Slashdot Mirror


Around the World in a Solar Plane

Coati writes "Bertrand Piccard, the guy that flew around the world in a balloon, wants to do it again, this time in a solar plane."

55 of 153 comments (clear)

  1. Sunny skies by Jumper99 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Guess he won't be flying at night.....

    --
    The opinions expressed here are not mine, but those of these dang voices in my head.
    1. Re:Sunny skies by kinnell · · Score: 4, Funny
      Guess he won't be flying at night.....

      As long as he can design a solar plane which can fly at mach 2, this shouldn't be a problem.

      --
      If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    2. Re:Sunny skies by isorox · · Score: 4, Informative

      You need to make 700mph to fly arround the world in complete sunlight, starting at sunrise on the equator, and taking 36 hours arriving at your departure point at sunset the next day.

    3. Re:Sunny skies by swillden · · Score: 4, Informative

      As long as he can design a solar plane which can fly at mach 2, this shouldn't be a problem.

      Nahh, 700 mph is all he needs. If he flies with the sun, night will gain on him at a velocity of v_s - v, where v_s is the speed of the light's edge and v is his speed. If he takes off at dawn, and flies along the equator, he has to get all the way around (25,000 miles) before night, which starts out at 12,500 miles away, catches up.

      So, he has to achieve a velocity v that satisfies both:

      (v_s - v) t = c/2

      and

      v t = c

      where t is the travel time and c is the circumference of the earth. Isolating t in each and setting them equal gives:

      c / [ 2 (v_s - v) ] = c / v
      ==> 2 (v_s - v) = v
      ==> 2 v_s = 3 v
      ==> v = 2/3 v_s

      Plugging in the numbers, that means he needs a velocity of about 694 mph, assuming the earth's circumference is 25000 miles.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  2. Oh no! RAIN! by Space+cowboy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hope he stays above the clouds :-)

    Simon

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  3. no sun = no fly by ikoleverhate · · Score: 5, Funny

    he'd better not fly over the UK then.. no sun here ;)

  4. OK... by penis+fish · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, but does it run Linux?

    --
    helo wat is ur asl ?
    1. Re:OK... by big_groo · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      No, but there's one powered by Macs.

    2. Re:OK... by crubb · · Score: 2, Informative
  5. eco friendly? by A1tha1us · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So after a few years of r&D half a dozen custom built protoypes (to be discarded as non-biodegradable junk) and other discarded parts they can have something that probably took more energy to make than a small town uses in a year, but then fly it around the world using only energy from the sun...I suppose it will be a cool engineering achievement.

    --
    .Sig. temporarily unavailable due to terminal lack of inventivness .we apologise for the inconvenience
    1. Re:eco friendly? by zeux · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Solar cells are not efficient, we all know that. We know that it takes more energy to build them than they will ever produce in their lifetime.

      But hey, this can be improved and to improve it researchers need funds. For researchers to get funds they have to make people understand that it's possible and that beautiful things could be achieved with solar cells. That's one of the purposes of this project.

      Anyway, I still prefer that guy building an expensive plane in terms of energy than millions of people riding inefficient SUV in towns.

    2. Re:eco friendly? by gobbo · · Score: 5, Insightful
      So after a few years of r&D half a dozen custom built protoypes (to be discarded as non-biodegradable junk) and other discarded parts they can have something that probably took more energy to make than a small town uses in a year, but then fly it around the world using only energy from the sun...

      A Proof of Concept product is always more costly. You can think of R&D costs not concentrated in a single product, but amortized across the series of product lines inspired by the new engineering, whether those costs are money or calories or a balance of available resources. The long-term savings (in all economic senses) represented by efficient design suggests a real bargain for global society.

      The publicity stunt aspect of this is really a kind of marketing for sustainable tech in the long view.

    3. Re:eco friendly? by Urkki · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you truly not see why developing solar energy technology to the level that makes this kind of plane possible is eco-friendly proejct, or are you just trying to troll?

      And it's not just developing better solar cells to enhance current applications of solar energy.

      Consider for example that if a lot of oribital satellites could be replaced with purely solar-powered autonomous planes that could stay up theoretically indefinitely. Just think how much "non-biodegradable junk" can this project produce to match the environmental impact of just a single space rocket launch...

