The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

[c1ue]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

miscellaneous previously posted arguments ignored...response therefore also ignored.

A times article is not data; Furthermore there is quite a bit of debate on whether the effect is real. Well balanced, does not mean correct. This isn't Fox News.

http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1748-9..._2_024001.html

Oh some data! Yes, the New York Times - that hotbed of conservatism, that focal point of red state flat earth denial...

The paper you pointed out specifically notes:

In conclusion, no corroboration of the claim of a causal connection between the changes in ionization and low cloud cover, made in [1, 2], could be found in this investigation. From the distribution of the depth of the dip in solar cycle 22 with geomagnetic latitude (the VRCO) we find that, averaged over the whole Earth, less than 23% of the dip comes from the solar modulation of the cosmic ray intensity, at the 95% confidence level. This implies that, if the dip represents a real correlation, more than 77% of it is caused by a source other than ionization and this source must be correlated with solar activity.

So unless my English is rusty, what I understand is that low cloud cover due to ionization is not highly correlated with solar activity, but that something else is and that something is correlated with solar activity.

Oh ok. That changes everything. Not.

More of the 'AGW consensus':

http://www.climatephysics.com/GlobalWarming/APS.htm

Regarding the National Policy Statement on Climate Change of the APS Council: An Open Letter to the Council of the American Physical Society

As physicists who are familiar with the science issues, and as current and past members of the American Physical Society, we the undersigned urge the Council to revise its current statement* on climate change as follows, so as to more accurately represent the current state of the science:

Greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, accompany human industrial and agricultural activity. While substantial concern has been expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th - 21st century changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today. In addition, there is an extensive scientific literature that examines beneficial effects of increased levels of carbon dioxide for both plants and animals.

Studies of a variety of natural processes, including ocean cycles and solar variability, indicate that they can account for variations in the Earth’s climate on the time scale of decades and centuries. Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate.

The APS supports an objective scientific effort to understand the effects of all processes – natural and human -- on the Earth’s climate and the biosphere’s response to climate change, and promotes technological options for meeting challenges of future climate changes, regardless of cause.

* The statement of the APS Council, adopted on November 18, 2007 is as follows:

“Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.”

— APS News; January 2008 (Volume 17, Number 1)

Harold M. Agnew
Director, Los Alamos National Laboratory (1970 - 1979)
President, General Atomics Corporation (1979 -1984)
White House Science Councilor (1982 -1989)
E.O. Lawrence Award 1966, Enrico Fermi Award 1978, Los Alamos Medal (with H.A. Bethe) 2001
Member National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Fellow APS, AAAS

Moorad Alexanian
Professor of Physics and Physical Oceanography
University of North Carolina Wilmington
Member Mexican Academy of Sciences, American Scientific Affiliation

Robert H. Austin
Professor of Physics
Princeton Universityy
Fellow APS, AAAS; APS Council: 1991-1994, 2007-2010
Member National Academy of Sciences, American Association of Arts and Sciences

Franco Battaglia, PhD
Professor of Chemical Physics and Environmental Chemistry
University of Modena, Italy
APS Life-member

Stuart B. Berger
Research Fellow and Divisional Time-to-Market Manager
Xerox Corporation (retired)

Barry L. Berman
Columbian Professor and Chair
Physics Department
The George Washington University
Fellow APS

Edwin X Berry
Atmospheric Physicist, Climate Physics, LLC
Certified Consulting Meteorologist #180
Member American Meteorological Society

Arie Bodek
George E. Pake Professor of Physics
University of Rochester
Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky Prize in Experimental Particle Physics (APS) 2004
Fellow APS

Timothy D. Calvin
President, Bearfoot Corporation (retired)
Fabricated rubber products for the DOD, shoe and automobile industries
Member ACS

Gregory H. Canavan
Senior Fellow and Scientific Advisor,
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Fellow APS

Roger W. Cohen
Manager, Strategic Planning and Programs
ExxonMobil Corporation (retired)
Otto Schade Prize (Society for Information Display) 2006
Fellow APS

Jerry M. Cuttler
President, Cuttler and Associates, Inc.
Engineering, consulting, and licensing services for the nuclear power industry
President, Canadian Nuclear Society 1995-1996
Fellow Canadian Nuclear Society, Member American Nuclear Society

David H. Douglass
Professor of Physics
University of Rochester
Fellow APS

Albert G. Engelhardt
President and CEO, Enfitek, Inc.
Environmental control and security systems
Senior Life Member IEEE

Jens G. Feder
Professor of Physics of Geological Processes
University of Oslo
Fellow APS

Peter D. Friedman
Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering
University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Member American Geophysical Union, ASME, American Nuclear Society

Ivar Giaever
Institute Professor, School of Engineering and School of Science
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Nobel Prize in Physics 1973
Fellow APS, Member National Academy of Science, National Academy of Engineering

Albert Gold
Associate Dean of Engineering and Applied Sciences (Retired)
Harvard University

Laurence I. Gould
Professor of Physics
University of Hartford
Member Executive Board of the New England Section of the APS
Chairman (2004), New England Section APS

Paul M. Grant
EPRI Science Fellow (retired)
IBM Research Staff Member Emeritus
Senior Life Fellow APS

Howard D. Greyber
University of Pennsylvania (retired)
Formerly Princeton University, LLNL Theory Group, Northeastern University
Member American Astronomical Society, Fellow Royal Astronomical Society

Mike Gruntman
Professor of AstronauticsUniversity of Southern California
Author, Blazing the Trail. The Early History of Spacecraft and Rocketry (AIAA)
Luigi G. Napolitano Book Award (International Academy of Astronautics) 2006
Member American Geophysical Union, Associate Fellow AIAA

