"Pete C." wrote in message

That 6hr/day could align nicely with the 2nd/3rd shift when you'd have
to run the fossil fuel boilers anyway. You'd still be cutting some 33%
of both your fuel consumption and your emissions. Again, you are the
only one saying 100% solar, I have consistently said ~33% solar. What
would 33% of your annual oil/gas consumption amount to in $? Probably a
hefty chunk of change towards building the daytime solar boiler.

We spent about 200,000 last year so the savings potential is $66,000. That
is assuming you get 33%. I'd guess we'd be closer to 20% considering
weather in New England. Sure, that would be a good savings, but what is the
equipment cost? You seem to have missed that question. Where does it get
installed and what has to be done to the infrastructure for it? What is the
heat potential?

Seems to me, if it was that simple and cost effective power plants around
the world would be using it.

Now if I have room for molten salt tanks, this may work
http://gizmodo.com/362271/280+megawa...ller-technique