On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 19:18:42 -0600, "Morris Dovey"
wrote:

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
.. .

| I think that pretty much reflects a practical approach. I fully
support
| cost-competitive alternate approaches that work. Therein lies the
rub with
| most alternatives thus far, either 1) they are not cost competitive
(or
| only will be if no maintenance is required and they last 20 years)
or 2)
| they don't perform as well as what they are replacing -- either they
don't
| provide the same quantity or require significant intervention and
work on
| the part of the user.
|
| Looks like the panels you are putting in place are definitely
addressing
| problem #2, and most likely pretty close to fixing problem #1.

Well, they aren't the "magic bullet" that most people seem to crave.
They do a first rate job of producing heat during the daylight hours,
but they won't produce heat between sundown and sunup. Still, that
represents a significant portion of the heating requirement,
especially for people who're comfortable sleeping in a cooler
environment. I think it's possible to shrink purchased heating energy
requirements by a significant amount (30-70%, depending on local
climate and the particular residential structure.)

In combination with improved building technology - I've been hearing
about R-60 SIP panels - it should be possible to achieve 100% of the
heating requirement with solar in much of the USA.

.... snip

Just out of curiosity, if you don't mind saying, how much would an
installation such as you showed in the pictures cost?



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+