It's even easier to figure out who the know all **** all's are. Firstly, I must say thanks to you. You have just reminded me why I stopped trying to get involved in light hearted chat in this forum. There is always the little crowd who feel that they are vastly superior in intelligence to the rest and feel the need to point it out on a regular basis...... You are correct in part I guess, 1 solar panel of that size would be unworkable. But the simple fact is that if banks of solar panels were placed strategically around the Globe feeding the different regions, approx 80% of the worlds power could be attained at anyone point in time. There is no difference from having solar panels hooked up to the transformers that distribute the power instead of a coal fed plant. No difference what so ever. I have been in the industry for 28 years now and know enough about power creation and distribution. The maths have been done but I guess you're the expert that can refute it all. Yes, there is some limitations to the panels in respect of the day and night cycle, but this issue is being addressed with new technology that keeps receiving the solar rays up to 6 hours after dark. Solar power can be stored just like nuclear or coal fed power sources. Claiming physics is the problem is just priceless. The only thing that is stopping this from happening is the Oil Corporations who fund the governments to get laws brought in to suit them and their trading practise's. Debunking something that is common knowledge is just laughable to be honest. I suggest you listen to some of the experts like Professor Keen. He is a master of economics and has been studying Geo Politics for about 40 years now. I have no doubt that he knows far more about the subject than you. Go and find out about the Hemp plant for instance, and how it can power a combustion engine. It is totally sustainable and pollution free. The American Oil Giants saw the threat it posed to their industry and got the governments to ban the growing and use of it. All achieved with the use of money. No conspiracy there, true facts from history. Money is far more important to these people than any environmental issues. A prime example of this is taking place now in the form of the TPP Agreement. Maybe you should look it up and learn something. Or you could just keep your rose tinted specs on and keep posting the ignorance without putting your brain in gear first.
Well, that escalated quickly! I'm sorry you feel like you've been downtrodden by my post, that's not my intention at all. The target of my reply is your original suggestion; lumping city-sized solar panel farms together and trying to distribute it globally, it would lose so much in transmission losses over a global journey would make it untenable. But I fully agree that a large solar-plant is, in principle, a brilliant idea. That said, there must be some reason why it's not a more invested-in technology, and as far as I can see it, cost is the problem. And for now, that's the driving force in the world, sad as it can be some times. Then again, if it weren't a problem, there would be far less drive to improve these technologies to a competitive level with what we already have - it's a very compelling motive for engineers and scientists. On the more political side, that's an interesting issue. Do the oil companies genuinely work against this kind of technology? If there's real money to be made in a world focussing on renewable/low-carbon energy then I can't believe they wouldn't get their finger in that pie as well - whatever our power requirements we'll still need oil for many hundreds of years to come yet. On the Hemp issue, the US may have banned its growth, but it's being grown in dozens of countries around the world. If it was a cheap, practical source of biofuel then surely someone would have used it that way by now? Thousands of tons are grown every year, and if there were a way to make money in it, someone would've jumped straight on the bandwagon. The restrictions on its growth (in several countries) are founded in fears of either high-THC varieties being mixed in, or an enterprising soul refining or extracting the THC to produce a narcotic.
As the least likely person to say this. Chill out. Back on topic, OP, I would recommend trying and finding a reputable installer who can install something which is architecturally sensitive to your building in not only its mechanical installation but in how it looks on your house. There are a variety of systems out there, sadly they are all based off the same tile hook concept which is inherently weak. Getting something like an in-roof installation would be beneficial or something like solar tiles. The reasoning behind the solar tile suggestion is yes, they are much less efficient than the larger panels, however they allow for a much larger coverage of the roof than cherry picking the nice neat rectangular areas they can tessellate into, enabling a more subtle application. Also having just completed a couple of pergola/sunshade extensions for a few clients enabling them to put panels onto their property without having to resort to ridiculous collections of scrap metal on their house is always a bonus. Plus they now don't get reamed by electric companies for turning on the kettle.
As I recently just had a letter through the post to say my standing charge has risen by about 15% the thing I would love is to go completely off grid.
Personally, I couldn't leave the grid's reliability just yet. To OP: Keep in mind over the next decade or so, solar panels will continue their drop in price and rise in efficiency. Currently, you can earn your money back in 8-10 years. If you are interested in the technology and have the funds, get in touch with local companies. They will have the location-specific solar-tables and know-how to estimate the benefit/cost ratio for you. There are a lot of novel and interesting advances taking place. Stacked solar cells, organic/semi organic solar cells along with practices that improve efficiency in all solar panel design such as AR coatings, techniques to reduce recombination junctions (loss from electrons combining with holes) ect. If you don't have the spare cash, or are more concerned with value it might be best to wait a few more years.
I think they do what they can to make alternative energy sources as unatanible as possible for people, through lobbying, campaign contributions et cetera. I don't see what they would stand to gain by having people empowering themselves by going off the grid. From my point of view it comes down to pure business, or pure control or a combination of both.
