Semantics as far as I'm concerned... "Fossil Fuels" are what the Environmental Left has declared war on and seek to eliminate asap.
Right, I'm saying that the premise to start with, 'fossil fuel', is incorrect. Oil is not made from fossils. If we can get that truth to sink in, we can derail this whole notion that it's going to run out and we need to get off it.
I also oppose all forms of taxpayer subsidies. Incentives in my policies include eliminating taxes on business and corporations, including but not limited to property taxes.
I oppose taxes just on a Constitutional level. Income and property taxes are immoral, and in the original sense of the Constitution, illegal.
Believe it or not, Environmentalists are the biggest impediment to the Viability of ALL alternative energy with the exception of Solar.
Of course. The real goal of all Environmentalists is destruction of the US. It's not surprising at all. They'll find something for solar as soon as they can.
"Nanosolar is a developer of solar power technology. Based in Palo Alto, CA, Nanosolar has developed and commercialized an extremely low-cost printable solar cell manufacturing process. The company started selling panels mid-December 2007, and plans to profitably sell them at around $1 per watt.
This would fall under the "too good to be true" department. It's where I have read so many "This will be unbelievable!" only to find out it really is without belief.
That said, the information is scarce. Although they claimed to have shipped, there is no peer review I could find, nor statements from happy customers. Further, the size is seemingly small, and it's possibly not scaleable to what would be needed for domestic utility power generation.
Granted $1/per watt is a great goal, but I'm still looking for more factual information. I'm a cynic at heart. The nearest estimates are about 12-14% efficiency, which is industry standard, and not likely to be produceable at $1/watt.
I'm also looking for the trade off of using a conductive ink, over silicon. Will it be as durable? Will it have the same life span? Will it have power generation degradation? What's the heat tolerance? Too many unanswered questions, and the lack of peer review and long term informations, as well as the companies apparent tight lips on all information except for the propaganda, makes me suspicious.
Another thing that makes me suspicious, is this isn't the first claim like this. There was another company in 2002 I believe, that claimed to make a nearly identical product, and nothing ever came of it.
Time will tell.
