White House Goes Solar
Click here for reuse options!President Obama, who will announce the project’s completion as part of a broader push to expand solar energy deployment in the private and public sectors, took up the gauntlet nearly three decades after Ronald Reagan dismantled the panels Jimmy Carter had put on the roof.
The president will also announce a combination of commercial and federal pledges, including a commitment by Wal-Mart to double the number of solar projects it will have onsite at its stores and distribution centers by 2020. The Energy Department will issue two new efficiency rules Friday, cutting the energy consumption of new electric motors and walk-in coolers and freezers, and will launch a training programs at community colleges across the country to help 50,000 workers to enter the solar industry by 2020.
The administration will also devote $2 billion to improving energy efficiency at federal buildings by 2016, and approve the industry’s latest commercial building energy code — which is 8.5 percent more efficient. Taken together, the initiatives translate into more than 850 megawatts of solar power and energy efficiency investments in more than 1 billion square feet of buildings.
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: William
retired military , former cop, lifelong gym rat and doting grandfather alive and living in Maine
152 responses to White House Goes Solar
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Sunka May 13th, 2014 at 00:56
Good news!
http://thesolarfoundation.org/
National Solar Jobs Census 2013
On January 27th, 2014, The Solar Foundation released National Solar Jobs Census 2013, which found that the U.S. solar industry currently employs over 142,000 Americans. This figure represents the addition of nearly 24,000 additional solar workers over the previous year. The industry’s nearly 20% growth in employment since 2012 shows that – for the first time ever – the solar industry exceeded the growth projections made in the previous year’s report. During the period covered by Census 2013, average employment in the national economy great at only 1.9%. Between September 2012 and November 2013, the U.S. solar industry added an average of 56 solar workers each day.
Read more in the full report and fact sheet.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 19:09
Not so good news.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=germany+fires+up+new+coal+plants
Chinese Democracy May 16th, 2014 at 15:32
better news
Germany Hits Historic High, Gets 74 Percent Of Energy From Renewables
http://goo.gl/ThF0iZ
the lmgtfy gag is old OLD I say
The Lochnar May 16th, 2014 at 19:38
It’s only old if you are not making a point. Mine is that many do not research opposing views.
The almost 75% was a peak period near midday and was not sustained for more than an hour or so.
They shut down nuclear power plants that output power a regular constant predictable rate so they need to replace these with something that doesn’t just has peaks that look good and crappy other times. So they are replacing the nuke plants with coal fired plants because they are also reliable steady power producers. How is this helpful?
Sunka May 13th, 2014 at 00:56
Good news!
http://thesolarfoundation.org/
National Solar Jobs Census 2013
On January 27th, 2014, The Solar Foundation released National Solar Jobs Census 2013, which found that the U.S. solar industry currently employs over 142,000 Americans. This figure represents the addition of nearly 24,000 additional solar workers over the previous year. The industry’s nearly 20% growth in employment since 2012 shows that – for the first time ever – the solar industry exceeded the growth projections made in the previous year’s report. During the period covered by Census 2013, average employment in the national economy great at only 1.9%. Between September 2012 and November 2013, the U.S. solar industry added an average of 56 solar workers each day.
Read more in the full report and fact sheet.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 19:09
Not so good news.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=germany+fires+up+new+coal+plants
Chinese Democracy May 16th, 2014 at 15:32
better news
Germany Hits Historic High, Gets 74 Percent Of Energy From Renewables
http://goo.gl/ThF0iZ
the lmgtfy gag is old OLD I say
The Lochnar May 16th, 2014 at 19:38
It’s only old if you are not making a point. Mine is that many do not research opposing views.
The almost 75% was a peak period near midday and was not sustained for more than an hour or so.
They shut down nuclear power plants that output power a regular constant predictable rate so they need to replace these with something that doesn’t just has peaks that look good and crappy other times. So they are replacing the nuke plants with coal fired plants because they are also reliable steady power producers. How is this helpful?
jasperjava May 13th, 2014 at 01:10
One of the most pig-headed things that Reagan ever did was to remove the solar panels that Carter had installed in the White House, out of sheer spite. It’s as if he WANTED people to know he was a dinosaur.
I hope some nasty right-wing RepubliKKKan Neanderthal never tries to undo ANY of the progress that has been achieved under this President. By the looks of it, it will be decades before another RepubliKKKan is ever elected President again.
jasperjava May 13th, 2014 at 01:10
One of the most pig-headed things that Reagan ever did was to remove the solar panels that Carter had installed in the White House, out of sheer spite. It’s as if he WANTED people to know he was a dinosaur.
I hope some nasty right-wing RepubliKKKan Neanderthal never tries to undo ANY of the progress that has been achieved under this President. By the looks of it, it will be decades before another RepubliKKKan is ever elected President again.
William May 13th, 2014 at 07:53
Weather a person subscribes to global warming or not, consider a world with cleaner air, and cheaper energy. Bonus. No one has ever had to close a beach because of a solar spill. Consider this solar carport charging facility, and even a person with only a casual relationship with science would understand and celebrate this achievement.
William May 13th, 2014 at 07:53
Weather a person subscribes to global warming or not, consider a world with cleaner air, and cheaper energy. Bonus. No one has ever had to close a beach because of a solar spill. Consider this solar carport charging facility, and even a person with only a casual relationship with science would understand and celebrate this achievement.
Budda May 13th, 2014 at 08:25
An efficient and economical solar system for the individual home is the big power companies worst fear.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 19:07
Actually it is not because you need 1000 square feet of panel and a battery pack to keep a 1000 watt heater going. We would have to cover the entire planet including the oceans for solar to geernate the power we need and then there is a battery packs …
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 19:25
Actually it takes far less space than that http://gizmodo.com/5350191/how-many-solar-panels-would-it-take-to-power-the-entire-world We do need better batteries though and there is some promising new technology with quinone flow batteries.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 20:16
The power density of PV is very poor. Where is the math behind that claim?
