Solar Challenge Revs Up On Route 66
from the using-the-sun's-power dept
Roland Piquepaille writes “In this article, Nature tells us about the American Solar Challenge, in which cars are using “Sun’s energy for race along US Route 66.” “The historic US Route 66 is set to host a futuristic convoy. Starting on Sunday, 30 solar-powered cars will hit the road for the American Solar Challenge, the world’s longest Sun-fueled race. The latest solar cars will cover nearly 2,300 miles (3,700 kilometers) from Chicago, Illinois, to Claremont, California.” My writeup contains photographs coming from the ASC Photo Library, but read Nature’s article for more technical details. And if you want to follow the race in real time, please visit the American Solar Challenge website.”
Comments on “Solar Challenge Revs Up On Route 66”
Magnetic Holocaust
We’re still on the topic of reducing greenhouse emissions? It’s been shown that random fluctuations in the sun’s brightness, earth’s orbit, and volcanic activity have a far greater impace on Earth’s climate; all of the above can and have caused catastrophic climate changes before. To add another kicker, because of random changes in the molten iron swirling around underground, our planet’s magnetic field is dramatically weakening; within 100 years, our planet may have either no magnetic field or an inverted one. If the magnetic field disappears, the Van Allen belts will disappear, which will in turn greatly increase solar radiation striking the Earth. Migratory animals will become confused and die en masse, unless the radiation kills them first. But, you won’t hear environmentalists talking about this stuff because then they can’t have their noisy protests in front of Big Bad Corporations.
The religion of our time
It seems every era has a movement, religious or otherwise, that shames people into supporting them. Environmentalists ask us to feel guilty about our modern prosperity, to “preserve” a nature that is itself unstable and self-destructive. We’re supposed to have a special place in our heart for dolphins, even though dolphins are vicious creatures that practice group rape, gang up on larger whales and tear them to shreds. Speaking of whales, they aren’t the world’s largest creatures. There are underground colonies of mold that grow several miles long, and is considered one organism. Mold colonies are really one cell with millions of nuclei.
We’re supposed to preserve the diversity of tropical ecosystems, even though tropical islands routinely undergo complete ecological destruction whenever a large storm washes over them. The lush vegetation associated with Hawaii is almost entirely artificial; before humans arrived, the islands had only about a dozen species of ugly shrubs.
A decade ago, biologists discovered hundreds of dead female harp seals washing up along California’s coast; it turned out to be caused by a (naturally made) hybrid elephant-harp seal whose manhood was too big for the smaller female harp seals. HIV is really the fault of chimpanzees, because they ate smaller monkeys and spawned a mutant virus. 70% of the world’s oxygen comes from microbes in the sea, so there is not much to worry about in cutting trees down. If we are serious about biodiversity, then we should oppose the eradication of polio virus, tapeworms, and prions.
Re: The religion of our time
What do these comments have at all to do with a group of solar powered cars driving across the country?
Re: Re: The religion of our time
So we have this religious pilgrimage called solar powered racing. I suppose it serves its purpose to entertain the environmentalism-hyped masses.
Re: Re: Re: The religion of our time
I looked at the site but I didn’t see anything about environmentalism or greenhouse gasses.
I did see mention of a technological challenge for students. This is an exercise in engineering. A test of excellence.
It’s hard to understand your line of reasoning AC, probably because there is no logic behind it.
Re: Re: Re:2 The religion of our time
What logic is there to solar power? It is unreliable, expensive, and a waste of resources.
Re: Re: Re:3 The religion of our time
I don’t know if that’s true or not, but if that’s the case then it sounds like a perfect pursuit for these engineering students. Maybe their work will help to make it more reliable, less expensive, and less wasteful.
Re: Re: Re:4 The religion of our time
The fact remains that solar cells cannot work at night, and barely works at all on cloudy days. This is really a practice in regression.
Re: Re: Re:5 The religion of our time
Hmm… somebody has a cute little soapbox there.
There are good economic and political reasons besides the environmental ones to develop more efficient sources of energy. For example, wouldn’t you like to reduce your gasoline and electric bills? This sort of research is always interesting, and should be encouraged. Events like this serve to draw attention to the research being done, and should be encouraged as well.
Re: Re: Re:6 The religion of our time
“There are good economic and political reasons besides the environmental ones to develop more efficient sources of energy. For example, wouldn’t you like to reduce your gasoline and electric bills?”
1. The gasoline bills will simply be replaced with solar cell bills.
2. Electric bills will go up because solar cells are less efficient.
“This sort of research is always interesting, and should be encouraged. Events like this serve to draw attention to the research being done, and should be encouraged as well.”
The best answer is to draw attention to research that is productive, not catering to shallow notions of “conservation”.
Re: Re: Re:5 The religion of our time
The fact remains that solar cells cannot work at night, and barely works at all on cloudy days. This is really a practice in regression.
That assumes that it’s not storing any of the energy that the cars build up – something that simply isn’t true.
Re: Re: Re:6 The religion of our time
“That assumes that it’s not storing any of the energy that the cars build up – something that simply isn’t true.”
Solar cells do not store energy. Fuel cells do. Thus, it makes far more sense to just build cars that run on fuel cells, instead of cars that only work during the day.
