Photos Of Apple's Massive Solar Farm

Starcrossed said:
I've known a shitload of people that run their entire houses off of solar power.
Click to expand...
A shitload eh? And how much are they paying on average per KWH for that privilege... oh wait, that's right, we paid for over half of it for them. And I imagine that they proooobably still rely on the grid, particularly like this week where its been constant thundershowers with very little sunlight and of course there is that pesky problem of the sun only being particularly useful between 11AM-5PM... actually even less so when you have solar panels like on most homes that can't rotate and follow the sun.
 
Ducman69 said:
You make yourself look like an idiot, not because you couldn't do two seconds in a google search, but because I already posted not only that its gassified but that its called syngas.

By burning the gas produced by the chemical reaction and capturing the heat produced to drive a steam turbine instead of the coal, you greatly reduce pollution.

Next time, do us all a favor and avoid going full-retard if you don't know what you're talking about.

7986101674_5f77f3a691_z.jpg
Click to expand...

I thought this was your poster child for why "clean coal" is awesome?

Ducman69 said:
So when your argument fails, you make up your own "facts". Nice, so name one coal plant in the United States still in operation that hasn't been upgraded with scrubbers years ago. Oops!

Clean coal is a series of technologies that are constantly being upgraded through the years, and all US plants have by law implemented various clean-coal technologies else the annual fines would bury them.

The latest clean coal involves eliminating CO2 output, but carbon dioxide coming out of a 500ft stack well dispersed is hardly something that is going to have you keeling over. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I know you are connected to the coal industry somehow, its the only explanation as to why you would try to pull the same dirty tricks as the coal industry. You throw up a "this is clean coal, its great!" type bullshit in the first post I quoted, yet don't mention that less then 1% of coal plants actually use anything more then scrubbers.

I see you also completely ignored what I said about nuclear power. I'm not surprised considering that when you weigh current nuclear technology against coal, coal is obsolete in every way imaginable, and the last thing you want is to actually have people look at how superior nuclear technology is vs coal.
 
Ducman69 said:
A shitload eh? And how much are they paying on average per KWH for that privilege... oh wait, that's right, we paid for over half of it for them. And I imagine that they proooobably still rely on the grid, particularly like this week where its been constant thundershowers with very little sunlight and of course there is that pesky problem of the sun only being particularly useful between 11AM-5PM... actually even less so when you have solar panels like on most homes that can't rotate and follow the sun.
Click to expand...

Many of the people that I knew using solar energy as a primary energy resource were quite self-reliant and lived in a dignified manner, respecting the environment around them and maintain a cohesion with the values of neighboring Native American tribe. Many of them lived off the grid, but many used the grid for water. Overall the impact of solar power in the area in which I lived was wonderful for the community and its citizenry.
 
(But, of course, the modern American has little clue or care for how he has stripped this piece of land of its resources over the past 3 centuries. He sees this place as a society for which he has the freedom to do as he wishes regardless of the lack of indignity with which he does it. His place is in the system that is the USA, and his goal is to further its wealth.)
 
Ducman69 said:
During the summer months, my AC runs at night. Oh, and btw, you are welcome. Glad my tax dollars were able to help you with your project.
Click to expand...
During the summer months my electric meter runs backwards, so I don't care when I use the electricity, or even if I use it on the same day.

Not sure why you seem to be pointing towards "only solar" as a solution that is being offered.

And thank you, your tax dollars were well spent, but hey if you're more happy having your tax dollars go to billion dollars of pork barrel projects that don't even have any use other than to pay off someone by all means continue your bitch fest.
 
darkstarcow said:
I know you are connected to the coal industry somehow, its the only explanation as to why you would try to pull the same dirty tricks as the coal industry. You throw up a "this is clean coal, its great!" type bullshit in the first post I quoted, yet don't mention that less then 1% of coal plants actually use anything more then scrubbers.
Click to expand...
Oh OK, see here I was assuming that $50 billion investment in coal-plant upgrades in the clean-coal initiative and new syngas plant designs (there are 144 in operation btw) were significant... at least more significant than the "less than 1%" statistic you have so conveniently pulled from your posterior.

