Let's watch this test case

--- In ssi_list@... "Paul D. Fernhout"

> I'm not going to argue that either of these specific companies
> really have anything to offer . . . . and there is nothing in
> theory which prevents such systems from eventually working as
> described or reaching those sorts of costs in mass production.

I realize that you've invested a lot of psychic capital into your
position over the years and you do put up a tireless defense for
what you believe, but, and you knew there was going to be a but :),
you're holding out for some future possibility of these devices
reaching fruitition while at the same time using the rationale of
immature technology to condemn SPS. It's time to look at the whle
SPS vs. solar/wind situation with a fresh perspective, not one you
formed 10 or 20 years ago. Through this whole process I've been
knocking down your sacred cows but you continue as though they are
still standing.

I've never disputed that solar/wind shouldn't play a part in our
energy infrastructure. Can you take satisfaction from that and let
go of the Lovins' decentralization chimera?

Also, the technologies you referenced both require waste heat in
order to produce power. For a solar array, that waste heat will be
used when it's created. That will do you little good in the middle
of the night. The fuel cell is optimum for the PV system, because it
is in fact a battery.

In the end, I don't think that a device of this type is a sufficient
substitute for a fuel cell. You're still stuck, my friend.

> Thus, these small scale technologies or ones like them with
> continued R&D will likely pass by any approach like SPS which
> requires twenty+ year investment lead times,

Your arguments are really fertile. :-) I know some wise-acre out
there will twist that comment into an insult, but I mean it this
way - you provide me so many opportunities for rebuttal that I can't
manage to respond to all of them at once.

Here's what I mean - Throughout the debate you've consistently
referred to the 20+ years of lead time for SPS and I've let it
slide. The same criteria must be applied to wind turbines, solar PV
arrays, fuel cell technology, and these mini sterling engines you
referred to.

SPS technology is pretty well understood. There are microwave ovens,
communication links via microwave, radar, steerable arrays, etc that
are all technologies that work on the same principles incorporated
into SPS. Any advance that solar PV makes on Earth is applicable to
SPS. There is also the option of Sterling Engine SPS.

The build-up to the first SPS may indeed take 20 years. So too would
the build-up to a commercial Solar plant with a closed system fuel
cell.

The important point I want to stress is to dispel the notion that
EACH SPS will require 20 years of lead time. I'd say that once the
infrastructure is in place then the lead time will fall well within
the planning horizons for most utilities.

TangoMan