wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 09:07:19 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Well yes, lots of electricity is certainly a problem for the greens

I mean, you don't expect power stations to generate electricity reliably
do you?

Windmills don't!
Solar Panels don't!

I recently saw a parking meter with built-in solar panel on top, next to a street
light. Thinking the angles didn't seem to add up, I noted where the sun would be at
noon, and saw the panel was tilted in entirely the wrong direction.


NT

Apparently modern solar cells don't require direct sunlight. For something with low
energy
requirements such as a parking meter they can function perfectly well using ambient
light which has passed through cloud and are even positioned under the canopies
of trees.


michael adams

....

In article , Tim Streater
writes
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 07/07/16 09:05, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/07/16 08:46, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message ,
harry writes
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 17:33:04 UTC+1, David Paste wrote:
On Saturday, 2 July 2016 06:34:01 UTC+1, harry wrote:

The real reason the the economics/nuclear waste issue of course.

What issues?

The issue that no-one knows how to deal with it.
Or the cost.

I think there might be a 'problem' if a nuclear power station had
'issues'.

Nuclear power stations don't have minds.
So they cant have 'issues'

Something being 'issued' by a power station might certainly indicate a
'problem'.
Well yes, lots of electricity is certainly a problem for the greens

Plus that this electricity is produced 24 x 7 whatever the weather, and
in amounts as required by the grid people.

And no CO2 emitted

--
bert

On Thursday, 7 July 2016 13:42:41 UTC+1, wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 09:07:19 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Well yes, lots of electricity is certainly a problem for the greens

I mean, you don't expect power stations to generate electricity reliably
do you?

Windmills don't!
Solar Panels don't!

I recently saw a parking meter with built-in solar panel on top, next to a street light. Thinking the angles didn't seem to add up, I noted where the sun would be at noon, and saw the panel was tilted in entirely the wrong direction.


NT

There are two sorts of solar radiation.
The stuff you expect, direct from the sun. (about 90%)
The indirect scatter from the whole sky.(about 10%)

So the more sky it "sees" the more power it generates.
ie coming from all directions.
So a PV panel at the top of a hill generates power from indirect light more then one in a valley because the horizon is further away.

On Thursday, 7 July 2016 08:37:33 UTC+1, harry wrote:

One of several failed attempts.
None have succeeded.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/...-nuclear-waste

http://www1.american.edu/TED/NKORNUKE.htm

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...565_story.html

http://www.yuccamountain.org/time.htm

http://www.google.com/patents/US4738564


Try to keep up instead of posting drivel propaganda.

But WHY did it "fail", Harry?

On Thursday, 7 July 2016 20:45:04 UTC+1, harry wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 13:42:41 UTC+1, tabbypurr wrote:

I recently saw a parking meter with built-in solar panel on top, next to a street light. Thinking the angles didn't seem to add up, I noted where the sun would be at noon, and saw the panel was tilted in entirely the wrong direction.


There are two sorts of solar radiation.
The stuff you expect, direct from the sun. (about 90%)
The indirect scatter from the whole sky.(about 10%)

So the more sky it "sees" the more power it generates.
ie coming from all directions.

ie 90% of it it's angled away from. Real smart. I can't help thinking it's most likely mains powered anyway.


NT

On Thursday, 7 July 2016 22:54:45 UTC+1, David Paste wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 08:37:33 UTC+1, harry wrote:

One of several failed attempts.
None have succeeded.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/...-nuclear-waste

http://www1.american.edu/TED/NKORNUKE.htm

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...565_story.html

http://www.yuccamountain.org/time.htm

http://www.google.com/patents/US4738564


Try to keep up instead of posting drivel propaganda.

But WHY did it "fail", Harry?

They think radiation would leak out.

On 08/07/2016 03:04, wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 20:45:04 UTC+1, harry wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 13:42:41 UTC+1, tabbypurr wrote:

I recently saw a parking meter with built-in solar panel on top,
next to a street light. Thinking the angles didn't seem to add
up, I noted where the sun would be at noon, and saw the panel was
tilted in entirely the wrong direction.


There are two sorts of solar radiation. The stuff you expect,
direct from the sun. (about 90%) The indirect scatter from the
whole sky.(about 10%)

So the more sky it "sees" the more power it generates. ie coming
from all directions.

ie 90% of it it's angled away from. Real smart. I can't help thinking
it's most likely mains powered anyway.


They are low power devices with a big enough panel to keep them going
even in winter.

The angle isn't to point at the sun its to stop louts leaving stuff on top.

They are sized so they don't need any sun on the panel.


Even cheap Chinese panels like harry's will generate a few watts in dull
weather.

Some of the better "hybrid" ones will generate more in poor weather.


Its a myth that they will generate power by moonlight.

On 08/07/2016 07:14, harry wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 22:54:45 UTC+1, David Paste wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 08:37:33 UTC+1, harry wrote:

One of several failed attempts.
None have succeeded.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/...-nuclear-waste

http://www1.american.edu/TED/NKORNUKE.htm

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...565_story.html

http://www.yuccamountain.org/time.htm

http://www.google.com/patents/US4738564


Try to keep up instead of posting drivel propaganda.

