Comment Re:Eh.... (Score 1) 241
Where's your enterprise data now?
dragging down the Windows brand with them.
Heh - Windows is already a terrible OS, needs no help from others: only continues to survive, where its already entrenched.
If this idea takes hold, can we please see a decent touch-screen e-ink reader out there too? Something akin to the iPad's functionality, but with an e-ink screen...
One more critical point - all of this math assumes current levels of energy consumption. They do NOT factor in the huge spike in consumption that'll occur when vehicles and environmental/housing systems are powered solely by electricity alone. If we even start trying to GUESS at those resulting power requirements, and that shoves solar so far out of the picture, our grandchildren will mock our consideration of it...
Intresting link about new tech, but it was established by an earlier poster that we can't consider the "theory" stuff...so let's put aside that unproven technology for a moment and look at what the Real World can actually do Today.
Under perfect conditions the Earth receives no more than 1 kW/sq-meter.
This means that my 1kW/sq-meter reference is not limited by our technological level. This means that if solar panels were 100% efficient, and operated under perfect conditions, then the maximum that anyone can hope to draw is 1kW per square meter of solar collectors...period.
Perfect conditions would effectively be high-noon on a clear day. At any other time in the day, the Sun’s rays are perpendicular to the ground. The actual amount decreases as the angle of the Sun’s rays vary from perpendicular. Any cloud cover is going to further reduce the amount of energy that is hitting the surface of the planet.
On a typical "perfect" day, one could hope to collect maybe 5kW of power per square meter. Throw in clouds, rain and other typical factors (such as panel cleaniness & existing peak 20% panel efficency levels), and now we're dropping averages to somewhere well under 1W per square meter per day over the course of a typical year.
So, you're right, using current and emerging technolgies (none of which have been proven to consistently exceed ~20% efficency), if we were able to cover somewhere around 20-30% of the direct-sun-facing surfaces of New York with solar panels, then current energy needs would be met. Let's put that into perspective: less than 1% of New York's current direct-sun-facing surfaces are covered by roads/asphalt. Multiply that coverage by 20 or 30; covering 20-30% of the state, and you can now visualize what solar panels would mean as a primary energy source.
I've said it once, so I'll repeat & clarify again, as a general or broadly-utilized energy source solar is a joke; solar has its purpose in specific and local/regional use-cases only.
Geothermal (damn, forgot that one earlier), wind & nuclear are where the math starts to yield more realistic options.
What this country needs is a good five cent nickel.