Priligy online now, save money

AUG 25

Recent Comment

"I was really excited about this technology until you see what it's mad..."

View all Comments

Solar Panel Printing Press

NanoSolar has just announced that it will be building a 430 MW / year production facility.  That's equivalent to about 200 million solar cells per year.  The best thing about Nanosolar is 5 mg original brand cialis that they don't use silicon.  Traditional solar cells require the use of expensive and canada viagra no prescription environmentally costly to produce silicon wafers.  The solar industry, if you can believe it, actually uses more silicon than the microprocessor industry.  And silicon is nasty stuff. 

So Nanosolar's thin-film, printable, copper-indium-gallium-selenium cells are very desirable.  They're thin, flexible, durable and cheap.  Depending on how much efficiency they can squeeze out of these cells and how cheap they can ultimately make them, solar might soon become cheaper than conventional power sources in much of the country.  All thanks to we recommend viagra online in usa Nanosolar (and that $25 million in seed funding from the founders of Google.)
Hits: 24358
Comments (9)Add Comment
solar power should be the tramadol on saturday delivery future
written by a guest, August 26, 2006
i think solar power makes more sense then any other source of energy. we should do a lot more research on it.
Hooray Nanosolar! Hooray Google!
written by a guest, August 26, 2006
Imagine what could be accomplished by putting the budget for the Iraq war into this. We need to elect politicians who are not in the pockets of best viagra prices the oil industry!

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
What about right now!
written by a guest, August 26, 2006
We have an energy source that has less co2 emissions than solar and over 65 years of safe dependable usage. The answer is clear it's nuclear. We could drastically reduce pollution in our air by being realistic about nuclear power. (see national geographic chernobol issue this year)
A clarification
written by a guest, August 26, 2006
Silicon is not nasty; it's one of the most pervasive molecules in all Earth. Making it in wafers that are almost totally pure is what makes silicon--for computer chips or for solar panels--is what makes it nasty. A little Geek for the Eco there. :)
spacing tip
written by a guest, August 27, 2006
The old double space rule applied only to typewriters. Be sure to space only once after a sentence when typing on a computer. The extra space is no longer needed!
Clarification Amplifier
written by a guest, August 30, 2006
Amplifying guest#4's comments, but the "good" and the "nasty" are being totally reversed in this story. If there is how much is viagra a polite way to say this - author Hank Green - you have this bass ackwards - politeness intended! Silicon _is_ one of the most eco-friendly elements to how much does cialis cost collect - as noted it's the ultra-purificantion that causes problems. BUT even then the environmental impact is nowhere near that of collecting the levitra levitra relatively rare, hard to mine, and toxic heavy metals referenced in the articles. (Unlike silicon,) copper indium gallium
written by Jay Tee, February 21, 2007
Actually, silicon is nasty in the form it's used for solar cells. But there's another problem. Conventional silicon solar cells use almost as much energy to make as they produce in their lifetime. Depressing but true.
Silicone is not nasty
written by guest, June 29, 2007
Jay Tee, The silicon used in Solar Cells is NOT nasty! The process of making a solar cell is not even nasty. They use ultra fine saw blades to cut blocks of silicon into ultra fine wafers. The "nastiest" part is that it uses lots of water during the cutting and polishing process. Jay Tee - Who is smoking what? You could hold it in your hand, even swallow some of generic viagra online it, no ill effects.

Conventional silicon cells are produced using less energy all the time. What you claim may have been true 40 years ago, but now it only takes around 10% (worst case close to 20%) of the cells energy production to create it.
Depleting mineral resources
written by AL, July 14, 2007
I was really excited about this technology until you see what it's made from. I don't know much about the relative toxicity of the metals, I'll leave others to comment. But what I do know is how much does viagra cost that this technology simply cannot be scaled up in its present form for very long. The reason? The use of incredibly rare metals. New Scientist had an article this month (http://environment.newscientis...audit.html
which was about how we are chewing through the earth's metal resources at a staggering pace. For example, Indium had 4-13 years left of production from existing reserves depending on demand levels which are skyrocketing as the metal is used in LCD tvs for example. Gallium had no figures. Is this 'solar printing'? Solar energy at the economics of printing? Nonsense. Any one else picked up on any of this?

Write comment

security code
Write the wow)) buy now cialis displayed characters


Are you an EcoGeek?

We've got to keep 7 billion people happy without destroying our planet. It's the biggest challenge we've ever faced....but we're taking it on. Are you with us?

The Most Popular Articles