Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on August 30, 2016
New Solar Cell is More Efficient, Costs Less
The cost of solar power is beginning to reach price parity with cheaper fossil fuel-based electricity in many parts of the world, yet the clean energy source still accounts for just slightly more than 1 percent of the world’s electricity mix.
Exposed in step-like formation, layers of new photovoltaic cell harvest more of sun’s energy.
By MIT News Office
Solar, or photovoltaic (PV), cells, which convert sunlight into electrical energy, have a large role to play in boosting solar power generation globally, but researchers still face limitations to scaling up this technology. For example, developing very high-efficiency solar cells that can convert a significant amount of sunlight into usable electrical energy at very low costs remains a significant challenge.
A team of researchers from MIT and the Masdar Institute of Science and Technology may have found a way around this seemingly intractable tradeoff between efficiency and cost. The team has developed a new solar cell that combines two different layers of sunlight-absorbing material to harvest a broader range of the sun’s energy. The researchers call the device a “step cell,” because the two layers are arranged in a stepwise fashion, with the lower layer jutting out beneath the upper layer, in order to expose both layers to incoming sunlight. Such layered, or “multijunction,” solar cells are typically expensive to manufacture, but the researchers also used a novel, low-cost manufacturing process for their step cell.
The team’s step-cell concept can reach theoretical efficiencies above 40 percent and estimated practical efficiencies of 35 percent, prompting the team’s principal investigators — Masdar Institute’s Ammar Nayfeh, associate professor of electrical engineering and computer science, and MIT’s Eugene Fitzgerald, the Merton C. Flemings-SMA Professor of Materials Science and Engineering — to plan a startup company to commercialize the promising solar cell.
Fitzgerald, who has launched several startups, including AmberWave Systems Corporation, Paradigm Research LLC, and 4Power LLC, thinks the step cells might be ready for the PV market within the next year or two.
The team presented its initial proof-of-concept step cell in June at the 43rd IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference in Portland, Oregon. The researchers have also reported their findings at the 40th and 42nd annual conferences, and in the Journal of Applied Physics and IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics.
Beyond silicon
Traditional silicon crystalline solar cells, which have been touted as the industry’s gold standard in terms of efficiency for over a decade, are relatively cheap to manufacture, but they are not very efficient at converting sunlight into electricity. On average, solar panels made from silicon-based solar cells convert between 15 and 20 percent of the sun’s energy into usable electricity.
Silicon’s low sunlight-to-electrical energy efficiency is partially due to a property known as its bandgap, which prevents the semiconductor from efficiently converting higher-energy photons, such as those emitted by blue, green, and yellow light waves, into electrical energy. Instead, only the lower-energy photons, such as those emitted by the longer red light waves, are efficiently converted into electricity.
To harness more of the sun’s higher-energy photons, scientists have explored different semiconductor materials, such as gallium arsenide and gallium phosphide. While these semiconductors have reached higher efficiencies than silicon, the highest-efficiency solar cells have been made by layering different semiconductor materials on top of each other and fine-tuning them so that each can absorb a different slice of the electromagnetic spectrum.
These layered solar cells can reach theoretical efficiencies upward of 50 percent, but their very high manufacturing costs have relegated their use to niche applications, such as on satellites, where high costs are less important than low weight and high efficiency.
The Masdar Institute-MIT step cell, in contrast, can be manufactured at a fraction of the cost because a key component is fabricated on a substrate that can be reused. The device may thus help boost commercial applications of high-efficiency, multijunction solar cells at the industrial level.
Steps to success
The step cell is made by layering a gallium arsenide phosphide-based solar cell, consisting of a semiconductor material that absorbs and efficiently converts higher-energy photons, on a low-cost silicon solar cell.
The silicon layer is exposed, appearing like a bottom step. This intentional step design allows the top gallium arsenide phosphide (GaAsP) layer to absorb the high-energy photons (from blue, green, and yellow light) leaving the bottom silicon layer free to absorb lower-energy photons (from red light) not only transmitted through top layers but also from the entire visible light spectrum.