William Happer
Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics
Princeton University
Fellow APS, AAAS
Member National Academy of Sciences

Howard C. Hayden
Emeritus Professor of Physics
University of Connecticut
Editor, The Energy Advocate

Jack M. Hollander
Professor Emeritus of Energy and Resources, University of California, Berkeley
Vice-President Emeritus, The Ohio State University
First Head, Energy and Environment Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Fellow APS, AAAS

David B. Holtkamp
Scientific Staff Member, Physics Division
Los Alamos National Laboratory

Andrew Kaldor
Distinguished Scientific Advisor
Manager of Breakthrough Research
ExxonMobil Corporation (retired)
Fellow AAAS, Member ACS

Alexander E. Kaplan
Professor, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
The Johns Hopkins University
Max Born Award (Optical Society of America) 2005
Alexander von Humboldt Award (von Humboldt Foundation) 1996
Fellow OSA

Jonathan Katz
Professor of Physics
Washington University

Robert S. Knox
Professor of Physics Emeritus
University of Rochester
Member APS Council (1985-1988)
Fellow APS

Joseph A. Kunc
Professor, Physics and Astronomy
University of Southern California
Fellow APS

Robert E. Levine
Industrial and Defense Physics and Engineering (retired)
Member ACM, IEEE

Harold W. Lewis
Professor of Physics Emeritus
University of California at Santa Barbara
Chairman, Defense Science Board Panel on Nuclear Winter
Fellow APS, AAAS; Chairman, APS Reactor Safety Study

John D. Lindl
James Clerk Maxwell Prize for Plasma Physics (APS) 2007
Fellow APS, AAAS

Phillip W. Mange
Associate Superintendent, Space Science Division
Scientific Consultant to the Director of Research,
Naval Research Laboratory (retired)

Jim Mitroy
Lecturer in Physics, School of Engineering and Information Technology
Charles Darwin University, Australia

Michael Monce
Professor of Physics, Astronomy, and Geophysics
Connecticut College
Member AAPT, and American Geophysical Union

Rodney W. Nichols
President and CEO, New York Academy of Sciences (1992-2001)
Vice President and Executive Vice President, The Rockefeller University (1970-1990)
Secretary of Defense Medal for Distinguished Meritorious Civilian Service (1970)
Fellow AAAS, New York Academy of Sciences

Frank R. Paolini
Adjunct Professor of Physics
University of Connecticut at Stamford (retired)
Senior Member APS, Member IEEE

Donald Rapp
Chief Technologist, Mechanical and Chemical Systems,
Jet Propulsion Laboratory (retired)Professor of Physics and Environmental Engineering, University of Texas (1973-1979)
Author, “Assessing Climate Change” and “Ice Ages and Interglacials” (Springer-Verlag)
Fellow APS

John E. Rhoads
Professor of Physics
Midwestern State University (retired)
Member SPE

Harry I. Ringermacher
Sr. Research Physicist
General Electric Global Research Center
AIP "History of Physics in Industry" Participant at GE
Sir William Herschel Medal (American Academy of Thermology)
Copper Black Award (American Mensa) 2003 and 2007

Stanley Robertson
Emeritus Professor of Physics
Southwestern Oklahoma State University

Berol Robinson
Principal Scientific Officer
UNESCO (retired)Member AAPT, AAAS, Association des Écologistes Pour le Nucléaire

Nicola Scafetta
Research Scientist, Physics Department, Duke University
Member American Geophysical Union

Thomas P. Sheahen
President/ CEO, Western Technology, Inc. (energy sciences consulting)
Member AAAS; APS Congressional Science Fellowship (1977-78)Author, Introduction to High Temperature Superconductivity (Springer)

Joseph Silverman
Professor Emeritus of Nuclear Engineering,
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
University of Maryland
Fellow APS, ANS

S. Fred Singer
Professor of Environmental Sciences Emeritus
University of Virginia
First Director of the National Weather Satellite Service
Fellow APS, AAAS, American Geophysical Union

Peter Stilbs
Professor of Physical Chemistry
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden
Life Member APS

Szymon Suckewer
Professor of School of Engineering & Applied Sciences
Director of Plasma Science & Technology Program
Princeton University
Fellow APS, OSA

Frank J. Tipler
Professor of Mathematical Physics
Tulane University
Co-author, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford U. Press)

Salvatore Torquato
Professor of Chemistry and the Princeton Center for Theoretical Science,
Materials Institute and Applied & Computational Mathematics
Princeton University
Fellow APS; 2009 APS David Alder Lectureship Award in the Field of Material Physics

Samuel A. Werner
Curators’ Professor Emeritus
The University of Missouri
Guest Researcher, NIST
Fellow APS, AAAS

Bruce J. West
Adjunct Professor of Physics, Duke University
Fellow APS

[Chris Coles]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

I would welcome you to post articles that support the AGW hypothesis. The closer we look at the data which supporters of the AGW hypothesis are using, the easier it may be to blow this AGW thesis out of the water.

For the young kids who may read this, AGW is anthropogenic global warming, which to speak in plain English is man-made global warming. The AGW thesis blames CO2 on the warming of the world.