      Or imagine a hydrogen fuel-cell car that could partly refuel itself in a sunny parking lot during the workday, and could keep moving (slowly) even if you run out of fuel. Not much use in higher latitudes maybe, but imagine southern China, India and entire SE Asia with 2 billion cars like this instead of 2 billion cars using fossil fuels.

  6. Power storage by GeckoFood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, assuming he has clear skies for most of that trip, no problem. However, if he hits "inclement weather," how much energy does that plane store up before it runs out of juice? Or can it be assumed he will be above the cloud cover for the whole trip? And, is it assumed the trip is continuous or will he be able to stop at "jump points" (this makes more sense for obvious reasons). If he can stop even briefly, this idea becomes a lot more feasible.

    --
    Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
    1. Re:Power storage by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I was wondering that too. I'd assume that the plane would essentially be a glider and would use the solar power to provide lift as required and thrust only if sufficient spare energy was available. I'd also assume any onboard batteries would be fully charged at takeoff too to give things a head start.

      Even so, doing this in one hop seems a little unlikely, unless circumnavigation near the pole in summer is in order, and it's not in my book! Ignoring the tilt of the Earth, then taking off at dawn and flying west to maximise the amount of daylight would require a circumnavigation within 36 hours before night would fall. That's in the region of an average speed of 1,000mph. Fully charged batteries at takeoff, flying on battery through pre-dawn and recharging through the day and finishing off on battery at night would reduce that some, but enough for one hop?

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Power storage by Coelacanth · · Score: 4, Informative


      An aircraft of this type will certainly be cruising above the clouds, and will be steering well clear of any convective activity (thunderstorms) for safety reasons. The real power storage challenge is to get through the night.

      This is the reason you don't see all that many solar-powered UAVs, never mind piloted aircraft. The economics of solar flight would change radically if battery technology improved.

    3. Re:Power storage by Daoenti · · Score: 3, Informative
      By looking at the site it appears as if they would be doing it non-stop. The following is from their list of objectives:
      # Complete night in the air during the first 36 hour solar flight in June 2007;
      # First flight tests of the second prototype from end 2007;
      # Solar flights lasting several days from start of 2009.
      With a 36 hour solar flight in June 2007 and then a several day flight in 2009 (plus all of the other information actually on the site) it would seem like a safe assumption that they are trying to make it a non-stop flight.
    4. Re:Power storage by Zocalo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ah ha! Found the relevent paragraph of the website! They do indeed expect to stay aloft overnight, several in fact, which means enough power stored in batteries to keep the aircraft aloft during the shorter summer nights. I can't see any mention on whether they plan on gliding and using the propellers as required or not though.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  7. Easy by kinnell · · Score: 2, Funny

    All he needs is a really big bungee cord...

    --
    If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
  8. A bit of both by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is there any scientific value to going around the world in a balloon

    Is there any scientific value to space exploration?

    I'm guessing that circumnavigation of Earth in a particular class of vehicle acts as a sort of proof of concept to the vehicle's operation. Engineers at transportation industry companies usually want to work with ideas that somebody else has tested in the field, and this is where the wealthy people's pastimes come in.

  9. Obligatory... by MoeMoe · · Score: 2, Funny

    Obliugatory Piccard joke.....



    Piccard: To boldy go, where no ma- (turbulence) Number 1, why are we rapidly descending?

    Riker: It seems to be a solar eclipse sir

    Piccard: All hands embrace for impact!

    --
    Business \Busi"ness\, n.;
    A scam in which all people involved perceive as beneficial...
    1. Re:Obligatory... by Xpilot · · Score: 2, Informative

      According to the wikipedia, Jean-luc Picard was named after Dr. Jean Piccard, another balloonist!

      --
      "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
  10. Glider by penguinoid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    People can stay in the air for several days in a glider. They use upward currents to gain height. You know, fly over a desert in the day, and over a forest at night.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  11. Get off the cross by Gothmolly · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We need the wood.

    Spare me the "any mention of ecology gets a lukewarm response from the public because their comfortable existence is threatened".