“We realized that when the top gallium arsenide phosphide layer completely covered the bottom silicon layer, the lower-energy photons were absorbed by the silicon germanium — the substrate on which the gallium arsenide phosphide is grown — and thus the solar cell had a much lower efficiency,” explains Sabina Abdul Hadi, a PhD student at Masdar Institute whose doctoral dissertation provided the foundational research for the step-cell. “By etching away the top layer and exposing some of the silicon layer, we were able to increase the efficiency considerably.”
Working under Nayfeh’s supervision, Abdul Hadi conducted simulations based on experimental results to determine the optimal levels and geometrical configuration of the GaAsP layer on silicon to yield the highest efficiencies. Her findings resulted in the team’s initial proof-of-concept solar cell. Abdul Hadi will continue supporting the step cell’s technological development as a post-doctoral researcher at Masdar Institute.
On the MIT side, the team developed the GaAsP, which they did by growing the semiconductor alloy on a substrate made of silicon germanium (SiGe).
“Gallium arsenide phosphide cannot be grown directly on silicon, because its crystal lattices differ considerably from silicon’s, so the silicon crystals become degraded. That’s why we grew the gallium arsenide phosphide on the silicon germanium — it provides a more stable base,” explains Nayfeh.
The problem with the silicon germanium under the GaAsP layer is that SiGe absorbs the lower-energy light waves before it reaches the bottom silicon layer, and SiGe does not convert these low-energy light waves into current.
“To get around the optical problem posed by the silicon germanium, we developed the idea of the step cell, which allows us to leverage the different energy absorption bands of gallium arsenide phosphate and silicon,” says Nayfeh.
The step cell concept led to an improved cell in which the SiGe template is removed and re-used, creating a solar cell in which GaAsP cell tiles are directly on top of a silicon cell. The step-cell allows for SiGe reuse since the GaAsP cell tiles can be under-cut during the transfer process. Explaining the future low-cost fabrication process, Fitzgerald says: “We grew the gallium arsenide phosphide on top of the silicon germanium, patterned it in the optimized geometric configuration, and bonded it to a silicon cell. Then we etched through the patterned channels and lifted off the silicon germanium alloys on silicon. What remains then, is a high-efficiency tandem solar cell and a silicon germanium template, ready to be reused.”
Because the tandem cell is bonded together, rather than created as a monolithic solar cell (where all layers are grown onto a single substrate), the SiGe can be removed and reused repeatedly, which significantly reduces the manufacturing costs.
“Adding that one layer of the gallium arsenide phosphide can really boost efficiency of the solar cell but because of the unique ability to etch away the silicon germanium and reuse it, the cost is kept low because you can amortize that silicon germanium cost over the course of manufacturing many cells,” Fitzgerald adds.
Filling a market gap
Fitzgerald believes the step cell fits well in the existing gap of the solar PV market, between the super high-efficiency and low-efficiency industrial applications. And as volume increases in this market gap, the manufacturing costs should be driven down even further over time.
This project began as one of nine Masdar Institute-MIT Flagship Research Projects, which are high-potential projects involving faculty and students from both universities. The MIT and Masdar Institute Cooperative Program helped launch the Masdar Institute in 2007. Research collaborations between the two institutes address global energy and sustainability issues, and seek to develop research and development capabilities in Abu Dhabi.
“This research project highlights the valuable role that research and international collaboration plays in developing a commercially-relevant technology-based innovation, and it is a perfect demonstration of how a research idea can transform into an entrepreneurial reality,” says Nayfeh.
72 Comments on "New Solar Cell is More Efficient, Costs Less"
Cloggie on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:01 am
IT and PV solar are related technologies. Between the sixties…
http://static.flickr.com/133/319387608_2707e06100.jpg
…and now, half a century later…
http://www.differencebtw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Processor-and-Microprocessor.png
the technological progress has been immense.
Give Solar PV a few decades more and a similar progress can be expected. No, not so much in performance, not much gain is to be expected there, but instead in optimizing production technologies, which will further increase EROEI value, with the sky being the limit, pun intended.