In a day or two, I will post some of the record or near record cold July mean temperatures now being recorded by the National Weather Service throughout the lower Midwest and the North-east U.S. We also are below normal near here at San Francisco Airport. (The data is just coming in now.) ;)

With all the very greatest of respects, you are not listening. I have recently posted reports that included a Steven Sacur Report from the BBC where he has interviewed a Greenland restaurant owner, (in Northern Greenland), who is nowadays growing vegetables outside, behind the restaurant to feed to his customers. The pity of it is I cannot find a link to the TV version, I seem only to be able to find the written report and the radio version.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...nt/default.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/hardtalk

But when we watched it on TV we could very clearly see that, on the coast of Greenland there was not a smidgen of ice to be seen ANYWHERE IN THE BACKGROUND. The land is solid ROCK, black rock absorbing heat for all it was worth. Within the Arctic Circle, temperatures are rising rapidly. What you are observing, we all are observing, is the result of higher temperatures at the North Pole. That increases the area of higher temperature which in turn increases the diameter of the jet stream. You heat gas, it expands, just like anything else.

We are seeing the same thing here in the UK with wet and cold summers. The jet stream is historically much further North at this time of year, but now it is much further DOWN the globe; all around the globe.

I suppose you will not stop arguing until the melt water laps around your knees.

[c1ue]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Chris,

Greenland was named that because it was warm and green when first landed on by the Vikings - not because glaciers are green.

That there is warming occurring (or not) is really not the debate in this thread.

The issue is whether any changes occurring are due man made CO2, and if so whether massive and dislocating changes in policy are warranted.

[Starving Steve]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

I would welcome you to post articles that support the AGW hypothesis. The closer we look at the data which supporters of the AGW hypothesis are using, the easier it may be to blow this AGW thesis out of the water.

For the young kids who may read this, AGW is anthropogenic global warming, which to speak in plain English is man-made global warming. The AGW thesis blames CO2 on the warming of the world.

In a day or two, I will post some of the record or near record cold July mean temperatures now being recorded by the National Weather Service throughout the lower Midwest and the North-east U.S. We also are below normal near here at San Francisco Airport. (The data is just coming in now.) ;)

From the National Weather Service, the July summary at SF Airport:
mean temperature 62.2F which was 0.6F below normal; record daily low set on the 24th 50F; rainfall was a trace, normal just 0.03 inches. Weather records which still stand at SF Airport: July 105F (>40C) set on July 17th, 1988; July 44F (7C) set on July 29th, 1951.

July on the central coast of California seemed very foggy and very normal. Monterey, down the coast from SF had 25 occurrences of fog and recorded an incredible 0.08 inches of rainfall in the official govn't rain guage due to drizzle from fog during the month.

From the National Weather Service, the July summary at Chicago:
mean temperature 69.4F which was 3.9 degrees F below normal.
Rainfall 1.53 inches which was 1.98 inches below normal.

This was the 7th coldest July on record in Chicago at the official NWS climate station.

From the NWS, July at Minneapolis-St. Paul taken at the airport: mean 70.0F which was 3.2F below normal; precipitation 2.17 inches which was 1.87 inches below the July normal.

From the NWS, July at NYC in Central Park: mean temp 72.7F or 3.8F below normal; 7.11 inches of rainfall recorded which was 2.49 inches above the July normal.

The highest temperature in July was 86F (30C) on July 17th. This was the only time a temperature over 85F was officially recorded. This was the 7th coolest July on record at New York City ( Central Park ).

From the NWS, Cleveland, Ohio: July mean 69.9F or -2.0F compared to the normal mean; precipitation 3.75 inches which was 0.23 above normal for the month of July.

From the NWS, St. Louis, Missouri: July mean 75.6F or -4.6F compared to the norm;
precip. 4.20 inches or 0.30 above normal for July.

The overall story is hot and bone-dry in the West, and cold to near-record cold in the Midwest; cold in the North-east U.S. Hot along the Gulf Coast in the South. Above normal rainfall along the Atlantic and Gulf Coast. This is how the El Nino begins; this is typical. And the winter may be warm and wet in the West, but cold and dry in the East.

The bottom-line is that El Nino is the story in North America and worldwide, not AGW nor climate models.

[GRG55]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Just when we thought it was safe to go back into the Arctic waters...

Ice pockets choking Northern Passage: officials

By Randy Boswell, Canwest News Service
August 1, 2009

Despite predictions from a top U.S. polar institute that the Arctic Ocean’s overall ice cover is headed for another “extreme” meltdown by mid-September, the Environment Canada agency monitoring our northern waters says an unusual combination of factors is making navigation more difficult in the Northwest Passage this year after two straight summers of virtually clear sailing.

In both the wider, deep-water northern corridor and the narrower, shallower southern branches of the passage, the Canadian Ice Service says pockets of more extensive winter freezing and concentrations of thicker, older ice at several key “choke points” are complicating ship travel.

The fabled trans-Arctic sea route, zealously sought by European explorers in centuries past as a shortcut to Asia, is increasingly seen in today’s era of rapidly retreating sea ice as a potential highway to resource riches and Arctic tourist destinations.

A record number of vessels passed through Canada’s Arctic islands last year, and experts have been predicting a steady rise in ship traffic in both the Northwest Passage and the Northern Sea Route, which connects Europe to eastern Asia along Russia’s Arctic coast.

The northern route of the Northwest Passage is called the Parry Channel, a deep, wide and relatively direct path between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans that runs through Canada’s Arctic archipelago between northern Baffin Island in the east and northern Banks Island in the west.

That route connects Lancaster Sound, Barrow Strait, Viscount Melville Sound and, finally, McClure Strait at the western outlet to the northern Beaufort Sea.

The southern branches of the Northwest Passage follow the northern route through Lancaster Sound and Barrow Strait before turning south on either side of Prince of Wales Island, through Peel Sound or McClintock Channel toward mainland Northwest Territories and a coastal route exiting at Amundsen Gulf and the southern Beaufort.

