[Rick Tiglon Eng]

Dear Gromain,
No problem, I have been in the industry for much longer than it has been fashionable, so I understand he frustration that comes from dealing with those that are not of the same opinion, my original points were made only to get people thinking and I too apologise for not having taken into account that especially for those not so fluent in English, being a native like myself, humour does not always come through in text.
On other matters I commend your work on solar panels, My opinion is divided when it comes to solar, I am not a fan of photovoltaics (sorry Einstein) due mainly to the production costs both in terms of $ and CO2/Energy consumption, but when their use cuts down the length of wire required to span a country like Australia they make total sense. Solar for heating is a "no brainer" meaning that it takes no effort to see how sensible it is to use the sun to warm water and air spaces, i have designed a number of Solar collectors for commercial use in the past and was "involved to a very small extent " in the successful solar program at Newcastle, Au, John Hunter Hospital in the late 90's.
In my opinion solar is reliable, even in places like England where the sun is not always evident you can rely on the fact that it is not always evident, providing the system is designed to deal with that, you will have a happy customer.
I think that as Einstein was in part resposible for photovoltaics i will finish up with one of my favorite of his quotes as i think it expresses my opinion on the matter perfectly,
"Concern for man himself and his fate must always form the chief interest of all technical endeavors, concern for the great unsolved problems of the organization of labor and the distribution of goods--in order that the creations of our mind shall be a blessing and not a curse to mankind. Never forget this in the midst of your diagrams and equations."

Best Regards and i will look forward to your future posts,

Rick

[gromain]

Well, for solar, I can give you some details. I was thinking (before starting this internship) that solar production was expensive (like you said, both in $ and CO2/Energy consumption).

But, since i'm here, I had more informations (I guess that really working in the business help a lot!). But anyway, let's start with the cost. It was really expensive. Now, it still is a bit expensive but you can get panels for 5$/W (just for the panels, if you add the inverter it can goes up to 8 to 10$/W installed). Not everybody can afford that, I realise it, but it made some huge progress since the last 10 years.

And for CO2/Energy consumption, I don't have a lot of informations for CO2 emission, but nowadays, a panels has an energy payback of 3 to 5 years depending on the brands. That means that after 5 years of average electricity production (I reckon it may be under standard test environment, that is sometimes under the reality and sometimes above), the panel generate more energy than it was needed for its manufacture. Maybe some manufacters will provide you the CO2 information, but it may be hard to get (just because I'm not even sure the manufacturer are tracking these emissions).

And you're right, as long the design of the system follows local conditions (and that the customer is aware that his system will perform differently than a system installed in another region), solar is still a good way to go.


Cheers Rick!


Gromain

[rokag3]

1.98$ PER WATT

http://sunelec.com/index.php?main_pa...roducts_id=249

[handlewanker]

Just a goddamm cotton pickin' minute One of Many, the suggestion about taxing the living sh!ts outta' the swampies is tantamount to a declaration of war on a broad front, especially down in OZ, where the evap cooler is a mighty fine bit of apparatus, even if'n it is a simple device, probably invented by some Abbo cave dweller who got a bit hot round the gills and waved a wet bunch of grass around to cool himself off, (I don't think he/she got any royalties for that bit of clever thinking).

As far as the mould in the ducting is concerned, Dufa, never had that problem, but circumstances might be that it would occur, so till it does, the swampie rules.

There's many ways to harness solar energy, and one of the simplest, (K.I.S.S. keep it stupid simple, know what I mean?), is the heat gathering simplicity of the water box and black metal plate type.

I saw one that had a coil of 20mm diam PVC garden irrigation pipe on the roof facing North, and that got hot, even without being contained in a sealed box behind glass like most designs, due to the piping being naturally black and able to withstand the temperature of hot water even if it got to boiling point.

The end product is OK if'n you just want to offset the preheating of your water heating system in Winter, but in Summer when it gets to 35 deg C and plus, having mega litres of hot water available becomes a head scratcher, unless you can convert that to electric power, and that if'n someone cracks the method will be a winner all the way to the bank.

The problem can be solved to some degree if you go to a parabolic mirror system and focus the sun's ray to get superheated steam, then all you gotta do is connect to a steam turbine and away you go.

