the environmental cost of mining in the desert

[Sal]

so then you would need about 4kw of solar panels. At $2.25 a watt you could get your panels for about $9000.00. Add in the cost of the mounts and installation--about $1000.00. so for about 10 grand you could be free of elec bills for 30 years at least. 10000 divided by 30 is $333.33 per year. If you're now paying $840 a year you're going to be ahead. the question is how long before the cost of electricity generated by fossil fuels goes up? your $70 months are numbered.

[Suzuki Phil]

Remember Sal solar panels convert sunlight to dc voltage. You would need many panels to actively add power to the grid. Don't forget that that dc voltage must be converted to ac via a converter. Solar panels are only about 20% efficient (somebody correct if I'm wrong), next you have loses due to cloudy days, next you have loses due to inefficient conversion, don't forgot to add transmission loses.

Sounds like a winner to me. I'd suggest you greenies go back to engineering or trade school (Like I did) and learn basic electronics. It can be done but it's very expensive and it will take years to recoup your initial investments.

A couple of new nuclear power plants would be a better deal.

SP

[Suzuki Phil]

Sounds like I'm against solar panels, I'm not I have one on my trailer (80 watt Kyocera). For a low power application it works great. Haven't charged my batteries in two years.

SP

[Dan]

Philip is absolutely correct. Nuclear power is fast becoming the only source of power that's viable for our world. Even the French know that. We're supposed to be smarter and more innovative than the French, but our Federal Govt is tying our hands behind our backs. They are currently in the process of confiscating all of the nation's discretionary research and development revenue to direct toward projects that those halfwit imbecile mercenaries determine are the ones upon which other peoples' money should be spent.

The only time our government operates in our best interest is when it aligns perfectly with each of THEIR best interest. That is not a government sworn to uphold and protect the US Constitution. These are not patriots in elected office, for the most part. They are mercenaries.

[Sal]

http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/tex ... orage.html

[Ken@WonderValley]

If this was true it could end all of our energy problems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4qjZocje0c

[Sal]

woops Phil is right--need to convert dc to ac with an invertor--maybe another $2000.00 bringing your total to $12,000.00 for 30 years. btw these are 96% efficient. Solar is a good option for sunny areas. If it's very overcast a lot of the time it will cut down on efficiency.

[Sal]

regarding clean ups of mines on public lands read this:

1872 Mining Law Reform

The archaic 1872 Mining Law was signed by President Ulysses S. Grant. It was passed to promote the development and settlement of publicly-owned lands in the western US. Clearly, times have changed since 1872, and there is no longer a need to give massive tax subsidies to large, wealthy mining corporations that often walk away from their mines leaving toxic water and decimated fish runs for communities to deal with on their own. Under the 1872 mining law, corporations can buy interests in public lands for no more than $5 per acre – this price being set and not altered since 1872! And in 1872, you can imagine what environmental protections were like – nonexistent. It was a wide open country with plenty of trees, clean water, and chock full of wildlife. Reform of the 1872 Mining Law is long overdue, and the Task Force is working with other groups across the nation for a new round of mining legislation that fits the nation’s needs and values today. For more details, please visit one of our partners’ webpages at http://www.earthworksaction.org/1872.cfm.
http://www.gptaskforce.org/policy/1872- ... law-reform

[Dan]

http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/tex ... orage.html

Nice site, Sal. But they have completely ignored the most important aspect of nuclear fuel storage: reprocessing. It's what shrinks the size of that fuel rod storage pool from the size of two olympic-size swimming pools down to the size of a Chevy Suburban. You can think of reprocessing as a manner of recycling fuel, re-concentrating it, and re-packaging it into rods. Perhaps the people presenting your side of the story should have told the whole story.

Ahhh, the error of omission. How it's SO capable of distorting the picture!

[Dan]

regarding clean ups of mines on public lands read this:

1872 Mining Law Reform

The archaic 1872 Mining Law was signed by President Ulysses S. Grant. It was passed to promote the development and settlement of publicly-owned lands in the western US. Clearly, times have changed since 1872, and there is no longer a need to give massive tax subsidies to large, wealthy mining corporations that often walk away from their mines leaving toxic water and decimated fish runs for communities to deal with on their own. Under the 1872 mining law, corporations can buy interests in public lands for no more than $5 per acre – this price being set and not altered since 1872! And in 1872, you can imagine what environmental protections were like – nonexistent. It was a wide open country with plenty of trees, clean water, and chock full of wildlife. Reform of the 1872 Mining Law is long overdue, and the Task Force is working with other groups across the nation for a new round of mining legislation that fits the nation’s needs and values today. For more details, please visit one of our partners’ webpages at http://www.earthworksaction.org/1872.cfm.
http://www.gptaskforce.org/policy/1872- ... law-reform

Hey, Sal: is the Endangered Species Act "archaic", too? How about the Wilderness Act of 1964? The US Constitution? Declaration of Independence?

Just because it's more recent, doesn't mean it's better. Don't you think?