I am sorry to have to break it to all the collapseniks, but a solar economy (PV + wind + passive + biofuel) is very well possible. In the long run there is no energy problem at all. All it takes is an area like Spain covered with panels to replace the current fossil fuel consumption (leaving a “little” storage problem to solve). That is admittedly a daunting task, but on a possitive note, we have 7 billion and counting to get the relatively simple installation job done, much simpler than building a power station. Cheap solar panels, most of them produced in China with factories produced in the West, are also the promise for the third world, where sun is abundant, to power their screens, tablets, lights, fridges, e-bike batteries.
Peak oil: yawn.
brough on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:05 am
All we need now is reliable sources of gallium and germanium and we’re ready to rock’n’roll.
Cloggie on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:16 am
Spain is 500,000 km2
World population 8 billion
That is 62 m2 installation effort per capita in an solar economic lifetime of 30 years.
That is a fraction of the total economic output of an adult person during an average 40-50 years working time.
Hello on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:18 am
So them cornies are right after all. The oil age ain’t ending cus of lack of oil.
Who would have thought? Certainly not me.
Cloggie on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:19 am
@brough
Oldskool thinking.
http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.nl/2014/11/renewable-energy-does-it-need.html
Cloggie on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:20 am
@Hello
I am talking solely about producing kwh, not about producing billions of cars.
Hello on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:34 am
Clog.
Yes. The car centric life might come to an end. But with sufficient energy available, doom doesn’t look nigh.
The wild card is the high tech. Will it be possible to maintain a high tech infrastructure with a significantly changed BAU? Will see.
Certainly even an ape from africa can install some solar panels (as long as it comes with easy instructions and no assembly required and some westener donated it and no muslim is nearbey destroying it), but can they continue to be engineered, manufactured etc?
Davy on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:56 am
“PV + wind + passive + biofuel is very well possible.” Is this possible with 7BIL-9BIL people? If it is but with half that population how are you going to dispose of all the bodies? Surely you don’t think this is possible with so many people. Think about the physics and that many people. If we had 1BIL people and a complex society now I would agree with that bold and reckless statement.
People that think this way are in denial of the other problems that PV+WIND+PASSIVE+BIOFUELS cannot solve. These alternatives are a vital tool in a collapsenik’s tool box but they are in no way a solution. It is the techno green engineering folks that are as delusional as the status quo capitalist. I will not say much against the green techno’s though because they serve a purpose. We can and should be investing in alternatives while we can. When I say something against them it is in regards to the damage these people do to the truth. They are living in denial and delusion and in this respect they are leading people into the dangerous habit of finding hopium when there is no hope. There is no hope for the status quo.
Hello on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:07 am
Davy
Nothing is sustainable. Even the sun will be gone eventually.
So let me ask, when do you consider a lifestyle sustainable? If it can be sustained for 5 years? 50? 500? 5000?
Would you rather live a life of hardship for 100 years, or rather a life of excess and comfort for 50 years?
Cloggie on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:15 am
Davy, I have been staring for half an hour at your post, but I can’t discern any serious argument, other than abstract use of words like “denial”, “delusional” and “hopium”.
Please explain to me in techie terms why a solar economy is impossible?
Has your EV arrived already?
Davy on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:27 am
Hello, let me ask you this what are you living for? That reason you are living must be sustainable or if not then if you had the guts you would mouth a gun. If you want to be clever then get a grip on sustainability and not talking about the last sunset. If we want to go a step further than it is about the basics of natural law and what allowed humans to survive for thousands of years. It is not what the Anthropocene has become which is a destabilized climate and destroyed ecosystem with a dominant species in overshoot initiating the 6th great extinction.
I want to live according to what my values are. That is my personal private choice. I want to protect and support my love ones in the face of a collapsing world. I want to live close to nature in a localized world because that is what has worked most of the human experience. Hardship and comfort are relative in this equation. Most of all I want to be honest and get closer to the truth. In the end a large brained animal for some reasons seems to want to find the truth. It is that effort that is the problem because most of us get lost on the way. Multiply that by billions and you have a mess.
