Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No they don't. Have you ever actually seen a PV solar panel in person? It does not seem like it. There's nothing to leak, even if you break them in half, or smash them to pieces, or just pile them in a heap.
Smh...sad..
Quote:
Really? What link? I've checked every post you've made here and I see no such link. Selective amnesia kicking up for you there, fella? Oh, and please find someone to explain to you what "emit" actually means, because you're obviously still confused about it.
I didnt post a link, I posted a quote from a link. You could have followed it yourself instead of making yourself the butt of jokes on a public forum
Quote:
"The EU Parliament has officially changed the guidelines for its WEEE (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment) Directive. Under the amendments, used photovoltaic modules must now be collected and recycled"
E waste buddy. If you dont know what e waste means, that means toxic waste is produced in one form or another. If it is burned, toxic waste is emitted. Landfilled, it leaches. When toxic materials leach into the ground they also can produce methane which emits dangerous fumes in the atmosphere.
One way or another, e waste can and will emit toxic waste in our atmosphere.
Here is another link in case you still dont understand common english. E-Waste Management
Quote:
And to correct you further, it is, in point of fact, your habitual use of insulting comments here that is a childish game, and it's very poor form to resort to in a debate. Stick to the points of discussion, leave the sarcasm and phony air of superiority out, and I won't have to whack you for lame behavior any more.
Dude...Stop being so sensitive. If you cant take the heat stay out the solar panels. I can flame you all day, that shouldnt stop you from replying to the actual points I have made. You still have yet to make a single valid point against what I have made by claiming you dont understand what I am saying. No speaka any english I see? You see some gramatical errors in my post, feel free to correct me. If you cant point out what part of my speach makes no sense then shut your mouth and sit down. Your all talk and no action. Spending time to tell me how dumb I am because you cant respond to the actual points being made is just redundent. Go learn how to make a sandwich and have one.
Quote:
Show some effort on your part and find a native speaker who can explain what is being said to you, and who can help you to more clearly express whatever it is you're trying to say.
More forum space wasting huh? Nothing to add to the discussion because your out of proof? Stick to the topic.
Quote:
No, I brought them up because it is quite well proven over many decades that they do not produce toxic waste, nor do they use toxic materials. It's not even a debatable issue.
Loool.....It is quite proven? Hahahahah....Ok...Ill post a link where it is not proven. You post one where it is....comical
Quote:
Existing solar concentrator systems typically use arrays of individual lenses that focus directly onto independent photovoltaic cells which all need to be aligned and electrically connected.
Tracking systems: Expensive, harmful materials used. Even on small scales. Materials in tracking systems when discarded will still harm the world. They are still waste.
Not only that but there are more harms for solar concentrators which include,
Quote:
1. "Degrade the PV cell lifespan [15]
2. Require mechanical tracking system [16],[17],[18]
3. Need to cool down the PV to ensure the performance of the PV is optimum"
Quote:
Intermittent
Low energy density
Slightly more expensive than solar PV
Construction/installation costs can be high
Relatively new technology involved
Hard to compete against very cheap natural gas
They require a considerable amount of space
Some people find them unattractive Manufacturing processes often create pollution
Heavily location dependent
Will involve significant transmission distances/losses
The metals and materials used for the production and manufacturing for concentrated solar panels all lead to pollution and more waste. If Solar concentration power becomes the law of the land, what makes you think production wont become excessive like any other energy source until CSP's inhabit every inch of the land like power towers do or more, all being manufactured at the expense of material pollution.
Quote:
Exposure to airborne pollutants from metal processing and smelting can lead to various acute and chronic diseases. Initial sudden exposure can lead to an irritation of the eyes, nose and throat. More serious and chronic effects are heart and lung problems, and even premature death.
Unless solar mirrors finds a way to rectify all these issues, including the cost to productivity issue, solar concentrators are far from being perfect sources of energy. There is still too much work to be done. To say this isnt up for debate is ignorant. If it wasnt up for debate then why isnt solar concentrators in the final stages of production? There is still work that is being done to perfect these issues.
Not mirrors but glass? Glass isnt the worlds friendliest substance ever either bud.
Quote:
Although, unlike plastic, glass is spared the environmentalists' finger pointing to it as a polluting material, the process of its creation is not as friendly.