The biggest problem is that the sun doesn't always shine consistently all the time to make a reflector/steam turbine type efficient all the time, whereas the water box type creates lots of hot water, even a swimming pool volume that stays as water that can be stored for a length of time as hot water till it's needed.

The simple hot air engine, if used to harness the wattage in the hot water, is so inneficient at conversion it would take a swimming pool full of hot water just to get a few hundred watts of power out of it, just not concentrated enough, I might be wrong on that one as it would probably take a few kilowatt/hours of electrics to get the swimming pool up to near boiling point anyway.

It's easy to get the energy into storage, but really hard to convert it to electricity which is the most usefull form of energy used.

Suppose someone invented a super diode pack that you dangled into the hot water and hey presto, the water turned to wine, err I mean electricity,( silly ol' wine drinking me), that would be something.

Compared to the wind turbine for electric generation on a local scale, the hot water/electric generator would be very fasible.

So, there's lots of energy present, but how to get it out as electric energy.

The early steam engines, actually atmospheric engines, used steam at only two PSI, to fill a cylinder, expelling the air, then condensing the steam and drawing a vacuum in the cylinder which pulled a massive diameter piston attached to a rod, so producing the power from the effect of atmospheric pressure on the other side of the piston, but that method still requires water to be just above boiling point to make steam that can then be condensed to form the vacuum that actually does the work.
Ian.

[One of Many]

Just a goddamm cotton pickin' minute One of Many, the suggestion about taxing the living sh!ts outta' the swampies is tantamount to a declaration of war on a broad front, especially down in OZ, where the evap cooler is a mighty fine bit of apparatus, even if'n it is a simple device, probably invented by some Abbo cave dweller who got a bit hot round the gills and waved a wet bunch of grass around to cool himself off, (I don't think he/she got any royalties for that bit of clever thinking).

As far as the mould in the ducting is concerned, Dufa, never had that problem, but circumstances might be that it would occur, so till it does, the swampie rules.

<SNIP>
Ian.

HA!

Kind of silly to focus on just one GHG emisson to remedy the AGW problem. If thy powers that be are serious in supporting the green movement transition to alterante energy. Every contributing factor should be eyed where it aids humaniod comfort at a cost to the environment as another evil apparatus.

All that is needed is a few "Scientists" to reach a concensus on the 80% reduction in swampies emissions and a few Politicians to see a short term revenue stream like brown coal and regulate it back into the stone age as the SUV of cooling devices. LOL!

DC

[handlewanker]

One of many, the short term advantages of burning brown coal may be an inconvenience to those that see it that way, but as it's a national asset to us in OZ, the more important bit is to capitalise on the bounty Mother Nature has endowed us with, and make hay while the sun shines, (the Chinese love the stuff, how can a billion + Chinese be all wrong and a mere 300 mill or so Yanks be all right?).

Supposing we'all in OZ got mighty pious and thought that it was inconsiderate to thrust on the Yanks, Poles, Hungarians, Russians, Poms and anyone else on the ball of mud called Earth, all the emissions of the coal burning facilities either directly or indirectly, and voted to suppress the mining and marketing of the stuff.

How long after the last drop of oil had flowed do you think we'all could hold off the ravening hordes that were hell bent on "liberating" us from whatever it was they thought we'all should be liberated from, just to get at the coal deposits?

Yo'all did it for oil in the Middle East, so where's your logic?

The time will come when energy sources, judged by today's standards as to be of such low yield and too costly to exploit, will be the normal everyday method for energy aquisition, be it by wave power, wind power or thermal activity, anything will go.

I don't see one mention in all the history books that the watermills and wind mills grinding corn etc in the past decades of Humanoid activity were too costly to run, they just built the things and used them, one of them, a watermill, that I know of was built over a thousand years ago and is still being used today to grind corn to make local wholmeal bread, and is always sold out.

The mill is situated in the village of Priston in Somerset UK, and was mentioned in the Domesday book of 1066, they just did whatever it took.

I do advocate the sane use of energy production, but at the same time I'm a realist and realise that whatever will be will be, so who cares, voting for Joe Blow and co ain't gonna change anything, it's the majority that will determine who controls you whether you like it or not, it's your democratic right.

