The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
I didn't say anything about how it works. But I have seen solar cells and they are reflective even if reflection has nothing to do with their functionality. Quit trying to play gotcha. I'm not interested.
Don't understand unintendend consequences, do you? Don't understand desert ecoolgy, temperature, wind and moisture patterns, etc etc. And even if you DO, you should know better than to think you know what's going to happen when you pave half a continent, desert or not, with solar cells. The albedo will NOT be the same, no matter what. And anything living there would be toast. You would be adding a gigantic permanently shaded surface area that would have effects impossible to predict. Just flippantly saying it would be the same betrays ignorance.Secondly: Either you heat the area by heating the ground or the solar panels. Yeah, that will make a huge ecological difference in the Sahara. How much ecology are we talking about there anyway? I mean, the place is called a barren wasteland for a reason.
Only if you're willing to pave gigantic sections of the earth with solar cells without any real idea what the effect would be. Sounds stupid. And you still have issues with weather and day/night cycle unless you plan to build a global electrical grid.I beg to differ: Efficiency is the primary and most important motivator in the energy creation business. And there's more than enough surface area on Earth.
<sigh> Above the pacific. The relays would be orbital.That still does not answer how you'll create those relay stations in the Pacific.
Likely there isn't going to be any feasible fusion power.However, it won't come about before Fusion power and the Space Lift are available. And by then, there's really no point anymore.
Death Valley. It's in California - the other side of the contintent. It's also a National Park for its uniquely high temperature, uniquley low elevation and unique ecology. Nobody will be paving it with solar panels.
Though you lose efficiency, you could use the electricity to split water and use the hydrogen as a fuel medium. Burn it or run it through a fuel cell. I wonder what it would cost to refit all those oil tankers with big compressed H2 tanks?
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
Give me 10 billion dollars and we'll find out.
Edit: also, I think you're being a little pessimistic. There are a few projects now (or are they proposed?) that use solar panels as a shade, with water fed through and plants growing underneath them.
Also, some scientists (I have read this somewhere; I think on the old forums...) believe that the brightness of the Sahara influences hurricane formation. So, we might even get rid of or largely eliminate hurricanes if we plastered (with solar cells) the part of the Sahara where hurricanes form, saving trillions of dollars in damages and tens of thousands of lives lost over the next decade.
As an added bonus, those stupid developing countries won't have their matchstick houses so often destroyed, and thus they might actually develop.
Only if you hire me as a special consultant.
I don't mean to be pessimistic. Sure, something very positive could come out of that Sahara project - the point is there will be effects, and we won't be able to predict them. Its not a good gamble to invest in all that infrastructure, creating reliance on the energy produced, only to find out we just totally fucked up some important part of the climate. Lets build a space industry, build the solar power infrastructure Out There; the risks will be lower and Humanity will be much better off with a good reason to spend more time in Space. Imagine that, a real space faring civilization. Everybody wins.Edit: also, I think you're being a little pessimistic. There are a few projects now (or are they proposed?) that use solar panels as a shade, with water fed through and plants growing underneath them.
Also, some scientists (I have read this somewhere; I think on the old forums...) believe that the brightness of the Sahara influences hurricane formation. So, we might even get rid of or largely eliminate hurricanes if we plastered (with solar cells) the part of the Sahara where hurricanes form, saving trillions of dollars in damages and tens of thousands of lives lost over the next decade.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
Great. And where do they reflect to? Hint: It ain't at the ground. And it ain't focused.
Yeah, that unique ecology is why we're trying to enhance desertification! Oh, wait...Don't understand unintendend consequences, do you? Don't understand desert ecoolgy, temperature, wind and moisture patterns, etc etc.
Yeah, because the sun suddenly ramps up it's output by 200% and aims it like a LASER beam directly at the Sahara?[...] And anything living there would be toast.
So, what is it? Toast or shade? Can't have both, y'know?You would be adding a gigantic permanently shaded surface area that would have effects impossible to predict.
Yeah, global electrical grid on Earth. Which differs from a global electrical grid in orbit exactly how? And you still haven't told me why stuff in orbit is not affected by a day/night cycle.Only if you're willing to pave gigantic sections of the earth with solar cells without any real idea what the effect would be. Sounds stupid. And you still have issues with weather and day/night cycle unless you plan to build a global electrical grid.
Either you have the satellites in a geo-synchronous orbit. Instant day/night cycle. Or you have them orbiting the earth always in sun light - which somehow creates a small problem for the part of the earth not shone upon by the sun - because they're out of reach of the satellites as well. Which leads to the creation of a ... global electrical grid. Fun, ain't it?
That's nice. But somehow you have to transfer power from above the Pacific to, eheh, sea level. Such a station would then have to relay the power received to continental mass. Are we having fun yet?<sigh> Above the pacific. The relays would be orbital.
And even more likely we won't have orbital solar power.Likely there isn't going to be any feasible fusion power.
Okay, one of the other North American Deserts, then.Death Valley. It's in California - the other side of the contintent. It's also a National Park for its uniquely high temperature, uniquley low elevation and unique ecology. Nobody will be paving it with solar panels.
Great. And you get that hydrogen from orbit down to earth exactly how? More importantly, you get the fuel containers and the water up there exactly how?Though you lose efficiency, you could use the electricity to split water and use the hydrogen as a fuel medium. Burn it or run it through a fuel cell. I wonder what it would cost to refit all those oil tankers with big compressed H2 tanks?