And no, I have not nor do work in any way related to coal. I work in IT for an engineering firm that deals with offshore oil drilling, but damn you were SO close... and I'm sure you have some kind of conspiracy theory about how the two are related. :D
starcrossed said:
respecting the environment around them and maintain a cohesion with the values of neighboring Native American tribe.
Click to expand...
Is this a false-flag debate tactic to make solar power advocates sound like irrational earth-mother hippies?
 
Ducman69 said:
Is this a false-flag debate tactic to make solar power advocates sound like irrational earth-mother hippies?
Click to expand...

No, maybe you need to get past your own prejudices. I lived next to a pueblo and the residents of the area participated in actual care of the neighboring land which was considered sacred to the tribe.

Paranoid much.
 
I went ahead and looked up "syngas" and it turns out that
1) syngas plants aren't just coal.
2) most syngas plants are for chemical production, not "clean coal."

It is sad just how misleading your posts are at this point.

Now even if all 144 plants were coal, that means 25%, that means 75% only use scrubbers.

I also really liked finding out that the Government funded gasification plants in the 90's... There goes your "no subsidies" argument.
 
Ducman69 said:
It will be quite amazing when solar power breaks the 1% adoption range, especially if it can do so without over 100% subsidy rate.
Click to expand...

All energy production is subsidized by the government. Petroleum actually gets the most subsidies, followed by nuclear and coal. There's been a dramatic upshoot in solar/wind subsidies since 2006 or so (the US government is investing heavily in production) but coal was actually more heavily subsidized than all renewable sources combined prior to that. No form of energy has ever been developed without major government investment.

And storing energy requires a lot of energy, and any engineer knows that the first rule is that you can't even break even.
Click to expand...

You can use some of the energy to pump water uphill into a reservoir, store energy by creating molten salt, or even generate hydrogen. You just need enough additional solar collectors to create and maintain the stockpile, the cost beyond that is minimal. Obviously no one is arguing that solar should be our only energy source, but there's no reason it can't be a part of the overall strategy.
 
BBA said:
LOL...as unrelated as it sounds, there is a definitive relation between photons falling out of the sky and coal. Nature invented it, the Sun provided the energy for it. Yep, that's right: Solar power is responsible for coal production through multiple biological and chemical reaction processes occurring over time. I am good with using that kind of solar power.
Click to expand...

Oh, so we're consuming carbon based fuels at the same rate at which they are being converted from decaying life? Wow, you just gave God a fucking aneurysm from how retarded that statement was.

Its just funny to see how many people are absolutely foaming-at-the-mouth "conservative" to the point at which all reason escapes them. The prospect of furthering and advancing technologies that will 1) replenish from energy sources that will outlive our species & 2) avoid many of the negative environmental effects associated with other technologies...

And all you have to offer is that carbon-based fuels are cheaper and easier to find, therefore we don't have to worry about their side effects or the inevitable day when civilization ceases to exist because too many of you short-sighted fucks cared to look past the next few decades. I am genuinely impressed (in a negative way).
 
DeathFromBelow said:
Obviously no one is arguing that solar should be our only energy source, but there's no reason it can't be a part of the overall strategy.
Click to expand...

After reading some more of that guys posts over the past couple days, don't even bother. He is either a rightwing nut or works for the coal industry and has skin the game. No rational human could both damn renewables and promote carbon-based fuels to such a degree without being either personally invested in the cause or having listened to so many hours of Rush Limbaugh he has started swallowing entire bottles of Oxycontin a few times a day.
 
Ducman69 said:
The irony coming from someone who posted a little micro-blog from a hardcore LA liberal otherwise known only for his leftist views on his radio show as an authority. *epic facepalm*
Click to expand...

Kid, you're so confused in this thread that you can't even keep posts straight. I posted no microblog. You're truly original; You espouse science at every corner, then when it comes to CO2 production you couldn't be bothered.

I'll let you in on a secret, science has essentially proven, and scientists who are not under the employ of those with profit motive unanimously agree, that CO2 emissions are NOT GOOD for our environment.

You really are making a fool out of yourself. Oh, Nuclear is the most abundant source of energy? So you're saying there's enough nuclear-reactive material that can be found within the borders of this country that will last us 5-10 Billion years? Its sure as hell not clean, or have you conveniently forgotten what happens when a natural disaster occurs, or once the fuel is spent where it must eventually be stored.

The only valid point you can make is that Carbon-based fuels are currently cheaper. We all agree on that, its just that some of us are intelligent enough to understand that price is no longer the only concern.
 