While the northern route offers a potentially faster, shorter path through deeper waters, its ice cover is typically thicker and last longer into the summer.

The southern routes are typically clearer of heavy ice, but shallower waters and the circuitous path present other challenges for ships making trans-Arctic voyages.

“In the southern route,” Canadian Ice Service officials told Canwest News Service, the agency “has observed more ice coverage than normal. This is partly due to the fact that the ice in the Amundsen Gulf consolidated this past winter, which is something it didn’t do in 2007 and 2008.”

In the central part of the passage where the northern and southern routes merge amid narrowings around Prince of Wales Island, the CIS has observed “greater than normal concentrations of thicker, multi-year ice. This is the result of an increased flow of older ice from the Beaufort Sea into the Canadian Arctic archipelago last year.”

The result, the agency said, is that ice conditions “are delaying any potential navigability of the Northwest Passage this year. This is opposite to what Environment Canada observed in the last week of July in 2007 and 2008.”

While Canada’s trans-Arctic sea route remains clogged with ice, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center is predicting another near-record meltdown by the end of this year’s summer thaw.

The unprecedented 2007 shrinkage of polar ice cover to just 4.13 million square kilometres — nearly matched last year when only a 4.52-million-sq.-km. expanse of ice was left by mid-September — has led many forecasters to envision a virtually ice-free Arctic

The Colorado-based NSIDC’s daily tracking of Arctic ice extent shows this year’s melt trending only slightly behind the record-setting 2007 rate.

“During the first half of July, Arctic sea ice extent declined more quickly than in 2008, but not as fast as in 2007,” the Colorado-based NSIDC states in its latest report. “International sea ice researchers expect another low September minimum ice extent, but they do not yet know if it will fall below the 2007 record.”

Scientists believe the ongoing retreat is being driven by several factors, including rising global temperatures associated with human-induced climate change, and the associated breakup and loss of thicker, multi-year year ice that is being replaced only seasonally by a thin layer of winter ice that disappears quickly each summer.

Earlier this summer, scientists with NASA and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration warned that the unprecedented thinning of Arctic sea ice — a phenomenon not always evident in satellite images showing the shrinking area of the polar cap — could soon lead to largely ice-free summers throughout the region.

[GRG55]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

...If we spend this money in the name of AGW abatement and it turns out we're incorrect, it will still serve to lessen pollution and create a more secure food and energy source for the US. In the US the equivalent of 120,000 US homes started providing their own energy with solar in 2008. This year it will be closer to 200,000. It will be a million homes a year in the US within a very few years...

AGW or no-AGW, here's a really interesting product. Starving Steve may be sceptical [next post ;)] but in the words of Neil Diamond, immortalized by the Monkees "...now I'm a believer, not a trace of doubt in my mind..."

Seriously, think about the amount of bloody roof area in homes on the continent and this could make a hell of dent in the requirement to build more power plants. I'd look at using something like this on my home over a conventional solar array or circulated fluid system [which I think look awful].

I spent two months, earlier this year, shingling the bunker and barn, and even at my northern latitude and moderate temperatures it didn't take much solar exposure to generate a lot of heat off that roof and make the work uncomfortable by mid-day. While I was up there banging nails, I kept thinking of ways to capture and use that heat without making the bunker look like hell and annoying the neighbours. This is a far more elegant solution than anything that I was cogitating about...

Dow sees huge market in solar shingles

Mon Oct 5, 2009 8:57pm EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Dow Chemical Co said on Monday it would begin selling a new rooftop shingle next year that converts sunlight into electricity -- and could generate $5 billion in revenue by 2015 for the company.

The new solar shingles can be integrated into rooftops with standard asphalt shingles, Dow said, and will be introduced in 2010 before a wider roll-out in 2011.

"We're looking at this one product that could generate $5 billion in revenue by 2015 and $10 billion by 2020," Jane Palmieri, managing director of Dow Solar Solutions, told Reuters in an interview.

The shingle will use thin-film cells of copper indium gallium diselenide (CIGS), a photovoltaic material that typically is more efficient at turning sunlight into electricity than traditional polysilicon cells.

Dow is using CIGS cells that operate at higher than 10 percent efficiency, below the efficiencies for the top polysilicon cells -- but would cost 10 to 15 percent less on a per watt basis.

Dow Solar Solutions said it expects "an enthusiastic response" from roofing contractors for the new shingles, since they require no specialized skills or knowledge of solar systems to install.

The new product is the latest advance in "Building Integrated Photovoltaic" (BIPV) systems, in which power-generating systems are built directly into the traditional materials used to construct buildings.

BIPV systems are currently limited mostly to roofing tiles, which operate at lower efficiencies than solar panels and have so far been too expensive to gain wide acceptance.
Dow's shingle will be about 30 to 40 percent cheaper than current BIPV systems.

The Dow shingles can be installed in about 10 hours, compared with 22 to 30 hours for traditional solar panels, reducing the installation costs that make up more than 50 percent of total system prices.

The product will be rolled out in North America through partnerships with home builders such as Lennar Corp and Pulte Homes Inc before marketing is expanded, Palmieri said.
Dow received $20 million in funding from the U.S.

Department of Energy to help develop its BIPV products.
The company also produces fluids used in concentrated solar systems, in which sunlight is used to generate heat that produces steam to power a turbine.

In addition, it supplies materials used to help manufacture photovoltaic panels and increase their efficiency.

Dow shares were up 4.4 percent at $24.67 on the New York Stock Exchange in afternoon trading.

[santafe2]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Thanks for the post GRG. I'm glad to see a company like DOW, working through the rigors of deploying a CIGS based thin film panel. I've posted several times before about the challenges with CIGS so I won't go into it here.