Obviously, when opening a bottle of wine, one might possibly be concerned by the prospects of a terrible hangover rather than the impact that the creation process of that respective bottle has on the environment on a large scale. The final material may be 100% recyclable and usable in order to yield new glass, but, as the new fining possibility of the United States' second biggest bottle producer (Saint-Gobain Containers) for polluting the air shows, some environmental organizations and rules, such as the federal Clean Air Act, are not so content with the way it is made.
Upon the glass manufacture process, air-polluting compounds like nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and particulates are released. The last are even more of a health issue since the particles of metals, chemicals, acids and dust that the particulates are comprised of are so tiny (10 micrometers or even smaller) that they are able to easily enter the nose and throat and reach the lungs, where they produce quite some damage.
In other words, CSP's very much do EMIT waste into the atmosphere in one form or another, whether it is through production, manufacturing of the glass, mirrors, pipes, and structures, or through disposal. It is not a full proof form of energy as you would like the people to believe.
Even if it was organic materials all being used, when landfilled, waste and harmful toxins still can be produced. Making CSP's with organic materials wont do much when they still are generating toxic in the landfill.
Quote:
And for the record, if your English was better it might have appeared to be funny, rather than just daft.
More unrelated words. Stick to the topic or shut up please.
Quote:
It is not. To the contrary. That's just another empty claim on your part. They're much like any other steam turbine except they have no chimney and no toxic emissions.
Some are and some arent. Depends on which you are talking about. As I have mentioned chemically treated mirrors and expensive tracking systems made with materials that are less than organic all are toxic and pose a risk.
Quote:
I started out taking you seriously, and I've worked pretty hard to understand whatever you've been trying to say, but unfortunately such clarity, to a large measure, is just not to be found in your writing. And now you're being rude on top of everything else. It's not a winning combination.
Thats sweet.
Quote:
And in the face of considerable evidence that the alternative energy technologies, utilizing renewable resources like sun and wind and water power are considerably friendlier to the environment than the fossil fuels they are intended to replace, you have yet to produce a suggestion for a better alternative.
I never said I had all the answers. I am just a student like you are. The difference between me and you is I dont come on a public forum and attempt to have all the answers disregarding clear proof that we all need help and we all need to discuss tangible solutions and not fairy tales. Close the door when your done.
Last edited by tariqblaze; 10-17-2013 at 12:01 PM..
IMO the lifestyles of those living even just a couple of hundred years ago were different due to less human population. 200 years ago agriculture on large expanses of land was still one of the main means of sustaining a persons family. That is not possible today because there is simply not enough land to go around.
Theres more than enough land. Think about how much land in our countries we have that isnt even being used, or being used for useless purposes. There is tons of space, we just have to figure out how to manage all of it.
Quote:
The other factor IMO is laziness. People would rather work in an office and go to the gym to exercise rather than work the land and walk everywhere.
Those lazy individuals have no one but to blame themselves. They will be forced to adapt to the times if we stop supplying their habits.
Quote:
You must also keep in mind that we are in the early stages of sustainable technology. When cars first came out they were weak, slow and inefficient. Now there are vehicles on the market capable of speeds over 200mph or over 80mpg. Sustainable technology is a burgeoning young field that will continue to gain efficiency and usefulness.
Eventually, once the singularity has been achieved, sustainability will no longer be an issue. I predict that our lives and the way energy is consumed and transferred will be vastly different then today.
Possibly it would be. Maybe it will just become fossil fuels part 2. That is the point, we dont know what will happen. Some people believe sustainable energy will become fossil fuels part 2. I for one understand this point of view because all the warning signs are there. It seems that our society has not yet grasped the idea of abstention. Our society is so greedy that we do not know how to deprive ourselves of anything that we want. If we want it we get it, and if we cant have it, we find another "alternative" way to getting it. It never solves the problem it just masks the symptoms. The problem doesnt lie in the fossils or the physical ends, but in the hearts of the users of said means.
You wont cure a balding scalp by putting wigs on. The issue will remain and society will continue to invent new "sustainable, renewable wigs" that will continue to conceal the ever-widening blaze that persist to scorch the scalp of our society. Alternative drugs may reduce the symtoms of our societal greed, sloth, and sickness, but I assure you, no matter what alternative energy source manages to surface, the disease will never be extinguished until it is directly treated.