But WHY did it "fail", Harry?

They think radiation would leak out.


Radiation doesn't leak out.
Brain dead greenies think the material will leak out.

I can just see a great river of disposable plastic gloves and coveralls
leaking out as that is what the majority of the waste is.

On 08/07/16 08:47, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
harry wrote:

On Thursday, 7 July 2016 22:54:45 UTC+1, David Paste wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 08:37:33 UTC+1, harry wrote:

One of several failed attempts.
None have succeeded.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/...-sinks-experim

ent-related-burying-nuclear-waste
http://www1.american.edu/TED/NKORNUKE.htm


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...tory-is-years-

away/2013/02/03/5e8ea0a4-6034-11e2-a389-ee565c81c565_story.html
http://www.yuccamountain.org/time.htm
http://www.google.com/patents/US4738564
Try to keep up instead of posting drivel propaganda.

But WHY did it "fail", Harry?

They think radiation would leak out.

How does radiation "leak out", harry? Do you walk hesitantly into the
kitchen, in case the bleach and washing up liquid have "leaked out" of
the bottles under the sink? D'ye think that lead will "leak out" of
glass and poison you?

I think harry thinks that electricity leaks out of light bulb sockets if
a bulb isn't screwed in...


--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

On Friday, 8 July 2016 09:47:13 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/07/16 08:47, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
harry wrote:

They think radiation would leak out.

How does radiation "leak out", harry? Do you walk hesitantly into the
kitchen, in case the bleach and washing up liquid have "leaked out" of
the bottles under the sink? D'ye think that lead will "leak out" of
glass and poison you?

I think harry thinks that electricity leaks out of light bulb sockets if
a bulb isn't screwed in...

I was shocked to find out that it can.


NT

On Friday, 8 July 2016 07:14:45 UTC+1, harry wrote:

They think radiation would leak out.

Feelings! Feelings, Harry! What's evidence and investigation in
the face of feelings?

Bah.

On Friday, 8 July 2016 09:47:13 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/07/16 08:47, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
harry wrote:

On Thursday, 7 July 2016 22:54:45 UTC+1, David Paste wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 08:37:33 UTC+1, harry wrote:

One of several failed attempts.
None have succeeded.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/...-sinks-experim

ent-related-burying-nuclear-waste
http://www1.american.edu/TED/NKORNUKE.htm


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...tory-is-years-

away/2013/02/03/5e8ea0a4-6034-11e2-a389-ee565c81c565_story.html
http://www.yuccamountain.org/time.htm
http://www.google.com/patents/US4738564
Try to keep up instead of posting drivel propaganda.

But WHY did it "fail", Harry?

They think radiation would leak out.

How does radiation "leak out", harry? Do you walk hesitantly into the
kitchen, in case the bleach and washing up liquid have "leaked out" of
the bottles under the sink? D'ye think that lead will "leak out" of
glass and poison you?

I think harry thinks that electricity leaks out of light bulb sockets if
a bulb isn't screwed in...


Either as a gas (eg radon) or carried out by ground water.
Very difficult to permanently exclude ground water from underground structures.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26441154
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/us...leak.html?_r=0

You might want to read about this continuing catastrophy:-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morsle...ste_repository

And another.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine


http://www.nirs.org/radwaste/yucca/0400yuccaupdate.htm

On Friday, 8 July 2016 20:39:02 UTC+1, David Paste wrote:
On Friday, 8 July 2016 07:14:45 UTC+1, harry wrote:

They think radiation would leak out.

Feelings! Feelings, Harry! What's evidence and investigation in
the face of feelings?

Bah.

Brian dead moron.
A few minutes Googling reveals numerous failed projects due to leaks.
See my previous posts.

On Friday, 8 July 2016 09:34:34 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 08/07/2016 03:04, wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 20:45:04 UTC+1, harry wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 13:42:41 UTC+1, tabbypurr wrote:

I recently saw a parking meter with built-in solar panel on top,
next to a street light. Thinking the angles didn't seem to add
up, I noted where the sun would be at noon, and saw the panel was
tilted in entirely the wrong direction.


There are two sorts of solar radiation. The stuff you expect,
direct from the sun. (about 90%) The indirect scatter from the
whole sky.(about 10%)

So the more sky it "sees" the more power it generates. ie coming
from all directions.

ie 90% of it it's angled away from. Real smart. I can't help thinking
it's most likely mains powered anyway.


They are low power devices with a big enough panel to keep them going
even in winter.

The angle isn't to point at the sun its to stop louts leaving stuff on top.

They are sized so they don't need any sun on the panel.


Even cheap Chinese panels like harry's will generate a few watts in dull
weather.

Some of the better "hybrid" ones will generate more in poor weather.


Its a myth that they will generate power by moonlight.

None of my panels come from China.

On Friday, 8 July 2016 21:24:19 UTC+1, harry wrote:

Brian dead moron.

Don't be so hard on yourself, Harry.

A few minutes Googling reveals numerous failed projects due to leaks.
See my previous posts.

Yes, everything in life, on earth, is static.