Repower America with Solar Energy

[zoperxplex]

That's good so long as it does not rain (it is in the desert, so presumably that is not much of a problem), and we can stop the Earth from spinning.

[ddnguyen278]

Given the US has over 3 million square miles, i think 9216 is reasonable to set aside for solar power.. what is that .3%? We set aside more land for parking lots than that..

[drewduffy1213]

9216 sq miles of solar panels...cause thats reasonable



[stevoe05]

stop making sense...get back in your hole

[danchad79]

check out/search 'climate chains'

on youtube.

It is a compelling take on the cap and trade scam

[mosesegypt]

This is nothing more than a giant, global redistribution-of-wealth scheme. Man-made global warming, the hoax that it is, has always been nothing but that -- with the accompanying gigantic growth-of-government from nation to nation occurring at the same time -- and the loss of individual liberty and freedom.

[strayvideo]

@mosesegypt So, eliminating the threat of foreign countries holding us hostage over oil (as already happened with OPEC in the 1970's) is reducing our freedom? Literally hundreds of companies can help provide solar collection devices, but only a small handful of multinational corporations provide us with petroleum products. I still can't even imagine where you get this loss of freedom stuff.

[koolsam50]

That is quite smart...using deserts solar power energy farms

[iknowyoux]

That's truly amazing! I slashed my electric bill in half! look here: solar.xfollow.me (Copy to your browser's address bar)

[christineglamazon]

While we're on the topic of nuclear, CNN just ran a story about the proliferation of sophisticated hacker software embedded in the power grid, which is capable of not only shutting down the grid but "damaging equipment." Now just imagine a Chinese hacker giving an order to a nuclear plant to do something catastrophic. And before you say that's impossible, they've already found such code in Wall Street and other "protected" institutions, including the military.

Now, why would we take that risk?

[markajaw]

I saw that story and that's not the impression that I got. When they say "damaging equipment" they mean overloading a part of the grid with power. So much power that it could basically fry the grid. After the point where the nuclear plant has put out the power.

I still feel uneasy about nuclear and I would like to replace with wind/solar etc. I'm also uneasy about the smart grid technology that is hackable. I say we invest in making the technology more secure. Possibly part of the stimulus?

[lifewarrior2375]

i`m pretty sure that the energy it takes to build a solar panel will never be replaced by the panel.......delivering it,getting all the parts from all over the world and getting new batteries every 5-7 years i say lights out

[christineglamazon]

Oh, you're "pretty sure" solar panels will never replace the amount of energy used to build them, huh? Then the people making these panels must be losing a fortune, because if they were priced to recoup all the energy you claim is used making them then nobody would buy them. Actually the reverse is true: people who install them find the panels pay for themselves in utility savings after a few years, and some even generate enough to sell to the grid and MAKE money.

Does Big Coal pay you well?

[toliverfive]

I don't know about the amount of energy needed to make solar panels, but have you priced them out when building a spec home? The numbers don't work. They're too expensive, and don't deliver enough energy. What they will do is make you feel better if that's your thing, and that's a big reason people buy them.

I look forward to better solar energy technologies in the future. In the meantime, we should be building nuclear power plants. The French are doing very well with theirs.

[christineglamazon]

The price of solar panels comes down every year as their energy output goes up. There are people, right now, who have exclusively solar electric and are actually able to sell excess power to the grid.

Until a permanent SAFE solution is found for nuclear waste, we should not be building more of those plants. Wiki "radiation poisoning" for a stark list of reasons. Not only is terrorism a factor, but plain ol' human error. Imagine a human-caused disaster magnified 1000 times. That's the potential.

[toliverfive]

Yes, the panels are getting better thank God, but they still aren't up to snuff.

Nuclear power is safe now. Yucca is OVER ENGINEERED. It's safe as hell. Whatever France is doing is safe. We should deal with what's real, not dreams. Some dreams do come come true, but they take time.

Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.

And who are these people that sell their excess power? They must've had money to burn putting in those cost prohibitive panels.