Davy on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:36 am
Clog if you can’t find any serious argument then you are hopeless. Did I not say you were useful? That means I am finding some meaning with your point of view. You need to look around you and without the rose colored glasses. The reason a solar economy is not possible is physics and scale. The physics are the realities of economics and an energy budget. Limits and diminishing returns at the macro systematic level come into play. We can’t afford it basically and the scale involves the “too many” people depending on an already destroyed ecosystem and destabilized climate with depleting vital resources in a systematically growth based civilization. A book could be written on this subject and many have been. Maybe you need to read more of those books and less 20th century history revisions. Your hopium is thinking so much can be done when it can’t. If you were realistic you would see that much can be done. You would find sobriety and humility. You would see we can live to die another day not cavalierly live like kings in a flourishing white civilization.
Hello on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:41 am
Davy,
Thank you. It was an honest question, not mocking you in any way. And I apologize if it came across wrongly.
It is something I struggle myself.
However I’m mostly irritated by the overuse of ‘sustainable’. What is this sustainable? Do I care if something is sustainable far beyond my lifetime? The life of my kids, grandkids? How far down the road should I care?
And what should I care about? Should I aim to make EU/USA sustainable so it can live for 1000 of years? Or should I emrace the fact that every nation/empire goes down the drain eventually, so a little sooner or later does not matter?
And most importantly. My sustainable might be different from your sustainable. Do I have any right to impose my version upon you?
peakyeast on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:56 am
Hello&Cloggie: Under ideal circumstances renewables might have been possible.
What we have is multiple problems – not only energy.
You need to acknowledge that even free energy would not solve:
1. Loss of biodiversity and eradication of all non-industrial lifeforms. – And the problems that arise with collapsed eco-systems.
2. Pollution – as resources get more scarce more energy must be used and more material has to be processed.
3. Population increasing that will mitigate most initiatives immediately.
4. Consumption already way over natures ability to sustain
5. Climate changes that both will cost massive investments in infrastructure, housing, loss of crops – but also accelerate species loss and pollution.
6. A huge “al-mighty” flock of demented warlords all insane enough to make wars just to increase personal profits at the expense of everybody else.
7. The human nature: “Everybody else is to blame for my problems” and btw. god loves me.
8. A huge pile of what i call “crazy” weapons – atomic and biological. And it only takes one dumb fuck to spark it all. Which has been very close already – and that in the BEST of times available to humans EVER.
9. Loss of drinking water and
10. Loss of arable land
And those are just a few…
When you have found a way to solve them in the bad times (which we could not solve in the best of times) – then perhaps I will give us a chance.
Please come with a coherent solution to each and all – a solution that is viable where the powers of society resides now. Not in some ideal fantasy world.
Just look at NIF.. They gave up saving the world and started focusing on mini atomic bombs. I think that is very good example on how things are playing out.
Davy on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 8:07 am
No offense taken Hello. I appreciate honesty and dialogue. These kind of discussions go to the heart of why we live. We should be able to discuss profound issues like this as individuals. It is pretty clear the greater society can’t do that properly. Part of the reason for this is society has grown too large and has hit a brick wall of limits. Groups lose flexibility when faced with adversity. It is easy to get along when everyone is happy and growing. We as individuals across the World Wide Web are left to try to make a difference if for no other reason than for ourselves as individuals talking to each other.
Davy on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 8:07 am
I guess alternatives are immune to this kind of slow down?
“For The First Time Since The Recession, Boeing Won’t Raise Airplane Prices Due To Plunge In Demand”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-30/first-time-recession-boeing-wont-raise-airplane-prices-due-plunge-demand
“As part of the US economic slowdown, many have observed the sharp drop in demand for heavy trucking, coupled with the steep dropoff in train and intermodal traffic. Now, a third major red flag has emerged in the sky, where the slowdown in sales and new orders for airplanes is now so acute that US plane giant, Boeing, announced on Monday it would refrain from increasing jetliner prices for the coming year, the first time it has held prices steady since 2009.”
Hello on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 8:09 am
yeast:
Yes. I acknowledge each one of your points. But it ties in with my previous post about sustainability.
