Environment Technology

Environment Technology

Solar Energy a Reliable and Practical Source

Posted by admin on July 31, 2012 in Clean Energy with 5 Comments

These days we are experiencing a growing awareness to the fact that our energy resources, as they have been used in the last few years, are probably not going to last for long and that the energy markets are exposed to more and more rapid changes, some due to political reasons and others because of the changing climate of the planet.
Solar energy is a renewable free source of energy which is sustainable as it is not inexhaustible, unlike fossil fuels which are finite. It is also a non-polluting source of energy and it does not emit any greenhouse gases when producing electricity. The solar electricity that is produced can supplement your entire or partial energy consumption. Using solar energy means reducing your energy bills and saving money. Also having solar PV panels adds value to your home, they are low maintenance and unobtrusive. Germany is the global leader for solar-generated electricity.
Why choose solar energy?
Australia is the luckiest country in the world. Our geography gives us the opportunity to use the most natural, sustainable and Clean Energy in our homes – the energy from the sun.

Solar thermal applications are the most widely used category of solar energy technology. These technologies use heat from the sun for water and space heating, ventilation, and many other applications.
Solar energy is not a new concept, it has been properly introduced to the global public many years ago and successfully implemented in different parts of the world in different ways, so we can say that solar energy is known to most people, but it is still not as popular as it should be, as a cheap replacement for other sources of energy. The energy of the sun, from its direct sun rays that are projected directly at the earth or by giant wind turbines are free fro us to use, to manipulate for our needs, and this can be done by almost anyone in any place, it just needs to technology and the know-how.

Energy Matters

« previous post

Tekkit with Duncan – Par...

Duncan upgrades some of his equipment to make it more energy efficient. http://www.techni...

next post »

Tree Preservation, Tree Protec....

Humans have an innate love for trees. We love them for their beauty. Their structural natu...

  1. Tom WJuly 31, 2012 - 5:35 am #1

    Why not Hydroelectric? Who is making money from wind and solar?
    We always said Bush was a slave to oil interests but I didn’t see in his background where he was an oil man. He was President of the Texas Rangers baseball team and a two term Gov or Texas. But now that we are going "green" (odd, same color as money) the emphasis is on wind and solar, both clean sources of energy but not practical for most of the U.S. who do not have wind or solar days. Hydroelectric dams are currently in common use, are totally clean and can be erected on any river or dam. Rivers like the Ohio now has some hyrdo dams and could have many, and hydo dams generate a lot of electricity, 24/7, 365. There could be hundreds such plants on the Ohio River, everywhere there is a lock or dam and on all other major rivers. But the emphasis has been only on solar and wind. Why? Who is getting rich on this, why are spending trillions to go this way when hyrdo is there, reliable and produces more kilowatts than the others AND is clean. Don’t say it would harm fish, the locks and dams have been around for a century.
    Algae. Well thats seems to be the main response from enviro types but is that just more mantra? there is no algae problem on the Ohio River, Missouri, there is no back up off water, it goes throughs the turbine immediately. We are talking locks and dams, many in place right now, some do have hydro power plants. If you are damming up a pond to run your house maybe but we are still a nation and need clean energy for 300 million people. Hydro is the only one that can do that, so why do people only talk wind and solar, is it because they are just looking out for themselves or their house. We still have to power large cities and hyrdo is there for all, not just the holy solitary enviro. I smell a another monopoly buidling with new power brokers. Hydro, one city, New Martinsville WV in the middle of coal country built on one the Hanibal locks and powers the city cleanly and reliably on the Ohio River. It has worked for years but gets left out of the clean energy scheme. Why?
    Trip, do you know that Bush is no longer President. We need to look to the future and not talk about the past and beside all of that you say he did must have been before Gov of TX and Pres of the TX Rangers baseball team. How old could he have been, 30-35. Are you saying he was really a genius? I do not get up in the morning and chant BBBBUSH to the west, his time is over, don’t live there. Think future, think clean energy. Let’s hold today’s leaders to the line in making progress, chanting Bush is just bowling team mentality. I want the future, not the past and hyrdo is the energy source of the future. Many enviros oppose wind turbines and have tied them up in court because they slaughter migrating birds. Dunno what impact we are talking about. Dams and locks on major rivers have been in place for decade to make large rivers navigable, they are already there and can be converted easily as they were in New Martinsville, WV.

  2. ixtasisJuly 31, 2012 - 10:37 am #2
  3. FireFighter523July 31, 2012 - 10:39 am #3

    First of all, hydroelectric dams arent all that clean. Think about the energy and resources it takes to build a dam big enough to power a city. First you have to divert the river. Excavate the area. Pour thousands of tons of concrete, etc. The pricetag for a dam is pretty big vs just building a windmill farm on the open plains. Also, not all rivers can support a dam because of the soil around them. You pretty much have to attach a dam to solid bedrock to keep the hydrostatic pressure from eroding soil under a dam and washing it away.

    I’m not saying hydroelectric isnt the best but it’s just not cost feasable for every location. We live in a world that is addicted to fossil fuels and I doubt that will change anytime soon. Our next goal is a fusion power plant. We have already successfully achieved fusion but sustained fusion and containment are our main obsticales. When we achieve commercial fusion power as a power source, then we will begin to shift from fossil fuels to nuclear fusion, which is a relatively clean renewable energy source.
    References :

  4. triphip2July 31, 2012 - 10:41 am #4

    Are you kidding? George Bush not an "oil man"?! He spent most his life involved with oil companies. He founded an oil company, then was made president of the oil company that bought that out. After that oil company went down, He was made director and consulting of yet another one! Harken. Can’t be much more a slave to oil than that. His life and mind has always been revolved around oil…
    References :

  5. ♥BETH♥July 31, 2012 - 10:43 am #5

    Out here on the Great Plains wind really is the best way to go. It’s clean and we have plenty of it. Wind generators are popping up all over.
    References :

Leave a Reply

No trackbacks yet.

No post with similar tags yet.

Posts in similar categories
Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE