Using Solar Tech to make Solar Tech

Apparently, somebody thinks the idea of using a solar furnace to bake photocells is an original idea. How many of you have I spoken to and mentioned my ideas for using solar heliostats and similar methods for heating things like an oven, cookout grill, sauna or steam room, water desalinization furnace tower and the like? I'm not claiming credit for the idea, I just assume it's common sense that anybody who's ever burned newspaper or lit a cigarette with a magnifying glass has likely already thought of. Appearantly, the Department of Energy and the manufacturers of over-priced comercially mass-produced solar cells think it their own original idea.

Yea, so maybe it is a good idea, but isn't the high profit mark-ups part of the problem? The petroleum industry uses the simple fact that comercialy produced solar setups cost so much that they take 20 years for the average buyer to "break even" as a key point in convincing people that solar is not cost effective to begin with.  How would it really be much better to say their $20k systems can be sold for as little as $15k or even $10k (usd), when the reality is that you can make your own of equal output for less than $6k? (And for $6k, that includes paying full price of about $5k for a comercially mass-produced grid-connect inverter)

Please read the article first, before continuing to my response to the article...

... to which I replied:

"Why do people still insist that photocell production is so costly or inefficient? I have a supplier who can sell me blank chrystaline silica wafers as low as 20 cents each and anybody who can sketch a trace stencil and bake solder paste can turn them into good photocells. Are we supposed to be joyous that the DOE wan't to take over technology or credit thereof that many home brewers of alternative energy have already been using? The tech isn't new, nor is it owned or invented by the DOE. The information delivered in this article leads some to believe that somebody is still buying into the DOE's share of petro interests or petro-propaganda, that the technology still isn't within anyman's reach and that it's not cost effective. The first step to proliferation of affordable and renewable energy is to first realize that anybody can do this, then to teach them how.

I'm not arguing or debating the final conclusion that solar is indeed the ideal path to focus in, I just find it misleading to suggest that this would reduce the costs of all solar cell availability, when it really only applies to comercially mass-produced photocells. In my opinion, it's that comercial production the keeps the costs at a premium. They are the ones who set their prices so high that a homeowner would need 20 years of use in order to break even on the costs. They are the ones who dread the thought of people discovering how cheap and easy it is to bake your own photocells. It's that 20 year payoff that feeds into the petroleum industry's argument that solar is not cost effective."

What are your opinions? Was I out of line, over-reacting or just off on a wild tangeant? The article is good in itself and it's nice to see that it's not just another case of a fuel-burning facility being used to make non-fuel-burning technology, but in some ways, I feel it still feeds into the misleading propoganda.

~Chaos Zen

What defines "Celebrity" status these days, anyway?

The further you look back into history, the more a person would have to accomplish to have been considered a celebrity of sorts. Conquer a kingdom, fell and empire, repell an invasion, die for faith, feed a nation or save humanity and you'd be sure to make a name for yourself and achieve celebrity status, if not hero or saint.

My idea of celebrities who have earned their stature would include a list of names more like Jesus/Yeshua, Mother Theresa, Dalai Lama, Ghandi, Joan of Arc, Louis Pasteur, Leonardo DaVinci, Benjamin Franklin, Nicolai Tesla and many others who have in some way contributed to humanity, the world or the quality of life in some small part or overall. 

Even to a lesser extent, many actors and actresses contribute to not only entertainment as well as assorted charities, but to improving the human condition by causing people to think and question, to experience how people might feel when living in other conditions or while overcoming hardships.

Worthy celebrities have likely donated money toward feeding hunger, given grants to public schools and hospitals, fought to defend their country, family or way of life. Worthy celebrities might have spoken out against injustice or corrupt politics, stood beside their unknown neighbors in hard times, volunteered for youth groups, art programs and mentoring programs. In short, a truly deserving celebrity has done something to help or shine a positive light on topics important to bettering life, the world and humanity, things like health, education, employment, security or preventing hunger and homeless.

My question today is: "Who the %#@$ are the Kardashians?"
It's not a literal question, I am aware of their presence on every tabloid, their occassional mention in entertainment news shows and the like, but rather a question of what good have they done for humanity, entertainment, charity or the world? What accomplishment earns them celebrity status? I do not presume that there isn't a reason for their fame or infamy, I am simply saying that if there is a reason to consider them to be celebrities, then I am not aware of it. Do they have some remarkable talent that I've never witnessed or have they fed a starving nation somewhere? Maybe they secretly found a cure for cancer, HIV or HPV.

Don't even get me started on "Snookie".

It's A Start

OK, so this is the new Blog. I'll be posting random ramblings about whatever I think to post here and if it does well enough, then perhaps I'll consider making several more blogs with more specific areas of focussed topics. I don't really know why I decided to create a blog, perhaps nothing more than a place to organize thoughts, since they do not seem to do well at organizing themselves within my head.

You're probably wondering, "what's up with the image?"
I like art and have many photographs and digitally rendered images of my own, so I'll likely be tossing one in with every post, whether it's relevant to the subject or not. Get used to it.

This image was a cover image I created for an industrial music piece called "Fast As Them". The music itself was an interpretive Industrial re-composition based on a Dwight Yokum song called "Fast As You". It was created as part of a music experiment to take a song I found least appealing of any others I could think of and learn some musical appreciation of the original by retuning and restyling it to suit my own prefered genre. I personally think all musicians should experiment with music they find unappealing in order to learn better what it is they actually do like and appreciate about music overall.

~ Chaos Zen