What’s the timeframe? And how much should I care? Every one of your points is tied to ever growing population pressure. As long as this is not solved all others don’t matter, but only delying the inevitable.
Boat on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 8:13 am
Hello,
I don’t worry about things out of my control. I can’t worry about sustainability. However I applaud and support any movement towards sustainability. I vote as green as I can be with my spending.
“And most importantly. My sustainable might be different from your sustainable. Do I have any right to impose my version upon you?”
I vote yes, for example I would love to see the day nations with a low birth rate would sanction trade with those over 2.2. No immigration unless its a trade. etc.etc.etc.
peakyeast on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 8:22 am
I wouldnt care about any of it. Not at all.
Which is why I have a child today. I fully expect him and me and my wife to die from one of above points or a derivative. I made that decision when I reached below conclusion.
My wife absolutely wanted a child and since it is too late by far IMO to do anything about the problems and our governments seems to be of the same opinion then why deny her the happiness and what her nature seems to force her to want?
Davy on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 8:33 am
Hello, time frame is one of those known unknowns. If one is honest and reflects on a broad list of predicaments much like Peaky’s list above than we come to the conclusion the next decade will be one of turmoil. Having a firm time frame is impossible because of so many possibilities. Not only is there so many variables but there are so many ways these variables can combine and reinforce each other.
Personally I live in the surreal of a view we have a very short time of the “normal”. Normal is what we have today. Lights work and food and fuel is available. I can buy what I want and money is still good. The surreal is I know I have no way of knowing the how long. The surreal is deciding to live as though it will not last more than a few years, yet, the normal continues. That is the story of my life since 2003. It has been a story of one extend and pretend after another so to speak. I am happy to survive is the plus of this experience. It has been pleasant to not suffer and die. I will say this though there are limits to extend and pretend. We are running out of time and options for normal. That reality to me is perfectly clear. One need only look at life from the view point of science to see an end game.
Kenz300 on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 9:17 am
Wind and solar power are the future…….the fossil fuel industry is poisoning the planet……….. Climate Change is real and it will impact all of us……..
Scotland blows away the competition – 106% of electricity needs from wind – joins select club
https://electrek.co/2016/08/14/scotland-electricity-needs-from-wind/
3 Sure Signs of Texas’ Emerging Solar Market
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/ugc-content/2016/07/22/3-sure-signs-of-texas-emerging-solar-market.html
Watch The Climate Change Ad Fox News Didn’t Want Its Viewers To See
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/climate-change-ad-fox-news_us_57892a37e4b03fc3ee50c207?section=
dave vthompson on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 10:42 am
Alt fuels such as solar and wind will have to replace what we do with liquid FF to be of any real importance. So far it has not happened.
tahoe1780 on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 11:54 am
Storage – fossil fuels have that built in. Infrastructure – Dave T. right on.
Scott Maxwell on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:30 pm
Now a couple of issues are never discussed about alternative energy. How are they going to build a grid system for there energy?
Everyone forgets that our grid system is mostly privately owned by stockholders in the fossil fuel sector. Everyone objects when they place a roof top solar system on their roof and expect the utility company to pay them for their excess energy.
But how much should they have to pay for the construction, operations, and maintenance of the grid that they own? Most people think that they should get the same rate back that they paid from that utility. But there has to be a cost for using someone else’s lines and grids.
This is often fought by not often reported when we talk about the effects of alternative energy on the country.
One other thing to think about. If we were to nearly stop all fossil fuel use, what would happen to most everything else that requires the use of refined oil? Without energy use, the cost of refining a smaller amount of oil would mean a large rise in the cost of other things we use everyday.
Every plastic bottle, every IV solution bag, and on and on. These things would cost much much more if we were to take gasoline and oil out of the picture.
So when someone talks about the alternative energy, ask them how your life will be effected by the reduction of oil in the world.
ghung on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:47 pm
Scott Maxwell said; “Now a couple of issues are never discussed about alternative energy. How are they going to build a grid system for there energy?”
Gosh, Scott, this has been discussed for years, here and elsewhere. We’ve discussed how various States are requiring feed-in tarrifs, the need for the grid to adapt (private or not), etc.,, and all about what the effects of weaning ourselves from fossil fuels as a primary energy source will be..