    The problem with many so-called 'ecologists' is that they frame everything in terms of 'saving the Planet'. Here's a clue - the Planet will survive long after we're all dead. The Earth will be there when the sun becomes a red giant and eats it. We shouldn't save the Planet, we should save ourselves. Does the Earth 'care' if biodiversity diminishes due to pollution? Does the Earth 'care' if the light pollution causes algae disruptions in the Great Lakes? No. but we should.

    This project is great at raising visibility and research focus in the fields of energy capture, storage and motor design, but these folks aren't the Messaihs.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:Get off the cross by penguinoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I bet we could exterminate most nn-human life if we really tried. Or if we let factories spew out pollution at any rate they please (which would be a cheaper way to do it). How would you like to breathe smog, instead of air? Granted, though, the *planet* won't die, but what we care about are living things.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    2. Re:Get off the cross by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The problem with many so-called 'ecologists' is that they frame everything in terms of 'saving the Planet'.
      No, the problem with many so-called ecologists is that they frame everything in terms of threats to 'our comfortable existence'. They wrongly believe that it 'has to hurt if it's to heal', and translate every ecological problem, not just global warming but local small scale problems as well, into something that can, will and should have an enormous impact on our everyday lives. They do not believe in simple and painless solutions.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:Get off the cross by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't be so literal.

      Save the planet means save the lifeforms on the planet; save the beauty of the planet; keep it all the same so our grandkids can enjoy a walk on the beach and a trip through the woods.

      Not saving the planet is trashing it in small ways by throwing a soda can down in a forest or large ways by nations using the oceans as a sewer.

      Not saving the planet is letting lots of species die out - faster than evolution can replace them.

      New York trash including needles washed up on New Jersey beaches a while back. Soviet built reactors blew up making milk unfit to drink from Norway to China for a few months. Car caused air pollution makes it harder for me to breathe some days.

      Slogans that work are better than slogans that are technically more accurate.

      So help save the planet and be a hero!

    4. Re:Get off the cross by gobbo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Here's a clue - the Planet will survive long after we're all dead. The Earth will be there when the sun becomes a red giant and eats it. We shouldn't save the Planet, we should save ourselves. Does the Earth 'care' if biodiversity diminishes due to pollution? Does the Earth 'care' if the light pollution causes algae disruptions in the Great Lakes? No. but we should.

      That's a very humanistic position, which suggests that homo sapiens' mental capabilities separate us from the rest of the planet. You're saying that the whole enterprise of linking human destiny with the ecological structure of Gaia [or whatever name you give the "vast, self regulating system" that we live inside of] is annoying to you, as it diminishes us and is out of touch with the people.

      Here's a clue: people saying 'save the planet' are doing several things: 1) referring to the ecosphere as it is, not just a playground for hominids, 2) pointing out that ecology is an interconnected web with unforseen dependencies, 3) pointing out that our survival as a species may depend on us curbing our global practice of extinction, 4) stating that our humanistic rise above our environment's demands is a liability when it comes to understanding all that, so humanism needs adjustment.

      Better to die on my feet than live on my knees, as the saying goes, and for those connected to a natural environment, a diminished ecosphere is an oppression. In many senses, saving the planet = saving ourselves.

  12. Everyone asking 'can it fly at night' by hookedup · · Score: 5, Informative


    If you had clicked the article link, you'd see a picture of it flying at dusk, right on the front page!.

    Also from the press release

    The Solar Impulse aircraft will have an extremely long wingspan, advanced aerodynamics, and a revolutionary structure in order to capture and store sufficient solar energy during the day and to be able to maintain itself in flight during the night.

    1. Re:Everyone asking 'can it fly at night' by Robert+Osfield · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My guess is that they will probably climb during the day and charge batteries then glide all night with a small power draw to the batteries extending the glide. If they can climb enough during the day then they might not need to use batteries, and just glide until the morning. It should be possible to build such a machine with less than 100ft/min sink rate, perhaps even 50ft/min. Thanks 3000-6000 ft lost per hour, 8 hours is 24000-48000ft height loss. Manned flight makes this more complicated though with needing oxygen and heating the pilot at high altitudes.

  13. not going to happen??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    and you run and you run to catch up with the sun but its sinking, only to come up behind you again...

