The French (Total) go SOLAR

[Mega]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...wer-renewables
Mike

[Starving Steve]

Re: The French (Total) go SOLAR

Other than to heat water in a low-latitude desert, solar investments are a total waste of money. Sad to say, the Total Oil Company will find this out after a few years, just as BP and Shell Oil Company did.

I used to think solar might be good for heating homes because of the greenhouse effect. That kind of solar is called, "passive solar". But my brother's house in California is heated by passive solar, and what little heat is gained during the day from passive solar is lost during the night. In order to make passive solar viable, you have to be a slave to thermal drapes which have to be opened at precisely the right moment and closed later in the day at precisely the right moment. Any variation in the times of opening and closing your drapes makes the solar energy system a complete loser; the house ends-up cold.

Another problem with solar is that in inland subtropical deserts, the nights are hot and the days are even hotter. So the problem (correctly defined by any three-year-old child) is cooling for most of the year, not heating. Cooling requires electric energy, not heat energy, and solar-electric is a joke because of its outrageous cost.

Even when used just to heat water, solar water-heaters still require a conventional energy source (electricity, natural gas, or propane) for a back-up. In other words, solar lowers the cost of water-heating in deserts, but alone it doesn't solve the problem of heating water. Furthermore, at night in inland subtropical deserts, solar water-heaters still radiate heat to the frigid clear sky at the top of the Earth's atmosphere. So, solar water-heaters require covering at night, too.

But I am the outspoken moron here.... British Columbia keeps me medicated and quiet, and now banned from driving.

[jiimbergin]

Re: The French (Total) go SOLAR

Other than to heat water in a low-latitude desert, solar investments are a total waste of money. Sad to say, the Total Oil Company will find this out after a few years, just as BP and Shell Oil Company did.

I used to think solar might be good for heating homes because of the greenhouse effect. That kind of solar is called, "passive solar". But my brother's house in California is heated by passive solar, and what little heat is gained during the day from passive solar is lost during the night. In order to make passive solar viable, you have to be a slave to thermal drapes which have to be opened at precisely the right moment and closed later in the day at precisely the right moment. Any variation in the times of opening and closing your drapes makes the solar energy system a complete loser; the house ends-up cold.

Another problem with solar is that in inland subtropical deserts, the nights are hot and the days are even hotter. So the problem (correctly defined by any three-year-old child) is cooling for most of the year, not heating. Cooling requires electric energy, not heat energy, and solar-electric is a joke because of its outrageous cost.

Even when used just to heat water, solar water-heaters still require a conventional energy source (electricity, natural gas, or propane) for a back-up. In other words, solar lowers the cost of water-heating in deserts, but alone it doesn't solve the problem of heating water. Furthermore, at night in inland subtropical deserts, solar water-heaters still radiate heat to the frigid clear sky at the top of the Earth's atmosphere. So, solar water-heaters require covering at night, too.

But I am the outspoken moron here.... British Columbia keeps me medicated and quiet, and now banned from driving.

Steve, I do not think you are a moron! But I had solar hot water for 16 years in my home in Raleigh, NC. It provided wonderful hot water and definitely lowered my bills. Now that there is only my wife and I (except when many of our 14 grandchildren are here) our current gas costs really don't justify putting in a new solar hot water system, but at times I am tempted.

[Starving Steve]

Re: The French (Total) go SOLAR

Steve, I do not think you are a moron! But I had solar hot water for 16 years in my home in Raleigh, NC. It provided wonderful hot water and definitely lowered my bills. Now that there is only my wife and I (except when many of our 14 grandchildren are here) our current gas costs really don't justify putting in a new solar hot water system, but at times I am tempted.

In America's South, you have cloudy skies and high humidity in the lower atmosphere at night for much of the year. So you wouldn't have as much of a problem with nighttime radiation of heat to the upper atmosphere as a desert would have. But in the day, you would need clear skies and a dry lower atmosphere to allow solar radiation to heat your hot-water heater. That could be a problem on many days in the South, all-year long.

Still, I agree with you that a solar hot water-heater can significantly lower your cost of water heating. In a low-latitude inland desert, a solar water-heater would be my choice for heating water, but I would have a natural-gas back-up for the water-heater.

One more point on passive solar for space-heating in the home: such systems work best not only with thermal drapes and a drape-slave, but also with a bed of black rocks engineered into your floor. Such a bed of black rocks (to store heat for the night)) would require a basement and plenty of cost for installation, especially in homes without a basement or deep crawl-space......As always, it is all about the cost.

[GRG55]

Re: The French (Total) go SOLAR

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...wer-renewables
Mike

LOL. Time to sell Total stock, if you own it.

This is another classic example of an incompetent Board and self-serving management team once again wasting the excess cashflows from high product prices buying into businesses that have nothing to do with their own core competencies. As the article stated, BP and Shell recently re-learned this lesson for the umteenth time the hard way. Total is about to do the same at great cost to their shareholders. If they can't think of ways to grow their business with their excess cashflows they should up the dividend and give it to the shareholders who can then decide to invest it in solar if they choose.

Total might be the best thing that ever happened to BP. All those idiot BP shareholders who bought stock in an oil company, and now feel compelled to protest at BP's annual meeting that the company is producing oil from offshore and the tar sands should consider selling their depressed BP stock and buying into the new-found solar religion at Total, non?

I'd go one further. I used to think BP should mulch that stupid sunflower logo that John Browne created, but maybe they should just sell it to Total.

My wife is a pretty astute investor - better than me in many respects. Her youngest sister, who lives on one of the islands off the left coast of Canada, needs help with her income, and has no money management sense at all, came into a small inheritance and asked my wife to help her invest it. During last week's carnage in the commodity complex my wife purchased some dividend paying oil company stock for her sister's account. When her younger granola-culture sibling found out my wife got a lecture about the evils of oil companies and a demand that such things had no place in her portfolio. My wife's calm response..."Have you stopped driving? Have you stopped taking the ferry off the island? If you want to save the planet sell your car and buy a rowboat." End of conversation...

Edit added: After re-reading this post I am worried...I'm starting to sound like Starving Steve...