Why havn't we converted to SOLAR ENERGY? What are we waiting for?!?

Question

I heard that with a a solar panel a square mile in size could power the entire united states? WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR!?

Answer 1

You heard wrong. Very, very wrong. Nuclear and Geothermal energy will be the future. Hell, it should be the present, but environmentalists got so scared about the destructive power of nuclear energy, they refused to see it's possibilities.

Upset with the state of the environment, or the US economy? Environmentalists only need to look in the mirror to find out who's to blame.

Hell we could take care of our own oil demand right here at home because we know where so much of it is. But 'No!'. Environmentalists don't want to risk an oil spill, despite the fact that we have INCREDIBLY high safety standards (second only to Japan). So instead we have to pay 90+ USD a barrel to a foreign power over seas (whom is most likely funding Muslim militants who hate the US of A.) while our dollar value continues to sink like a stone.


Sorry for the rant... I'm a little bitter.

Answer 2

Actually I'm not sure what it is, but I've heard that it was more something like if the entire South West was covered in solar panels then it could power the U.S. or World or something big, either way however, that statement about a square mile isn't true. And solar energy is still expensive and requires a lot of effort, digging out silicon and materials from the ground, melting the materials into shapeable parts, etc., don't get me wrong I think we should use more solar and wind energy here in the U.S., however it isn't very easy nor very economical to do so quickly

Answer 3

Depending on the type of battery will depend on how long it will store a charge before the internal resistance of the battery increases and the battery will slowly lose charge. You could use solar panels to create electricity (25% typical efficiency, up to 35% for GaAs panels) Or concentrate the solar energy to produce steam to run a turbine. Wind powered generators are another option, but a bit noisy. The Australian National University has some good info. If the power isn't for immediate use, then storage is a problem. The energy could be converted and stored as hydrogen gas. This could be done by using the generated electricity to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen through electrolysis. Less efficient, but a longer shelf-life if done properly. Some safety hazards apply when storing large amounts of hydrogen :)

Answer 4

I believe it is that most people don't care what happens after they die. Meaning Global Warming is not going to affect anyone over the age of 10 years old so why should they care what will not happen till after they are dead and gone. Most people want and want and want but they don't want the things that will help anyone but them and right at this minute.

Most people can't do the math correctly and see that solar cost less then renting power from the local utility. With solar electric you are buying 30 years of electric power all at once and up front. If you rent from the utility you pay cost of living increases and taxes that increase every year and the increase of fuel till it is gone. Then everyone will be wanting solar and the price will go up because they will say the demand is higher then production.

So like with a home you buy you can resell it later but if you rent a home you have a stack of payment stubs which are not worth the paper it is writen on.

How much are people willing to pay for that new car that they don't need or that big SUV or Hummer?
Why are people not driving a low priced Ugo or maybe a VW or something cheap like a Dodge Colt or a Ford Pinto?
If people are sick don't they go to the doctor anyway and charge it?
So why not be the doctor and fix our global warming problem and give our grand kids a chance to live?

Not going to happen till people are forced into it because people are too greedy.

Ok not all people are like I said but a lot are. Their back pockets come way before your grand kids or the birds and trees.

And I will be like anyone else (even the nuke and coal people) and would fight to keep nuclear waste out of my back yard.

Go Solar

Answer 5

Having lived off grid for a number of years, I can give you some answers. First, I think the one mile square is an exaggeration. Solar panels are still fairly expensive although new technologies are bringing the prices down. Panels are somewhat fragile, and do take a fair amount of maintenance. It is not nearly as simple as just walking into the house and turning on a light. People are resistant to change and intimidated by the amount of additional work.

There is an initiative called a million solar roofs that has been quite successful. Most experts I have read feel that single commercial building or house instals are more practical than giant installations.

That being said, at least in Colorado, the cost of electricity from a new wind farm is cheaper than the cost of electricity from a new coal fired electric plant. Renewable energy is the future, it will just take longer than we might like.

Answer 6

Nobody's doing the actual maths, so here are the numbers!:

1 square meter of traditional photovoltaics produces about 200Watts (facing up) and costs 1000 dollars

1 sq kilometer would produce 200MegaWatts and cost already 1 billion dollars
1 sq mile is about 2.5 times this, so:
1 sq mile produces 500MW and costs 2.5 billion dollars
The problem is that America consumes about 500GW live (i think), which is 1000 times more, so:
1000 sq mile produce 500GW and cost 2500 billion
This is a square of side 30 miles times 30 miles, much bigger than your square mile (900 times bigger). It's big but not impossible. Note some gaps may be needed for roads etc but on the other hand panel efficiency may rise in 5-10 years. The problem lies in the cost, the 2500B, but mass volume could reduce the cost 3 to 5x so it could turn into 500 billion...

Do you think 500B is prohibitive? well that's what we spent in Irak. At least with solar we would have solved our energy crisis

PS: any calculation error please email me

Answer 7

When I was in the electric power business in the 60's and 70's, the Electric Power Research Institute and many other organizations spent millions, if not billions researching and testing Solar power. There are scientists and engineers spending their lives studying this great source of energy.

I guess you know more than all of them because you are obviously a "Environmentalist". We are just stupid ignorant engineers. You probably believe it is because the oil companies bought up all the good designs, or maybe it was Bush again because he likes oil.

If and when Solar Power becomes even close to cost effective and reliable, there are millions and billions of people that will snap it up and use it. Even with oil at $100 a barrel, it just isn't without major subsidies. Get educated. Learn Physics and Chemistry and Engineering Economics. Then analyze it and you will understand why.

Answer 8

1) If we converted completely to solar energy as you seem adamant we should, what would happen when it was night and everyone wanted to turn their lights on. Or a day when it was overcast. All that money spent on panels and we'd still have to revert to old methods

2) Plus solar panels are still new, very hard to make, and not cost efficient. A square mile of panels would need a tremendous amount of energy and resources (and money) to make.

We need to wait until we can make panels cheaper, more efficient and with less by-products.

Answer 9

It's an economics problem. If you look at the solar units now being sold to homeowners, they just don't pencil out. Even with tax credits, purchase allowances and all that other stuff, it is still a poor use of your money to invest in solar. If you want widespread solar use, then you should look for $200 to $300 per barrel for crude oil (which would mean about $5 to $8 per gallon of gasoline. Probably at $200 and certainly at $300, solar energy becomes a prudent use of your money.

Answer 10

While it is a good idea, it is often to unreliable and inefficient. Since soler energy cells can't produce energy 24/7 it would cause a shortage of power.
To anyone wondering why they don't convert try setting up wing or solar generators in your home. You will notice that, while useful and easy energy, they do not produce nearly enough. Often you can have homes covered entirely in solar panels yet still need to be connected to the power grid. Once they are more efficient though they may become more common use.

Answer 11

I agree that it can be frustrating to wait for this technology to become more widespread. While solar power has made significant strides in recent years in cost, it still costs more to install and maintain solar power than other options. Part of this cost is due to solar power only working during the day. While a coal or nuclear plant can run all day, solar power can only be generated during the daytime hours.

Despite this, solar power plants are being installed across the world, and is getting cheaper very quickly.