PV can only has a 9 watt per square meter power average taking the day night cycle, sun angle, clouds and other weather, seasons, etc etc into account.
http://www.vaclavsmil.com/wp-content/uploads/docs/smil-article-power-density-primer.pdf
In 2008 the total world wide power consumption was this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption#cite_note-2
You do the math and you will see PV can’t provide the power we need.
Nuclear of a safer variety is the only choice we have because there is no time left and other even safer choices such as fusion are still a ways out to be commercially viable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 21:14
Your math seems to be based on a northern location with less than optimum weather conditions. In Texas with better conditions and panels made recently with greater efficiency ratings we are far exceeding that. I certainly propose pushing solar in the south and moving northward as necessary, as technology develops. Solar is now cheaper when all things such as climate change and the resulting damage from severe weather caused by climate change are considered.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:35
Ok then – what power figure would you accept to be the one we should use? And it can’t be peak power at high noon when the sun has to cut through less atmosphere. I want you to link me to a reputable site the gives the average for Texas year.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:36
That math takes world wide average into account.
CB May 14th, 2014 at 23:17
It is absolutely possible to run a country like the USA using 100% renewable energy:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/05/13-4
mea_mark May 15th, 2014 at 13:35
I don’t think there is a big push to build a lot of solar projects far north unless the cost of energy is very high. So who really cares about world wide averages. Build the solar where it makes sense.
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 21:12
“So who really cares about world wide averages”
It is important because it shows the best you can hope for. If you do not include the power that can be gotten from the places that get far less sun (such as closer to the poles) you then further reduce the world wide average to far less than the already dismal 9-10 watts per square meter (a bit more than a square yard or just under 11 square feet square feet).
The calculation is based on the total solar power that falls on the earth than can be collected by PV panels. It’s the only way to calculate if PV can prodcue enough. Wind is a bit worse and biofuels are laughable.
I truly wish this was not the case but it is. I have designed a few products that use PV panels and it was a challenge to ensure enough power could be collected to allow the product to operate 24/7/365.25
Budda May 13th, 2014 at 08:25
An efficient and economical solar system for the individual home is the big power companies worst fear.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 19:07
Actually it is not because you need 1000 square feet of panel and a battery pack to keep a 1000 watt heater going. We would have to cover the entire planet including the oceans for solar to geernate the power we need and then there is a battery packs …
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 19:25
Actually it takes far less space than that http://gizmodo.com/5350191/how-many-solar-panels-would-it-take-to-power-the-entire-world We do need better batteries though and there is some promising new technology with quinone flow batteries.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 20:16
The power density of PV is very poor. Where is the math behind that claim?
PV can only has a 9 watt per square meter power average taking the day night cycle, sun angle, clouds and other weather, seasons, etc etc into account.
http://www.vaclavsmil.com/wp-content/uploads/docs/smil-article-power-density-primer.pdf
In 2008 the total world wide power consumption was this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption#cite_note-2
You do the math and you will see PV can’t provide the power we need.
Nuclear of a safer variety is the only choice we have because there is no time left and other even safer choices such as fusion are still a ways out to be commercially viable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 21:14
Your math seems to be based on a northern location with less than optimum weather conditions. In Texas with better conditions and panels made recently with greater efficiency ratings we are far exceeding that. I certainly propose pushing solar in the south and moving northward as necessary, as technology develops. Solar is now cheaper when all things such as climate change and the resulting damage from severe weather caused by climate change are considered.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:35
Ok then – what power figure would you accept to be the one we should use? And it can’t be peak power at high noon when the sun has to cut through less atmosphere. I want you to link me to a reputable site the gives the average for Texas year.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:36
That math takes world wide average into account.
CB May 14th, 2014 at 23:17
It is absolutely possible to run a country like the USA using 100% renewable energy:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/05/13-4
mea_mark May 15th, 2014 at 13:35
I don’t think there is a big push to build a lot of solar projects far north unless the cost of energy is very high. So who really cares about world wide averages. Build the solar where it makes sense.
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 21:12
“So who really cares about world wide averages”
It is important because it shows the best you can hope for. If you do not include the power that can be gotten from the places that get far less sun (such as closer to the poles) you then further reduce the world wide average to far less than the already dismal 9-10 watts per square meter (a bit more than a square yard or just under 11 square feet square feet).
The calculation is based on the total solar power that falls on the earth that can be collected by PV panels. It’s the only way to calculate if PV can produce enough. Wind is a bit worse and biomass fuels are laughable.
I truly wish this was not the case but it is. I have designed a few products that use PV panels and it was a challenge to ensure enough power could be collected to allow the product to operate 24/7/365.25
Nobama May 13th, 2014 at 10:19
Wow! How strange that nothing was said of how much was spent. That amount of panels won’t even provide the hot water in the White House.
arc99 May 13th, 2014 at 11:28
How strange right wingers never asked how much things cost when a Republican is in the White House.
The solar array was necessarily small due to security concerns on the roof of the White House. In addition to the solar panel installation, other energy-saving measures were implemented inside the building which in the long run will save taxpayers money.
But facts have never been a significant ingredient in the non-stop hatred of the President. No reason for you to start now.
Budda May 13th, 2014 at 11:30
How about what was spent for the Iraq war?
Nobama May 13th, 2014 at 12:01
Kinda off the subject. Ok let’s see how many and who were the Dems that voted for the Iraq war on 10/11/2012 according to the WaPo archives; Boxer, Biden, Bayh, Baucus, Grassley, Feinstein, Landrieu, Kerry, Harry Reid, Hagel, Schumer, Edwards, Daschle, Rockefeller in all a total of 29. How about Afghanistan and what it cost? Obama said he was going to pull us out his first term. 70% of the casualties from Afghanistan occured under Obama.
mea_mark May 13th, 2014 at 12:28
If the republicans didn’t lie to them so much they probably wouldn’t of voted the way they did. Republican deception at the highest political levels needs to be stopped so this kind of stuff never happens again.