Night, clouds & powergrid = PROBLEM

[christineglamazon]

Who says nuclear power is "safe" other than advocates like you? In the end, insurance companies, (like the ones who had to shell out for Three Mile Island), will be the ones who dictate whether or not anymore are built. If they see a risk of a multi-billion dollar payout, they will not cover a new plant. That's the *real* reason for no new plants since TMI.

BTW, your claims about solar are horsepuckey. Here's an example of a solar house I described -- tinyurl(.)com/solarhome

[toliverfive]

Ask the USN, France [~90%], Japan [~30% and rising] if it's safe. Your fear-mongering is unsupported by the facts. It's not insurance that is the major stumbling block for clean nuclear power, but government.

Your link: 20K for panels? You make my case.

[christineglamazon]

Oh, please, are you that naive? The government routinely goes against what citizens want and kowtows to big business. Here in our lawsuit-happy country, insurance companies have the final say on what is or is not done. If it can't find insurance, it isn't done. Military use is tiny scale compared with civilian power generation, and the scale creates the risk.

BTW, 35% of that 20K is rebated and in a sunny clime the panels would pay for themselves in a few years in utility savings.

[toliverfive]

I agree we should have meaningful tort reform legislation. Notwithstanding that, it's gov. regs that keep us from proceeding

In the example provided, only ~4k has been reimbursed so far. The rest is in the air [see his site]. It'll take 10-20 years to recoup such money in most situations. Al Gore has panels BTW, and he's still buying most of his electricity from the grid.

The scale of use in Japan, France and even the limited use here plainly demonstrate the safely of modern nuclear power.

[christineglamazon]

Which government regulations preventing nuke power are you alluding to? Also, where do you get your 10-20 years figure? Cite specific references for both.

Regarding the solar house, he says his own laziness has kept him from getting the rest of his rebate. It's true his neighborhood sees the most fog and overcast in San Francisco, so it will take him longer to recoup, but people elsewhere -- especically in sunny places like the SJ Valley and all of So. Cal will recoup much more quickly.

[toliverfive]

The government red tape involved with building a new nuclear plant is stifling. [See offshore drilling for an extreme example.]

I figured out the solar panel figures for myself, and I live in "sunny Florida". I would have only got about 1/3 of the electricity I needed at the cost of over the 20K. That kind of money takes beaucoup time to recoup, which is why most people who crunch the numbers decide to pass, unless of course they are looking to make a statement and/or feel good.

[christineglamazon]

I said, cite the specific regulations. There were actual laws, both Legislative and Executive decrees that banned offshore drilling. Name the decree or law that applies to solar.

With regard to your 10-20 figure and you running your own solar energy numbers yourself, how did you arrive at those numbers? Are you an electrical engineer? According to an actual engineer for a power company, converting the rating of a solar system back to Kwatts/day is moderately complex.

[christineglamazon]

I shouldn't post before I've had my caffeine. I meant to say "name the decree or law that applies to nuclear." What specific law hasn't the nuke industry been able to get around (by stuffing GOP or Demo pockets) in twenty years to build even one new plant?

[toliverfive]

There is no specific law, as it's a smorgasbord of Federal, state and often local regulatory bodies that have very lengthy and expensive hoops to jump through. Then there are the phalanx of lawsuits filed by envro groups. IIRC, plans for a new local nuclear plant were dropped because the legal and regulatory hurdles.

A nuclear plant is almost as hard to build as a coal plant.

Most any rudimentary search will show you what's been going on for 20+ years in the US with regards to nuclear power.

[christineglamazon]

"A nuclear plant is almost as hard to build as a coal plant."

According to the DOE, as of January 2009 there are 48 coal plants in the USA under or near construction or have obtained permits. How many nukes have been permitted since then? Don't you think with all the money at stake that industry couldn't twist enough arms to get even one plant built in 30 years?

[christineglamazon]

It turns out you're right it isn't insurance companies. No insurance company has EVER agreed to insure a nuclear power plant because they are too risky. Congress had to step in and pass a law that limits the owner's liability. After TMI and Chernobyl people woke up to the dangers.

Here in California we have these things called "earthquakes." I shudder to think of the one operating nuke plant in Diablo (Devil's) Canyon. Could end up a self-fulfilling prophecy building one there.

[toliverfive]

It's not hard to estimate the numbers. I was being generous with my 50% power and "over 20K" numbers.