I’m pretty sure you won’t like it, but it’s coming for you, Scott. Got a Plan B? Hint: We’re running out of planet to exploit.
Harquebus on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 6:55 pm
http://energyskeptic.com/2016/net-metering-and-the-death-of-us-rooftop-solar/
makati1 on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:02 pm
ghung, you still dream of a future that will not /cannot exist. States can mandate what ever they want including the feeding and care of unicorns, but that does not make it happen. It takes $$$$$ lots of $$$$$ not just a piece of paper saying it must be and most states, along with the federal government, are bankrupt.
ghung on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:16 pm
Go away Mak. I neither claimed nor implied that I ““still dream of a future that will not /cannot exist”. I only explained to Scott that his claim that “a couple of issues are never discussed about alternative energy. How are they going to build a grid system for there energy?” isn’t accurate. Further, if you pay attention to my comments, you should know that I make no claims at all about what future will exist, other than that most folks won’t like it, and that they won’t handle the changes well.
My only claims are that our society is in the early stages of decline/collapse, that the industrial age has shot its wad, and that we have a shitload of assholes that think they know how this will play out; and who come on here and attribute things to others that they never actually said. This is why we’re fucked. Too many of us can’t get the storey straight.
Apneaman on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:22 pm
ghung, you see this one?
Waterloo chemists develop promising cheap, sustainable battery for grid energy storage
”
You are here
Waterloo News » News » 2016 » August »
Waterloo chemists develop promising cheap, sustainable battery for grid energy storage
FRIDAY, AUGUST 26, 2016
Chemists at the University of Waterloo have developed a long-lasting zinc-ion battery that costs half the price of current lithium-ion batteries and could help enable communities to shift away from traditional power plants and into renewable solar and wind energy production.
Professor Linda Nazar and her colleagues from the Faculty of Science at Waterloo made the important discovery, which appears in the journal, Nature Energy.
The battery uses safe, non-flammable, non-toxic materials and a pH-neutral, water-based salt. It consists of a water-based electrolyte, a pillared vanadium oxide positive electrode and an inexpensive metallic zinc negative electrode. The battery generates electricity through a reversible process called intercalation, where positively-charged zinc ions are oxidized from the zinc metal negative electrode, travel through the electrolyte and insert between the layers of vanadium oxide nanosheets in the positive electrode. This drives the flow of electrons in the external circuit, creating an electrical current. The reverse process occurs on charge.
The cell represents the first demonstration of zinc ion intercalation in a solid state material that satisfies four vital criteria: high reversibility, rate and capacity and no zinc dendrite formation. It provides more than 1,000 cycles with 80 per cent capacity retention and an estimated energy density of 450 watt-hours per litre. Lithium-ion batteries also operate by intercalation—of lithium ions—but they typically use expensive, flammable, organic electrolytes.”
More
https://uwaterloo.ca/news/news/waterloo-chemists-develop-promising-cheap-sustainable
Not my area and given how we live in a world of 24/7 hype, maybe you and other (non techno utopians) with real world knowledge and experience could weigh in.
ghung on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:30 pm
Thanks, Ap. Looks interesting, except the specs don’t look any better than lead-acid batteries, some of which get over 2000 cycles.
Then there are “Edison” batteries (NiFe) that get 10,000 cycles or more. Their loss rate is a bit higher than lead-acid batteries, but in a grid storage environment, I don’t see that as being a problem. That’s likely where my next battery dollars will go.
makati1 on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:47 pm
ghung, maybe you should write more clearly? I see a negative in your comment. Do you?
ghung on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:50 pm
….sigh…. Which comment, Mak?
makati1 on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 7:52 pm
BTW ghung, I am not going anywhere. Some on here do not know how to write in understandable English. And, I doubt that some even proof read their post before they push the submit button to see if it makes sense. But, then, if you are an American, that may be beyond your ability.
ghung on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 8:02 pm
My posts make perfect sense to me, Mak. It’s not my problem if your filters are biased.
