Alternative energy = the next internet?
 

Lets avoid talking about politics if we can.

Whats the 'next big thing' for the United States? We always seem to come up with some way of reinventing ourselves. Leading a global movement towards alternative energy seems as good an effort as any.

Talk some 'Megatrends' talk to me.

Whats the next big thing?

Holographic Pr0n.

Virtual Reality Pr0n

Are you talking near future? I just dont see alternative energy happening soon. I think maybe a decade or so before we see any real progress on that front.

I'm not so sure. Of course, we will run out of oil someday. Coal, too. But wind and solar may never be able to provide enough of what we need. After all, the sun is only out half the time, and it's not always windy, especially at night.

If the market were to drive the future of energy, I'd put my money on nuclear.

(reset this quote to 1990): Are you talking near future? I just don't see The Internet happening soon. I think maybe a decade or so before we see any real progress on that front.

Now imagine if you had possessed the foresight to invest in The Internet in 1990. If "Going Green" becomes a global movement -- and with the press that Green gets these days, it has the potential -- we'll all feel silly for not investing today.

Dan

I think it will be alternative energy; lotsa money and momentum going that way now.

Right now, it would be easy to loose quite a bit of money in alternative energy. The field is broad, and many start-ups will be left in the dust as a select few will become big players that will dominate the market.

I agree that alt energy will be big, but there are still too many roadblocks in the way to take off right away

the big VC firms are all over alt energy

they will probably make out like bandits again - nothing wrong with that and I'm glad to see them doing it

First Solar's stock looks like a rocket launch

and the battery designer for GM is just about to go public...

also 3-4 solar chip fabs are starting up right now in Oregon

Thats the reason for the post. The VC boys seem to be all over it. I can dump money into GE (who WILL do well, even if the USA has to sell the statue of liberty), but I was frankly fishing for industry knowledge.

Time travel, here one minute, dead the next!

I like the idea of putting generators or large fans at 800 to 1000 feet agl to use the winds aloft to power the generators. Some what surprised tall building don't have them already.

How about, "Turn the lights out when you leave the room"

Conservation is the easiest, cheapest and can be delivered immediately.

Alternative energy sounds right - so companies with a vested interest will have tax and other laws written, and they will invest huge sums and make even more money in return. Will it make a dent in our energy needs or replace any coal or oil?? No.

To be fair you didn't say a successful rocket launch. :D

http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/cha...ck=1&rand=3381

First Solar is a local company as is Xunlight. We have done work for both. Both rely on basically semiconductor technology to apply precious metals to the solar cells. The process is extremely expensive...without govt subsidies, the technology is not cost effective. As it stands now, it would cost nearly $40,000 to install on the average home..... Even if the cost could be reduced by half (highly unlikely), I can't foresee anyone but a relatively small number of wealthy treehuggers paying through the nose for this insignificant form of electricity.

Basically the only substantial way to make large quantities of electricity is to spin large generators. Presently steam is the most cost effective method to drive large generators. Coal and nuclear reactors do this well.

Wind and hydroelectric plants can probably be cost effective, but large scale worldwide affordable power generation is probably best attained by nuclear reactors producing steam to drive large generators.

A few weeks ago on Larry King Live, Bill Clinton said that when the tech bubble burst, investment resources were funneled into housing. He said that now that the housing bubble has busted, resources should be put into alternative energy (and not to prop up housing).

Smart man.

Oh the shear joy of spending other people's money! It must be like an addictive drug!

Shear joy in directing investment opportunities maybe.

I think thats the way they did in the old East Germany and USSR.

All of these alternative energies are propped up by tax dollars. Other people's money going into the pockets of those who lobby and pay off those doing the "directing".

And they pretend to be "Green" to cover these thefts.

One of the big areas for me when I was the Program Manager for Navy and Marine Corp UAS' was improvements in batteries.

Interesting stuff:

http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/wtr_16326,303,p1.html?a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f& a=f

Voh
 

In the future, changes in energy, to power cars and heat homes will all come from a giant vat of this new technology called " Hope." ... Vat O' Hope. (VOH)

Some think it will fail miserably, but they just aren't doing enough to squeeze out their "fair share" of this New miracle energy to add to the Bigger common Vat O' Hope.


