Who hates greens? (2 Viewers)

[Trefoil]

Thanks man I didn't realise you were a renewable engineer.

I was but I changed degrees at the last minute. They're working on some superconducting polymers at the research school for chemistry though, which I plan to look into.

If you were being sarcastic, that would be a shame, but here:

http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/01/216215
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/31/2034239
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/29/1814247
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_efficiency_solar_cells

You can do a lot with tracking system, concentrator dishes, as well as just good old materials science (e.g. multijunction systems or increasing absorption range).

 

[spiny norman]

As a Catholic I thought you would be more inclined to support the Liberal Party. When it comes to issues of homosexual marriage, abortion, euthenasia, RU-486 the Liberal Party was the strongest and received the preference vote for the Christian Democrat Party or whatever it was called...

How stupid. You realise, through history, the Labor Party has been the party for Catholics?

Greens are cool with me. It'd be great if they could rise as the second power, with all elections being Labor vs. Greens, and the vile existence of the Coalition can be forever diminished.

 

[Iron]

How stupid. You realise, through history, the Labor Party has been the party for Catholics?

Until the Catholics broke away about 60 years ago, right?

 

[Trefoil]

I briefly googled some points and it appears you found some PV/solar propaganda websites who don't cite their sources either.

Oh? What points did you google? I only quoted wikipedia, whose sources are referenced (scroll to the bottom of the page).

I did not argue this.

What is your point then?

Efficiency of the Otto and Diesel Cycles are around 50-60% each as in, what you get divided by what you pay for.

This is false. The energy efficiency is about 20% and the theoretical maximum is about 37%.

http://courses.washington.edu/me341/oct22v2.htm
http://mb-soft.com/public2/engine.html

Yes, it is MUCH harder to get to 40%. Like, lol. If it wasn't hard, it would have been done by now.

It has been done. Links above.

 

[jb_nc]

Oh? What points did you google? I only quoted wikipedia, whose sources are referenced (scroll to the bottom of the page).

The first few.

What is your point then?

Solar is, at the moment, not a technology worth pursuing to roll out... And solar technology is a policy of the Greens.

This is false. The energy efficiency is about 20% and the theoretical maximum is about 37%.

http://courses.washington.edu/me341/oct22v2.htm
http://mb-soft.com/public2/engine.html

I was talking about the ideal cycles... The real cycle varies so much based on many factors from compression ratio to fuel mix used.

It has been done. Links above.

Yeah, apparently 14 years ago they made 20 per cent and it hasn't even come to market yet... Surely there would be demand for such a thing so it's probably far too expensive.

If it can't be mass produced it's not worth talking about.

 

[Captain Hero]

Dude I was being sarcastic; Solar's a red herring. It is way too costly over its lifecycle and doesn't provide base load. Geothermal all the way baby.

 

[JaredR]

How stupid. You realise, through history, the Labor Party has been the party for Catholics?

Greens are cool with me. It'd be great if they could rise as the second power, with all elections being Labor vs. Greens, and the vile existence of the Coalition can be forever diminished.

How stupid. That's "through history" with a strong shift especially as a result of the Howard years.

 

[sam04u]

Green > Liberal Party.

Infact I really like the Green Party.
The only party with the nuts to call out Israel on it's human rights abuses on it's 60th anniversary.

 

[Lentern]

What do people think about the Greens prospects for Melbourne? I think the liberal vote is likely to decline their but for what labor gains in the centre I think it stands to lose a fair bit from the left, disenchanted that Rudd isn't governing like Gough.

It'd be a ridiculous swing but swings to the Greens are a different kettle of fish to swings between the two major parties. The next election is perhaps a bit unlikely, odds are Labor actually get an increased majority at that election, but with Hawke, Howard and Fraser had a fairly miserable time going for second re-election. Hawkey lost the popular vote from memory, John was rescued by Ruddock and his refugees and Fraser although won comfortably lost a dozen or so seats and won a dozen by a knifes edge or something. I reckon labor will go to the polls in 2014 with about six percent less on primary votes, in a left wing seat probably more. I reckon by the end of the Rudd government Lindsay will be gone for a greenie with Grayndler, Sydney and Cunnigham turning maverick.