Nobama May 13th, 2014 at 12:44
There were more than 40 countries who voted for the invasion of Iraq so I guess those nasty Repubs conned them too? Come on guy the decision was based on the best available intelligence the CIA and other sources could provide at the time. Kerry is on you tube stating that he fully agreed with the assessment of Iraq. It was common knowledge that Saddam gassed thousands of Kurds with chemical weapons. And just so you know I am not in favor of war either.
Nobama May 13th, 2014 at 12:44
There were more than 40 countries who voted for the invasion of Iraq so I guess those nasty Repubs conned them too? Come on guy the decision was based on the best available intelligence the CIA and other sources could provide at the time. Kerry is on you tube stating that he fully agreed with the assessment of Iraq. It was common knowledge that Saddam gassed thousands of Kurds with chemical weapons. And just so you know I am not in favor of war either.
mea_mark May 13th, 2014 at 13:06
Make that, “best ‘made up’ intelligence by Cheney and people like Rumsfeld at the time”. And yes a lot of people were conned, and we will not be so easily conned again. We now know how little integrity the republican party now has and how low they will go.
Nobama May 13th, 2014 at 13:35
Like when Obama conned the people with “If you like your plan” or “If you like your doctor” or” the average savings to a family of $2500.00 a year” with Obamacare?? One side is as bad as the other.
Obewon May 13th, 2014 at 19:24
No solar panel or wind turbine spill requires hospitalization but POTUS Obama extended Non-ACA compliant HC policies 2 years through 2017. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/us/politics/obama-extends-renewal-period-for-noncompliant-insurance-policies.html
It’s amazing how uninformed Big Oil welfare queen supporters remain e.g. US GHG Emissions Lowest Level in 20 Yrs! On target to meet -17% Drop by 2020 Amid Record $16T GDP+3.5% APR. http://www.climatecentral.org/news/u.s.-greenhouse-gas-emissions-decline-in-2012-17313
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 19:00
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=germany+fires+up+new+coal+plants
Obewon May 14th, 2014 at 20:38
Germany Sets New Record, Generating 74% Of Energy Needs From Renewable Energy(☯‿☯) http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/05/13/3436923/germany-energy-records/
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 20:54
Now that sounds like good news to me. ☺
Obewon May 14th, 2014 at 21:03
USA! USA! We’re #2 in solar trailing China’s lawn lamps.
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 21:22
We are doing better though — { Austin recently signed a contract with SunEdison for 150 megawatts of solar at a reported price of only 5 cents per kilowatt-hour. The city council has required the utility to get 35 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020, including 200 megawatts from solar power. It already buys solar power from a 2011 SunEdison project, a 30-megawatt installation at Webberville.} http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/that-mean-old-texas-sun With prices like this we will see more in the near future. Solar is now affordable.
The Lochnar May 16th, 2014 at 19:01
30 megawatts ? 100 megawatts? all small potatoes …
What about automobiles? What about the millions of megawatts generated by fossils fuels.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:44
So Germany decides to do the slow pollute thing because no one will notice. The shutting down of its’ aging nuclear plants is leaving an energy drought. I predict they will develop their own LFTR pretty quick. It’s the only logical choice at this time.
Obewon May 15th, 2014 at 00:35
Germany mothballed their newest post-80’s Nukes after Fukushima’s 4+ Meltdowns and Tepco’s 17% Plutonium Mox-Fuel breeder reactor exploded. Germany met their ‘20% renewable energy by 2020 in 2011’ and produced 25% RE in 2012. Germany exports electricity to other EU nations which offsets their gross output & domestic renewable energy production rates.
EU 20% Renewabel by 2020 on target with 50% RE by 2050. The US? Were stuck with Koch Oil & coal Tea party buffoons screaming because USA’s 2/3 coal powered electricity dropped to 40% under the Obama admin:) http://theenergycollective.com/hermantrabish/210731/eu-track-meet-2020-solar-wind-renewables-targets
Obewon May 16th, 2014 at 19:36
Benner you’ve got 0 LFTR vs the USA’s 4 year old NIF 550 Trillion watt record power produced from fusing a few seawater atoms together via two 200 watt lasers amplified 4 B+ times.into 196 13kJ. beams.
Many previously have posted that you’re likely delusional to believe the DOA “Nuclear Industry” propaganda in denial that Thorium is rare -and would need to be mined, refined that creates HUGE amounts of greenhouse gasses just like the 15% uranium & plutonium mining & refining required to be ‘mixed into the fuel for any LFTR operation.’ The US has many production fusion reactors including LIFE powerplant protoype NIF https://life.llnl.gov/, Fusion of Seawater is soon to be augmented by the G8 ITER in 2017. http://www.iter.org/ The Z machine is yet another long in production fusion reactor. Meanwhile thorium has 0 in production with no new active research facilities,http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico/albuquerque/check-out-sandias-80-million-z-machine/21271604
Obewon May 15th, 2014 at 01:01
‘Liquid fluoride thorium reactors require fissile plutonium and/or uranium to achieve critical mass.’-Google has 94,100 results because not many take (LFTR) as a serious option. Thorium & nuclear Fission are the most expensive ways to boil water. That’s why USA’s NIF & the G8 ITER Fusion reactors from seawater are better mid 2020 rollout choices with 1M+ times greater efficiency.. https://lasers.llnl.gov/
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 20:48
‘Liquid fluoride thorium reactors require fissile plutonium and/or ) uranium to achieve critical mass.’
True but only to start it. A plant can start many reactors from the same source which doesn’t ned to stay in the reactor.
