Brittian Planning Individual Carbon Rationing

Because I'm aware there is a problem, both environmental and rising energy costs, and changes need to happen. I just don't think either are urgent enough to hurt my finances and/or quality of life right now. I've made minor changes like recycling everything, fluorescent light bulbs etc., and I'll gladly look into alternative cars, home energy etc. when the added cost is minimal or non-existent and there's little to no inconvenience added.

I don't want a pat on the back, I live my life for myself not for pats on the back from others. I am very self-centered and short sited. The world will be fine for my lifetime, and I can't say I care that much about what happens after that. I have some degree of conscience about it I guess, since I'm willing to recycle etc., but I certainly don't give enough of a shit that it will ever come before my own conveniences.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I don't want a pat on the back, I live my life for myself not for pats on the back from others. I am very self-centered and short sited. The world will be fine for my lifetime, and I can't say I care that much about what happens after that. I have some degree of conscience about it I guess, since I'm willing to recycle etc., but I certainly don't give enough of a shit that it will ever come before my own conveniences.[/quote]

Many people I know are always talking about their kids, their kids and some of them don't do the green things you do (with the bulbs and all) out of sheer laziness. They do have all sorts of ways of fooling themselves though.

This is a Generation Y (why?) thing, isn't it ;)
 
Not generation Y for me, I don't think anyway. I turn 30 this year.

I don't have, or want kids, so that furthers my short-sightedness I guess.
 
[quote name='Koggit']I don't feel like getting into it, but the fact of the matter is that going off the grid is generally more expensive than paying an electric company.

There's a 5-credit six-day class (two full weekends) at my school for the installation of solar hot water systems (using solar energy to heat the water directly, rather than creating electricity through photovoltaic cells and then using the electricity to heat the water). I took the class because I was only taking two real classes and needed to be full time to be covered by my health insurance. Anyway, even though the class wasn't about photovoltaic cells we did talk a lot about solar energy's practicality and even my professor conceded that going off the grid is generally not worth it financially.

I could elaborate as to why, or explain his idealized implementation of solar panel if anyone's interested. Either would be pretty lengthy and I'd rather not put them in this post because I don't want to detract from the main point: Sarang's statements are inaccurate in that going off the grid does not save money.[/QUOTE]

That's what the Electric company would like you to believe. They want to keep you enslaved $wise.

I'm not talking about Solar Panels on the market right now unless Nanosolar can cut it. I'm talking about Konarka Solar Panels using new battery technology by 123systems. Konarka panels can even work in places like Seattle where it's cloudy all the time. You can also draw power from regular lights as well. So indoors you could place the Konarka Solar Panels all in the kitchen or any other place in your house that's well lit and truly benefit. Imagine most appliances, with the exception of the Refrigerator and Freezer, having said panel and being completely powered by it when the lights are on. Can you imagine how much the energy usage would be reduced as well from that?
Dmaul nice to see someone understands.

Koggit this rent, rent, rent bullshit needs not to cut it anymore. We see it CONSTANTLY in many ways, many forms. Case in point, planned oblesense. Of course this doesn't hold water so much with Electronics such as computers for the most part considering Moore's Law and the computer manufacturers will know people will upgrade, upgrade, upgrade. Big diseases you don't cure, you treat them unless they kill if you don't cure.
Houses built like shit as compared to how they were built. Using shitty materials.
Film giving way to digital. Now this I wouldn't have an issue with if you had some digital storage material that would last near 100 years at least or even 75. But one number I remember seeing was 30 years.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']That's what the Electric company would like you to believe. They want to keep you enslaved $wise.[/quote]

First, no, that's what my professor would like me to believe. The one teaching the class about solar energy, in a program designed for people in the solar industry. But I'm sure you're right -- he just didn't want anybody to get the crazy idea, in his solar energy class, that solar energy might be a worthwhile industry. That makes complete sense.

