Welcome to PatsFans.com

China Solar Makers Face ‘Suicidal’ Prices on Excess Output

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by patsfan13, Nov 26, 2011.

  1. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3

    China Solar Makers Face ‘Suicidal’ Prices on Excess Output - Businessweek



    Commentary on the State of the Chinese Solar Industry which was being touted here in the US as the Green Economy of the future. Some here have consistently said that this is not a viable source of large scale industries government subsidies notwithstanding.

    New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard

  2. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3

    So continuing on the theme of 'renewable' energy and why it doesn't work in the real world....


    From the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist:

    The myth of renewable energy | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

  3. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3

    And this about tens of thousands abandoned wind turbines littering America:

  4. Ilikehappyppl

    Ilikehappyppl Rookie

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    So when the oil runs out then what?

    If you can answer this, you could be a very rich man....

    Way I look at it, we better find another source of energy or we are all ****ed! The oil and the coal is gonna be gone someday, then what?

    I keep hearing solar is not efficient enough but just a few days ago a 13 year old kid figured out how to get more efficiency for solar panels just through design. We have to keep working at it, someday maybe we can get 80-90% efficiency through better design and better panels.

    As for wind, same thing we need better design and better efficiency but that costs money and R&D, we have to keep going forward!

    So unless you can tell me how to make oil or coal out of sand or dirt or water ( our most abundant resources) then you need to start thinking about tomorrow instead of today, because sometime maybe not next year maybe not in 10 years but someday the oil and the coal is gonna run out and we can't afford to sit around and do nothing about it!

    Plus we can kill two birds with one stone here, we get rid of or at least lower our consumption of oil and coal we can help our environment too, now does it really matter if burning oil or coal makes global warming? I don't like smog and I like clean air, do you like clean air? do you like breathing in dirty air?

    So what's your plan when the oil are coal runs out?:cool:
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2011
  5. scout

    scout Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,625
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    #15 Jersey

    Yet, small businesses keep installing these wind turbines as they think it saves them money. We need to stop thinking of options to to fossil fuels. Pffffffft, next thing you know we'll be saying we'll send a man to the moon within the next decade.
  6. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    He has none.

    Leave it to 13 to create false dichotomies and then squawk, "see? told ya!"

    No one said renewables would provide what fossil fuels currently provide. That's not really the point. The point is that it's essential we fill the ever-widening gap. Hydrocarbons ARE currently failing to meet demand, and a day will come - very soon - that we rue not building renewable infrastructure when we had the capital to do so.

    Growth is over. People had better start reprogramming that things can or will ever go back to the way they were.

    Again, you can tell me that you've found a trillion barrels of conventional crude behind the moon, but that doesn't make it economically viable to get to it. If it costs more to extract, refine and distribute it than it provides, you're not sustaining growth.
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2011
  7. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    Same old, same old.. someone should tell the author of this thread how improper it is to pimp your own thread..

    The reality is that the US is lagging behind countries like Spain, Germany and Japan in solar panel installation.. and no matter how many times it has been explained to this author of this thread, it takes time to offset the intial purchase and installation costs before a profit is turned.. it takes time to offset the costs, whether it be Nuclear, Coal, Oil or Solar..

    Now there is a trend to rent the panels instead of buying them, like we do for cable tv...

    http://go.solarcity.com/campaigns/2...cov85580s6f76a4a4-d76f-3c69-63ed-0000646deced

    The underlying belief that if you tell a lie often enough it becomes the truth is never more evident than it is here..
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2011
  8. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3




    You wouldn't know the truth or lie when it relates to a technical subject due to your abysmal ignorance of all things technical.

    You just mindlessly parrot things from left wing blogs you don't understand.