LFTR is starting to gain traction as it is proven to be viable. The cost of a thorium plant is far less because the alpha wave ractiaon can be stopped with a sheet of paper and there is very little waste to store. Also no fancy containment (they do not explode) or active cooling (both reducing costs) is needed so they do not need to be located near water. They do not need back up generators if they need to be shutdown. Since they do not produce weapons grade material they are perfect for countries who want to show that they do not want to make a weapon.
The expense doesn’t matter when it’s your only choice and besides, the cost will drop significantly if more are produced.
NIF has so many technical hurdles to overcome such as containment and fuel delivery. As I recall they have not achieved anything more that a picosecond (one trillionth of one second) of power output. This only has demonstrated the concept – a concept prototype and are no where a working prototype, let alone a production prototype.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:27
Then why is Germany firing up more coal plants?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=germany+fires+up+new+coal+plants
arc99 May 13th, 2014 at 13:07
the best available intelligence came from the UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq just weeks before we invaded.
their findings were dismissed by the American right, and the UN team was called “incompetent”.
this was the best available intelligence as of February 2003
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/feb/14/iraq.unitednations
We have to date found no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear related activities in Iraq. However, as I have just indicated, a number of issues are still under investigation and we are not yet in a position to reach a conclusion about them, although we are moving forward with regard to some of them. To that end, we intend to make full use of the authority granted to us under all relevant Security Council resolutions to build as much capacity into the inspection process as necessary.
arc99 May 13th, 2014 at 12:54
It never fails. For five years, we have heard the Obama-haters demanding that the President take responsibility for what happens on his watch.
But the instant the discussion turns to the Bush administration and the war in Iraq, the reponse is, but, but, but Democrats supported it too. double-standard strikes again.
I am perfectly willing to recognize what a catastrophic mistake it was for those Congressional Democrats to agree with the Bush administration’s decision to go to war.
I am also perfectly willing to point out that the most LIBERAL members of Congress voted against the war. Just goes to show you what good comes out of listening to conservatives.
little or in the case of Iraq, none whatsoever.
hopefully those moderate Democrats will not repeat their mistake and next time will listen to the most liberal voices in the party.
fancypants May 13th, 2014 at 18:53
Obama had to stick to what gwb promised Karzai. You know how Boehner gets when it comes to pointing out big political mistakes
mea_mark May 13th, 2014 at 11:59
The White House should have a solar hot water system also, they are way more efficient than solar panels. Good point, we should push for Obama to install a solar hot water system.
Nobama May 13th, 2014 at 12:03
I agree with you. I think their comment about security being the reason for a small system is untrue. The security is so tight they can spot a cockroach on the White House grounds.
mea_mark May 13th, 2014 at 12:18
I didn’t say anything about security being the reason. It probably does have something to do with people being able to move around on the roof though. The roof of the White House is not the only place solar can go though. Also new technologies like paintable solar may allow it to be used where conventional panels don’t work. I am sure they will be able to expand on the system with new technologies in the future as they as become available. If nothing else but for a symbolic gesture showing what can be done.
fancypants May 13th, 2014 at 18:37
who said ( in the article or video ) that they were done with the installation
after all the “conservative ” presidents blew off this idea ..correct ?
William May 13th, 2014 at 23:31
Wow! How strange that nothing was said of how much was spent…… taking down the panels by Regan.
Oblowz May 13th, 2014 at 10:19
Wow! How strange that nothing was said of how much was spent. That amount of panels won’t even provide the hot water in the White House.
arc99 May 13th, 2014 at 11:28
How strange right wingers never asked how much things cost when a Republican is in the White House.
The solar array was necessarily small due to security concerns on the roof of the White House. In addition to the solar panel installation, other energy-saving measures were implemented inside the building which in the long run will save taxpayers money.
But facts have never been a significant ingredient in the non-stop hatred of the President. No reason for you to start now.
Budda May 13th, 2014 at 11:30
How about what was spent for the Iraq war?
Oblowz May 13th, 2014 at 12:01
Kinda off the subject. Ok let’s see how many and who were the Dems that voted for the Iraq war on 10/11/2012 according to the WaPo archives; Boxer, Biden, Bayh, Baucus, Grassley, Feinstein, Landrieu, Kerry, Harry Reid, Hagel, Schumer, Edwards, Daschle, Rockefeller in all a total of 29. How about Afghanistan and what it cost? Obama said he was going to pull us out his first term. 70% of the casualties from Afghanistan occured under Obama.
mea_mark May 13th, 2014 at 12:28
If the republicans didn’t lie to them so much they probably wouldn’t of voted the way they did. Republican deception at the highest political levels needs to be stopped so this kind of stuff never happens again.
Oblowz May 13th, 2014 at 12:44
There were more than 40 countries who voted for the invasion of Iraq so I guess those nasty Repubs conned them too? Come on guy the decision was based on the best available intelligence the CIA and other sources could provide at the time. Kerry is on you tube stating that he fully agreed with the assessment of Iraq. It was common knowledge that Saddam gassed thousands of Kurds with chemical weapons. And just so you know I am not in favor of war either.
mea_mark May 13th, 2014 at 13:06
Make that, “best ‘made up’ intelligence by Cheney and people like Rumsfeld at the time”. And yes a lot of people were conned, and we will not be so easily conned again. We now know how little integrity the republican party now has and how low they will go.
Oblowz May 13th, 2014 at 13:35
Like when Obama conned the people with “If you like your plan” or “If you like your doctor” or” the average savings to a family of $2500.00 a year” with Obamacare?? One side is as bad as the other.
