 Quote:
Originally Posted by Zack  Solar panels for meeting the needs of one home minus Air Conditioning costs about $30,000, with climate control more. We are a long way off from solar electricity so NUKES, Coal or Natural Gas? I say nukes and NG and work on Clean Coal and alternative energy at the same time. | I predict that by the time the next possible newly-built-from-the-ground-up nuclear plant goes online in the US, perhaps seven (or more) years from now, the cost of solar cell-produced power per kiloWatt-hour will very likely drop to a small fraction of what it costs today. And this is because solar cell technology is currently and quickly evolving such that their conversion efficiencies are growing while, at the same time, they are becoming cheaper to manufacture. And, nuclear power plants are incredibly expensive. (Not to mention the fact that the fuel for non-breeder-type nuclear reactors, just like oil, is a non-renewable, finite commodity that will always increase in price, on average, in the future. And, as well as being even more expensive than conventional nuclear reactors, breeder-type reactors carry substantial security and safety risks.) And, who do you think will end up paying for them? The consumer, meaning us, will end up paying for them in the end. So, I'd rather spend my hard-earned money intelligently, at least as a homeowner, than throw my money away on technologies that are outdated and, more importantly, more expensive to me in the end. (Fossil fuel and electric heating and standard electric air conditioning systems are significantly less efficient at heating and cooling a home than geothermal heating and cooling systems. So, if a homeowner is to install geothermal heating and cooling in their home today and invest in solar cell technology in seven to ten years from now, he or she could potentially “live off the grid” in the future while, at the same time, spend less money to heat, cool, and power their home in the future.)
Last edited by baloney_detector; 06-21-2008 at 10:52 AM.
|