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
So? Reflecting light upward and diffusely from half a continent is good?
Your ignorance of all things biology and conservation is adorable.Yeah, that unique ecology is why we're trying to enhance desertification! Oh, wait...
Are you drunk? Toast doesn't necessarily mean 'cooked.' In the American vernacular, it means dead or really screwed up.Yeah, because the sun suddenly ramps up it's output by 200% and aims it like a LASER beam directly at the Sahara?
You can move energy around in space via lazer, meaning you don't have to string wire all over the place. That's your orbital grid. Regarding day/night - the solar collectors don't have to be in low orbit. They don't even have to be in Earth orbit. They could be in a trailing orbit, like in one of the Lagrange points or something. Use your imagination.Yeah, global electrical grid on Earth. Which differs from a global electrical grid in orbit exactly how? And you still haven't told me why stuff in orbit is not affected by a day/night cycle.
They're about equally feasible according to an analysis by SciAm last year. But I'm sure you know better than that. Right.And even more likely we won't have orbital solar power.
Because deserts are blank empty land completely separate from the rest of the world that when paved over will have no affect on anything at all.Okay, one of the other North American Deserts, then.
Are you here just for the argument? I was actually suggesting a solution to a problem he had with YOUR hair brained idea. Are you able to discuss something without constructing the whole thing around conflict?Great. And you get that hydrogen from orbit down to earth exactly how? More importantly, you get the fuel containers and the water up there exactly how?
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
Things are getting ugly, with misunderstanding of quotes and undermining common phrases...
I have a nail trimmer available for sale!
You don't need to cover half a continent for enough power production using solar, IIRC 0.3% of all the sun power in the Sahara would be enough to power Europe. And you'd probably want to use not PV cells but molten salt or boiling water or something which is heated by mirrors. The effect won't be that big if you cover 1%, I suppose (besides, it's probably not going to be your sole power source so it will be less).
Biggest problems are transportation (but that is possible, but very expensive to implement) and costs.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Molten salt. Sweet.
<sigh> The only point in all of that Sahara stuff is to acknowledge that if you pave over half a continent with solar cells, as was suggested, there's likely going to be unforseen climatological effects, to say nothing of destroying hundreds of ecological systems which are likely valuable to somebody, if not Kenny.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
No, I wouldn't, because they haven't had any successes.
"Public awareness" hasn't stopped the slash and burn agriculture which is destroying the rainforests, nor has what little legislation exists on the issue. In fact, nothing's stopped it - it's still going on.
However, the asshats who predicted the rainforests would all be gone by 2010 based their predictions on the rate of deforestation... as calculated, based on satellite photos... of smoke (from the burning of the cut down rainforests). Surprisingly to everyone, smoke expands rather rapidly, so the rate of deforestation was an order of magnitude or two higher than predicted by the so called "scientists" researching rainforest deforestation. (I can't bring myself to call someone a scientist when they don't know that smoke expands, so I put it in quotations.)
What damage? There hasn't been any quantifiable damage. Just doom and gloom predictions of damage to come, if we don't let the government tax energy at a punitively high rate.
Besides, any actual warming from fossil fuel emissions is surely a good thing, given that it helped us avert that catastrophic ice age that we were supposed to have by now, according to the same climate "scientists" who are now warning us about the dangers of warming.
No. Because there's no science in it, just politics. You know, like "adjusting" raw data to match a predetermined hypothesis, rather than adjusting your hypothesis to match the data. That's politics, not science.
Furthermore, given that they're making the same mistakes they did back when they predicted a new ice age (extrapolating a decade's worth of data out to the year 2250 or w/e, while ignoring massive external factors, such as the energy output of the sun), I'd say that climate "science" hasn't evolved an iota since 1970. They're still fudging numbers and trying to get away with shit that my 8th grade science teachers wouldn't put up with.
Actually, it was subsequently discarded when they realized that the trend they had extrapolated out for a few centuries... wasn't a perpetual trend, but just a temporary cooling period. It had nothing to do with the scientific method, and everything to do with mistakes that wouldn't be tolerated from a student in any stats 101 class.
No, it's completely relevant, because they're still making the same mistakes today that led them to the opposite conclusion yesterday. Namely, extrapolating a short term trend as far into the future as necessary to support their predetermined conclusion. And I'm sure that the millions (billions?) of dollars in government funding available only to scientists who support the government position doesn't color what that predetermined conclusion is, or anything like that.
Thank you.
This is really the only "green" energy technology that has any chance of providing enough energy to be worthwhile, so if we're going to invest in "green" energy, our money should go there, instead of being wasted on 14th century technologies like wind power, pipe dreams like orbital solar, or by-products of the nuclear arms race, like nuclear reactors.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
One big problem is that people who shout the loudest and the most shocking get all the attention, especially if there's politics involved.
That's bullshit. You should know that any stats 101 class student is still crap at statistics, too, hardly anyone does it right Don't know about the actually issue so I wouldn't know why they changed the hypothesis.It had nothing to do with the scientific method, and everything to do with mistakes that wouldn't be tolerated from a student in any stats 101 class.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Frankly, sounds like an excellent argument for what I've been saying all along - any decisions worth making is *far* too important to be let politics influence it.
I dunno... I was taught that in a stats 101 course, at a state university... (though I first learned it from my 8th grade science teacher ) so I kind of assume that anyone with any exposure to even the fundamentals of statistics heard it too.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.