Maybe sustainable energy can cure our energy issues. For that possibility to become a reality, there needs to be a concrete plan on how this will occur that everyone for the most part agrees on. Plainly saying we can do it one day in the future is not enough. We need clear, consise, and immediate courses of action now before we can even discuss possibilities. Anything is possible but not everything is actual. You say you think sustainble energy will be better in the future. It doesnt matter what you think will happen in the future, give me some explanations on not what will happen in the future but concrete information on the how it will happen. Telling me it will get better tommorow doesnt tell me a single thing I need to know. I dont care what you think about the future personally. Dont tell me what you think will happen, tell me what is happening now and how it is unraveling.
Maybe sustainable energy CANNOT cure our energy issues. Sustainble energy may fix the CO2 problem, but what other problems will it open up consquently? Again we dont really know. And if they cant solve our issues, we just have wasted 40 years and billions of dollars just to end up even worst off then we started all off a possibile solution to avoid the absolute solution we all know is the real issue.
Again I am not a direct opponent of sustainble energy. I am just not a blind following naive sleeper that follows whatever new trend or idea sounds like it has potential for momentum. Everything must be questioned. It would help if more people were realistic and critical about their little products instead of being blind spokesmen for technology they will never even get a penny from. I never said there is something bad with innovation, the overlying point I am elluding to is that not ever current issue can and will be solved with future innovation. Sometimes newer technology is the solution, and sometimes newer technology just only adds to an already blazing fire that is only being made worst by the innovators. We seen it happened over and over before, what makes green energy proponpents so gullible to beleive it cant nor wont happen again with their savior devices? Gullible people are the reason accidents happen. Because they are too vain to think that their knowledge or advancements can be flawed, and to arrogant to ever recheck nor be honest with themselves about the conflicting and burdening findings. The cycle just continues.
If people are not honest with themselves, and humble enough to admit to their own agendas and differing data for the good of mankind and not their schemes, how could real solutions ever really advance?
Innovation, stagnation, or subsistence. Whichever route is the best for us, we still need to have a more critical look to honestly decide what our society really needs to thrive on healthily. It is not about whose idea is the right one. It doesn't matter who is more right. What matters is that we come up with something that actually works, no matter where it comes from. Fighting, bickering, and lying to strengthen ones own argument is beyond childish, its inhumane for the conditions of our society at hand.
The whole point I am trying to make is, simply one. Just be honest about our conditions and really, really, really, really, really ask yourselves; what is really the best solution for all of us. What is really most important. Some studies suggest green energy is better. Considerable evidence also states the opposite that they are not friendlier to the environment. That is where civilization people come in to identify the problems based on the evidence and discuss very plausible solutions to these issues and not make up lies to strengthen ones own argument. We all just need to be completely honest with ourselves and with each other about what we want and what we know we really need to do. That is the only real solution to our environmental crises.
Last edited by tariqblaze; 10-17-2013 at 01:45 PM..
I think there are drawbacks to every energy option. That is the point I am trying to make with this thread. There is no perfect solution. This world is not a perfect paradise. Every one of us will die. So why make life harder fighting over the perfect home in a fading existence when there isnt any?
People, such as the posters seen even on this thread, will lie, cheat, steal, and kill, just to protect their own personal agendas to prove they have the right solution and no one else. Manipulating data and so forth all for their own schemes. There is no honesty in todays society because no one really cares for our society, they only care about their greed and lusts.
There is no perfect alternative energy source. It doesnt exist and it never has existed. We were born in a catch 22. We were born sick, and destined to crumble, fade, and die. We were never meant to survive in this polluted land. It all was a setup from the initial design of our creation. We see that there has never been a perfect nation. Our creation is so weak that we cant face these facts. Instead we will try to deny them and go against logic. We lie to ourselves and make ourselves believe we can create the perfect world, only if we try really hard. That is not true.
If you personally believe that your preferred source of energy or path is a less harmful way or more beneficial way than the others, that is good for you. Go and pursue its ends. But by no means come on any public forum or book or tv show or anywhere for that matter and try to mislead others into sharing your belief. Tell the positive of your findings but never deceive the people by concealing the negative. There is surely some to be found.
The only path that is perfect is the path that acknowledges the imperfections of this life. Truth and honesty is perfect. Acknowledgement that nothing in this lowly life is perfect is perfection and peace. That is the only perfection to be had in this world, and it is not something you can necessarily create with a physical hand nor a solar panel.