As a matter of fact, the estimate offered by a industry website [Google: "solar estimate", top of page] was more than double my ballpark cost estimate. The government rebates are less than set in stone and may take over a year to get, if ever.

Try to think practically christine.

[christineglamazon]

I am thinking practically. I used one of those solar calculators I just found. With a house that has a $300 monthly electric bill the system is only $24.3K after all the rebates and incentives with a break-even point of 11 years and 25-year ROI of 300%. I admit I was over-optimistic with my earlier calc, but it's still worth it. And it will be 11 years of not contributing to pollution or being held hostage by fossil fuels or waiting for nuclear that may never be built. I *am* being practical.

[darliegoddess]

Think before you say stupid things. Sheesh !

[Ireg2post1]

I'd like to see a king sized honkin' nuclear power plant instead. But that would be too easy wouldn't it.

[cjone234]

The thing that kills me is, there's enough oil on the north face of Alaska to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil until we can get things like this built. God forbid we disturb a few owls and reindeer. I say drill it all. Then we can establish a national grid of solar power across the United States. You don't have to put all 97 miles in the desert. There's enough land still in this country to put panels in a lot of places. I have a solar roof and I get money back every month from my electric

[glowingball]

I think the fact that they are asking us to make a patch of land 96 miles wide be filled with solar panels that cost what..300 bucks each? Yea..have fun footing the bill of more GNP then there is in the entire planet to make those. Much less the BILLIONS of units necessary to fill that spot would be so vast who could produce them all?

[sw8741]

BEWARE!! LIES AND DECEPTION! "Saudi Arabia of the desert?? The sun does not shine 24/7/365 in any location!! Electricity can not be store in large quantities!! I'm one for finding alternative sources of power on national security grounds alone and do not agree with these green thugs! They use tactics of lies, deception, manipulation and are no better then Hitler and make his propaganda machine proud!

[OOO1203]

This is stupid ... everybody will continue to depend on oil

[kostea13]

SOLAR POWER + Plugin Electric Vehicles = FREE AMERICA and Europe !

NO OIL , NO POLUTION , NO DEEPENCE on ENERGY ! THE FUTURE IS ELECTRIC !

[AmersfoortTristan]

@kostea13 Exactly.

[SMOKEDATREESITSNANG]

but its not that the sun needs to shine , it just need a little light , I USE A SOLAR POWERED MP4 PLAYER woooo

[SaveTheFoothills]

I tried to post a critical video response yesterday, but it's still not up. I wonder why? (As if I didn't know.) You can see it by clicking on "SaveTheFoothills."

[SaveTheFoothills]

For some reason, the poster of the original video get to choose whether or not to allow a video response. Obviously, this choice should be made by a disinterested judge. This rule flies in the face of free debate.

[tainoaz]

BTW we all know that as we type the Fortune 500 are looking into ways to exploit this new frontier. No problem with anybody getting filthy rich as long as they let U.S. make a Living Wage/Health Benefits/Retirement Benefits before they give multimillion dollar yearly salaries with Golden Parachutes to Executives that don't take into account the impact of their companies on the following generations.

[scout233]

Cooool !!!  I hope this was in the stimulus plan!.. let's build that 10,000 sq ft parking lot and go!

[medicinesocks]

I've just subscribed because this is such an important issue, but you appear terribly misinformed about solar power. You see, we're in a climate CRISIS, so your recommending that we power our entire country on solar power seems extremely irresponsible. The fact is solar panels are made with nitrogen trifluoride, the worst greenhouse gas. DuPont makes it in China to avoid regulation. Your proposal eliminates 10,000 square miles of land that would otherwise be re-sequestering CO2 with plant life.

[tainoaz]

Nice to know about Nitrogen Trifluoride. Guess what? I am willing to bet it is made from oil and it is dirt cheap. We have to think things through. Business Ethics should not be an Oxymoron. If you listen to this commercial it is in the desert and not likely to support the re-sequestering of CO2.

China is a perfect example of Mindless Blind Capitalism. One more term of Conservatives in power would have finished dismantling the EPA, NIH, FDA, OSHA etc. China thinks hanging a CEO will stop it.