    Now perhaps in the wake of Fukishima the Japanese will attempt to impoverish themselves instead of shutting down their Gen 1 &2 Nuclear plants and moving to Gen 3 Plants which don't need active cooling system to be safe.
    but the cost will be ~10 times the cost of electricily from Coal or Nuclear:

    A Solar Future? Prospects, Problems, and Japan?s Solar Energy Plans???????????????????????????????? :: JapanFocus


    Then in Germany taxes to subsidize an ineffective energy source:


    more on the failure in Germany here:
    Solar PV has failed in Germany and it will fail in the UK | George Monbiot | Environment | guardian.co.uk

    Of course the Spanish are on edge of default and their 'solar economy' is collapsing because they can no longer finance the lavish subsidies for expensive solar power:

    Spain's Solar Deals on Edge of Bankruptcy as Subsidies Founder - Bloomberg
  9. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3

    What is 'saving' them money are taxpayers subsidies. The true cost is hidden by the government subsidies...
  10. Ilikehappyppl

    Ilikehappyppl Rookie

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Pats13

    So what's your plan when the oil are coal runs out?

    You talk about cost but what happens when we don't have anymore oil and coal? Its gonna cost us then, so why just not do it now?

    What's your end game? Yes we all know coal and oil are cheaper but what happens when they run out? We are gonna have to eat the cost someday anyways....
  11. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3


    The fundamental issue with Solar and Wind energy is their intermittent nature and the old term 'energy density', these are physical limitations which cannot be overcome, even when the technology is 'perfected'. See the links from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientist in the first post and this link :

    http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=2469



    We should invest in technologies that can succeed not in technologies that will always be insufficient.

    Thorium reactors should be developed these should be supplemented by Third and fourth generation breeder reactors, with a ratio of ~10 thorium to 1 Breeder reactor, this will reduce the amount of nuclear reactor. This would be a sufficient source of electricity until fusion reactors become commercially feasible.


    We should use these technologies to phase out coal and the first and second generation nuclear reactors.

    http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/energy/nuclear/is-thorium-the-nuclear-fuel-of-the-future

    http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html

    http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/348/


    The rare earth elements needed for Solar and Wind are very toxic and coal plants are being built that produce very little particulate matter. So the differences aren't nearly as great as you might believe.
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2011
  12. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3


    We have enough coal and oil for a few hundred years. So there is no need to impoverish ourselves in the meantime with technologies that are inherently costly.
  13. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +14 / 0 / -0

    You're back to your all or nothing standard, I see. :rolleyes:
  14. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +14 / 0 / -0

    What is the "true cost" of oil?
  15. Titus Pullo

    Titus Pullo Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Fail.

    I can't tell if you're lying, or just not very smart. Either way, it's absolutely amazing how often you willfully keep coming back to a topic that you quite clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
  16. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    You repeat the same lie over and over, and it is still not believable.

    All energy technologies are costly initially, and they are conceptualized to make money over the long run whether it be Solar, wind, Nuclear or conventional. There is tremendous capitol needed to build and put any energy facility on line.

    You should be very concerned as is memory serves me correctly you live in the Delaware River Wathershed, and up river there is serious hydrofracking going on by irresponsible companies who were and are protected by Darth Cheney. This action potentially could effect the drinking water of the 26 million people who live between NYC and Philadelphia..

    Check the impact on Dimock, Penn or Dish, Texas... the incidents are not isolated and also take place in Wyoming and Colorado. To make it worse the 2005 Energy act exempts the Hyrdrofracking industry from divulging what they use to extract gas from the earth, known as the Haliburton Rule. Aside from this they use millions of gallons of water that is injected back into the earth that can never be used again.. these are the costs that cannot be factored.

    Clean burning gas is a lie..

    We all do live downstream...
  17. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Well I can safely, 100% guarantee you we won't be sending a man to the moon in the next decade, so I'm not entirely sure your point.
  18. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,253
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    PF13, as the article you quoted about the limitations of solar and wind energy states, "There is no technology for storing commercial quantities of electricity. Until something is developed – which seems unlikely – wind and solar can serve only as intermittent, unpredictable resources."