BTW, anyone who gets concerned that their Carbon Footprint is a bit on the big size had better put their money where their mouth is and turn off all their power sources, get rid of their gas guzzling buggies and eat cold food, that's definately being committed......No didn't think anyone was that stupid or had the balls to be a masochist either......just too much stress crusading against technological advances....LOL.
Ian.
------------------------------------------------------
Just too concious of the effort it takes to get out of bed.

[fizzissist]

Supposing we'all in OZ got mighty pious

Got?? Suppose?? Wrong tense. Reading your posts, we don't need to suppose.

Yo'all did it for oil in the Middle East, so where's your logic?

Again, having read your posts, we've been asking the same question.

The time will come when energy sources, judged by today's standards as to be of such low yield and too costly to exploit, will be the normal everyday method for energy aquisition, be it by wave power, wind power or thermal activity, anything will go.

I don't see one mention in all the history books that the watermills and wind mills grinding corn etc in the past decades of Humanoid activity were too costly to run, they just built the things and used them, one of them, a watermill, that I know of was built over a thousand years ago and is still being used today to grind corn to make local wholmeal bread, and is always sold out.

Logic? Time will come, but hasn't in the past....Ok. Flip. Flop.

BTW, anyone who gets concerned that their Carbon Footprint is a bit on the big size had better put their money where their mouth is and turn off all their power sources, get rid of their gas guzzling buggies and eat cold food, that's definately being committed......No didn't think anyone was that stupid or had the balls to be a masochist either......just too much stress crusading against technological advances....LOL.
Ian.
------------------------------------------------------
Just too concious of the effort it takes to get out of bed.

Amazing, isn't it? The ability of this guy to write with such circular logic, ever forgetful of what he's written in his previous posts where he praised Gore and the consensus of AGW scientists, blasted the U.S. (and still does) for our voting record, condemns "Humanoids" then praises them...I stand in awe.

Reading his posts gives one the sense of what Scientific American would be like if Homer Simpson were its editor....a very pious Homer Simpson.

[Rick Tiglon Eng]

It is my job to design energy efficient technology, i use waste products to power them when possible, i have used solar and wind as well, but at the end of the day they will need to sell / be bought, in order to do any good.

So as we seem to have a heap of different view points on this thread i would like to know about how we all tick, i know that the questions will be over simplified and that a simple rating system of 1 to 5, (1 = strongly agree:wave:, 3 = don't know and 5 = strongly disagree:bs is not going to give any scope to explain your points but please humour me, as in the end, i want to create technology to satisfy the strongest critic, while staying true to my own principles. So here goes, i am going to start very basic;

1. Our current energy sources will one day run out.

2. CO2 output is causing Climate change.

3. The inconsiderate use of all forms of energy contributes to climate change.

4. The climate was always bound to change any way.

5. Mankind has an effect on the climate but potentially is not the greatest factor and we need to understand more about this.

6. If the climate changes mankind will cope as they did in the past.

7. I would be willing to significantly change my lifestyle in order to reduce my carbon footprint.

8. Public transport is available to fill my needs in my area.

9. I would be willing to use public transport in place of my car if it were available.

10. Personal transport has little effect on climate change anyway.

11. I would pay ten times as much for locally made goods.

12. I would pay twice as much for locally made goods.

13. I would not pay any more for locally made goods as they don't need the freight so should be cheaper.

14. The developing countries pose the biggest risk for all matters "green".

15. The develpoed countries pose the biggest risk for all matters "green".

16. The effects of overcrowding the planet are more significant than CO2 production, as more people = more CO2 as well as less of everthing else per person.

I think it would be unfair for me to ask this, without "fessing up" to the crowd so my answers are as follows;

1. (1), 2.(4), 3.(2), 4.(1), 5.(1), 6.(1), 7.(2), 8.(4), 9.(5), 10.(2.5), 11.(5), 12.(2), 13.(5), 14.(1), 15.(4), 16.(1)

Answering these questions has raised a few issues for me, it pointed out that it is not always possible to be entirely rational, in particular the issue of public transport, i hate with a passion being "sardined" with a pack of strangers, and while i have implemented a number of lifestyle changes to reduce CO2 output i am not a believer in CO2 as the big enemy, but rather CO2 is a good measuring stick for efficiency, and i view inefficiency as the evil.