Obewon May 13th, 2014 at 19:24
No solar panel or wind turbine spill requires hospitalization but POTUS Obama extended Non-ACA compliant HC policies 2 years through 2017. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/us/politics/obama-extends-renewal-period-for-noncompliant-insurance-policies.html
It’s amazing how uninformed Big Oil welfare queen supporters remain e.g. US GHG Emissions Lowest Level in 20 Yrs! On target to meet -17% Drop by 2020 Amid Record $16T GDP+3.5% APR. http://www.climatecentral.org/news/u.s.-greenhouse-gas-emissions-decline-in-2012-17313
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 19:00
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=germany+fires+up+new+coal+plants
Obewon May 14th, 2014 at 20:38
Germany Sets New Record, Generating 74% Of Energy Needs From Renewable Energy(☯‿☯) http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/05/13/3436923/germany-energy-records/
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 20:54
Now that sounds like good news to me. ☺
Obewon May 14th, 2014 at 21:03
USA! USA! We’re #2 in solar trailing China’s lawn lamps.
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 21:22
We are doing better though — { Austin recently signed a contract with SunEdison for 150 megawatts of solar at a reported price of only 5 cents per kilowatt-hour. The city council has required the utility to get 35 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020, including 200 megawatts from solar power. It already buys solar power from a 2011 SunEdison project, a 30-megawatt installation at Webberville.} http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/that-mean-old-texas-sun With prices like this we will see more in the near future. Solar is now affordable.
The Lochnar May 16th, 2014 at 19:01
30 megawatts ? 100 megawatts? all small potatoes …
What about automobiles? What about the millions of megawatts generated by fossils fuels.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:44
So Germany decides to do the slow pollute thing because no one will notice. The shutting down of its’ aging nuclear plants is leaving an energy drought. I predict they will develop their own LFTR pretty quick. It’s the only logical choice at this time.
Obewon May 15th, 2014 at 00:35
Germany mothballed their newest post-80’s Nukes after Fukushima’s 4+ Meltdowns and Tepco’s 17% Plutonium Mox-Fuel breeder reactor exploded. Germany met their ‘20% renewable energy by 2020 in 2011’ and produced 25% RE in 2012. Germany exports electricity to other EU nations which offsets their gross output & domestic renewable energy production rates.
EU 20% Renewabel by 2020 on target with 50% RE by 2050. The US? We’re stuck with Koch Oil & coal Tea party buffoons screaming because USA’s 2/3 coal powered electricity dropped to 40% under the Obama admin:) http://theenergycollective.com/hermantrabish/210731/eu-track-meet-2020-solar-wind-renewables-targets
Obewon May 16th, 2014 at 19:36
Benner you’ve got 0 LFTR vs the USA’s 4 year old NIF 550 Trillion watt record power produced from fusing two seawater atoms together in 9 billionths of a second via two 200 watt lasers amplified more than 4 billion times.into 192 13kJ beams. https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2012/Jul/NR-12-07-01.html
Many previously have posted that you’re likely delusional to believe the DOA “Nuclear Industry” propaganda in denial that Thorium is rare -and would need to be mined, refined that creates HUGE amounts of greenhouse gasses just like the 15% uranium & plutonium mining & refining required to be ‘mixed into the fuel for any LFTR operation.’ The US has many production fusion reactors including LIFE powerplant protoype NIF https://life.llnl.gov/, Fusion of Seawater is soon to be augmented by the G8 ITER in 2017. http://www.iter.org/ This 1980’s built Z machine is yet another long in production US fusion reactor. Meanwhile thorium has 0 in production with no new active research facilities,http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico/albuquerque/check-out-sandias-80-million-z-machine/21271604
Obewon May 15th, 2014 at 01:01
‘Liquid fluoride thorium reactors require fissile plutonium and/or uranium to achieve critical mass.’-Google has 94,100 results because not many take (LFTR) as a serious option. Thorium & nuclear Fission are the most expensive ways to boil water. That’s why USA’s NIF & the G8 ITER Fusion reactors from seawater are better choices for mid 2020 rollout with 1M+ times greater efficiency.. https://lasers.llnl.gov/
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 20:48
‘Liquid fluoride thorium reactors require fissile plutonium and/or ) uranium to achieve critical mass.’
True but only to start it. A plant can start many reactors from the same source which doesn’t ned to stay in the reactor.
LFTR is starting to gain traction as it is proven to be viable. The cost of a thorium plant is far less because the alpha wave ractiaon can be stopped with a sheet of paper and there is very little waste to store. Also no fancy containment (they do not explode) or active cooling (both reducing costs) is needed so they do not need to be located near water. They do not need back up generators if they need to be shutdown. Since they do not produce weapons grade material they are perfect for countries who want to show that they do not want to make a weapon.
The expense doesn’t matter when it’s your only choice and besides, the cost will drop significantly if more are produced.
NIF has so many technical hurdles to overcome such as containment and fuel delivery. As I recall they have not achieved anything more that a picosecond (one trillionth of one second) of power output. This only has demonstrated the concept – a concept prototype and are no where a working prototype, let alone a production prototype.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:27
Then why is Germany firing up more coal plants?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=germany+fires+up+new+coal+plants
arc99 May 13th, 2014 at 13:07
the best available intelligence came from the UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq just weeks before we invaded.
their findings were dismissed by the American right, and the UN team was called “incompetent”.
this was the best available intelligence as of February 2003
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/feb/14/iraq.unitednations
We have to date found no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear related activities in Iraq. However, as I have just indicated, a number of issues are still under investigation and we are not yet in a position to reach a conclusion about them, although we are moving forward with regard to some of them. To that end, we intend to make full use of the authority granted to us under all relevant Security Council resolutions to build as much capacity into the inspection process as necessary.
arc99 May 13th, 2014 at 12:54
It never fails. For five years, we have heard the Obama-haters demanding that the President take responsibility for what happens on his watch.
But the instant the discussion turns to the Bush administration and the war in Iraq, the reponse is, but, but, but Democrats supported it too. double-standard strikes again.
I am perfectly willing to recognize what a catastrophic mistake it was for those Congressional Democrats to agree with the Bush administration’s decision to go to war.
