Slashdot Mirror
What Gore Didn't Say About Solar Cells
AmericanInKiev writes "Computer World posted a piece on Al Gore and his claim that solar cells will improve at the same rate as microprocessors. Vinod Khosla on the other hand has expressed disappointment that the doubling rate for price/performance of PV is 10 years rather than 18 months for transistors. Which of these two has the facts on their side?" Before anyone has him inventing the Internet again, note that Gore's claim as related in the article is much milder than that Moore's Law applies to solar cells per se -- namely, he's quoted as saying "We're now beginning to see the same kind of sharp cost reductions as the demand grows for solar cells." An optimistic statement, but not a flat-out silly one.
What he's doing is offering hype to convince the guillible that a new energy source will magically become exponentially cheaper. With there being no factual basis for that claim.
He is just plain wrong, and it's typical hype from Al Gore. There is no reason to suppose the prices will drop at 'the same rate' and saying so just promotes these kinds of side arguements.
People into politics will take sides and use the rhetoric to batt things around. But Gore's statement is wrong and contributes nothing but distortion to the issue.
Oh yeah, they'll be like 20% efficient then 40 then 80 then 160...talk about idiotic. Just because of that simple fact, they obviously won't double in performance for any repetetive time period. It has to end eventually. Also I think with interest in solar technology going up lately, I think the innovation will spike then slow down. It's more of a logarithmic pattern or whatever that is. You know where it takes more and more effort to keep improving further. Kinda like speeding up to near light speed taking more and more energy as you get closer to 100%. And the cost of improving the quality of electronics increasing higher and higher as it gets closer to perfect. It's proven to be pretty cheap to improve efficiency as it is now but when we're at like 80% efficiency it's gonna take a heck of a lot more effort to get from 80 to 81% than it did to get from 20 to 21% and even more to get from 81 to 90% until it's just not feasible to get any higher.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
In much the same way, I would like to hear Bush or McCain be correct. They aren't often correct, let alone accurate.
how many more votes did Bush get than Gore again
Significantly less. Due to the electoral system and screwups in Florida (along with actual crime--I swear to god the people who shut down the recount in Miami should be in prison).
AlGore is a moron that is milking his moment of fame. He has no scientific knowledge or ability.
I have watched solar tech for decades as I find it fascinating. However for a reality check go to Circuit Cellar and read the articles on the editors own system. Solar is still wildly expensive with the only chance of reasonable payback needing massive rebates and tax incentives. Guess what you (and me) still pay for those and the payback is the same merely hidden.
Further while cells have improved and progress continues that is FAR from the whole system. You need inverters if you want to grid tie and they are a big portion of cost. If no grid tie then you need inverters AND batteries. Then add in the expert installation needed that is unavailable in large sections of the USA (yes the world does not consist of LA and NYC). Then add in maintainence.
Solar has advanced and does make sense for some applications. Solar will continue to advance in all probability with the sensible applications expanding. Someone MIGHT make systems more plug and play reducing the need for expert solutions. However government mandate will not make this happen.
As I noted above, a single nuclear power plant could have provided all the bomb fuel we ever wanted. 109 more reactors gives new meaning to the word 'overkill.'
The Admin and the Engineer
Its a heavily subsidized Plant - which I would applaud - if there was any chance of that technology scaling up while becoming more competative. Unfortunately, there isn't anyone credible who believes PV is going to hit its stride.
You miss the point of solar energy. Breeder reactors create less, but an even more deadly longer lasting waste. The idea only postpones the problem, because eventually, maybe 200 short years of running breeder reactors, and we are at the same point... super deadly waste that can neither be transported nor safely stored.
Solar, you see, regardless of the amount of effort required to achieve a mostly solar energy source, is always clean...
I think it is people like you that are having a knee jerk reaction to the energy crisis. Fuck instant energy gratification... let's do this the RIGHT way.
The Admin and the Engineer