Second, my electric company doesn't want me to believe anything, since they're city owned (Seattle Public Utilities) nonprofit and one of the greenest in the nation. They have a ton of conservation programs and actively encourage solar. They even offer rebate checks for customers who add panels, I think it's something like $10 a month for 3 years. They also offer free CFLs (they'll mail you up to 20 CFLs free, one for every incandescent you mail in). But I'm sure you're right, they just want me to waste more electricity. They're raking in big bucks at 4 cents per kwh.

[quote name='Sarang01']I'm not talking about Solar Panels on the market right now unless Nanosolar can cut it. I'm talking about Konarka Solar Panels using new battery technology by 123systems. Konarka panels can even work in places like Seattle where it's cloudy all the time. You can also draw power from regular lights as well. So indoors you could place the Konarka Solar Panels all in the kitchen or any other place in your house that's well lit and truly benefit. Imagine most appliances, with the exception of the Refrigerator and Freezer, having said panel and being completely powered by it when the lights are on. Can you imagine how much the energy usage would be reduced as well from that?
Dmaul nice to see someone understands.

Koggit this rent, rent, rent bullshit needs not to cut it anymore. We see it CONSTANTLY in many ways, many forms. Case in point, planned oblesense. Of course this doesn't hold water so much with Electronics such as computers for the most part considering Moore's Law and the computer manufacturers will know people will upgrade, upgrade, upgrade. Big diseases you don't cure, you treat them unless they kill if you don't cure.
Houses built like shit as compared to how they were built. Using shitty materials.
Film giving way to digital. Now this I wouldn't have an issue with if you had some digital storage material that would last near 100 years at least or even 75. But one number I remember seeing was 30 years.[/QUOTE]

You sound like you're 80. Bitter, delusional, ignorant and pretending to have solutions. The difference is that nobody here will nod and say "Yes, grandma."

I'm a physics/electric engineering double major and have little patience for your ignorance. Powering appliances on indoor lighting? 2 meters from a light source, without obstruction, the surface area is 125,600 cm^2 (12.56 m^2). How big would you like each panel to be? 100 cm^2? Then you'd get 1/1,250th of the energy produced by the light, assuming 100% efficiency (which is literally impossible, no matter the technology). That means a 13w CFL (which most people use in place of old 60w incandescents) will give you a hundredth of a watt.

Take it elsewhere, your BS is wasting our time.
 
[quote name='Koggit']First, no, that's what my professor would like me to believe. The one teaching the class about solar energy, in a program designed for people in the solar industry. But I'm sure you're right -- he just didn't want anybody to get the crazy idea, in his solar energy class, that solar energy might be a worthwhile industry. That makes complete sense.

Second, my electric company doesn't want me to believe anything, since they're city owned (Seattle Public Utilities) nonprofit and one of the greenest in the nation. They have a ton of conservation programs and actively encourage solar. They even offer rebate checks for customers who add panels, I think it's something like $10 a month for 3 years. They also offer free CFLs (they'll mail you up to 20 CFLs free, one for every incandescent you mail in). But I'm sure you're right, they just want me to waste more electricity. They're raking in big bucks at 4 cents per kwh.



You sound like you're 80. Bitter, delusional, ignorant and pretending to have solutions. The difference is that nobody here will nod and say "Yes, grandma."

I'm a physics/electric engineering double major and have little patience for your ignorance. Powering appliances on indoor lighting? 2 meters from a light source, without obstruction, the surface area is 125,600 cm^2 (12.56 m^2). How big would you like each panel to be? 100 cm^2? Then you'd get 1/1,250th of the energy produced by the light, assuming 100% efficiency (which is literally impossible, no matter the technology). That means a 13w CFL (which most people use in place of old 60w incandescents) will give you a hundredth of a watt.

