Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

I'm hoping that with some innovations regarding nanotechnology that we will see solar cells that become MUCH more efficient. I think solar power will be most useful in powering the electricity in your house. Solar panels on the roof? Seems logical enough to me.

I look forward to the transition to green...I hope I can witness it in my lifetime.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Regarding the fragile nature of solar cells, there is new technology that allows solar cells to be printed from what amounts to an ink-jet printer onto practically any surface. You can buy these right now in flexible sheets.



I don't remember how the efficiency compares. But there have been some promising recent advances.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Except then there are high winds or a hailstorm, and you have replacement costs of thousands of dollars, and meanwhile you are without power. Also, most of the country doesn't get enough sun to make solar a viable replacement for carbon fuel. Same case goes for much of the world. Thats why I believe truly "green" energy alternatives are regional at best, unless there is a major breakthrough.

So do I, but we also need to be realistic.

And Mana, I'm also very curious to hear more about these new cells. I have my doubts as to their efficiency, but at least they definitely will not be as fragile or as expensive. Its a great step forward. Do you have a link?

Found a linK

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0326131312.htm

10% efficiency. Its a good first step, but they have a LONG way to go.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Looks like I got my solar cell advances mixed up. The "ink-jet" type I was referring to is actually the nanotube type that KG mentioned before me. The flexible type that I showed a picture of are different.

Found a link on the nanotube solar technology:

http://www.scientificblogging.com/ja..._panels_really

From that article, it seems there are three main types of solar cells, listed here in order of highest efficiency

1. Quantam Dot -- supposedly a theoretical limit of 60% efficiency
2. Silicon-based -- the traditional ones that everyone knows and loves, with a theoretical limit of 33% efficiency
3. Thin-film -- the flexible type in the photo above. The theoretical efficiency isn't mentioned, but right now they are lower than silicon-based cells at less than 15% vs. about 22% for silcon-based cells.

The interesting part about these Buckyball-nanotube concoctions is that supposedly they can be added to any of the three types of solar cells to improve their efficiency. So that means theoretically the efficiency of quantum dot cells could be even higher than 60%.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

"If you find faults with our country, make it a better one. If you're disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to correct them. Enlist in our Armed Forces. Become a teacher. Enter the ministry. Run for public office. Feed a hungry child. Teach an illiterate adult to read. Comfort the afflicted. Defend the rights of the oppressed. Our country will be the better, and you will be the happier. Because nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself.

...

Fight for what's right for our country.

Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.

Fight for our children's future.

Fight for justice and opportunity for all.

Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.

Stand up for each other; for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America.

Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. Nothing is inevitable here. We're Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.

Thank you, and God Bless you."

I wonder when the ideal of service and fighting for one's country disappeared from America's mindset? I certainly hope it makes a fruitful return in the coming years.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Could be when their returns home started being protested, they got flicked off walking down the street, and abused by the ranks of politicians and military alike. In other words, TV started the fall, and then the internet did the final blow.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Hm, yes I do wonder that...maybe when we went to war with Iraq for no reason?

It might be different if they were actually fighting for our country, instead people are being killed for oil.

Oh, and I find this amusing...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/in...in-gender-card

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

I don't think Bond was necessarily talking about military service, and I'm done responding to thoughtless "blood for oil" rants. They are meritless and do more to show an individuals refusal inform their own opinion.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Refusal to form my own opinion? My opinion is we went to war with Iraq for oil. Thats my opinion.

Did I stutter?

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

You don't have to stutter to be misinformed, and you are. I've repeatedly posted rebuttals to the rediculous "blood for oil" mantra over and over again for YEARS, and I'm done answering nonsense with facts only to have them ignored. If you want to make such a claim, here is my challenge: PROVE IT. You want to make such accusations? Fine, but back them up with something besides "we went to war for oil because oil is in these areas that we went to war in and we want oil and Bush was owns parts of oil comapnie and cheyney loves haliburton and free-masons run the country!!!!"

If you don't feel the need to prevent evidence for such outrageous claims, then do yourself a favor and do not speak on the subject,m because you only make yourself look like a fool. Until I see something concrete, you may as well be babbling into a mirror, because thats the only person listening.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Thats a World War I poem and that had little to do with nationalism or service, and more a reaction to a war that had more to do with feudalism and vassals serving their moneyed lords. Completely different times and cultures.

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

Were you just referencing that poem or stating it as your opinion?

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

I was actually just referencing the poem. ^_^

On another subject, did anyone else think Palin speech was pretty bad the other night?

Re: Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)
 

No, just the opposite. I think she nailed that speech. Even Chris Matthews raved about her performance. The McCain Palin ticket has done a pretty amazing job of re-establishing themselves as the "mavericks" and painting Obama as a presumptuous child. Plus, they managed to turn the media against itself and now even major news sources are on the defensive after their dizzying reporting of the Palin nomination.