Best Regards to all,
Rick

[Geof]

I am not going to spend time or space answering your quiz because your answer to this question; 6. If the climate changes mankind will cope as they did in the past. is a 1 which suggests you have certainly not read much history. Mankind has rarely 'coped' with Climate Change in the past and very often entire civilization ceased to exist in different locations around the globe at different times.

The one time Mankind did cope, at least in some locations, was during the most recent round of Climate Change known as The Little Ice Age and to a large extent this coping can be attributed to the better availability of a, then new, source of cheap energy...coal.

[jhowelb]

Climate change = power grab/hoax

Lawmakers' Global-Warming Trip Hit Tourist Hot Spots
Penguins, a Rocket-Propelled Airplane (and Tax Dollars) Also Involved


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124967502810515267.html

[fizzissist]

Geof really sums it up well, IMHO...

Man has not only survived thousands of years of climate change...change that has surrounded us with temps both warmer, cooler, wetter, and drier than today's climate, but man has THRIVED and advanced.

I appreciate Rick's effort and intent, I truly do...but rather than answer a quiz, I'll direct Rick to read earlier posts for my opinion. They're all in there, somewhere.

Land use and pollution are man's biggest self-imposed threats. What anthropogenic climate change we do see is far more influenced by those factors than CO2.

[Rick Tiglon Eng]

Dear Geof,
I absolutely respect your opinion and decision not to contribute, but i beg to differ regarding question 6, the point of the question is to find out whether you agree or disagree with the statement, so in fact you have answered only question 6 of the questionaire, ironic, as your disapproval of the question was your reason for not taking part.
I consider survival to be the very least form of coping, we are here now and according to the history books we were here before the little ice age,(for those unfamiliar, the "little ice age" was the cool period just after the medieval warm period) therefore i assert that "we coped", As for whether or not i have read a lot of history, does it matter? i have read enough to know that average temperatures have been cycling for thousands of years and that during the 1400's the average temperatures were likely to have been measurably higher than they are currently. My opinion is that any pronounced change in average temperature is a climate change, isn't it? I am not even sure that the change in question needs to be global in order that it be relevant in this debate, as we are now much more mobile than we were in say the 1400s, if the local climate changed and became unbearably hot, cold, wet or dry moving was not always an option so what to do, how to "cope" people for the most part sat it out, moved or died, but someone always made it through, or we would not be here now. Mankind is nothing if not inventive.
For the record mankind can cope badly with a problem, question 6 only asks whether you think we will cope in the same manner, not whether we will cope well or prosper as a result.
I would like to assert to all readers that i am here to listen to your opinions as i want to learn about what you think, i am not trying to push anything onto you, even if i disagree wth your opinion does not mean that i will want to tear anyone up.
Thanks also to Fizzissist, My opinion differs slightly, i think the greatest challenge we will ever see is how to overcome man's inhumanity to man. My purpose for thie quiz is to look beyond what people are saying and analyse what they believe, i have noticed that some folks are all hung up on the failure of one or two systems for example the friction caused by use of the term "swamp cooler" and this seems to cloud their posts.
For the record well designed Evaporative coolers are excellent in dry enviroments when maintained properly and absolutely terrible in humid environments and used without proper maintenance. It is all a matter of "the right technology for the conditions in question".

Best Regards
Rick

[Geof]

I guess on a global scale you can assert that "we coped", but for all the individuals and even entire civilizations, that seem to have totally perished in previous episodes of Climate Change this probably does not seem liking coping.

For what it's worth I think that Mankind could have a reasonable chance of coping with Climate Change involving warming but if the next round of Climate Change involves cooling so that world grain harvests drop dramatically there are going to be a lot of people who do not cope with the resulting famine.

EDIT: Incidentally I am an Inglese and I know the interpretation of: "I absolutely respect your opinion", which is why I would never use it.

[One of Many]

No Fear Rick,

You don't have the thread history in context perspective as some of us have been here for a few years.

When responding to Ian, As of late. The objective was to see where reverse psychology gets him chasing his own tail over things he supports of Oz, yet nags everyone else for on any issue as ignorant and worse. Cornering the incessant arrogant pessimist will lead to them donning there own cone shaped cap in denial of any contribution and UN claimed reparations therein!