I am also perfectly willing to point out that the most LIBERAL members of Congress voted against the war. Just goes to show you what good comes out of listening to conservatives.
little or in the case of Iraq, none whatsoever.
hopefully those moderate Democrats will not repeat their mistake and next time will listen to the most liberal voices in the party.
fancypants May 13th, 2014 at 18:53
Obama had to stick to what gwb promised Karzai. You know how Boehner gets when it comes to pointing out big political mistakes
mea_mark May 13th, 2014 at 11:59
The White House should have a solar hot water system also, they are way more efficient than solar panels. Good point, we should push for Obama to install a solar hot water system.
Oblowz May 13th, 2014 at 12:03
I agree with you. I think their comment about security being the reason for a small system is untrue. The security is so tight they can spot a cockroach on the White House grounds. The security comment is in the article above.
mea_mark May 13th, 2014 at 12:18
I didn’t say anything about security being the reason. It probably does have something to do with people being able to move around on the roof though. The roof of the White House is not the only place solar can go though. Also new technologies like paintable solar may allow it to be used where conventional panels don’t work. I am sure they will be able to expand on the system with new technologies in the future as they as become available. If nothing else but for a symbolic gesture showing what can be done.
fancypants May 13th, 2014 at 18:37
who said ( in the article or video ) that they were done with the installation
after all the “conservative ” presidents blew off this idea ..correct ?
William May 13th, 2014 at 23:31
Wow! How strange that nothing was said of how much was spent…… taking down the panels by Regan.
The Lochnar May 13th, 2014 at 19:58
All other emotion and off topic comments aside, PV solar has been around for a long time and has not proven to be able to provide enough power for the space it takes up. PV solar takes 100 to 300 times the space to provide the same power output as current power generation systems.
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 19:51
Solar PV panels are usually installed in wasted space so it is a winning situation. It’s not like they are competing for the space on someones roof with a coal fired power plant.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:24
You can’t put solar panels on so called “wasted space” because they need access for maintenance which usually indicates useable space. What kind of wasted space are you referring to?
Also you can not put them in deserts (the traditional wasted space) where they can get sand blown, which is most deserts.
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 21:38
Roof tops are generally considered wasted space. With the new glass they make now, they should do fine in the desert, the sand will not hurt the glass. Everything else can be easily protected from the environment.
I am beginning to think you have investments in other forms of energy production and just don’t want to see solar do well. You are cherry picking data that doesn’t necessarily apply and making assumptions that don’t hold up.
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 20:26
I know of no glass that can withstand a severe sand storm. There are some PV panels that can withstand light storms (5g/m2) but they still lose some output.
The best panels an average person can get only outputs 150watts per square meter (about a square yard) and weighs 550 lbs.
http://www.astronergy.com/attch/product/20130913_CHSM6612P_with_50mm_frame.pdf
A 1500 watt heater will barely heat a 200 square foot room in the wintertime in many northern locations in the USA.
You would need at least 10 of these panels just for a bit of heat and only if you had sun every day and assuming you can achieve peak output while the sun is out. Peak output is defined as sun directly over head on a clear (no smog or fog etc). You would need to have sun tracking gear (not just laying there) and even with that you will not even see peak power because the sun needs to cut through more atmosphere when not at highest point in sky.
Since you only see peak power for a short period you would need at least 2 times and more likely 4 times) this amount and a battery system to match. You would have about 2000 square foot of panel that weighs 11,000 lbs (not including the mounting or tracking gear) that your roof may not support in its current design, since mounts tend to not distribute load evenly.
And we have not even talked about cooking, hot water, heating other areas, laundry and other big power pigs. Lighting and entertainment is a tiny portion of ones energy use.
And what about your person transport vehicle?
Chinese Democracy May 15th, 2014 at 21:34
“I know of no glass that can withstand a severe sand storm.”
try these guys.
Consolidated Armor Products – Products
wwww.caparmor.com/products.html
“If You Can Imagine It, We Can Build It”; Specialty glass is available in a vast array of colors. … Anti-Hurricane / Tornado / Sandstorm
Chinese Democracy May 15th, 2014 at 21:36
P.S I live in California where I know for a fact that there are rather large homes up in the foothills that not only supply all the power they would ever need to the home. They sell the excess back to the utility companies.
The Lochnar May 16th, 2014 at 18:54
“that not only supply all the power they would ever need to the home.”
Sure – and they use gas to cook and heat as well as gas clothes dryers or hanging outside. Like I said – lighting and entertainment are not the major power guzzlers. Using gas for still produces the main greenhouse gas. CO2
Why are you not doing it?
The Lochnar May 16th, 2014 at 18:48
It called sandstorm resistant – not sandstorm proof. Besides the potential damage in deserts there is also the heat problem where solar panels drop efficiency when they are operated in extreme temperature climates..
The Lochnar May 13th, 2014 at 19:58
All other emotion and off topic comments aside, PV solar has been around for a long time and has not proven to be able to provide enough power for the space it takes up. PV solar takes 100 to 300 times the space to provide the same power output as current power generation systems.
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 19:51
Solar PV panels are usually installed in wasted space so it is a winning situation. It’s not like they are competing for the space on someones roof with a coal fired power plant.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:24
You can’t put solar panels on so called “wasted space” because they need access for maintenance which usually indicates useable space. What kind of wasted space are you referring to?
Also you can not put them in deserts (the traditional wasted space) where they can get sand blown, which is most deserts.
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 21:38
Roof tops are generally considered wasted space. With the new glass they make now, they should do fine in the desert, the sand will not hurt the glass. Everything else can be easily protected from the environment.
I am beginning to think you have investments in other forms of energy production and just don’t want to see solar do well. You are cherry picking data that doesn’t necessarily apply and making assumptions that don’t hold up.
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 20:26
I know of no glass that can withstand a severe sand storm. There are some PV panels that can withstand light storms (5g/m2) but they still lose some output.
