I find it difficult to believe?

Question

that we have enough technology that a satelitte can view the front page of a news paper from space but we do not have efficient enough soloar panels to power cars or homes sufficiently. What gives?

Answer 1

I find it difficult to believe that we are fighting a war that we cannot win too. I find it hard to believe that our environment is being sold off slowly to industry from other nations. I choke on the idea that we have had almost seven years of an administration who would rather wage war that protect the planet that we live on.

I hear your question and ask the same......

Answer 2

Elementary economics.

In the open market, both panels and satellites have to somehow be worth what they cost. In the case of panels, since they are essentially replacing other power sources, they need to be price-competitive with those other power sources, and are not [yet].

The government can of course interfere with the free market and subsidize certain favored industries (like solar if you wish), but unfortunately government subsidies always have "unforeseen" side effects and are typically an inefficient way to accomplish anything. Government subsidies are often a corruptive influence as well. This is precisely what will happen with ethanol subsidies in the near future, for example.

The government could also interfere with the free market by taxing all of the non-favored alternatives (like raising the gas tax even higher). This is slightly less harmful than subsidies, but is harder to do in a corrupt way, so it is probably not as likely to happen.

The cleanest, most efficient, and least corrupt way is to wait for the economies of scale (with increasing demand) to change the economic comparison in the favor of solar panels. Since it is easy, clean, efficient, and not corrupt, this will almost certainly not happen.

Answer 3

righteousjohnson, you couldnt be more wrong. You have got your facts backwards. solar energy is a very good source of energy. We just reached the 30% efficiency threshold a month ago, and a home with solar panels on its roof can sustain itself in almost any circumstance (unless totally shaded by trees). Every residence has the ability to produce its own energy using clean alternative energy sources.

If the US invested only a fraction of the budget that it currently puts into the defence industry, we would be self sustaining. However, lobyist have a very effective way of keeping influential politicians in their pockets. This is why we are not as advanced as other countries in alternative energies.

Answer 4

Physics is a b***h. Solar panels do not generate energy, they just collect it. The amount of energy striking an object (especially vehicles), even if collected with 100% efficiency, would not be enough to make it commercially viable. The amount of sunlight hitting this planet is finite and fickle. In order for there to be enough solar energy coming our way to power everything, we would be cooking like an egg in the microwave.
We use energy faster than it can be made or collected, that's the rub. Any increase in supply will just increase our demand.

Answer 5

Research is vigorous in this area. There are promising breakthroughs in the area of nano-technology. At the present, solar panels only convert about 4% of the energy that hits them into electricity. The market will come up with a solution. There is a huge amount of money to be made IF they are cost-effective.

Answer 6

Why not just go price how much money you would need to spend to outfit your home with enough solar panels to provide all of the electrical energy you required? The last time I ran the rough numbers it came out to about $30,000 and I couldn't have an airconditioner. Lets assume it's come down to $25,000 since then. Are you ready to pay the bill for your own solar energy?

Answer 7

AMEN! Some see it fit to put money in today and not towards the future. Why not do what Yahoo is doing now. GIVE everyone just one CFB to put in their house....it would save enough power to power a city for quiet some time. Why not use only ethanol for public transportation? The answers are simple...getting those in power to listen is the hardest step.

Answer 8

i agree, i think th big hancho type people need to start focusing on more important stuff than teh daily news, like teh enviornment. you never kno maybe one day someone will be reading teh newspaper from a sattelite and they'll read a head line about teh enviornment dieing! that would be a wake up call!

Answer 9

its all economics. Right now we already have infastructure for other sources of electricity, so its cheaper to stick with it than to develop new technology and buy tons of solar panels.

Satelites however are funded in two ways, first theres the government that doesn't need to justify its expenses, they just spend whatever it takes and say "its good for the american people, so its worth it" and second you have private companies, like satelite TV that can make a profit from the technology, so they push it until it becomes profitable

Answer 10

big oil and not enough solar energy out there period. Now synthetic energy is another story. If we can create synthetic true to life diamonds which match the exact characteristics of a diamond or clone a goat.... we can do something to make more dependable cheap fuel.