You're observation about solar panels is one I've heard many times before, most recently from my wife regarding the panels to go on our guest house. The great majority of people don't want to see them. Energy at the right price, yes. Ugly energy no. It's as if I was asking to put an oil derrick in the back yard.

Without denegrating the value of a BIPV roofing tile, I'll make a few notes here regarding the hyperbole in the press release.

The shingle will use thin-film cells of copper indium gallium diselenide (CIGS), a photovoltaic material that typically is more efficient at turning sunlight into electricity than traditional polysilicon cells.

Dow is using CIGS cells that operate at higher than 10 percent efficiency, below the efficiencies for the top polysilicon cells -- but would cost 10 to 15 percent less on a per watt basis.

OK, these two paragraphs are just hilarious. The first says that CIGS are "typically" more efficient than polysilicon. The second says CIGS operate below polycilicon cell efficiency - but it's ok - we promise, it will be cheaper.

CIGS is thin film on steroids but it's not polysilicon and poly is the poor cousin of monosilicon. We sell mostly mono and it's in the 18% efficiency range. Poly is in the 12-14% range.

Dow Solar Solutions said it expects "an enthusiastic response" from roofing contractors for the new shingles, since they require no specialized skills or knowledge of solar systems to install.

This is the trend in solar electric. We're the largest distributor for a system that requires no knowledge of DC circuitry for a solar electric installation. Everyone loves the idea of a solar system that can be installed by a journeyman AC electrician. It's only the beginning of making solar simple.

The Dow shingles can be installed in about 10 hours, compared with 22 to 30 hours for traditional solar panels, reducing the installation costs that make up more than 50 percent of total system prices.

Typical labor costs are 10-15% of system costs. I would love to see the spreadsheet this marketing person used. Note also that the writer does not sight the size of the system. Without that we can't judge the cost of their 10 hour installation. A typical poly / mono installation costs 50-75 cents a watt.

Good stuff here and I hope DOW is successful, but it's still years and several early adopter failures away.

[GRG55]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Thanks for the post GRG. I'm glad to see a company like DOW, working through the rigors of deploying a CIGS based thin film panel. I've posted several times before about the challenges with CIGS so I won't go into it here.

You're observation about solar panels is one I've heard many times before, most recently from my wife regarding the panels to go on our guest house. The great majority of people don't want to see them. Energy at the right price, yes. Ugly energy no. It's as if I was asking to put an oil derrick in the back yard.

Without denegrating the value of a BIPV roofing tile, I'll make a few notes here regarding the hyperbole in the press release.

OK, these two paragraphs are just hilarious. The first says that CIGS are "typically" more efficient than polysilicon. The second says CIGS operate below polycilicon cell efficiency - but it's ok - we promise, it will be cheaper.

CIGS is thin film on steroids but it's not polysilicon and poly is the poor cousin of monosilicon. We sell mostly mono and it's in the 18% efficiency range. Poly is in the 12-14% range.

This is the trend in solar electric. We're the largest distributor for a system that requires no knowledge of DC circuitry for a solar electric installation. Everyone loves the idea of a solar system that can be installed by a journeyman AC electrician. It's only the beginning of making solar simple.Typical labor costs are 10-15% of system costs. I would love to see the spreadsheet this marketing person used. Note also that the writer does not sight the size of the system. Without that we can't judge the cost of their 10 hour installation. A typical poly / mono installation costs 50-75 cents a watt...

Thanks for your always valuable insights on this topic santafe2! I deliberately tied this item to one of your relevant posts hoping we would benefit from that.

I'm sure there's a ton of other, often mundane, but important issues that have to be dealt with in a product like this, including:

• fire ratings;
• wind resistance [shingles tearing off in a storm] at different roof pitches;
• ability to walk on the shingles/roof without damaging them;
• how well they work with existing flashing and sealing methods and materials;
• how sensitive they are to variations in nailing patterns, etc [humans, including roofing contractors, being human after all];
• colour availability and compatibility;
• power output degradation from being covered by debris [leaves and tree needles];
• durability of the product under UV, wide temperature and humidity range conditions;
• understructure ventilation requirements;
• truss loading;

and so on...

However, just like the computers that control the engines and transmissions in our cars [to optimize fuel economy, emissions and performance] I think that before alternate/renewable/green [take your pick ] energy really comes into the mainstream it will have to be integrated into products and into our lives in ways that make it inobtrusive, efficient and reliable.

Right now too much alternate energy seems "in your face" and disruptive. Sometimes I get the impression that some proponents want it that way. Frankly, I think that's getting in the way of adopting more of it, faster.

After seeing first hand the [imo] desecration of France's Normandy countryside with forests of absolutely gargantuan wind turbines planted along the ridgelines [all painted white of course, so they really stand out against the landscape - why can't green energy be green? ], I can well understand the protests against wind farms. I occasionally see examples of lovely historic public buildings that have been equally desecrated by the installation of solar systems on the rooftops, visible from the street, and completely incongruent with the original building...no doubt the officials responsible are exceedingly pleased with their newfound "green" credentials...but generations in the future will live with the polluted results. A perfectly efficient, climatically pure world that looks like an industrial factory is probably not one I would prefer to inhabit.

Good stuff here and I hope DOW is successful, but it's still years and several early adopter failures away.

No doubt.

Coming back to my earlier comment about automobiles, the computers in our cars seem to work a lot better than the Windows-based boxes on our desks; they do not require anyone purchasing a car to re-learn how to drive, or go to classes or take on-line tutorials to understand how to use the software...they just work quietly and efficiently in the background doing their thing and allow us to enjoy an improved automotive product as a result.