Take it elsewhere, your BS is wasting our time.[/QUOTE]

Do you even know a fucking thing about Konarka Solar Panels? If not don't assume I'm being absurd. For one you can make them quite easily and cheaply, just using newspaper printers. If you check Konarka.com you'll find they even printed one off an Inkjet. Their quick reaction on picking up the sun's light is even faster then Photosynthesis. What I'm saying is these panels collect the sun's energy quickly. Also even IF and I say if because I doubt it, these "panels" only match the production of traditional Photovoltaics you can cover more surface area with them. This tech can match your paint job and be laid on top of it. I even wouldn't be surprised if it could be done on some roofs.
You could easily cover your car in it. http://www.konarka.com/technology/

Look there.

As for your Seattle comment I doubt most peoples Power companies are not for Profit so consider yourself lucky. I know MINE isn't city owned. One company in my state wants to build another Coal power plant and most of the power they want to sell to another state for unregulated sales. One who has Windmills up I've heard is selling most if not ALL of the power in unregulated sales to Oklahoma or some setup is being done to accomodate that for new windmills.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Do you even know a fucking thing about Konarka Solar Panels? If not don't assume I'm being absurd. For one you can make them quite easily and cheaply, just using newspaper printers. If you check Konarka.com you'll find they even printed one off an Inkjet. Their quick reaction on picking up the sun's light is even faster then Photosynthesis. What I'm saying is these panels collect the sun's energy quickly. Also even IF and I say if because I doubt it, these "panels" only match the production of traditional Photovoltaics you can cover more surface area with them. This tech can match your paint job and be laid on top of it. I even wouldn't be surprised if it could be done on some roofs.
You could easily cover your car in it. http://www.konarka.com/technology/

Look there.[/QUOTE]

What does that have to do with anything?

First and foremost, the price of solar cells has absolutely nothing to do with the absurdity of your comments. The fact is that there is not enough radiation indoors to warrant indoor PV units. That's what your post suggested, and that's why I called you ignorant. PV units could cost a penny a square meter and it would have still been a retarded suggestion.

Further, although it really has no place in this argument, those cells are really not so groundbreaking. They make it sound cheap by saying it can be applied roll-to-roll, but they don't address the cost of the material nor the polymer. PV cells are already fairly cheap to produce, what's expensive is the rest of the PV unit, making the cells durable, and recouping R&D. You say "This tech can match your paint job and be laid on top of it" but that assumes a loss of efficiency. Either you change the color, which would absorb far less of that portion of the visible spectrum, and either way, it's not going to look like your paint job, so it's pretty impractical. Why would you cover your car in white PV panels instead of black, when it doesn't look much better and you'd only get 5% of the energy?

But, as I said, the practicality of a particular company's technology isn't the topic of discussion. There are a lot of good, efficient and affordable solar technologies and solutions available. But that isn't what we're debating.

[quote name='Sarang01']As for your Seattle comment I doubt most peoples Power companies are not for Profit so consider yourself lucky. I know MINE isn't city owned. One company in my state wants to build another Coal power plant and most of the power they want to sell to another state for unregulated sales. One who has Windmills up I've heard is selling most if not ALL of the power in unregulated sales to Oklahoma or some setup is being done to accomodate that for new windmills.[/QUOTE]

A large portion of America's electric utilities are public. I don't see what your talk about sale of energy has anything to do with anything. We (Seattle) buy a portion of our energy from Vancouver, which is, as far as I know, "unregulated." Production should be regulated, not sale.
 
Ok now I never said they weren't public so don't try to mince words with me. I said most aren't not for Profit. Using the term public you could mean a publically owned company, which, unless stated otherwise, is for profit.
Did you even LOOK at the fucking link I posted? See the pic of that military shed? When the fuck did I say you'd have to get a WHITE paint job for a car? I'm saying you could cover your car in this tech in ANY color.
As for the radiation comment this tech doesn't just pick up power from the sun but light in general. I'm guessing you're assuming this functions like typical PV, it doesn't. You read my Photosynthesis comment before. Now how about you shut up and read about the tech first? Also whatever you specify as cheap for Photovoltaics doesn't apply here. Even this tech not mass produced, which would drop the price of this tech like a stone, it's still incredibly cheap compared to PV tech as we know it.
 