 

[Trefoil]

The first few.

Which ones?

Solar is, at the moment, not a technology worth pursuing to roll out... And solar technology is a policy of the Greens.

Solar is very much worth pursuing today. I'll leave it at that, though, because from memory you don't even believe in global warming, so there's clearly an idealogical gap at work here.

I was talking about the ideal cycles... The real cycle varies so much based on many factors from compression ratio to fuel mix used.

You say I'm talking about idealistic technologies and then you go on about 'ideal efficiency' for combustion engines? Dude.

Yeah, apparently 14 years ago they made 20 per cent and it hasn't even come to market yet... Surely there would be demand for such a thing so it's probably far too expensive.

If it can't be mass produced it's not worth talking about.

Uh what? Average solar cell efficiency on the market these days is 17%. But often it's advantageous to go for lower efficiencies for various reasons.

 

[sam04u]

I hate greens cause i hate poofters

lol...

Poofter?
lol I haven't heard that word in a long ass time.

 

[spiny norman]

How stupid. That's "through history" with a strong shift especially as a result of the Howard years.

Well, I can only say anecdotally today I've noticed Catholics today tend to be Labor supporters, and Labor members, if not atheists/agnostics, more often Catholic than something else.

 

[poWerdrY]

Well, I can only say anecdotally today I've noticed Catholics today tend to be Labor supporters, and Labor members, if not atheists/agnostics, more often Catholic than something else.

erm no. catholics tend to be conservative, and conservatism is the homefront of the liberals.

 

[jb_nc]

Solar is very much worth pursuing today. I'll leave it at that, though, because from memory you don't even believe in global warming, so there's clearly an idealogical gap at work here.

Uh, what? Everything I post here and from your memory is 100 per cent genuine.

You say I'm talking about idealistic technologies and then you go on about 'ideal efficiency' for combustion engines? Dude.

Ideal cycle, not efficiency. Again, congrats on misquoting me. There is no "ideal efficiency" for combustion engines but the real cycle is impossible to quantify because of the variables involved in determining n.

And I don't think I ever said that. So don't put words in my mouth.

I said you were operating on some hypothetical future technology.

Uh what? Average solar cell efficiency on the market these days is 17%. But often it's advantageous to go for lower efficiencies for various reasons.

Various reasons. Such as high efficency PV cells being completely unaffordable and highly expensive for generating power.

 

[Captain Hero]

erm no. catholics tend to be conservative, and conservatism is the homefront of the liberals.

No that's fairly incorrect, a great deal of the Labor kids are Catholics, freals.

 

[JaredR]

Green > Liberal Party.

Infact I really like the Green Party.
The only party with the nuts to call out Israel on it's human rights abuses on it's 60th anniversary.

As I said, left wing radicals.

 

[Lentern]

No that's fairly incorrect, a great deal of the Labor kids are Catholics, freals.

Yep, it's a traditional thing though, they are in effect more politically alligned with the coalition but the traditional Calwel kind of labor party drew great catholic support and the truth is most catholics just vote for whoever they're parents vote for.

 

[Trefoil]

Various reasons. Such as high efficency PV cells being completely unaffordable and highly expensive for generating power.

You do economics - you should know that price goes down as demand increases. Arguing against the existence of a market because prices are initially high is retarded.

Anyway, the main reason is actually that various uses for solar energy simply don't require high efficiency to get the job done. That includes things like peak demand reducing cells for homes and such.

Anybody with a decent background in renewable energy will be able to tell you the idea is to pursue multiple energy sources, though, and use them in tandem, such that you'd be hard-pressed to see any one source being used to generate more than 30% of demand.

An ideal scenario for the near future (a few decades) would be something like 10% solar, 10% hydro, 10% wind, 10% geothermal, 20% nuclear, 40% coal. Right now it's something like 90% coal. That's not good. Places in Europe are heading towards a weighting like this.

 

[Iron]

No that's fairly incorrect, a great deal of the Labor kids are Catholics, freals.

They should be denied communion!

 

[Captain Hero]

^^^ You have a price floor based on the amount the materials cost. Otherwise why wouldn't computers be practically free?