So again. If you believe that your way is the least harmful, then by all means pursue it. As long as you know it is not completely harmless, nor completely perfect and you dont deceive yourself nor others into believing the opposite.
More importantly, know that most things in life are just subjective and really based upon personal preference. There is no best/worst/least harmful way when it comes to physicalities. Every path has its own pros and cons or limitations. It really all boils down to which poison you pick. Pick your poison because we all eventually have to taste one or the other. That is man's fate.
You choose the poison of fossil fuels? He chooses the poison of renewable fuels. Personally I will choose the poison of reduced to little or no fuels: Minimalism and abstinence. That is my personal preference and I am not telling or making anyone else choose what I believe is best for me. What I choose is best for me may not be what is best for you or for him. But what I will do is not sit around while the politicians make laws and hinder others from pursuing what they personally feel best because of some public or political agenda mandating fossil fuels or renewable energy on the public.
Present society with the facts, not the half-truths or the falsities, and then let the public make their own personal uniform decision on what they feel is best for them. If they choose to opt out of energy altogether, let no energy company con them into doing the opposite for the false sake of the collective pubic and not for the real sake of those same energy companies.
If that too is not possible, and a collective, uniform decision must be made for the collective sake of the public, then at least educate the entire public about the complete truth for all options, and not resort to lies, and scare tactics to con the public into supporting a false regime or innovation. At least then, cooperation can be made under understanding and not confusion.
If all else fails and we eventually do have to commit to one energy source, then at the same time let us be civil about the final decision, knowing that not even ones personal preference is absolute. Sometimes in life we may think we feel we know what is best for ourselves individually, but we really dont even know our own bodies and our own states. No one is not even the perfect master of his own self. Because nothing in this world nor anyone is perfect. Our entire existence is endured through imperfection.
If we all die from carbon poisoning, let us all die together. At least we can say we tried to make it better to the best of our capabilities. Death is not important. Nor is health. What is most important is not whether we will ruin our world into destruction, but that if we do destroy our entire civilization, at least we go out in peace, with dignity, and respect for all of each other and one another. Its not about the if we will die, but the how was our condition when we do actually self-destruct.
Last edited by tariqblaze; 10-17-2013 at 03:32 PM..
All in all, no matter what energy source we choose, the human condition will still be the focal point that determines the level of its harm, or its benefit. If the condition of the human is upon truth, honesty, purity, sincerity, and goodness, than all of those traits will reflect within our innovations and the outcome of our tools. It is not about the what the who is using , but the how the who is using it.
What happens to all the heat generated by solar panels if they become the defacto way to provide alternative energy? It isn't yet a problem. Wait until they are located in enough quantities to make a significant impact on the use of other fuels to generate electricity.
Where are the majority of solar panel farms being located? Where it is already hot. What happens to solar panels as they get hot? They harvest less energy. The solution? They now install active cooling systems to keep solar panel concentrators in service or they destroy themselves.
We've all seen the maps depicting the scale of solar panel installations needed to significantly lessen the use of conventional fuels to operate power plants. Take the same picture and think heater. Oh, the heat just goes into the air and dissipates right?
Cities already change weather due to many variables but the fact is they do. Now take a combined area larger than any city and larger than some entire states and just where will that heat go? It isn't absorbed by the panels, it is radiated. The sunlight no longer reaches the ground but instead is reflected. Long after the sun sets, the panels will radiate heat. No problem, the regions are cool at night anyway so all that heat won't make much difference.
Naturally, the industry says this isn't a problem. The same industry that brought you gasoline (BP solar panels anyone?) oil, coal and every other fuel now being cited as a reason to use solar or other alternatives.
I hope you realize that solar panels (PV) neither produce or consume thermal energy.
The heat you are referring to is from the sun and the exact same amount of sunlight arrives whether
there are panels or not. And PV solar panels do not "destroy themselves" if they over heat, they lose efficiency. Now oil refineries, that is a different story, they truly produce heat in massive amounts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack Knife
What happens to all the heat generated by solar panels if they become the defacto way to provide alternative energy? It isn't yet a problem. Wait until they are located in enough quantities to make a significant impact on the use of other fuels to generate electricity.
Where are the majority of solar panel farms being located? Where it is already hot. What happens to solar panels as they get hot? They harvest less energy. The solution? They now install active cooling systems to keep solar panel concentrators in service or they destroy themselves.