By his response, I'd see it as proven, without ever being serious in the coal/swampie impact presented.....what goes around comes around?

DC

[dufas]

i have noticed that some folks are all hung up on the failure of one or two systems for example the friction caused by use of the term "swamp cooler" and this seems to cloud their posts.
For the record well designed Evaporative coolers are excellent in dry enviroments when maintained properly and absolutely terrible in humid environments and used without proper maintenance. It is all a matter of "the right technology for the conditions in question".

Best Regards
Rick

To correctly analyze the the friction caused by the "swamp cooler" brouhaha plus others, one would have to do some heavy research such as go back to the beginning of this forum and begin reading the posts...

I know the 'swamp coolers' work well when used as they were supposed to be used.

My point was that politicians and environmentalists many times jump on an idea and put it in motion before even thinking as they did in this case. They attempted to use 'evaporative coolers' in the same way that a refrigerator air conditioner is used. They, as with the global warmists of today, will not listen to anyone that has a contrary opinion. The people that put this project together were told that the cooling system that they were going to install would lead to the exact problem that occurred. Mold that made people sick and destroyed structures. Air conditioners dry the air out where as 'swamp coolers' force sometimes exceedingly wet air through any duct work and usually leads to problems. Many years ago, a similar situation happened in a hospital. Moisture formed in the duct system and a deadly mold formed killing a lot of people.

But, with the politicians and the environmentalists spurring them on in an almost cult like atmosphere, the only answer is their answer. everyone else becomes a denier, an evil person..... No one wants to see many of the political sub-plots that are going on.

[dufas]

HA!

Kind of silly to focus on just one GHG emisson to remedy the AGW problem. If thy powers that be are serious in supporting the green movement transition to alterante energy. Every contributing factor should be eyed where it aids humaniod comfort at a cost to the environment as another evil apparatus.

All that is needed is a few "Scientists" to reach a concensus on the 80% reduction in swampies emissions and a few Politicians to see a short term revenue stream like brown coal and regulate it back into the stone age as the SUV of cooling devices. LOL!

DC

Yep, remember, not too long ago, California Air Resources Board [non elected personas] wanted to outlaw dark painted vehicles or at least the black ones. That wouldn't work so they went to work on the windows and windshields of said vehicles... Now we have a law that by 2015 all glass in cars is to be coated with a infra red reflective barrier. Reason, so vehicle air conditioners don't have to work so hard in order to use less fuel so as not to emit as much CO2 into the atmosphere in order to stop global warming/climate change. They figure that the change will cut down 0.002 percent of CO2 emissions and only add around $300.00 to the cost of a vehicle.

If the wingnuts ever figure out that moisture in the air traps more heat than CO2...watch the powers that be try to tax the swamp cooler or eliminate them altogether....

[One of Many]

Yep, remember, not too long ago, California Air Resources Board [non elected personas] wanted to outlaw dark painted vehicles or at least the black ones. That wouldn't work so they went to work on the windows and windshields of said vehicles... Now we have a law that by 2015 all glass in cars is to be coated with a infra red reflective barrier. Reason, so vehicle air conditioners don't have to work so hard in order to use less fuel so as not to emit as much CO2 into the atmosphere in order to stop global warming/climate change. They figure that the change will cut down 0.002 percent of CO2 emissions and only add around $300.00 to the cost of a vehicle.

If the wingnuts ever figure out that moisture in the air traps more heat than CO2...watch the powers that be try to tax the swamp cooler or eliminate them altogether....

Let's not ignore as the price of a vehicle goes up, there is also a gain in taxes from all its process to the end sale.

I like this innovative solution! LOL!

DC

[Rick Tiglon Eng]

One of many, If the pictured vehicle was using a diesel fuelled generator it could be classified as a diesel/gasoline hybrid and might actually be considered for exemption from the London low emission zone (if it were a commercial vehicle) or even the congestion charge! the applicant would need to prove certain parameters, but it would be no more insane than a hybrid SUV being exempt even though it is huge, weighs tons and puts out far more of just about every emission than a modern Diesel or Petrol(Gasolene) micro car would, not to mention that the conjestion charge was implemented to reduce conjestion, surely bigger car = more conjestion regardless of emissions?