  14. Re:The grand grand grand grand grand son by mmonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Given that TNG is set around 2380, wouldn't that be great great great great great great great great great great grand-father? :)

  15. Re:solar polar by Theatetus · · Score: 2, Interesting
    how high would you need to fly at what lattitude and at what time of year to get out of earth shadow?

    Any trig gurus please improve this for me:

    Let T = radius of the earth
    Let L = given angle of latitutde
    Let X = "altitude" above the center of the earth to escape the earth's shadow
    Let A = altitude above the earth's surface.

    Now assume it is an equinox (thus the sun's rays are tangent to the earth at the poles), we want to find:

    A
    A = X - T since radii of a circle are equal
    X = T * sec(L) X is our hypotenuse
    thus
    A = T * sec(L) - T
    or perhaps more attractively:
    T * (sec(L) - 1)

    Something tells me there's a way to simplify that but I can't remember it.

    For days other than an equinox, recalculate a new lattitude from the point of tangency of the Sun's rays to the earth and convert to standard lattitude

    Disclaimer: this doesn't entirely work because the sun's rays are not parallel, but it should be pretty close.

    --
    All's true that is mistrusted
  16. Flying backwards to meet the dawn by G4from128k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would assume that the pilot would fly a zigziag course. During the day, they would fly westward to stay in the sun as long as possible. During the night, they would fly eastward to meet the dawn as soon as possible.

    I also wonder if they might choose a route that flies over the upwelling of air at the equatorial convergence zone. It might be rough, but those air currents could help them stay aloft during the night.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Flying backwards to meet the dawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bob: "How come we're not getting anywhere?"
      Phil: "Cos the flight plan has us doing a one-eighty every sunrise and sunset."
      Bob: "Oh?"
      Phil: "Yeah, more cold coffee please."

  17. That's not cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    They should go around the world in a solar-powered submarine.

  18. Re:Why? by jester42 · · Score: 2, Funny
    • They should be made to sign a "no extreme measures or rescue-tation attempts" paper before leaving.
    Right. I can't remember how often that guy had to be rescued with his balloon but i do remember that he needed a few tries and almost died more than once.

    Any bets on how many tries it will take him this time?
    To me, this is Jackass for rich people.
  19. We're not alone... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps we have a right to wipe humanity of the face of the planet, perhaps we don't. But I don't see how we have a right to wipe out all the countless other species and to poison the earth, sky and the seas.

    To use a famous quote, this is a beautiful planet, it's a miracle and we're destroying it.

    (Cue a dozen posts from people who think environmental awareness is for only for hippies high as a kite.)

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    1. Re:We're not alone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We aren't going to "wipe out all the countless other species" out there. I seriously doubt we could do it, even if we tried, at this point.

      We'll kill some, but we'll also create new environmental niches for other species to evolve to fill. The various rodents, and pets, and farm animals that have evolved and prospered in symbiosis with man may not be "exotic" enough to satisfy those high as a kite hippies you mentioned, but they are no less alive or a part of this world's environment.

      What one being sees as "poison(ing) the earth, sky and the seas" is just the opening of new ecological niches.
      The last time there was a truely large scale "poison(ing) (of) the earth, sky and the seas" was when plants first flooded the world with harsh burning oxygen, killing all sorts of anaerobic life, and giving birth to aerobic life and animals as we know them. I trust you don't see that as having been a bad thing?

      Whatever nasty reactive chemicals we spew into the environment are likely to become the food of tomorrow's most feccund life.
      Our nuclear waste and depleted ozone will generate mutations, and spur new evolution to fill those niches we're creating.

      We won't, we can't, destroy the planet; but we will change it.
      If you're so small minded that you have to classify everything that evolved before man as 'a good ecosystem' and everything that evolved after we became dominant as 'a bad ecosystem', then you're missing a whole lot of the beauty of this planet's life.

  20. You say Picard, I say Piccard, . . by Latent+Heat · · Score: 2, Informative
    Check out this dude here and try and tell me the two aren't related.