The best panels an average person can get only outputs 150watts per square meter (about a square yard) and weighs 550 lbs.
http://www.astronergy.com/attch/product/20130913_CHSM6612P_with_50mm_frame.pdf
A 1500 watt heater will barely heat a 200 square foot room in the wintertime in many northern locations in the USA.
You would need at least 10 of these panels just for a bit of heat and only if you had sun every day and assuming you can achieve peak output while the sun is out. Peak output is defined as sun directly over head on a clear (no smog or fog etc). You would need to have sun tracking gear (not just laying there) and even with that you will not even see peak power because the sun needs to cut through more atmosphere when not at highest point in sky.
Since you only see peak power for a short period you would need at least 2 times and more likely 4 times) this amount and a battery system to match. You would have about 2000 square foot of panel that weighs 11,000 lbs (not including the mounting or tracking gear) that your roof may not support in its current design, since mounts tend to not distribute load evenly.
And we have not even talked about cooking, hot water, heating other areas, laundry and other big power pigs. Lighting and entertainment is a tiny portion of ones energy use.
And what about your person transport vehicle?
Chinese Democracy May 15th, 2014 at 21:34
“I know of no glass that can withstand a severe sand storm.”
try these guys.
Consolidated Armor Products – Products
wwww.caparmor.com/products.html
“If You Can Imagine It, We Can Build It”; Specialty glass is available in a vast array of colors. … Anti-Hurricane / Tornado / Sandstorm
Chinese Democracy May 15th, 2014 at 21:36
P.S I live in California where I know for a fact that there are rather large homes up in the foothills that not only supply all the power they would ever need to the home. They sell the excess back to the utility companies.
The Lochnar May 16th, 2014 at 18:54
“that not only supply all the power they would ever need to the home.”
Sure – and they use gas to cook and heat as well as gas clothes dryers or hanging outside. Like I said – lighting and entertainment are not the major power guzzlers. Using gas for still produces the main greenhouse gas. CO2
Why are you not doing it?
The Lochnar May 16th, 2014 at 18:48
It called sandstorm resistant – not sandstorm proof. Besides the potential damage in deserts there is also the heat problem where solar panels drop efficiency when they are operated in extreme temperature climates..
Nobama May 14th, 2014 at 19:39
According to the Daily Caller the solar panels will be contributing less than 2% of the electricity needed to power the White House. At least Barry wont have to worry about his golf cart being charged up if the power goes out!
arc99 May 14th, 2014 at 19:44
another ridiculous non-issue for right wingers to whine about.
dailycaller has to find some way to generate those advertising clicks.
Nobama May 14th, 2014 at 20:22
I bet Obama signs an executive order for halogen lights to be put on the roof to boost the solar efficiency of the panels.
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 20:51
Now that is just a plain dumb comment. I hope you are proud of that.
Nobama May 15th, 2014 at 09:09
Obamalogic. Like trying to spend your way out of debt or the continual “pivot to jobs”. ” I will not rest until Americans are back to work” “What? I found out like you did when I turned on the TV” ” Al Quaida is on the run!”
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 19:32
Nobama, your logic … ignore warning and continue to go off topic.
Nobama May 15th, 2014 at 20:47
Maybe you should check how many hours ago I was warned and how many hours since the comment above your post was put up. Good information you posted below.
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 20:54
Sorry – not used to Disqus yet.
Nobama May 15th, 2014 at 21:10
No sweat I make mistakes on a regular basis. A lot of people are unaware of the fact that tempered glass is sandblasted and used in doors like the Mayflower Hotel in downtown D.C. Laminated cannot take the abuse from the luggage carts banging the doors and plate has been illlegal for use in and within 4 feet of an entranceway since 1968. Plate cannot be used in solar because of the heat build up cracks the glass same as laminated will. Commercial buildings with insulated plate glass install film on the inside to reflect the sun and conserve energy. The heat builds up in the unit and the glass cracks. Marriott Headquarters outside D.C. is a prime example. I replaced them regularly before I retired. My boss told the facilities manager it was birds flying into the windows and that’s how they cracked! They bought that for years!! True story I swear.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:24
Your silly comments diminish your credibility. You seem to focus on being an Obama hater instead of the subject at hand. I suspect you do because you are a parrot and really have no thoughts of your own, other than hateful ones.
Nobama May 15th, 2014 at 13:35
See my response to Mea- Mark above. It is lengthy though.
mea_mark May 15th, 2014 at 13:43
Get on topic or at least close or you will banned, much to the delight of some of the readers here.
Obewon May 15th, 2014 at 01:09
The White House Fusion reactor is being tested on the Koch brothers funded TP Patriot Nation coup this Friday. Ride the beamline & watch the tea party sizzle in their coup de grâce. https://lasers.llnl.gov/media/video-gallery/ride-the-beamline
Nobama May 15th, 2014 at 08:52
Safe to say Obama won’t be peering out the White House windows watching the show this weekend. When the vets were bringing the barrycades to the WH Marine One whisked him away to a safer place. Personally I hope for a peaceful demonstration. I say less than 100K show up.
mea_mark May 15th, 2014 at 09:10
Do you ever check for facts? http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule
Nobama May 15th, 2014 at 13:31
Facts you say?I got a few facts for you to look at 6 pages http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/?page=1
mea_mark May 15th, 2014 at 13:39
I am deleting this because you are going way off topic.
William May 15th, 2014 at 09:15
Marine One whisked him away to a safer place…..
Still bitter huh? Oh well, now that the new site gives previously banished right wing crybabies a fresh start, you are free to share your fantasies with the other trolls.
Bunya May 15th, 2014 at 14:14
“…Marine One whisked him away to a safer place.”
Brings me back to the time they whisked famous chickenhawk coward Dick Cheney away to a safer place so he wouldn’t have to witness the destruction he caused on 9/11.
