Hi Guys I must say I'm enjoying all of these fascinating off topic followups but isn't about time to move this discussion to nanog-offtopic@lists.blank.org ? -- Thanks, Rafi -- Rafi Sadowsky rafi@noc.ilan.net.il Network Operations Center | VoiceMail: +972-3-646-0592 FAX: +972-3-646-0454 ILAN - IUCC -I2(Israel) | FIRST-REP ILAN-CERT(CERT@CERT.AC.IL) (Israeli Academic Network) | (PGP key -> ) http://telem.openu.ac.il/~rafi ## On 2003-08-18 02:22 -0700 Vadim Antonov typed: VA> VA> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 hackerwacker@tarpit.cybermesa.com wrote: VA> VA> > Use hydrogen. One solar panel (which will last forever unless you drop VA> > something on it) can split H2O into H and O. VA> VA> Solar panels do not last forever. In fact, they degrade rather quickly due VA> to the radiation damage to the semiconductor (older thin film panels were VA> guaranteed to perform within specs for 2-5 years, new crystalline ones VA> stay within nominal parameters for 20 years). Lifetimes of hydrogen VA> storage products, and electrolytic converters are also limited. Note that VA> exploitation of those involve creation and eventual disposal of toxic compounds. VA> VA> Making those panels requires energy, and involves processes producing VA> pollition. So does their disposal. Besides, solar panels convert VA> visible-light high-energy photons (used by the biosphere) into low-energy VA> (infrared) photons which are a form of pollution, and are useless for the VA> biosphere. Fossil fuels and nuclear energy do not steal this source of VA> negative enthropy from the biospere (just a counterpoint - I'm no big fan VA> of those ways of producing energy, for different reasons). Given the VA> relatively low power density of the solar energy, the full-lifecycle VA> adjustments are much higher on per-joule basis than for traditional energy VA> sources. VA> VA> So when you talk about advantages of the solar (or any other renewable VA> power) you need to take into account the full energy budget (including VA> manufacturing and disposal) and ecological impact of the entire lifecycle VA> of the product, not just the generation phase. Such analysis will likely VA> show that renewables are not as green or renewable as they seem to be. VA> VA> It seems to me that the debate on superiority of different methods of VA> producing useable energy is high on emotions and very low on useful VA> data; it will be a horrible mistake to waste lots of time or resources on VA> an approach which may turn out to be worse than others in the final VA> analysis. VA> VA> --vadim VA> VA> PS My personal favourite option is to move power generation out to space, VA> where pollution will not be a problem for a very long time. VA> VA> This option is technically feasible now, economics and political will VA> are entirely different matters, however. Quoting from one of my VA> favourite authors: "...most of people ... were quite unhappy for pretty VA> much of the time. Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but VA> most of these were largely concerned with the movements of small green VA> pieces of paper, which is odd because on the whole it was not the small VA> green pieces of paper that were unhappy." VA> VA>