Green energy on its way; let's turn talk into reality

"But New Mexico has been among the leaders in wind-power use, and in solar-energy development — and our state is host not only to Intel and other high-tech companies, but to some of the best brains in science and technology: Los Alamos and Sandia national laboratories."

Wind-power and solar may not have the HEAT RATE or CAPACITY FACTOR required for practicial electric generation. New Mexico Coal does at about 9,000 BTUs per pound.

Fast Neutron's January 12, 2009 claims may warrant investigation.

"From actual experience, wind farms produce 1.2 watts per square meter. Solar Thermal and Photovoltaic methods capture 5 to 6 watts per square meter. There is no economy of size in either technology. Dividing the watts you need by those values gives the land area in square meters needed to produce the juice. The numbers are astronomical"

http://www.topix.net/forum/source/santa-fe-ne...

Turning "green energy" talk into reality requires the construction of more nuclear power plants.

So far New Mexico is mostly full of hot air. The Politicians have failed here. The Gov and Major try a bit but so far the results are nil. Here with some of the best solar and wind on the continent we have very few practical applications. We need a dozen or more solar thermal plants. It is best if they run up the Rio Grande near the polulation centers. There is plently of land on the the west side of the volcanos outside Albuquerque for a huge plant. And why are there not generous tax credits for purchasing and/or upgrading to solar. New Mexico needs to get really serious if it wants to foster solar R&D here. New Mexico has many natural advantages. We can hook into our Natural Gas resources for backup electric generation to solar and wind. We could even use coal as a backup in some locations if we used the best available technology. And let's not forget about Nuclear. It is safer than ever and could be improved futher. It could anchor the grid against fluctuations common with solar and wind. We even have many hot rock sites. There are many options for no or low CO2 and energy independence. We only lack the political will and 20 Billion dollars.

billp37 wrote:

"But New Mexico has been among the leaders in wind-power use, and in solar-energy development — and our state is host not only to Intel and other high-tech companies, but to some of the best brains in science and technology: Los Alamos and Sandia national laboratories."
Wind-power and solar may not have the HEAT RATE or CAPACITY FACTOR required for practicial electric generation. New Mexico Coal does at about 9,000 BTUs per pound.
Fast Neutron's January 12, 2009 claims may warrant investigation.
"From actual experience, wind farms produce 1.2 watts per square meter. Solar Thermal and Photovoltaic methods capture 5 to 6 watts per square meter. There is no economy of size in either technology. Dividing the watts you need by those values gives the land area in square meters needed to produce the juice. The numbers are astronomical"
http://www.topix.net/forum/source/santa-fe-ne...

Rrrrrriiight. There have been solar thermal plants operating in the Mojave for decades. I guess those plants just weren't economical? And there is a new one under construction that will occupy 9 square miles and power over 400,000 homes. Do the math on that. Seems like a pretty good trade off to me. But it's not economical, right?

Yeah, there are more concentrated BTU's in coal. So that means it's better? Last time I checked (like last week), in business when we want to decide what is our best option we do a cost/benefit analysis. That's great that coal has that benefit, but have you considered the costs? Negative health impacts? How much is that costing the public, costs that don't get charged back to the people reaping the profits from coal? Environmental impacts?

Do the real cost/benefit analysis, then tell me about the wonders of coal vs. solar or wind.

To bad we can't harness the energy created by our politicians hot air-many of my clients are already in the developing and mfging stage on wind turbines and solar roof panels but in other countries,I'm told that by the time you get done jumping through all the hoops and red tape here you will be a third world nation-its really a complex struggle for us political,we are imprisoned by our own liberty-but take heart,we are making progress in one area of green energy(750 billion$)but what it generates is still a mystery?

"Yeah, there are more concentrated BTU's in coal. So that means it's better? Last time I checked (like last week), in business when we want to decide what is our best option we do a cost/benefit analysis. That's great that coal has that benefit, but have you considered the costs? Negative health impacts? How much is that costing the public, costs that don't get charged back to the people reaping the profits from coal? Environmental impacts?"

Oh yes, we have considered negative impacts.

http://www.prosefights.org/pnmelectric/pnmele...

PeterW Santa Fe

Steve Martin PNM load forecaster pointed out the problem.

http://home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/pnmelectric...

Increased new constuction.

What to do about this?

Limit new construction?

cheers

http://www.prosefights.org/nmlegal/vazquez/va...

Nuclear energy will reduce CO2 and provide more power faster than wind or solar.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2012692...

A good read from a wise man on global warming.

Redford and company appears to be sucessful in stopping coal electric generation in Texas.

Perhaps Redford and company should think of efforts to

1 limit new construction
2 reduce home cubic feel heating and cooling requirements
3 stop refrigerated air conditioning installation
4 stop flat screen lcd and plasma tv purchases
5 stop elecric tooth brushes, cell phone, bluetooth,... and other electricty guzzling appliances?

Let's see what Redford and company does.

http://home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/pnmelectric...