View Single Post
Old 12-13-2012, 06:49 PM   #93
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,123

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
We should be using our coal and natural gas while pouring the r&d money into nuclear fusion reactors. We get those babies online and look out it could fuel another era of huge advancement. Solar? sorry but not so much. Anyone who thinks solar is ever going to change the world is kidding themselves. They have poured a ton into it last 10 yrs and basically they aren't signifcantly more effecient yet. If you want the govt to fund something make it something big, that can really change our bottom line.
Wow, just repeating yourself endlessly does not an argument make. That you completely blew off my previous reply to this malarkey is pretty telling.

Of course, no matter what we use to replace dino power (fusion, solar, wind, hydro, whatever), we'll still need a way to STORE that power in order to use it in mobile applications (e.g. cars), which is why we need better batteries! Dino power comes pre-stored in a readily usable form. Nuclear binding energy does not.

btw: You're full of sh*t, as usual. Average commercial solar cell (both major kinds) efficiency has nearly doubled in the last 10 years. If that's not 'significant' what is? It still lags significantly from what we have achieved in the lab, which is why we should keep working on ways to improve what we are currently doing. In the same time, the price has been reduced to a fraction of the cost 10 years ago.

I love that you're such a p***Y that 10 years of work on something and you want to tuck tail and run. Like I said before, if the likes of you were running things we'd still be in the stone age.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote