On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:03:57 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


British scientists called "a revolution" in generating electricity.

Ooo-oooooooooooooh "British Scientists" call it "a revolution"

and there was I thinking it was a figment of the imagination of a
Bowldy-Headed hack in the Grauniad.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...enewableenergy

Snip my stuff.


"Our first solar panels will be used in a solar power station in
Germany," said Erik Oldekop, Nanosolar's manager in Switzerland.

California, Germany, Switzerland, Far away places with strange
sounding names, no wonder our money is not good enough for them.

"We aim to produce the panels for 99 cents [50p] a watt, which is
comparable to the price of electricity generated from coal."

How do you work that out ?


Precsiely. I suspect what he is saying is that in bright california
sunshine the PANEL COST is about $1 per watt generated.


No, no, you got it wrong It's not a dollar. (Hell, that would be
*three digits*, IE $1.00) it's 99 cents. Precisely, in Calfornia.

Have they made any? Yes, last week.

Do they work? Hard to say.

Have they measured how they perform ? Erm pass on that it's not summer
in Calfornia ...

God help them in Switzerland it's always been ****ing down when I've
been there.

More snips

At 100% efficiency, - probably ten times what is realistically
achievable by ANY technology - that means AT LEAST 300 square kilometers
of solar panes. Realistically at 10% efficiency thats 3000 square
kilometers, and thats daytime only power. So an area the size of the
lake district covered in solar panels. Right. And a hell of a lot of
overnight storage heaters or batteries.

Its greenmyth nonsense.


Greenmythology only works in "magic numbers". IE CFL's last 25 years.