I thought something seemed off with those numbers! A "solar panel" in their calculation is a 2.1 kw solar system. It would be composed for example of 28 75watt solar panels.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2320
They're also assuming 24 hour insolation. Something like 5 hours per day is a more typical average. If a 75 watt panel was all it took to power a car, we'd all be driving around Jetson's style in our solar cars. So in order to replace the energy in our current petroleum usage, I get that we would need 67 billion 75 watt solar panels. That might be a bit harder to achieve. At $400 each that would be, $27 trillion dollars in solar panels (Just over double the US GDP.)
That cubic mile of oil has 26.2 billion barrels. At $130 per barrel that's 3.4 trillion dollars per year.
I've got a feeling solar isn't going to be the best solution to our oil problem.
PeakOil is You
Coolest oil equivalency graphic you'll see all week...
Re: Coolest oil equivalency graphic you'll see all week...
by smallpoxgirl » Wed 04 Jun 2008, 23:44:48
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
-
smallpoxgirl - Expert
- Posts: 7258
- Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Re: Coolest oil equivalency graphic you'll see all week...
by MD » Thu 05 Jun 2008, 05:39:17
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '.')..
I've got a feeling solar isn't going to be the best solution to our oil problem.
I've got a feeling solar isn't going to be the best solution to our oil problem.
Silicon solar may well be the best solution we have.
Yes I know the energy return isn't so great, but from an entirely pragmatic perspective, I'd rather see us pour fossil fuels into solar production than into trips to Disney World.
We are going to burn the stuff anyway, so I'd rather see it go into anything that provides residual energy for a long time.
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.
Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
-
MD - COB
- Posts: 4953
- Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: On the ball
Re: Coolest oil equivalency graphic you'll see all week...
by DavidFolks » Thu 05 Jun 2008, 07:26:54
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'I') thought something seemed off with those numbers! A "solar panel" in their calculation is a 2.1 kw solar system. It would be composed for example of 28 75watt solar panels.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2320
They're also assuming 24 hour insolation. Something like 5 hours per day is a more typical average. If a 75 watt panel was all it took to power a car, we'd all be driving around Jetson's style in our solar cars. So in order to replace the energy in our current petroleum usage, I get that we would need 67 billion 75 watt solar panels. That might be a bit harder to achieve. At $400 each that would be, $27 trillion dollars in solar panels (Just over double the US GDP.)
That cubic mile of oil has 26.2 billion barrels. At $130 per barrel that's 3.4 trillion dollars per year.
I've got a feeling solar isn't going to be the best solution to our oil problem.
Sooo.... (he says as he taps on the calculator)
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2320
They're also assuming 24 hour insolation. Something like 5 hours per day is a more typical average. If a 75 watt panel was all it took to power a car, we'd all be driving around Jetson's style in our solar cars. So in order to replace the energy in our current petroleum usage, I get that we would need 67 billion 75 watt solar panels. That might be a bit harder to achieve. At $400 each that would be, $27 trillion dollars in solar panels (Just over double the US GDP.)
That cubic mile of oil has 26.2 billion barrels. At $130 per barrel that's 3.4 trillion dollars per year.
I've got a feeling solar isn't going to be the best solution to our oil problem.
$27 trillion divided by a life expectancy of 20 years is $ 1.3 trillion a year....
Hey! That's only a little more than a third of the (current) price of the oil we'd consume!!!! That assumes no growth, or price increases of course.
Way cool.
If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research. ~A. Einstein
TANSTAAFL ~R.A.H.
The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The next best time is today. ~Chinese proverb
TANSTAAFL ~R.A.H.
The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The next best time is today. ~Chinese proverb
-
DavidFolks - Expert
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Mon 19 Mar 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Coolest oil equivalency graphic you'll see all week...
by smallpoxgirl » Thu 05 Jun 2008, 09:10:47
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DavidFolks', '$')27 trillion divided by a life expectancy of 20 years is $ 1.3 trillion a year....