    Clearly, this is something that is being heavily explored from two angles -- better batteries and more efficient products. As we make strides in both of those areas, our need for energy could actually decrease, making nonthreatening, nonpolluting solutions more realistic. Your Malthusian thinking with regard to this issue sort seems to run against your thinking on other issue. In another thread you accused someone of Malthusian thinking because they questioned how big the oil reserves are; you seem to be questioning the possibility of technological developments making solar and wind power more viable when in fact there have been enormous technical developments in terms of efficiency and significant ones in terms of energy storage.
  19. scout

    scout Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,625
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    #15 Jersey

    Looking back at that statement by JFK, we think how dramatic it was. At that time, it was fairly inconceivable. The computers that we are using to post on this site are exponentially more powerful then what was in that mooned flight. I would imagine that there were many critics who scoffed at such a statement, but probably quite a few who believed in American ingenuity and that impossible was not relative.
    Today, when an individual or group states that we can harness the wind and use that for our energy needs, I tend to find value that statement. I also know that a bulk of the critics have a vested interests in wind energy not happening.
    Thus, my statement concerning "putting a man on the moon within the next decade".
  20. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,486
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -1

    That's like saying that as long as we keep doing what we're doing we'll have enough people in the world for a few hundred years. So there is no need to impoverish our women by making them carry unwanted pregnancies in the meantime with babies that are inherently costly.

    What happens in "a few hundred years," when that coal and oil runs out? Do we just not give a dam about the people who come after us? Do we ignore all biblical commands to care for the earth? Do we deny our stewardship of the earth's resources because - well because we don't want to spend the money?
  21. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3




    Your right you can't tell. This perhaps explains the consistent lack of content and substance in you posting history.
  22. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3




    Batteries require rare earth minerals, the quantities required for thing other than batteries for portable electronics aren't available also there is the problem of disposing of all those highly toxic batteries. The disposal problem isn't being adequately addressed as it is with the batteries we consume now.
  23. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +14 / 0 / -0

    You continue to speak as if technology can't change or be improved upon.

    Let me guess: is this another one of your supposed "laws of physics"?
  24. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,486
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -1

    It's ok, 13. There's enough disposal room to last a couple hundred years.
  25. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Yoiu will NEVER get any sort of answer from the Drill & Mine Baby, Drill & Mine crowd to that question. Not only do they not want to acknowledge it- they refuse to even attempt to understand it because the system dynamics of the fossil fuel economy is so far-reaching and complex, it blows their over-simplistic, incurious view of the world. Black-and-white is right. No need to get into the Big Picture regarding anything. Besides, the People wouldn't care or understand it (a point on which they may be right:(). Factoring in things like groundwater contamination, air pollution, general environmental degradation, the biological impacts of those factors, war, social destabilization of oil producers, and the continued redistribution of wealth that Big Oil & Coal fosters, etc...

    Those costs are too difficult to quantify so throw them out!
  26. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,001
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +37 / 0 / -7

    "Made in China" is becoming less and less of an option to US corporations. Wages in China have climbed dramatically over the past 5 years and it's no longer much of an advantage to have products made there.

    This is actually worth celebrating in America! As 3rd world countries advance rapidly, so does the cost to have products made there. I've heard that some companies have even shifted manufacturing back to America rather than have them made in China.

    We benefit from China's losses, so that's a good thing.
  27. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    It's good only if the US wages go up as well. Even if all things were made in the US and everyone was employed, there would still be nothing to buy. There needs to be a sea change in American corporate and financial cultures to the model we had in the 1950's and 60's...without the institutional flaws that have already been identified. The redistribution of American wealth needs to be reversed to a more equitable flow from the top down, or better yet, the upward flow needs to be diverted to the middle class...how's that?
  28. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,001
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +37 / 0 / -7

    I don't know wistah...you threw a bunch of unrelated thoughts into one post, so I can't make any sense of it.:confused:

    Right now, we shouldn't be concerned with wages so much as increasing employment. First things first....

    Why would there be nothing to buy?

    What specific mechanisms are you referring to that existed in the 50's and 60's? Back then, the US had a self-sustaining economy in a world where companies rarely competed on a world-wide level. In other words, we mainly bought our own stuff and if Europe tanked, it didn't affect us much.

    I'm fine with some re-distribution of wealth as long as it doesn't include "Giving money to people for doing nothing"
  29. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    ....................................
  30. scout

    scout Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,625
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    #15 Jersey

    I would look at the cost of government subsidies as research and development. If you choose to include government subsidies as a cost for solar energy, then it would be logical to use the cost of war as a cost in using fossil fuels. When we go to war it is typically stated, "to protect our interests" which translates to oil. The reality is we are subsidizing some terrorism with the continued use of fossil fuel. In the world of supply and demand we are supporting those terrorist organizations, even if we do not buy directly from them.

Share This Page