Solar Energy

If the Nation had invested $500M in the Energy systems of the National Labs…there would have been
future cost savings…increased employment, and the Dept of Energy could have been a role model..
Instead the nation invested in a loosing option!!!

I agree with SKIP 100 percent. This nation was just beginning to look into alternative energy until Ronald Reagan was elected. Reagan wanted to live in an anachronistic America where women still wore white gloves when they went out in public; and people drove around in sedans of the pre-seatbelt era (they had straps on the inside mounted btween the back seats and the front door to keep the backseat passengers from falling over when cars went around curves in the road).

One of the really big reasons that DOE is not investing in solar energy is that there has been recent talk in the past few years about reviving nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuels and the carbon dioxide emissions they produce. Going back to nuclear power and its potential safety hazards would ensure the survival of the Department of Energy because alternative energy sources don’t produce greenhouse gases or produce still-radioactive spent fuel rods from reactors.

If yes, why?

Yes- because the panels are converting sunlight to other forms of power.

Anything that difuses that light, obstructs it of filters it will reduce the conversion of energy because there is less energy there. This is true of passive systems, active heat systems and PV arrays.

On a cloudy day I only see a temperature rise in my greenhouse of about 5 degreesF, on a bright sunny day, it can be 70 degrees F inside with the outdoor temps being around 0 degrees F.