Professor Elam

Accounting & Investing Info for San Antonio A & M

about

No Sizzle in Solar

September 1, 2011

Thursday Sept 1, 2011

The third solar energy company in a month has now declared bankruptcy.

I understand that it also takes a great deal of energy to actually manufacture a solar cell, so much that over the life of the cell the net gain in energy saved is questionable.

My opinion has always been that solar would best be used as a boost to water heaters. A line could be run from an existing water heater to a radiator on the roof. Given the temperatures we have had this summer, 100+, I suspect a black radiator could easily maintain a temperature of 110 for the water.

Constructing homes with porches and awnings so that no window received direct sunlight would also save energy in cooling the home. This was standard procedure in homes in the 1890s.

Here is an example of what I am describing. Both the first and second floors are ringed with porches all around the building. The result is that direct sunlight does not hit the windows. And you can sit outside in the shade. Note the French had this figured out in 1700 but now we have abandoned this great idea.

Posted in Texas Oil & Gas

5 responses to “No Sizzle in Solar”

Javier Carvajal

September 1, 2011

The cost of solar energy is to high right now. Many people can not afford this. Then you have HOA’s stating that these panels are eye sores as well. To many things are against solar power. A great idea is to have the solar package installed with the house already. This could be manditory or as an upgrade. This way there is no added cost to the homeowner in the future. Everything is tided into the house payment. The governemnt has without a doubt been expressive on solar power. They have given huge incentives to homeowners as well.

LikeLike

Reply
kaileigh hughes

September 3, 2011

I like the idea of solar energy. However, like you and javier stated, it’s just to costly to make as well as purchase. The neighborhood I live in won’t allow solar panels. I didn’t know the houses used to have awnings and porches over all the windows. They should consider going to back to that. I also like your idea for the water heater. In Texas, with it being so hot most of the year, it would save people a bit of money on their water heater bill.

LikeLike

Reply
Luis Martinez

September 3, 2011

Indeed. My house takes the sun on full force with the 5 pm sunlight hitting my bedroom window at the peak of its heat. I’ve tried to grow bushes in front of the windows, but no success. The current technology can do wonders for water heaters; at best, it can supplement electrical needs in the house, but not significantly. Until the technology improves, solar power is not a viable replacement for the cheaper energy sources we have.

LikeLike

Reply
Travis Case

September 7, 2011

Have you ever noticed the solar panels on top of the School Zone signs to power the lights? I am curious to know how much energy they are taking in and producing. It must be cheaper to use the solar energy for those lights right? Maybe it is possible to use smaller less expensive panels to power other objects in your house like the TV or lights. This would obviously not cut down on your AC bill each month but it would make a dent in your other utilities.

LikeLike

Reply
Dennis Elam

September 7, 2011

I suspect the debate really needs to begin with the actual amount on energy it takes to build a solar panel. My understanding is that it is considerable. Then we would need to construct how long it takes to overcome that deficit of energy to create the solar cell,ie the payback period.
I don’t know if the solar panels are on the lights because it is a great idea or if someone managed to convince the feds to subsidize such lights with solar as an experiment, given that all such lights are govt controlled, I would suggest that is a high possibility.
Solar does not produce a lot of electricity, they work greats on satellites, no cloud cover, light all the time, low energy required.

LikeLike

Reply