[oftoftoftlarry]

To state we can power the whole country with solar power sounds really good but anyone with a bit of brain knows it cannot be done.

Average usable sun is max of +/-10 hours/day.

Even in the desert, the sun does not always shine.

At best, solar can supplement the grid.

To run an ad claiming we can power the country on solar only makes you look foolish and not to be taken seriously.

[tainoaz]

Totally agree on your point. Having said we totally need a paradigm shift. Ethanol has some rather bad side effects. Maybe algae? What ever we do we have to keep an eye on the equipment needed and how is it produced. Corporations that have the capital will be lining up to profit from any major shift. I have NO problem with that BUT don't expect them to have anymore of a conscience. I served in a Nuclear vessel and as green as I wanna be I am for some nuclear where disposal can be reasonable.

[janefas]

Identify which solar panel are being used before commenting. These look like concentrators, not flat plates. They do not use nitrogen trifluoride. I made one of my own. Also, the location shown is a dessert with few plants to sequester carbon. Not to say there aren't living things that have adapted to that climate, but for sure, it is not effective in sequesting carbon (or carbon dioxide) as a forest would be.

[toliverfive]

Am I to understand that a single ~96X~96 parcel of land will power all of America's homes, government buildings, military bases and businesses?

I'm all for energy independence, but I smell BS.

And why isn't nuclear power a part of the solution?

[marklross2]

watch?v=qsjqT9QNl-k

[southloopsoxfan]

Where is this located??

[DRSmetal]

I really hope this will work!

[Hercules2345]

Who else remembers that President Carter put solar panels on the White House in the 70's? President Ronald Reagan had them removed in 1980! Thanks again politicians!

Hopefully those days are behind us.

[1SunKissedAngel]

its so simple it makes me wonder why this hasnt been the norm yet

[Teratornis]

Solar power is not the norm because the free market does not internalize the external costs of destroying the planet with coal. Coal appears cheaper to consumers than solar power, because with coal you can freely spew mercury into the oceans, carbon dioxide into the air, etc.

Many utility companies in the U.S. sell Renewable Energy Certificates, so you can use solar and wind to get your electricity right now if you want. If everybody demanded it, that's what utilities would supply.

[uptownxgirlx]

omg, i know!!!

[1walicki]

Why stop at acres of solar.. Let's put solar panels up everywhere.. on buildings in NYC, on airplane wings in the sky, on your car everytime you drive!!!

[Teratornis]

If solar cells can be cheap and durable enough, they can make sense on motor vehicles, since vehicles have to be covered with something, it might as well collect some energy. However, motor vehicles expend far more energy than they can collect from solar cells. That's why solar powered cars have to be built out of ultra-light bicycle components, to use far less power. One gasoline engine puts out hundreds of kW, which would require a whole parking lot covered with solar cells.

[Teratornis]

We can save far more petroleum, and cut emissions much faster, simply by traveling less. Learn how to edit on Wikipedia - nobody is doing anything more complicated than Wikipedia is doing, and Wikipedia users do it all without having to travel. Move bits, not bodies!

[SaveTheFoothills]

Acres of solar? These generators take up tens of square miles of desert habitat. This is the WRONG way to go. Distributed Renewable Generation is the right way.

[SaveTheFoothills]

Not to mention the hundreds of miles of transmission lines with 200 foot towers built on rights of way acquired through eminent domain. These big projects have huge environmental impacts. Again, Renewable Distributed Generation is the way to go. Not huge projects that benefit huge corporations.

[Deadlytrick]

COOL! I really hope Obama pushes this forward. AND I hope the idiot republicans would wake up and smell the pollution one of these days!

[mvathegr8]

You said it!

[kimberleycalling]

It's a great thing, but what rankles is the fact that the scientist behind this is an Australian who abandoned this country due to lack of interest and support from the previous GW denying conservative government under John Howard.

Howard effectively shipped our future, our economy, our jobs, our security overseas and now we're behind the game.

Good on you USA for recognising the broad range of values for taking action on GW. I guess we might be able to buy this technology from you some day.

[rustyflavors]

This is awesome

[ProductionsChess]

You have my support!