You still haven’t explained the ‘negative in my comment’ or how it is in any way relevant. I doubt you can, honestly. I think you’re just trying to pick a fight, even if you have to conjure one. I’d rather watch a movie and sort cucumbers.
Bored much?
Sissyfuss on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 8:41 pm
Davy says Clogged synapses through realism could perhaps find humility. Never sawi the D-man smoke from the hopium bong so intensely. Hope he comes down by Friday.
speculawyer on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 9:20 pm
Solar PV Panels are ridiculously cheap as is.
Now it is time to reduce the cost of inverters and installation.
makati1 on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 9:29 pm
ghung, even the jabbering of idiots makes sense to them, but that does not mean that others understand it.
I have no reason to pick a fight. I just replied to your comment as I understood it. Perhaps you should think about how others will understand what you wrote before you hit submit.
We ALL have ‘filters’. It’s called experience and viewpoint. If you look carefully, you will see them in everyone who posts here. That is why it is an interesting site.
I’ll ignore your comments if you like. No problem.
makati1 on Tue, 30th Aug 2016 9:33 pm
speculawyer, keep in mind that you get always what you pay for. Cheaper is not always better or even equal in today’s market.
Was a time, before planned obsolescence, that refrigerators and TVs were easily repairable and lasted 30+ years with little or no maintenance…
Davy on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 5:35 am
Sis, Clog is a smart guy I wish he would see through racism. I don’t care society thinks it is wrong. It does not add up for me.
JuanP on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 7:18 am
Hello “Every one of your points is tied to ever growing population pressure. As long as this is not solved all others don’t matter, but only delying the inevitable.”
I completely agree! All our problems are aggravated by our numbers and until we face that the situation is hopeless. Unfortunately, breeding unsustainably is part of our evolutionary conditioning and that will not change. As the people who realize this stop breeding like I did there will be less and less of us. Every human generation has a lower percentage of people capable of understanding these issues. We are devolving and have been for quite a few generations already. Human intelligence peaked a long time before we were born.
Sissyfuss on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 8:37 am
Davy, I think Clog is overeducated to a fault and quite supercilious also. Oops, sorry. Channeled the Clogenfreund for a second. Yes, racism is the purest form of ignorance in a lazy mind and a huge blind spot to those who practice it. I have given up trying to change people’s life long views. Life is to short.
Sissyfuss on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 8:39 am
Too, dammit, too. Curse you spell check all to hell. I stab at your cold digital heart!
Cloggie on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 9:56 am
“Yes, racism is the purest form of ignorance in a lazy mind and a huge blind spot to those who practice it”
Once you realize that most of the wars in history are between differing tribes, one should become a little more cautious with embracing potential enemy combatants on your soil.
But Americans have little interest in history (some would call that ignorance) other than as a sort of American product placement: the entire history as one big crescendo towards American exceptionalism. “We are not racists. Our business is to crush these racists and add them to our empire. We love everybody without distinction”. That’s the kind of thinking prevalent in Washington. Meanwhile the achieving part of the US population has different thoughts on the matter and hates the way the country has developed. There is probably no country with more rampant racism than the US, mostly because it is a melting pot (some would say a pressure cooker about to explode due to over-pressure). In the media a fantasy world is created of racial harmony, that has nothing to do with the reality in the US cities.
Davy on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 10:22 am
Clog, you are thinking too highly of American interests. Most of us could give a shit of the intellectual side of racism and or the manifest destiny of American exceptionalism. We have only stumbled into American exceptionalism because of the rest of the world stumbling first into their own dumbass. This is especially true of Europe that invented the idea of dumbasses. Plenty of racism here in the US for normal reasons. I am a bit tired for the ignorant black gangster culture that hypes black lives matter as they kill themselves and whoever. Yet, blacks have reasons to be like this. Part of the blame rests at the steps of a corrupt white culture. I have black friends that are highly educated and successful. I have a friend dating a black guy. I have indulged in some black sugar in my younger days…lol. Clog, Try getting out of your head and reading too much of the same thing. Come over here to the US and travel and meet people before you consider yourself an American expert. Most of what you talk about is from esoteric American intellectual class that the adjective intellectual is being generous of.