And before i offend anyone here, i would like to point out that i love my old F250 and would never give it up willingly, but i'm not dumb enough to try and drive it through central London. All things are good in their place and my old "Effie" likes the agricultural zones, and hasn't done many miles in the last ten years, so is more of a driveway ornament anyway.

It has been expressed a number of times throughout this thread that an individual needs to know the history in order to comment, and i do agree. but i would like to affirm that i think, without fence sitting, everyone is right. and it is more the implementation that we all disagree with. We all have our differences and a lot of opinions are gained from watching polititions and greenies playing with technology that they just don't understand, It is like handing a mobile phone to a monkey sometimes!

I like the swamp/evaporative cooler example as it is just so typical, there is no way that it replaces traditional airconditioning practice, certainly not in humid areas, but a hard core greeny "Mr Sandles" might say that it does to "Mr Charisma" the Politician, the project is then put in the hands of "Mr Jobsworth" the accountant, and he decides that he can cut the budget by using the old ducting for a nice cheap retrofit solution and guess what, all of the "Key performance indicators" point to a job well done;
1, Protestors, quiet (or at least whining about something else).
2, Politician, re-elected as he has satisfied public opinion.
3, Accountant, chuffed as he has saved a fortune.

But all of a sudden folks start to get sick and die from Spores and Legionella and whatever else. but why blame the gun? it's the people that pulled the trigger isn't it?

My Utopia is a place where folks fit an evaporative cooler because it works in their environment, it saves them enough money to justify correct installation and that it be properly maintained. We all move on to designing a system that works in an area that the swamp cooler just won't work, surely it would be better to devote time to discussing the successes and promoting them relentlessly, If one doesn't believe in climate change he/she might believe in the saving of public funds, or just good old fashioned progress where a new idea lives or dies on the back of it's own merits.

And before I get cut down yes, it is over simplified, yes someone has already said it a couple of years ago and yes we could all benefit from reading more books.

Best Regards
Rick

[widetrack]

It seems to me that if we (as a population) were actually concerned about the increase in CO2, then why have we, and why are we continuously deforesting the planet. The single largest CO2 scrubber in our world, and yet hundreds of thousands of acres have been removed. I wasn't as aware of this until I moved to the Pacific Northwest, and have spent a huge amount of time in the forests, and have witnessed the destruction here. Then study a world wide practice of the same thing, albeit for some different reasons. I have noticed how people swarm into the mountains (where I live) on weekends, I dont think they even realize why. The oxygen rich air there draws them like ants. not so many years ago this deforestation was a hot topic. Wonder where all those people went? I hear that Al was one of them, now he wants to charge us for it. It's funny how people love the area where I live. But as soon as they move there, they want to change it.

[dufas]

Before someone jumps in screaming "Off Topic", realize that if the below comes to fruition, these tactics will be used for installing egregious global warming laws plus any other agenda that the left wants to put forward. It will become illegal to think in the USA. What is sadly funny is that the same people that are upset about detaining true terrorists think nothing of using Nazi tactics on their own citizens who might disagree with them.... also a way to eliminate one's political opposition..





http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106304

Snip============================================== ===================================

LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Why is National Guard recruiting for 'internment' cops?
Ad campaign seeks workers at 'civilian resettlement facility'
Posted: August 07, 2009
11:45 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

An ad campaign featured on a U.S. Army website seeking those who would be interested in being an "Internment/Resettlement" specialist is raising alarms across the country, generating concerns that there is some truth in those theories about domestic detention camps, a roundup of dissidents and a crackdown on "threatening" conservatives.

Are you an enemy of the state? Get the bumper sticker that lets everyone know you have no apologies for being right!

The ads, at the GoArmy.com website as well as others including Monster.com, cite the need for:

"Internment/Resettlement (I/R) Specialists in the Army are primarily responsible for day-to-day operations in a military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility. I/R Specialists provide rehabilitative, health, welfare, and security to U.S. military prisoners within a confinement or correctional facility; conduct inspections; prepare written reports; and coordinate activities of prisoners/internees and staff personnel.

The campaign follows by only weeks a report from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security warning about "right-wing extremists" who could pose a danger to the country – including those who support third-party political candidates, oppose abortion and would prefer to have the U.S. immigration laws already on the books enforced.

Snip============================================== ===================================