Re: Re: Re:3 The religion of our time
Glad to see that AC has completely disregarded the fact that almost ALL of our power comes from the SUN originally….
Maybe our current solar power technology isn’t best suited for use in vehicles, but that doesn’t mean it’s a “waste of resources”…
What /isn’t/ a waste of resources?
Re: Re: Re:4 The religion of our time
“Glad to see that AC has completely disregarded the fact that almost ALL of our power comes from the SUN originally….”
If you want to use that argument, then you should be consistent and admit that gasoline is a form of “solar” energy.
“What /isn’t/ a waste of resources?”
There are plenty of sources of energy far more powerful than solar energy, such as nuclear, geothermal, or tide-powered, to name a few. However, petrochemical energy remains the most economical source. The roots of current anti-petrochemical hysteria began with the oil shocks of the 1970s, when Muslim nations refused to sell oil to the West, and Westerners thought that we would run out of oil. Since then, plenty of oil deposits have been discovered all over the world. Additionally, the tar sands of Canada hold the potential to make Canada into another Saudi Arabia, should the technology for economical extraction be discovered. Perhaps engineering students would be better off spending their talents figuring out how to cheaply obtain oil from tar sands.
Re: Re: Re:5 The religion of our time
Short story
Petrol power is not terrible.
SOLAR IS BETTER
&
NUKE IS BETTER
The digression of this post into stupidity is unfortunate.
KameSama
________________________________________________
Long Story
I’ll admit that fossil fuels are a form of “solar” energy. A form of solar energy that locked away several billion tons of noxious and toxic gases that would kill us all if released whole sale back into the atmosphere. Also petrochemicals are not the most economically viable source of power. Nuclear power is the most economically viable(at the moment) it just has health and safety issues that makes it scary to the masses. Harnessing solar power direct from the sun is a lot more efficient than burning fosil fuels. As every reaction that the matter went through there was a subsequent loss of energy to heat. Improvements in the technology could save us the extra steps of refining crude to oil to gasoline or karosine for subsequent burning and heating of water. Also keep in mind the release of sulfur and nitrogen through burning fosil fuels make for some nasty acids when they meet up with water in the atmosphere and then rains down on us all.
Don’t get me wrong I’m not one of those green peace sorts. I personally think that if they put themselves in dangerous situations. IE jet ski in front of tanker they deserve the consequences IE being run over by said tanker and postumously awarded a darwin award.
I’m just lazy is all. Refining stuff is a lot of on going hard work….whereas just throwing a bunch of reliable panels on roof tops and pointing them skyward all over the place is a lot of work in the short term. In the long term it will save lots of cash and work.
The processes surrounding petrochemicals have been improved for several hundred years. But solar power(biomass and panels) are just in their infancy. Give em a chance, it is probable that it will yield better returns than burning fossil fuels.
Sorry to continue with this discussion that is more appropriate for another topic.
I tend to get all emotional and angry when I see ignorance run rampant.
AC your criticizism of exploring Solar Power through Engineering is unfounded and superficial. So muzzle yourself you old basset hound. You are barking up the wrong tree.
I also get the impression that you don’t deal well with reason where it challenges your notions of being right, correct, or whatever. But if you want a professional oppinion seek a phychologist on that matter.
L8R
KameSama
The religion of our time
It seems every era has a movement, religious or otherwise, that shames people into supporting them. Environmentalists ask us to feel guilty about our modern prosperity, to “preserve” a nature that is itself unstable and self-destructive. We’re supposed to have a special place in our heart for dolphins, even though dolphins are vicious creatures that practice group rape, gang up on larger whales and tear them to shreds. Speaking of whales, they aren’t the world’s largest creatures. There are underground colonies of mold that grow several miles long, and is considered one organism. Mold colonies are really one cell with millions of nuclei.
We’re supposed to preserve the diversity of tropical ecosystems, even though tropical islands routinely undergo complete ecological destruction whenever a large storm washes over them. The lush vegetation associated with Hawaii is almost entirely artificial; before humans arrived, the islands had only about a dozen species of ugly shrubs.
A decade ago, biologists discovered hundreds of dead female harp seals washing up along California’s coast; it turned out to be caused by a (naturally made) hybrid elephant-harp seal whose manhood was too big for the smaller female harp seals. HIV is really the fault of chimpanzees, because they ate smaller monkeys and spawned a mutant virus. 70% of the world’s oxygen comes from microbes in the sea, so there is not much to worry about in cutting trees down. If we are serious about biodiversity, then we should oppose the eradication of polio virus, tapeworms, and prions.
Re: The religion of our time
I don’t see the real point of this um may I call it an essay? You seem to switch your argument multiple times, are you supporting industrial development, or are you protesting the eradication of vicious parasites and viruses that have very little value in the ecosystem other than to keep population levels down. You seem to switch from con-environment to con-industrial. What is your purpose, or drive for this essay. The trees of this world support a home for animals from the rain forests of Africa, South America, and South Asia to the deciduous forests of North America and Europe. Without this forests almost all of the worlds animals would be thrust into towns and cities looking for food and shelter. Polio, tapeworms, and prions hinder the development of animal populations and contribute very little to the ecosystem.
*twiddle thumbs*
I hope the cars are faster than the website – yeesh that took ages to load