PracticalMaina on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 10:32 am
The achieving part of America is racist eh cloggie? Outside of Trump “achieving” a large inheritance and Paula Deen achieving the ability to make delicious fried cholesterol.
Cloggie, there are areas more racist than the US. Its just those places tend to not give the minorities smartphones to record the 1% henchmen beating them.
PracticalMaina on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 10:36 am
BTW I have a solar device that beats the snots out of this ones efficiency, its a solar oven, or….. anything involving solar thermal.
And its cheap as hell, take some ole chip bags, turn em inside out, wash the mylar, get a small piece of glazing, some scrap insulation and your in business.
Cloggie on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 10:38 am
Next Sunday there are regional elections in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern or “MecPom” for short. Situated in East-Germany, with only 2% foreigners, polls suggest that out of the blue the socalled “populist” AfD could get 23%, behind Labour (SPD, 28%) but before Merkel’s CDU (20%). And usually people don’t like to admit that they vote populist. Some think that the AfD could become the largest, just like the FN is already the largest in France and PVV the largest in Holland.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/mecklenburg-vorpommern-umfrage-sieht-afd-vor-cdu-a-1110335.html
Meanwhile the Pegida movement has expanded from Dresden and other East-German cities to the West, including Munich:
https://youtu.be/OAFR-NSROJA
The format is always the same: first speeches on a central aquare, city walk and then return to the square for more speeches.
The difference is that in cities like Munich there are socalled “anti-fascist” counter demonstrators, just watch the city walk in the middle of the video.
The goal of Pegida is Fortress Europe. Eastern Europe is already practicing that. The only “open” route left into Europe is oversees to Italy. The Italians used to send the young male invaders to the North, but these days not even the French are that interested anymore, so they are stuck in Italy, where they don’t want to be. Tough luck. The EU leftist, US-oriented elite is committing political suicide. Poland no longer uses the EU flag. The EU “elite” is ruining half a century of unification work by disconnecting themselves from the population, that has enough of functioning as a free hotel for the rest of the world.
The horror vision of the NWO personel is becoming reality:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVoL5CyXAAAiKRA.jpg:large
Cloggie on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 10:50 am
@Davy – you may not be 1% pursewise, but you are absolutely in the top few % in terms of education and international experience. And you likely frequent with similar people from different backgrounds. But that is absolutely not representative for the “bottom of the barrel”. You are not going to revolt, instead you make sure that you stay away from the wrong areas. But large numbers of people don’t have that option. They will revolt first.
Sissyfuss on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 12:15 pm
Clogenhoffer, we Americans are taught that all men are created equal and I try to live that averment. People that immigrate here adopt our culture after a generation or two because they see the wisdom and rightness in it. We don’t, for the most part, bury ourselves in the malignant teachings of history to substantiate our jaundiced present day view. We as a species need to ramp up the evolutionary process to procure the slightest chance of survival in the near future. And yes Davy, brown sugar is quite the tasty treat!
Cloggie on Wed, 31st Aug 2016 12:52 pm
“Clogenhoffer, we Americans are taught that all men are created equal and I try to live that averment”
Sissy, yes I know and that’s why your country goes down the drain. In reality you have people who are able to put a man on the moon and you have people who build mud huts for a living. America is currently underway from a moonlander to a mud hut country. Please do, if that makes you happy but don’t force us to do the same. Enjoy the ride. Riding downhill with a bicycle is always more fun and easier than going up hill, although the view at the top is usually more interesting than deep in the valley.
Oh btw, you should pay a little more attention to who exactly is doing the teaching in America, would be an eye-opener. Hint: its the same people who taught the Russians also that all people are equal and that (in the Soviet context) class struggle was the way forward to the egalitarian Nirvana. We all know what happened to the USSR, in the end one big Sverdlovsk-East. Watch Tarkovsky’s Stalker movie to get an idea.
Currently America’s cities are not turning into Sverdlovsk-East, but instead into Detroit’s and Baltimore’s and it ain’t pretty either.