Homestead mailing list

[Clansgian AT wmconnect.com]

> But it was the second part that really set off my BS detector.  I'm 
> trying to find some other interpretation for what's written here, but 
> 120 watts per square inch is far more energy than what is contained in 
> sunlight. ...., and generally nowhere near that, since at most 10% 
> of the energy is converted to electricity.
> 

Bill, your grave error here is applying science and math to the search for 
the Holy Grail.  It's a very unpopular thing to do.  The expectation to find 
the 
Elixir of Life, Universal Solvent, and Philosopher's Stone continues unabated.

Solar is a great source of electricity for a fence charger.  It is also 
feasible for relatively low wattage devices like computers and radios.  It's 
feasibility becomes shaky when applied anything but very modest lighting.  
One only 
has to apply the math to see how much resources are needed to run electrical 
motors and (gasp) heating devices like ranges and water heaters.

It's a paradox that in order to adapt a household entirely to alternate 
energy, it requires drastic lifestyle changes ... and once those changes are 
effected, the dependency on electricity is so small it is negligible making 
in 
unattractive to expend extensive resouces to bring about the alternate energy 
in 
the first place (except here there's no other choice).

James