There is enough thorium in the U.S.A. to power nuclear reactors for at least the next 10,000 years, and they create 10-10,000 times less long term waste.

The smartest thing we can do is standardize a thorium power plant design that produces 4-5k MW, and then build 20+ of them.
 
Elios said:
the thing is we have it now
its called LFTR
Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY

OH and its safer then most coal power the issue is getting the gov't and public over the fear of the nuclear boggy man
Click to expand...

THIS, this * 1.5e+50.

And I'm not sure who it was who was bragging about buying a gas generator...gas, are you fucking serious? Gas generators are pure short use SHIT and I wouldn't have one. You want a REAL generator, go diesel. Those bad boys can run goddamn near forever AND you have the added benefit (with a very low cost modification) of being able to burn other liquid fuel types aside from diesel. Simply put, diesel generators are superior in every single way compared to a gasoline or propane fired generator.

LOL gas generators...
 
eh for small stuff gas is fine and when i say small i mean like 1kw lol
i know a few guys that have them for there RVs they have 1 and 2 kw honda gensets
 
darkstarcow said:
There is enough thorium in the U.S.A. to power nuclear reactors for at least the next 10,000 years, and they create 10-10,000 times less long term waste.

The smartest thing we can do is standardize a thorium power plant design that produces 4-5k MW, and then build 20+ of them.
Click to expand...
Has anyone calculated what the average price per KWH would be on that power source though over say a 50 year recovery period for the cost of the plant?

Minus subsidies, the real price. That's usually what stands in the way of adopting alternative technologies.
 
Dethred said:
Kid, you're so confused in this thread that you can't even keep posts straight. I posted no microblog. You're truly original; You espouse science at every corner, then when it comes to CO2 production you couldn't be bothered.
Click to expand...
Someone needs to untwist their panties and actually bother reading the thread. We've already hashed over the CO2 debate, including sequestration technologies of pumping it under many layers of clay underground, providing it to the oil industry to help with oil recovery (even better, helps offset the cost and doesn't go into the atmosphere), or under salt-water aquifers. Your welcome for rehashing the discussion you either couldn't remember or didn't bother to read. ;)
 
STrooperTK421 said:
And I'm not sure who it was who was bragging about buying a gas generator...gas, are you fucking serious? Gas generators are pure short use SHIT and I wouldn't have one. You want a REAL generator, go diesel.
Click to expand...
Please explain to the class how a 10K watt gas unit is inferior to a 10K watt diesel unit?

Diesels are usually reserved for very large scale systems, such as an office building, and are almost unheard of for home use.

Gas units are cost effective, very quiet, clean, and are typically installed permanently. Natural gas prices at least in Texas are REDICULOUSLY cheap and at historic lows, whereas diesel prices are rising steadily every six months. There is furthermore no concern with natural gas generators in leaving old fuel in the unit, and they tend to be the most reliable. In a pinch, they can run on cans of liquid propane.

If you are just in a hurricane prone area or just want backup for your entire home for bad storms and the like, gas generators are excellent, and can be had for about $1000-$5000 in the 5K to 20K watt range which is more than enough for the home.

If you are in an earthquake prone area, then gas lines can be interupted along with the power, and gas is less ideal. Still for home use you will find virtually ALL small generators are gasoline powered and not diesel. They produce excellent power for their size and weight, which offsets the slight drop in efficiency.
 
I think looking Texas for guidance on energy policy is probably one of the more retarded mistakes a nation could make -- outside of Austin.
 
Starcrossed said:
I think looking Texas for guidance on energy policy is probably one of the more retarded mistakes a nation could make -- outside of Austin.
Click to expand...
Austin is hippy central, but when the college students grow up they quickly learn to mix a dose of reality with their ideology and change their tune quickly... myself included (I'm a Longhorn).

Oh, and you might want to take your foot out of your mouth when you realize that Texas is a world leader in energy production, INCLUDING investment in alternative energy sources. For example, I wonder which state produces the most wind power?

Oops, its Texas! 10,377 MW of capacity. How emberassing for you.
 
Ducman69 said:
How emberassing for you.
Click to expand...

The state generates a lot of wind energy because the place is a large, barren wasteland and money can be made off of it. The state and its cities are quite incapable of tending to their own environmental realities.
 