Obewon May 15th, 2014 at 21:33
Every 4 minutes, another American home or business went solar in 2013. 15 people or businesses going solar every hour in the USA will likely exceed the dozens of Friday Koch oil & coal bros funded ‘Patriot Nation’ protesters during their time outside the White House. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/12/131226-utilities-dispute-net-metering-for-solar/
Solar Homes are more valuable and sell faster too. https://worldwildlife.org/blogs/wwf-climate-blog/posts/every-four-minutes-another-american-home-or-business-goes-solar But if there’s a coal slurry near your home? Toxic heavy metals with Arsenic have poisoned you and any long gone market-rate buyers.
Oblowz May 14th, 2014 at 19:39
According to the Daily Caller the solar panels will be contributing less than 2% of the electricity needed to power the White House. At least Barry wont have to worry about his golf cart being charged up if the power goes out!
arc99 May 14th, 2014 at 19:44
another ridiculous non-issue for right wingers to whine about.
dailycaller has to find some way to generate those advertising clicks.
Oblowz May 14th, 2014 at 20:22
I bet Obama signs an executive order for halogen lights to be put on the roof to boost the solar efficiency of the panels.
mea_mark May 14th, 2014 at 20:51
Now that is just a plain dumb comment. I hope you are proud of that.
Oblowz May 15th, 2014 at 09:09
Obamalogic. Like trying to spend your way out of debt or the continual “pivot to jobs”. ” I will not rest until Americans are back to work” “What? I found out like you did when I turned on the TV” ” Al Quaida is on the run!”
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 19:32
Nobama, your logic … ignore warning and continue to go off topic.
Oblowz May 15th, 2014 at 20:47
Maybe you should check how many hours ago I was warned and how many hours since the comment above your post was put up. Good information you posted below.
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 20:54
Sorry – not used to Disqus yet.
Oblowz May 15th, 2014 at 21:10
No sweat I make mistakes on a regular basis. A lot of people are unaware of the fact that tempered glass is sandblasted and used in doors like the Mayflower Hotel in downtown D.C. Laminated cannot take the abuse from the luggage carts banging the doors and plate has been illlegal for use in and within 4 feet of an entranceway since 1968. Plate cannot be used in solar because of the heat build up cracks the glass same as laminated will. Commercial buildings with insulated plate glass install film on the inside to reflect the sun and conserve energy. The heat builds up in the unit and the glass cracks. Marriott Headquarters outside D.C. is a prime example. I replaced them regularly before I retired. My boss told the facilities manager it was birds flying into the windows and that’s how they cracked! They bought that for years!! True story I swear.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 21:24
Your silly comments diminish your credibility. You seem to focus on being an Obama hater instead of the subject at hand. I suspect you do because you are a parrot and really have no thoughts of your own, other than hateful ones.
Oblowz May 15th, 2014 at 13:35
See my response to Mea- Mark above. It is lengthy though.
mea_mark May 15th, 2014 at 13:43
Get on topic or at least close or you will banned, much to the delight of some of the readers here.
Obewon May 15th, 2014 at 01:09
The White House Fusion reactor is being tested on the Koch brothers funded TP Patriot Nation coup this Friday. Ride the beamline & watch the tea party sizzle in their coup de grâce at 100 M degrees from 2 atoms squeezed together by lasers. https://lasers.llnl.gov/media/video-gallery/control-room
Oblowz May 15th, 2014 at 08:52
Safe to say Obama won’t be peering out the White House windows watching the show this weekend. When the vets were bringing the barrycades to the WH Marine One whisked him away to a safer place. Personally I hope for a peaceful demonstration. I say less than 100K show up.
mea_mark May 15th, 2014 at 09:10
Do you ever check for facts? http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule
mea_mark May 15th, 2014 at 13:39
I am deleting this because you are going way off topic.
William May 15th, 2014 at 09:15
Marine One whisked him away to a safer place…..
Still bitter huh? Oh well, now that the new site gives previously banished right wing crybabies a fresh start, you are free to share your fantasies with the other trolls.
Bunya May 15th, 2014 at 14:14
“…Marine One whisked him away to a safer place.”
Brings me back to the time they whisked famous chickenhawk coward Dick Cheney away to a safer place so he wouldn’t have to witness the destruction he caused on 9/11.
Obewon May 15th, 2014 at 21:33
Every 4 minutes, another American home or business went solar in 2013. 15 families or businesses going solar every hour in the USA will likely exceed the dozens of Friday Koch oil & coal bros funded ‘Patriot Nation’ protesters during their time outside the White House. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/12/131226-utilities-dispute-net-metering-for-solar/
Solar Homes are more valuable and sell faster too. https://worldwildlife.org/blogs/wwf-climate-blog/posts/every-four-minutes-another-american-home-or-business-goes-solar But if there’s a coal slurry near your home? Toxic heavy metals with Arsenic have poisoned you and any long gone market-rate buyers.
Chinese Democracy May 15th, 2014 at 13:47
its about time
Chinese Democracy May 15th, 2014 at 13:47
its about time
Bunya May 15th, 2014 at 14:31
Of COURSE Reagan took down the panels that Jimmy Carter put up, but not because he thought they were a bad idea. Nope, Reagan did it because he had to prove how manly someone who starred in such blockbuster movies such as “Bonzo Goes to College” can be. And what better way for a demented old geezer to prove his manhood by removing solar panels from the roof! Lord knows he certainly wan’t presidential material.
Bunya May 15th, 2014 at 14:31
Of COURSE Reagan took down the panels that Jimmy Carter put up, but not because he thought they were a bad idea. Nope, Reagan did it because he had to prove how manly someone who starred in such blockbuster movies such as “Bonzo Goes to College” can be. And what better way for a demented old geezer to prove his manhood by removing solar panels from the roof! Lord knows he certainly wan’t presidential material.