    Auguste Piccard was a Swiss while J-L Picard is a Scot actor playing a French dude. I am certain the Star Trek NG writers had in the back of their mind that A. Piccard was a famous explorer, and they wanted their J-L Picard to be more the Swiss Explorer than the Captain Cook-like J.T. Kirk. If they knew about A. Piccard, they may have changed the name and nationality to make it simpler for TV viewers.

    Cook definitely was the inspiration for Kirk, both as an explorer and as a shoot-from-the-hip military man, while I think that J-L Picard was meant to be more science and less militarism. Remember, STNG was kind of like a Total Quality Management, Fan Focus Group, New and Improved Star Trek, and one of the criticisms of Star Trek was putting the captain in harms way all the time. Captain Cook put himself in harms way and was killed in a skirmish in Hawaii, but some dweeb critics thought the captain of the Enterprise was too important to get into hand-to-hand combat with aliens every other episode, so Picard was supposed to be kept safe by Worf, and Riker was supposed to tangle with the aliens and get beat up. But as episodes went on, we learned from Q that Picard had an artificial heart because he was more hot-headed than he let on, and by the time he has turned into Locutus, he was fighting aliens and proved to be a scrappier fighter than Kirk (or the time he single-handedly thwarted a hijacking of the Enterprise by terrorists when the crew was gone on leave in a thin ripoff of Stephen Segal's "Under Siege" -- while Navy Seal Segal was "only a cook" because he was busted in rank, Captain Picard was "only the barber" because I suppose with his shaved head that was real funny).

  21. Remember Helios? by adun · · Score: 5, Interesting

    NASA's little darling solar plane flew at about 90,000 feet, well above any potential cloud cover. You can assume that these guys are planning on the same strategy. But if you plan to send a manned flight up to 90k feet, doesn't that raise a whole slew of logistics questions? i.e., the amount of oxygen needed, the weight ratios to follow, etc...

  22. Re:No, the son of Jacques & grand-son of Augus by rduke15 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Who is Jean-Luc Piccard anyway?

    Bertrand is the son of Jacques and the grand-son of Auguste. See his biography.

    "His grandfather, Auguste (1884-1962), [...invented] the principle of the pressurised cockpit and the stratospheric balloon. In making the first exploration of the stratosphere [...] in 1931, he [...] became the first man to see the curvature of the earth's surface with his own eyes."

    "His father, Jacques, continued the work of Auguste [...] the world's deepest dive (-10916 metres in the Marianas Trench, the greatest known ocean depth)."

  23. Re:TRULY A WASTE by MrAngryForNoReason · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The point of this kind of research is to improve technology. The result is more efficient solar cells and batteries, the kind of tech which will improve thousands of things.

    Its not just some guy with loads of money who thinks it would be cool to fly around the world, it is serious research into several important fields. The kind of research that without rich enthusiasts wouldn't get done.

    I agree that people should be more willing to spread the wealth, which is why I applaud the "give so much a month" approach charities use, and wish more people would do it. Who would notice 10 pounds a month missing from their salary of thousands? If everyone gave an amount they could afford without even noticing then a hell of a lot of people could be helped.

  24. I can just imagine the TV ads for this... by agentforsythe · · Score: 2, Funny

    soundtrack: "don't let the sun go down on me" by Elton John

  25. Paul MacCready by airuck · · Score: 3, Informative

    Those interested in efficient flight should read about Paul MacCready (and many others) who have been involved in the American human/solar powered flight movement: More with Less: Paul MacCready and the Dream of Efficient Flight.

    --
    First entomology, then virology, and finally bioinformatics systems. Bugs follow me wherever I go.
  26. A better link, explaining the technology by rduke15 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The EPFL explains much more about the technological aspects. It's in French of course: here.

    But for those who cannot read :-), they also have nice pictures

    One technological aspect is that by flying very high, they can take advantage of the cold (-55C), which can improve efficiency of electro-magnetic motors.

    There are other interesting bits. I guess the page will be translated in English in a few days. (Forget computer translations, unless you want a cheap laugh)

  27. Re:I doubt the cleverness of this! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wow are you dumb!
    If the sun goes out he'll just use the moon!!