"Public" can mean multiple things, and from the context of my sentence any literate person should have a clear understanding of how the word should be taken. The internet supports me:

"The term "public company" may also refer to a government-owned corporation. This meaning of a "public company" comes from the tradition of public ownership of assets and interests by and for the people as a whole"
Click to expand...

Now, I think on the color and radiation front I need to teach you some very basic science. I'm actually going to quote it just so you can't edit it to save face.

Did you even LOOK at the ing link I posted? See the pic of that military shed? When the did I say you'd have to get a WHITE paint job for a car? I'm saying you could cover your car in this tech in ANY color.
As for the radiation comment this tech doesn't just pick up power from the sun but light in general. I'm guessing you're assuming this functions like typical PV, it doesn't. You read my Photosynthesis comment before. Now how about you shut up and read about the tech first? Also whatever you specify as cheap for Photovoltaics doesn't apply here. Even this tech not mass produced, which would drop the price of this tech like a stone, it's still incredibly cheap compared to PV tech as we know it.
Click to expand...

First, I never said it had to be white. I used it as an example. Don't put shit in my mouth. ANY non-black color will be less efficient. I'll explain why in a second, but I just want you to understand I don't appreciate you twisting what I say. You should be thanking me for taking time out of my day to talk to you, rather than show disrespect by spewing more of your bullshit. You haven't made a single factual comment since you entered this thread, just shut up and learn.

Now, it seems you lack any sort of basic background in science, so I'll tell you a couple things that you should've learned in 5th grade.

Radiation is what we call energy moving through the air in the form of electromagnetic waves. The sun produces a wide range of radiation. The vast majority of light (just another word for electromagnetic radiation) that reaches the earth is in the visible spectrum. This is probably why our eyes evolved to sense this spectrum, because it's the most abundant. When you see colors, you are seeing a portion of the visible spectrum of radiation. If you see black, that means no visible radiation is being reflected. If you see white, that means all visible radiation is being reflected. Colors between are reflecting different portions of the spectrum (e.g. if you see blue, the red end of radiation is being absorbed). Therefore, if a solar panel is any color other than black, it will be at less than maximum efficiency because it will be reflecting a portion of its potential energy source. The most efficient solar panel will always be black, because that it is the only way to absorb all radiation in the visible spectrum.

Now, you say "this tech doesn't just pick up power from the sun but light in general". This is true of ALL PV units, and there's no difference between "light from the sun" and "light in general." The light emitted by your flashlight is the exact same as the light emitted by the sun -- it just may not contain the full spectrum (in particular, gamma waves and the like). Also of note is, as I've mentioned, the law of conservation of energy. If you have a 13 watt lightbulb on for 10 seconds (a watt is the time derivative of a joule), assuming 100% efficiency (which is impossible) it will emit 130 joules of energy in the form of heat (which is just another word for molecular kinetic energy) and radiation. A small portion of that radiation could be recollected, but it would be so incredibly small that it would be pointless. As I've already shown, a 100 cm^2 panel at a distance of 6 ft would only be receiving 1/1,250th of the power used, in the very best case scenario.

Really, this is just ridiculous. You're just ridiculous. I'm not a middle school science teacher. If you want to talk to the adults, go read a book and get back to us.
 
This is obviously a scam.

Instead of oil use other power!

This is like when in the USA certain people scan your ID when buying boozes or smokes. It's so they can keep track of what people are doing.

Great way to be evil UK!
 
Sorry to re-rail the thread but....

In light of the Chinese earthquakes and the suspension of their child quota laws, I'd like to point out that carbon rationing and child rationing are also one and the same.

First Spaghetti, then gunpowder. Who knew the Chinese were still churning out new inventions well before the West catches on ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top