Tank Slap - Motorcycle Forum

Kwacky wrote:Whilst the production of the electricity may not be green it does cut down on pollution because it's not dumping more crap into the air. Most cars are driven for very short journeys in crowded areas.

I dread to think what my lungs look like from breathing in car fumes commuting to work.

It's for governments to be more forward thinking in terms of energy production (i know i know...) but if every house had solar panels, there wouldnt be a problem with energy production...........

It should be a mandatory planning condition for new homes and businesses to have an element of energy production engineered in.

I'm living in my ideal world again today - i'll be ok tomorrow

The problem with solar Cookie, as we have found out in Aussie, is solar production is not in the peak usage times and power storage on a large scale is still in its infancy.

They are researching possible hydrobattery opportunities here in Aussie atm. Excess production pumps water up to a holding dam and in demand periods it runs turbines as it transfers to the lower dam.

It's already mandatory here in CA for new construction .....but it's no more than a drop in the bucket in the big scheme of things.

Cav wrote:The problem with electric cars is the source of the energy. Nothing is green/blue while the electricity for these clean cars is filthy dirty... same for the production of the batteries.

I'll stick to my non-DPF diesel car doing 55-65mpg with 170,000 miles on it for now. Much less polluting than any current modern car

You will be so restricted in its use soon though that it won’t be worth having. Within 10 years I wouldn’t be surprised if only electric vehicles are allowed in town centres. Maybe even half that time.

As the article says, once one city shows it works and the benefits it will bring, they will all want to do it. Once the technology is proven, the changeover will be rapid.

Solar energy has zero drawbacks. As Kiwi says, if we are producing too much at the wrong time, just use it to push water up a hill and then release it to power turbines when you need it. It’s still not polluting at all.

As Paul says, it's not an energy production problem it's an energy storage problem. We could easily run the UK on wind, wave and tidal power, just from a kWs required point of view. The problem is peak use and diversity.

Every house having a solar panel and a big battery for the peaks would make a massive difference.

Solar panels in a sunless country??

Nice.

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/wea ... 2018-10-10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You don't just charge the battery from the solar panels, you also charge it from the grid when it has a renewable energy power surplus.

There's an island up in Scotland doing this and they're now 90% off grid. Next year they hope to be 100% off grid.

Solar panels don't need sunlight now, daylight is enough.

Solar panels use the energy from daylight, as opposed to sunlight, to produce electricity so panels do not need direct sunlight to work. It is photons in natural daylight which is converted by solar panels cells to produce electricity. Heat has no effect on the production of electricity.

Heat does have an effect on production. A negative effect. Increase heat, increase resistance, reduced output.

When the temps here get to high 30’s/40’s deg C my production on my system noticeably drops off.

kiwikrasher wrote:
When the temps here get to high 30’s/40’s deg C my production on my system noticeably drops off.

Yeah. I don't think that's going to be a problem.

C00kiemonster wrote:....Give it a few years and we will all be able to sit and stare at phones all day instead of most of the day.

May all sound grumpy but effort and activities that are challenging are good for us.

it seems to me that the animated film Wall-E had a very prescient image of the evolution of our species.:

Kwacky wrote:

kiwikrasher wrote:
When the temps here get to high 30’s/40’s deg C my production on my system noticeably drops off.

Yeah. I don't think that's going to be a problem.

Give it a decade of exponential population increases with the associated planetary exploitation , and Trump a second term, and that may be not be so unlikely.?

Watched a programme the other day where calculations are that in the UK a hot summers day will be low 40s C and winter days will average double figures. And all within 30 years from now.

But it's the weather....it's not like anyone can do anything to change it. Not in a realistic or meaningful way.

D41 wrote:But it's the weather....it's not like anyone can do anything to change it. Not in a realistic or meaningful way.

I thought that was the whole point of the Paris Summit? I thought that the consensus was that our conduct was directly attributable to the changes in the weather.??

I think politically the whole subject is nothing more than a paper tiger. I feel any changes we may or may not have on the planet's climate are minimal at best, & regardless of whatever changes there are, the "counter-measures" we're dreaming up will be completely bloody ineffective. A clean drop of water in a polluted ocean.

Until making the World sustainable for future human inhabitation becomes profitable then we are destined to destroy our own environment.