Hey! That's only a little more than a third of the (current) price of the oil we'd consume!!!! That assumes no growth, or price increases of course.
Way cool.
Hey! That's only a little more than a third of the (current) price of the oil we'd consume!!!! That assumes no growth, or price increases of course.
Way cool.
Yeah. If we had it that'd be right. But we don't got it. What we got is $130 oil and no solar. We got people selling their blood to buy gas. You going to be the one to convince them to sell another pint for solar panels because it'll save them money 10 years from now?
Also bear in mind that is more or less the cost of the panels. It doesn't bring into account the rest of the system (wiring, mounting hardware, etc) or installation costs. It also doesn't take into account all the costs of expanding the photovoltaic industry by ten million fold or whatever. Theres the issue of the availability of things like rare earth metals for semi-conductor dopants. I understand it current production of solar panels is usually done with scrap silicon crystals from the semiconductor industry. If you were going to start producing them in the billions, you'd have to grow crystals specifically for it which could be quite expensive.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
-
smallpoxgirl - Expert
- Posts: 7258
- Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Re: Coolest oil equivalency graphic you'll see all week...
by DavidFolks » Thu 05 Jun 2008, 11:30:17
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '
')Yeah. If we had it that'd be right. But we don't got it. What we got is $130 oil and no solar. We got people selling their blood to buy gas. You going to be the one to convince them to sell another pint for solar panels because it'll save them money 10 years from now?
Also bear in mind that is more or less the cost of the panels. It doesn't bring into account the rest of the system (wiring, mounting hardware, etc) or installation costs. It also doesn't take into account all the costs of expanding the photovoltaic industry by ten million fold or whatever. Theres the issue of the availability of things like rare earth metals for semi-conductor dopants. I understand it current production of solar panels is usually done with scrap silicon crystals from the semiconductor industry. If you were going to start producing them in the billions, you'd have to grow crystals specifically for it which could be quite expensive.
')Yeah. If we had it that'd be right. But we don't got it. What we got is $130 oil and no solar. We got people selling their blood to buy gas. You going to be the one to convince them to sell another pint for solar panels because it'll save them money 10 years from now?
Also bear in mind that is more or less the cost of the panels. It doesn't bring into account the rest of the system (wiring, mounting hardware, etc) or installation costs. It also doesn't take into account all the costs of expanding the photovoltaic industry by ten million fold or whatever. Theres the issue of the availability of things like rare earth metals for semi-conductor dopants. I understand it current production of solar panels is usually done with scrap silicon crystals from the semiconductor industry. If you were going to start producing them in the billions, you'd have to grow crystals specifically for it which could be quite expensive.
Picks up the phone....
Hello, Mr. Banker?
I've convinced 5% of the population that solar would be a good thing, and I need to ramp up production of solar cells and other infrastructure requirements to fill orders.
How much do I have in orders? Well, I'm only supplying 5% of the possible market, so it only comes to $ 1.35 trillion.
What? Yes, trillion, with a "t".
Sure I can come by and pick up a cheque.
Dials the next number on the list....
Hello Governor?
I want to beef up production of solar cells, and need a place to work, access to materials and work force.
How many people will I be employing?
On the close order of 2 million.
Sure I can come by and show you where I want the rail spur to go.
Hi, Ms. President?
I'd like to talk to you about endorsing a national energy program that offers incentives to people to upgrade their homes to renewables, and mandates the inclusion of solar panels to all new construction.
Yes, I understand that there is an up-front cost involved, but it would be better for the interests of national security and independence to be a net energy producer.
Sure, I'd be happy to come by and discuss the idea in detail.
You might be pleased to know that this kind of program is going to create jobs, and help transition the economy to a more stable basis.
If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research. ~A. Einstein
TANSTAAFL ~R.A.H.
The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The next best time is today. ~Chinese proverb
TANSTAAFL ~R.A.H.
The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The next best time is today. ~Chinese proverb
-
DavidFolks - Expert
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Mon 19 Mar 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: Ontario, Canada