But a small story from the early days of auto computers. In the mid-70s a friend of mine purchased a new Japanese car with some then advanced sophisticated technologies. Shortly after delivery the car started to randomly shut-down and not re-start, usually on the freeway on his commute to work in the morning. After several tow-ins and unsuccessful efforts to fix the problem the frustrated local dealer service department mechanics hit on a solution. They kept the car at the dealership, and each day changed out one sensor or module with the service manager's identical model. On the morning that the service manager called in to say he would be late because his car had quit running on the freeway on the way in to work, they knew they had found the problem.

There will be early adopter failures, but I think Dow is on the right track because they seem to be putting the consumer first...which is a lot better than our governments and utilities ramming taxpayer funded or subsidized, low-bid megaprojects down our throats because they "are good for us".

[bcassill]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Whether man-made or not, there is plenty to suggest that there are some serious changes occurring to the environment. I was watching a who on the Discovery channel about smoke-jumper (i.e. the guys and gals who fight forest fires). The guy in charge of the Federal program was saying that we are likely to lose 50% of the forested areas in the Western U.S. due to fire from a combination of dense forests and drier climate over the next several years. The severity of the fires will be bad enough that it will take literally hundreds of years for these forests to regenerate given that the fires burn hot enough to kill even the largest trees.

What I've wondered over the last year or so is if we are not entering a so called "perfect storm": a confluence of events including economic collapse due to debt fueled growth, climate change, and peak oil/energy. Any one by themselves would be considered potentially catastrophic under normal circumstances. Now we might be getting all three at once. I don't doubt the ability of the wealthy nations to survive any of this, but one can imagine the geopolitical consequences of collapsing food productions in underdeveloped countries. Instead of 1 Somalia, we might be looking at 50 or more failed states around the world (I'm just making this number up, but just imagine a world with multiple Afghanistans). You can also imagine the political dislocations in emerging countries with a large underclass/poor. Think China, India, Mexico, etc., etc., etc.

Even in wealthy countries, I would expect the disenfranchised to get behind people who would promise something better or an overthrow of the existing order (though not necessarily the form of government, just who runs it and for whom). Populist movements would be all the rage. Look for more people to begin talking like this:

http://www.market-ticker.org/archive...le-Speech.html

Though understand I'm not going to be running out an voting for Mr. Denninger anytime soon. http://www.itulip.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[we_are_toast]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Typical labor costs are 10-15% of system costs. I would love to see the spreadsheet this marketing person used. Note also that the writer does not sight the size of the system. Without that we can't judge the cost of their 10 hour installation. A typical poly / mono installation costs 50-75 cents a watt.

Santafe2, these costs seem a bit on the low side. I don't think I'm understanding them. Are these your costs, or actual costs to the retail customer? Would you mind giving a back of the envelope example?

[santafe2]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Santafe2, these costs seem a bit on the low side. I don't think I'm understanding them. Are these your costs, or actual costs to the retail customer? Would you mind giving a back of the envelope example?

No problem and I'll expand it to include non-installation tasks so you can get a more complete picture of how a small PV sales/installation business might function.

These are fully loaded labor costs. I'll use a typical install which does not include one of these 3 entities which can add time and cost: Historical review, CCR/board review, (often with condos and planned communities), or neighbor hates you and your stupid solar panels, (add a $1 a watt if he's a lawyer).

Let's assume our average cost for labor is $75 an hour and it will take 60 work hours total to design, install and commission a 5kw PV system, (about 90 cents a watt).

Tasks:
4 hours - Office: Submit paperwork for approval with governing authority, get electrical permit, create project schedule, order product.
4 hours - Design: 3 line drawing, site drawing.
6 hours - Electrician wires small sub-panel with 4 breakers and a disconnect to the main service.
16 hours - Roofer makes 24 penetrations, seals roof. Laborer installs rail, inverters, grounding, J-box, sets conduit, strings wire, (no connections).
8 hours - Electrician wires inverters to 2 j-boxes and to sub-panel, wires 4 breakers, tests system. He probably adds 2 roof based AC disconnects because, well, he's an electrician and doesn't trust the disco on the ground which he can't see while he's on the roof.
12 hours - Panelize the system. Two laborers 6 hours ea.
4 hours - Electrician - Retest energized system, set-up monitoring, pass electrical inspection.
4 hours - Scheduling and interacting with utility who may add revenue grade two way meter, commissions and signs off paperwork so you can get paid. This process differs depending on your local governing authority and regulations.
2 hours - Office - Track and collect utility rebate or ensure REC payment stream begins.

A good installer with a full time helper and a part time office person can manage 4 of these jobs a month. One person has to be a journeyman electrician and the other should have roofing and general building experience. If this is a sales & installation business, the electrician/owner will have about 1/2 their week to make site visits to prospective customers and the office person will spend about 1/2 their time taking calls, screening prospects and managing the web site. This business model works with only 2 sales a month and 3 will create a ~$1M a year business.

I should say that we are not installers, we're product distributors and work with our installer base around the country to help them work in an organized and profitable way. The big issues for our partners are always, managing sales and managing cash flow. The installation piece is fairly easy as most have done similar work for 10 years or longer.

[GRG55]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Whether man-made or not, there is plenty to suggest that there are some serious changes occurring to the environment. I was watching a who on the Discovery channel about smoke-jumper (i.e. the guys and gals who fight forest fires). The guy in charge of the Federal program was saying that we are likely to lose 50% of the forested areas in the Western U.S. due to fire from a combination of dense forests and drier climate over the next several years. The severity of the fires will be bad enough that it will take literally hundreds of years for these forests to regenerate given that the fires burn hot enough to kill even the largest trees...

