Comments (8) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   HUMPHRIES said, 10 months ago

   … and a H€ll’ve of a lot to set straight too.

2. 

   claudermilk said, 10 months ago

   Yup. One step at a time…

3. 

   lalas said, 10 months ago

   Was talking to my dad (PhD Chemist) about this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solarthermalcollector
   Apparently they’re starting to use non-water liquids like liquid sodium that holds the heat better and can be used to generate steam/electricity even after dark.

   I’m so pissed how so many people say we can’t do this type of stuff. It’s all about how we’re the greatest nation on earth because of our ingenuity EXCEPT when corporations pay the media/ gov’t to convince us otherwise.

4. 

   acellist said, 10 months ago

   Life is just a bowl of cherries…
   welcome to Pittsburgh, one of the most overcast cities in the USA!

5. 

   motivemagus said, 10 months ago

   Doubt Pgh is worse than Boston - but so what? Solar power is free, nonpolluting, generally requires no moving parts, and can be used incrementally on top of existing sources. And a quarter of the country has very little cloud cover indeed – we should ignore that?

6. 

   acellist said, 10 months ago

   Not for the more sunny places,
   wind power would probably be better here,
   as for Boston…
   what ever happened to those huge floating-in-the-ocean-machines-exploiting-the-differential-between-the-deep-cold-water-and-the-warm-surface-water proposed so many years ago that would provide energy to whole coastal cities such as New York, Boston, and the like?

7. 

   DALLASDAN said, 10 months ago

   Texas has plenty of sun and wind, we could have all of y’all over a barrel with alt. energy just like we do with oil.

8. 

   motivemagus said, 10 months ago

   acellist - you know, I wondered about that myself! I read about those thirty years ago in National Geographic. I think they use some of that in Iceland, but I haven’t heard much since. Perhaps it isn’t efficient enough.