Seriously, you cannot change the laws of physics....no matter how much you hope.

Cool stuff.

What happens to a battery's charge when you cryogenically freeze and spin it like crazy?

Just a crazy question I've been thinking about for no reason - good for wires though.

http://www.amsc.com/products/htswire/index.html
EDIT:
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier= AD0911451
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=19016650

har!!

the launch went fine - there HAVE been some orbital dropouts

re fishing for industry info

the internet is the LAST hole I'd fish in

F soloar and some others are likely in valueline's extended ed. -- that is the #1 place to get good surveys on stocks

i would want to spread the risk also -- a mutual fund would be great but mgmt. fees could be out the roof

you might find out what pickens is buying and try to just follow him

yes, unlike the oil industry, the nuke industry, the coal industry

what drivel

Those industries pull gold from politicians just like any other but they don't require subsidies to exist like solar.

of course they are subsidized!

coal - pollutes but doesn't pay the medical costs of its pollution - much less the other costs

nuke - no liability for radiation effects by act of congress; waste storage not paid for

oil - military costs not paid for, env'l damages not paid

only listed 1 or 2 but each industry is riddled with subsidies

I ceded that there are subsidies, the difference is that only solar cannot exist as a profitable enterprise without them.

I see. But one needs a quantitative analysis to determine which conventional sources -- if any -- could survive without THEIR subsidies.

The real issue is whether you focus on the future or not.

is there any doubt that solar is one of the ways to go? the Germans, the Saudis, and seemingly every Asian country + US VC's think it is.

solar includes more than just PV solar of course - our national labs already built a large mirror array using liq. Na as a working fluid
- we can expand building design to use soalr, add on hot water panels and more

gererators

It's scary that you're serious. Of course there is a question. The market will vet the technology better than any government every could. So far the markets say "yea, not so much". So again, yes there is a question.

This is part of the real issue. Too many are thinking "old school" - alternative energy to replace hi volume/hi output (ie use the sun instead of a oil fired power plant). Instead I think the real money will be in *energy efficiency* in all forms of devices and processes coupled with small scale output by alternative sources.

I kinda like where we are now...

http://www.reallifephotos.org/wp-con...8_05/wrong.jpg

guess I am too much of a scientist, eh

Oh please, is there anything you don't claim to be an expert in? Even given that I hope you understand an education in a curriculum does not make your assumptions correct. Many an (actual) expert disagree. "Scientist", what a gloriously vague term.

If a capitalist society like ours can't find a way to make any money from solar (without direct subsidies)then it's far from a foregone conclusion. Hell, they're making money on ethanol after subsidies and only a damn fool would get behind that.

I've never claimed expertise in any subjects except science and law. I am a former university professor and am a professional physiological ecologist. What do you want, a CV?

Markets are not known for looking very far down the road - how many CEO's and analysts have excoriated the quarter by quarter short-sightedness of markets? HINT: P AG is one.

We are indeed lucky that short-sighted people like you are not in charge of our energy policy. It will improve a LOT more in 77 days.

Just science and law, you might not want to pigeon-hole yourself :D

As a business owner I proclaim myself an expert in all things business/market related and thereby I'm correct on this. Sorry for your luck;)

Seriously though, solar conversion is a very old idea, hell it was the friggen 1800's. People have been refining it for 150 years, it's a know quantity.

I'm not saying it can't be improved, but guys like you have been pretty slow with the goods :D

I've been pricing out vacuum solar tubes to build a DIY solar water heater. I am having a tough time making the economics work, even when pricing suspect Chinese-built vacuum tubes. For a 20 tube array, I am getting cost savings of $5/month vs a natural gas fired water heater. This was with output of 2000 BTU/hr and 8 hours of sun. In the summertime, the output would increase dramatically, but then I may be absorbing too much heat and getting little increased cost savings.

I really want to make this work, but I'm not going to spend $1000+ and many man-hours fabrication time if the payback time is in the order of decades. We aren't even talking about the professional evacuated tube units ringing the cash register at $3000-7000.