It doesn't take hundreds of years to regenerate a western softwood forest after a fire. It doesn't even take dozens of years. In actual fact fire is needed to regenerate the forests in the western part of the continent. If you don't believe me, go to the US Parks Service and read about:

• the 1988 fires that burned 36% of the forests in Yellowstone National Park;
• the process of regeneration that has occurred since [probably one of the best funded series of studies of the process];
• the "natural fire management" plan that is in place at Yellowstone, which completely repudiates the long standing view that fire is destructive to the forest ecosystems and should always be supressed.

...Ecosystemwide, about 1.2 million acres was scorched; 793,000 (about 36%) of the park’s 2,221,800 acres were burned. Sixty-seven structures were destroyed, including 18 cabins used by employees and guests and one backcountry patrol cabin in Yellowstone. Estimated property damage totaled more than $3 million. About 665 miles of hand-cut fireline and 137 miles of bulldozer lines, including 32 miles in the park, needed some rehabilitation, along with the remnants of fire camps and helicopter-landing spots. Surveys found that 345 dead elk (of an estimated 40,000-50,000), 36 deer, 12 moose, 6 black bears, and 9 bison died in greater Yellowstone as a direct result of the fires; 2 radio-collared grizzly bears were missing and were presumed to have been killed, (although one turned up alive and well several years later). Most of the animals that died were trapped as fire quickly swept down two drainages, and were discovered when biologists subsequently observed scavenging grizzlies, coyotes, and birds feeding on the carcasses. A few small fish-kills occurred as a result of either heated water or dropping fire retardant on the streams. Surveys revealed that less than 1% of soils were heated enough to burn below-ground plant seeds and roots...

...In the several years following 1988, ample precipitation combined with the short-term effects of ash and nutrient influx to make for spectacular displays of wildflowers in burned areas. And, where serotinous lodgepole pines were burned, seed densities ranged from 50,000 to 1 million per acre, beginning a new cycle of forest growth under the blackened canopy above...

[santafe2]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

I'm sure there's a ton of other, often mundane, but important issues that have to be dealt with in a product like this, including:

• fire ratings;
• wind resistance [shingles tearing off in a storm] at different roof pitches;
• ability to walk on the shingles/roof without damaging them;
• how well they work with existing flashing and sealing methods and materials;
• how sensitive they are to variations in nailing patterns, etc [humans, including roofing contractors, being human after all];
• colour availability and compatibility;
• power output degradation from being covered by debris [leaves and tree needles];
• durability of the product under UV, wide temperature and humidity range conditions;
• understructure ventilation requirements;
• truss loading;

and so on...

These are all important points. Let's discuss your points above within the context of your original point:

• Fire rating - This is fairly standard. Some panels are "A" fire rated which is preferred but expensive. Most carry a "C" rating. But a deeper and more troubling question is fire fighter safety, and this is a question just now being discussed at length with few communities yet setting regulations for how fire fighter safety will be addressed when a home has an energy system on its roof generating 500V at 15A. That is not something you want to put an ax into. I made a couple of calls today but have not gotten a solid answer on how these tiles string together electrically. Any one of them does not create enough energy to injure anyone but they are likely strung together in a way to create a fairly large energy flow.
• Wind - No doubt it's an expensive roof but this seems more like an insurance issue. If you live in an area where winds are occasionally 130 mph there are very well understood methods to keep your roofing material attached whether they are solar or just asphalt shingle.
• Withstand traffic - While it's probably not a good idea to walk regularly on these tiles, CIGS and other thin film products are better suited to this than mono or poly silicon. Although I no longer recommend or design off-grid solar systems we would sometimes recommend people use thin film if they were in a remote area where someone might make a target of their solar panel. Put a hole in a poly silicon panel and it's dead. Not so with thin film.
• Flashing - Picture below. It looks like they did an excellent job.
• Nailing - See the picture, this is designed for a roofer, not a solar technician.
• Design qualities - See the picture, apparently it still looks like a solar panel, just roof integrated.
• Debris degradation - Depending on location, quarterly to yearly cleaning. Rain cleans solar panels amazingly well. Sap could be a problem if you've a large conifer near your roof but shade could be a worse problem.
• Environmental damage - All panels are warranted in two steps. To 90% full power for 12 years and 80% for 25 years. They vary, but this is a standard warranty. But if you've low power, try to find the culprit when you have so many small small tiles instead of a few large panels. Not to mention getting the leads of your test equipment in place - remove the roof? This would be a key question for me. How do I monitor the system and understand it's actual output.
• Ventilation - Bad new, there is no ventilation with this system. Good news, thin film is much more resistant to energy loss due to heat. Overall, it's not an issue.
• Load - Not much with these tiles so it won't be an issue.

I would add these questions. What inverter is used to convert energy to AC? Is it off-the-shelf or proprietary? How is DC energy aggregated? Is it low volt/current and more safe than standard systems? What is the mean time between failure? After all, there is one hell of a lot of these little panels on the roof, the MTBF better be 500 years or someone is going to be on your roof every year.

There will be early adopter failures, but I think Dow is on the right track because they seem to be putting the consumer first...which is a lot better than our governments and utilities ramming taxpayer funded or subsidized, low-bid megaprojects down our throats because they "are good for us".

Your right, the solar industry needs partners like DOW so we can get large enough to get our subsidies the old fashioned way...care for a Churchill or a Lonsdale...put your feet up Senator, solar is funding your next campaign...