  28. Consumables are the problem by G4from128k · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Helios Solar Airplane probably could have flown around the world. But with a cruising speed of only about 40 km/hr it would have taken 1000 hours (41 days). Such a long duration flight is fine for an unmanned aircraft, but poses severe challenges for manned flight. Carrying weeks worth of food, water, and oxygen represents additional payload that such a vehicle can ill afford. Onboard recycling/extraction systems could reduce the need for consumables, but they add weight also.

    But without a person in the cockpit, the venture won't get much media attention. And without media attention, the project won't attract much sponsorship. ..... SIGH!

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  29. Consequences of using solar power? by CausticWindow · · Score: 2, Funny

    Right now, using solar power sounds like a good idea. It's a renewable and non polluting source of energy.

    But if we have learned anything about excessive energy use from the past, we should proceed with caution. What will happen when the whole world is powered by solar power? Think of it, all this energy from the sun that would normally heat the earth would now go towards generating electricity. This would probably lead to a global chilling which is not a good thing.

    I think we should either stay dependant on fossil fuels for now, or even increase our consumption of them to counter the effects of global chilling in the future with more global warming now.

    --
    How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
  30. Thank Burt Rutan for this; by B5_geek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    December 1986 this was done with fuel
    Why can't this now be done with solar cells and high-density batteries?

    I would have more faith in this project if it was being done by somebody else.

    Stay aloft for weeks at a time? sure why not. Just expand on this idea

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
  31. Re:Why? by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Hey, I have no problem with people trying stunts that seem crazy at the time--and dying because maybe it was crazy.

    What I object to are the people that do some damned-fool stunt like travelling to the north pole by pogo-stick, then calling for help when they get snow in their boot. Suddenly a huge effort to save them is made at great expense and risk to other people. Launching a search and rescue effort shouldn't like calling the AAA. If you want to do something dangerous, do it. Or do not and die.

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  32. Re:TRULY A WASTE by MrAngryForNoReason · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's called 'withheld income tax'.

    I would challenge you to find anyone who doesn't notice the amount of income tax they pay.

  33. Awareness my Ass by rocker_wannabe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just repeat after me:

    "It's all about money."

    "It's all about money."

    I have a 2kw solar system on my roof so I'm certainly not anti-renewable energy. I just think people should realize that the problem has nothing to do with technology or people's desire maintain their lifestyle because it's not even allowed to come down to that. It's about greed and established infrastructure. I don't think it's any coincidence that the major solar panel manufacturers are all owned by oil companies. I can't prove it but it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that they are controlling the price of solar panels to keep the usage at a level that is comfortable to them.

    We have reached the level of corporate control in this world that is reminicent of the movie Rollerball (for those of you old enough to remember it). The U.S. courts and the EU and make a good show of protecting their citizens but corporations don't need to do anything illegal to get what they want. With enough money and lawyers you can blunt any reform that comes down the pike. Movies have to be more dramatic but the truth is much more banal.

    I'm glad Mr. Piccard has the ability to put together these inspiring projects. I wish he'd invite me to be on his team. I just don't think for a minute that it's going to address the real problem.

    "I tried solar power but it just made my skin peel. I'll stick with food, thank you."

    --
    "Meaningless!, Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless!"
  34. Forget solar by bobdotorg · · Score: 2, Funny

    after reading the website, it's clear to me that if Piccard were to make an ego powered craft he could probably land on the Moon.

    --
    __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
  35. Re:The person in the cockpit by rduke15 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But without a person in the cockpit, the venture won't get much media attention. And without media attention, the project won't attract much sponsorship. ..... SIGH!

    Exactly.

    And being the "person in the cockpit", and attracting sponsorship is what the latest Piccard seems to be good at.

    And he is nicely grateful to his sponsors too. On the contacts page of the site, the link to his own site (www.bertrandpiccard.com) actually points to his sponsors (www.breitling.com)! Whether it is accidental, intentional, or a nice meaning-ladden lapsus is open to speculations :-)

    In different times, the scientist could end up getting the media's attention, but now the work has been "Taylorized": one does the acting, and others do the real (ineteresting but not so media-flashy) work. In this case, it's the Lausanne university. In his previous achievement, it was mainly meteorologists sitting in front of boring computer screens.

    Nevertheless, the project sounds exciting.