable energy. The thing I hear the most often is that it will destroy the economy and will have us all gathering our belongings and moving to Hoover Towns.

But somebody is going to be making money like crazy, and isn't that something you little capitalists say is all that matters? It seems to me that there is money to be made and money to be saved in renewable energy. The only ones who stand to lose are those who insist on staying behind.

Seriously, going to Mars-no problem. Shifting to renewable, cleaner ways to generate power, "Oh my god, you're crazy!!! Why don't you just ask us to turn you invisible!...What, we think we might be able to do that, too? Yeah, well...renewable energy is still crazy...for...whatever reason..."

You know.. I'm waiting for the day that I see someone who opposes solar energy on the belief that sucking power out of the sun will make it go out.

Now perhaps I can fulfil my dream and make myself solar powered! :)

You know.. I'm waiting for the day that I see someone who opposes solar energy on the belief that sucking power out of the sun will make it go out.

Bonus points would be awarded if it was an elected official or candidate for high office.

Bonus points would be awarded if it was an elected official or candidate for high office.

Haven't people already done that, though, when solar power collectors were first invented?

I still haven't heard from a scientifically minded person on how soon the effects of this much cheaper method of production will take to filter through to the market.

I think the biggest problem occurs in areas with less sunlight. This means nothing to a family living in, say, Vermont, where they won't ever make back their investment. With mountains all around reducing total daylight hours, and a very cloudy winter, solar power isn't all that worthwhile. On the other hand, this is great for places in the Midwest like Minnesota, where sunny winters are common. Anywho, my point is that even if/when solar power does become much cheaper, it still won't be for everyone.

I think the biggest problem occurs in areas with less sunlight. This means nothing to a family living in, say, Vermont, where they won't ever make back their investment. With mountains all around reducing total daylight hours, and a very cloudy winter, solar power isn't all that worthwhile. On the other hand, this is great for places in the Midwest like Minnesota, where sunny winters are common. Anywho, my point is that even if/when solar power does become much cheaper, it still won't be for everyone.

True enough. It's hardly a whole solution by itself.

Still, by making it much cheaper and more affordable, that makes it a larger part of a solution. We still need other technologies as well, because we've got Peak Oil literally breathing down our necks as we speak now. This came at a very good time and that's why I keep asking about how long it will take to trickle into the market, because we have very little time left for dicking around when it comes to research into alternative energy sources.

True enough. It's hardly a whole solution by itself.

Still, by making it much cheaper and more affordable, that makes it a larger part of a solution. We still need other technologies as well, because we've got Peak Oil literally breathing down our necks as we speak now. This came at a very good time and that's why I keep asking about how long it will take to trickle into the market, because we have very little time left for dicking around when it comes to research into alternative energy sources.

It could eventually become a solution by itself if the collectors become more efficient, but even in the shorter term, it would help simply because the places more suited to solar could move over to it and free up traditional resources for those places who need them.

You know.. I'm waiting for the day that I see someone who opposes solar energy on the belief that sucking power out of the sun will make it go out.
I'm tempted to email Senators Inhofe and Coburn and see if one of them picks up on it.

It could eventually become a solution by itself if the collectors become more efficient, but even in the shorter term, it would help simply because the places more suited to solar could move over to it and free up traditional resources for those places who need them.
Definitely. Seeing new technology like this come out now is making me feel a bit more relaxed about the future of energy for the world.

Definitely. Seeing new technology like this come out now is making me feel a bit more relaxed about the future of energy for the world.

Don't get comfortable yet. The description I read in the article from the OP didn't sound like the technology is ready for primetime yet. It sounds promising, but there's a universe between promising and application.

Don't get comfortable yet. The description I read in the article from the OP didn't sound like the technology is ready for primetime yet. It sounds promising, but there's a universe between promising and application.

And suddenly I just tensed up again. Thanks a lot, Nazz.

What we need is Dosuun in here...he knows a lot about engineering, and I want his opinion.

And suddenly I just tensed up again. Thanks a lot, Nazz.

What we need is Dosuun in here...he knows a lot about engineering, and I want his opinion.

Sorry about that--don't tense. This is, as far as I can tell, good news overall, and it sounds very promising. I'm just saying don't make plans to paint your house solar in the next couple of years.

And suddenly I just tensed up again. Thanks a lot, Nazz.

What we need is Dosuun in here...he knows a lot about engineering, and I want his opinion.

I read about a lot of this stuff, and a lot of people who are eager with a good idea but haven't actually gotten very far.

This is one of many articles I've read on this particular one. The difference here is that they've actually done most of what they're talking about (the individual things work, getting it to all work together is where they're at, is my understanding). So there is still a road to haul between where they are and billboards powering the country side, it's on the 'feasible' side of things. It could still fall flat on its face, but things like this are being looked into all over the place now, and that alone is encouraging.

Ah, well then...I will...wait for more information.

Ah, well then...I will...wait for more information.

This is from two years ago (http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/001918.html)
Researchers at the University of Toronto have developed a new form of photovoltaic material using "quantum dots" -- confined sets of electrons with unusual optical and electronic properties -- embedded into a thin polymer film. The material can generate the photoelectric effect using infrared light, and is the first photoelectric polymer to have significant infrared sensitivity. When working across infrared and visual spectra, it has a photoelectric efficiency of 30% -- six times better than other polymer photovoltaics. 30% efficiency would make quantum dot polymer solar cells competitive with traditional silicon-and-glass panels, and far more functional.
...
. As the polymer could be readily woven into fabric, it could enable better wearable biosensors, and would definitely be an enabling technology for fabric computers. The big win, of course, would be the possibility of an easily-added solar power layer to the external shell of any device using electricity. It doesn't have to replace plug-in power completely to be a significant efficiency improvement.
To view articles in Nature Materials you have to buy them. There are several on 'paint-on' solar power and a lot seem like research results.

It's not the same thing, but similar. I think when people are making a lot of parallel discoveries it's a good sign.

An alternative to upfront solar costs (http://www.connect2thesun.com/) That's brilliant. Dammit, I hate puns...