CIGS_DOW.jpg

[we_are_toast]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

No problem and I'll expand it to include non-installation tasks so you can get a more complete picture of how a small PV sales/installation business might function.

These are fully loaded labor costs. I'll use a typical install which does not include one of these 3 entities which can add time and cost: Historical review, CCR/board review, (often with condos and planned communities), or neighbor hates you and your stupid solar panels, (add a $1 a watt if he's a lawyer).

Let's assume our average cost for labor is $75 an hour and it will take 60 work hours total to design, install and commission a 5kw PV system, (about 90 cents a watt).

Tasks:
4 hours - Office: Submit paperwork for approval with governing authority, get electrical permit, create project schedule, order product.
4 hours - Design: 3 line drawing, site drawing.
6 hours - Electrician wires small sub-panel with 4 breakers and a disconnect to the main service.
16 hours - Roofer makes 24 penetrations, seals roof. Laborer installs rail, inverters, grounding, J-box, sets conduit, strings wire, (no connections).
8 hours - Electrician wires inverters to 2 j-boxes and to sub-panel, wires 4 breakers, tests system. He probably adds 2 roof based AC disconnects because, well, he's an electrician and doesn't trust the disco on the ground which he can't see while he's on the roof.
12 hours - Panelize the system. Two laborers 6 hours ea.
4 hours - Electrician - Retest energized system, set-up monitoring, pass electrical inspection.
4 hours - Scheduling and interacting with utility who may add revenue grade two way meter, commissions and signs off paperwork so you can get paid. This process differs depending on your local governing authority and regulations.
2 hours - Office - Track and collect utility rebate or ensure REC payment stream begins.

A good installer with a full time helper and a part time office person can manage 4 of these jobs a month. One person has to be a journeyman electrician and the other should have roofing and general building experience. If this is a sales & installation business, the electrician/owner will have about 1/2 their week to make site visits to prospective customers and the office person will spend about 1/2 their time taking calls, screening prospects and managing the web site. This business model works with only 2 sales a month and 3 will create a ~$1M a year business.

I should say that we are not installers, we're product distributors and work with our installer base around the country to help them work in an organized and profitable way. The big issues for our partners are always, managing sales and managing cash flow. The installation piece is fairly easy as most have done similar work for 10 years or longer.

Thanks for the explanation, it's very helpful.

The reason I ask is that in the late 70's I met many thermal solar installers who were too dishonest to find a job as used car salesmen.

A guy who lives near to me just put a system in that cost about 3 times what I found the components for on the internet, and that was without installation costs! There's also a very wide difference in the component prices on the internet. I'm just wondering if the industry has changed since the 70's.

[we_are_toast]

Re: The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

It doesn't take hundreds of years to regenerate a western softwood forest after a fire. It doesn't even take dozens of years. In actual fact fire is needed to regenerate the forests in the western part of the continent. If you don't believe me, go to the US Parks Service and read about:

• the 1988 fires that burned 36% of the forests in Yellowstone National Park;
• the process of regeneration that has occurred since [probably one of the best funded series of studies of the process];
• the "natural fire management" plan that is in place at Yellowstone, which completely repudiates the long standing view that fire is destructive to the forest ecosystems and should always be supressed.

...Ecosystemwide, about 1.2 million acres was scorched; 793,000 (about 36%) of the park’s 2,221,800 acres were burned. Sixty-seven structures were destroyed, including 18 cabins used by employees and guests and one backcountry patrol cabin in Yellowstone. Estimated property damage totaled more than $3 million. About 665 miles of hand-cut fireline and 137 miles of bulldozer lines, including 32 miles in the park, needed some rehabilitation, along with the remnants of fire camps and helicopter-landing spots. Surveys found that 345 dead elk (of an estimated 40,000-50,000), 36 deer, 12 moose, 6 black bears, and 9 bison died in greater Yellowstone as a direct result of the fires; 2 radio-collared grizzly bears were missing and were presumed to have been killed, (although one turned up alive and well several years later). Most of the animals that died were trapped as fire quickly swept down two drainages, and were discovered when biologists subsequently observed scavenging grizzlies, coyotes, and birds feeding on the carcasses. A few small fish-kills occurred as a result of either heated water or dropping fire retardant on the streams. Surveys revealed that less than 1% of soils were heated enough to burn below-ground plant seeds and roots...

...In the several years following 1988, ample precipitation combined with the short-term effects of ash and nutrient influx to make for spectacular displays of wildflowers in burned areas. And, where serotinous lodgepole pines were burned, seed densities ranged from 50,000 to 1 million per acre, beginning a new cycle of forest growth under the blackened canopy above...

I'm not convinced about this recovery.

I was in Yellowstone during the 88 fires. It was spectacular and fantastic! I noted several areas in the park and have returned to those areas almost every year since then. My subjective observations are that some areas may never recover, some are recovering slowly, and some seem to be OK. One of the things I've noticed in recent years is that many of those dense areas of lodgepoles seem to be turning brown and are starting to die off.

Yellowstone, and many of the forests of the west were not healthy forests. Due to fire suppression and out dated forestry practices, they were no more a forest than a corn field would be considered a prairie. The mono species collections of trees lack the variation to recover in a manor consistent with their evolutionary history. Forests usually recover from disturbance in phases or seres. The lodgepoles may need other species during their life cycle in order to make a healthy recovery. The increase in temperatures and change in precipitation due to global warming may make some stages of their lives very difficult.

The problem is, we don't have a lot of data about large scale recovery of North American boreal forests under stressed conditions, so it's really hard to tell how it's going to turn out. The pine beetle infestation that is devastating so many forests is a good example of the unexpected.