We've all seen the maps depicting the scale of solar panel installations needed to significantly lessen the use of conventional fuels to operate power plants. Take the same picture and think heater. Oh, the heat just goes into the air and dissipates right?
Cities already change weather due to many variables but the fact is they do. Now take a combined area larger than any city and larger than some entire states and just where will that heat go? It isn't absorbed by the panels, it is radiated. The sunlight no longer reaches the ground but instead is reflected. Long after the sun sets, the panels will radiate heat. No problem, the regions are cool at night anyway so all that heat won't make much difference.
Naturally, the industry says this isn't a problem. The same industry that brought you gasoline (BP solar panels anyone?) oil, coal and every other fuel now being cited as a reason to use solar or other alternatives.
I think there are drawbacks to every energy option. That is the point I am trying to make with this thread. There is no perfect solution. This world is not a perfect paradise. Every one of us will die. So why make life harder fighting over the perfect home in a fading existence when there isnt any?
Thank you for clarifying that because your first 10 or 15 posts were quite pointless.
I'll sleep better tonight knowing the world is not a perfect pair of dice.
What happens to all the heat generated by solar panels if they become the defacto way to provide alternative energy? It isn't yet a problem. Wait until they are located in enough quantities to make a significant impact on the use of other fuels to generate electricity.
Where are the majority of solar panel farms being located? Where it is already hot. What happens to solar panels as they get hot? They harvest less energy. The solution? They now install active cooling systems to keep solar panel concentrators in service or they destroy themselves.
We've all seen the maps depicting the scale of solar panel installations needed to significantly lessen the use of conventional fuels to operate power plants. Take the same picture and think heater. Oh, the heat just goes into the air and dissipates right?
Cities already change weather due to many variables but the fact is they do. Now take a combined area larger than any city and larger than some entire states and just where will that heat go? It isn't absorbed by the panels, it is radiated. The sunlight no longer reaches the ground but instead is reflected. Long after the sun sets, the panels will radiate heat. No problem, the regions are cool at night anyway so all that heat won't make much difference.
Naturally, the industry says this isn't a problem. The same industry that brought you gasoline (BP solar panels anyone?) oil, coal and every other fuel now being cited as a reason to use solar or other alternatives.
And you believe them too. Amazing.
Wow..Very interesting points you make here. The list goes on to the possibilities and very plausible realities that pose as a risk here. I've only mentioned a very small percentage of that list, and I havent even began to go deeper. Only just a tip of the iceberg of how many risks are involved that the powers that be dont even mention nor bother to educate the public on. Anything for their agenda. Definitely something to consider and think about.
Last edited by tariqblaze; 10-17-2013 at 10:20 PM..
I hope you realize that solar panels (PV) neither produce or consume thermal energy.
The heat you are referring to is from the sun and the exact same amount of sunlight arrives whether
there are panels or not. And PV solar panels do not "destroy themselves" if they over heat, they lose efficiency. Now oil refineries, that is a different story, they truly produce heat in massive amounts.
I would like to know what your credentials are and why you think you are so qualified to talk about this issue and what makes you so sure you're absolutely correct about the things you are uttering on this forum?
Please share to the public what makes you the all-knowing being regarding solar panels before you make yourself out to be an insignificant mind speaking on issues you have no knowledge about.
Ill wait.....before I correct you or anything else. Ill be right here...
I would like to know what your credentials are and why you think you are so qualified to talk about this issue and what makes you so sure you're absolutely correct about the things you are uttering on this forum?
Please share to the public what makes you the all-knowing being regarding solar panels before you make yourself out to be an insignificant mind speaking on issues you have no knowledge about.
Ill wait.....before I correct you or anything else. Ill be right here...
You sound a little pissed because I called you out for being a troll.
Since you are responding to my post quoted below, perhaps you could point out the part of my post that is incorrect. While you are doing that I'll check the forum rules and see if I need "credentials" to comment on a public forum. I would ask you to post your credentials but we all know trolls have no credentials.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddyline View Post
I hope you realize that solar panels (PV) neither produce or consume thermal energy.
The heat you are referring to is from the sun and the exact same amount of sunlight arrives whether there are panels or not. And PV solar panels do not "destroy themselves" if they over heat, they lose efficiency. Now oil refineries, that is a different story, they truly produce heat in massive amounts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. I would ask you to post your credentials but we all know trolls have no credentials. 