Ducman69 said:
Austin is hippy central, but when the college students grow up they quickly learn to mix a dose of reality with their ideology and change their tune quickly... myself included (I'm a Longhorn).

Oh, and you might want to take your foot out of your mouth when you realize that Texas is a world leader in energy production, INCLUDING investment in alternative energy sources. For example, I wonder which state produces the most wind power?

Oops, its Texas! 10,377 MW of capacity. How emberassing for you.
Click to expand...

OMG, you're _still_ arguing with people about this? :eek:
 
Ducman69 said:
TexasSpace.jpg

What a barren wasteland... pfft.
Click to expand...

I shamefully admit that I lived in Texas for a while...more than once...it is a total wasteland except around San Antonio. Dallas used to be nice until Debbie started doing it there so that's a man-made problem. :( There are those dumb blue bonnet flowers (ugh, bonnets are so passe and silly now that we have tennis visors) and there are occasional prickly pear cactus plants and gnarly old trees that no one will miss. But yeah, I agree with you that it's a wasteland.
 
Starcrossed said:
An over-colored picture from space is about the only way you can make that place look good....
Click to expand...
Its a satelite photo, and if you look at the rest of the US, its average to above average greenery. And when I'm flying on the weekend I'm constantly flying over green forests and farms.

Sounds like some yanks are pissed they just can't argue with logic and facts. ;)
7996768346_654c6053f7_z.jpg
 
If you look at the photo, the color of the rest of the US is purposefully contrasted to show the border of Texas. Texas blows environmentally.
 
Ducman69 said:
Please explain to the class how a 10K watt gas unit is inferior to a 10K watt diesel unit?

Diesels are usually reserved for very large scale systems, such as an office building, and are almost unheard of for home use.

Gas units are cost effective, very quiet, clean, and are typically installed permanently. Natural gas prices at least in Texas are REDICULOUSLY cheap and at historic lows, whereas diesel prices are rising steadily every six months. There is furthermore no concern with natural gas generators in leaving old fuel in the unit, and they tend to be the most reliable. In a pinch, they can run on cans of liquid propane.

If you are just in a hurricane prone area or just want backup for your entire home for bad storms and the like, gas generators are excellent, and can be had for about $1000-$5000 in the 5K to 20K watt range which is more than enough for the home.

If you are in an earthquake prone area, then gas lines can be interupted along with the power, and gas is less ideal. Still for home use you will find virtually ALL small generators are gasoline powered and not diesel. They produce excellent power for their size and weight, which offsets the slight drop in efficiency.
Click to expand...

There are both portable and non-portable diesel based gen sets available out there in the price range that you described. They run cooler, use a hell of a lot less fuel and will last much longer under heavy loads then a gasoline based gen set would, and I also like the idea that if necessary a diesel generator can be modified to run on other fuel types aside from diesel.

Now granted, for very short term use a small gas generator is going to have the advantage just due to the pricing but I never ever look at short term since the area I live in is prone to hurricanes where the power could potentially be gone for 2+ weeks if shit gets bad like it did during Katrina, hence my rabid support for a diesel based unit.
 
As for being a "yank," I was born in Virginia, have lived in Kansas, Ohio, Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, and California. Knowing the US well, I can say without a shadow of a doubt, Texans do not take good care of their water, land, and air.
 
STrooperTK421 said:
Now granted, for very short term use a small gas generator is going to have the advantage just due to the pricing but I never ever look at short term since the area I live in is prone to hurricanes where the power could potentially be gone for 2+ weeks if shit gets bad like it did during Katrina, hence my rabid support for a diesel based unit.
Click to expand...
Not just pricing, but weight and size since they can use lightweight blocks and the efficiency difference isn't as big in cars because they aren't direct injection turbo diesels on the cheapo generators. Mine is rated .22 gallons per hour for example, so you can run 4 hours for about $3 which is fine IMO.

And my Yamaha I can easily pick up and toss in my trunk, bring it to a car to charge DC car batteries at the RC range, whatever, and it runs on LP, natural gas, and gasoline. And the advantage of gasoline is that when you are done with the unit, you can pour the remaining gas into your car, motorcycle, or lawn mower and you're good to go. With diesel, you're screwed if you don't have a diesel truck or car (not as common).

Pretty sure Amazon, Sears, and Home Depot and the like don't even carry small diesel units.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top