>> ^shogunkai:

>> ^Payback:
Be really bad if you are half way through something and run out of supplies.

I`d hate to run out of sand in a desert

Or when the sun explodes in a little while...

>> ^Payback:

Be really bad if you are half way through something and run out of supplies.


I`d hate to run out of sand in a desert

OK. I take your meaning about proof of concept for the 3D glass printer thing, but for this particular one, at no time will consumers at large accept paper products with burn marks around the edges. They'll have to be cut off, and then it would make more sense just to cut it with a blade in the first place. Now, that blade could be sun-powered, but that's a different concept.>> ^MaxWilder:

>> ^messenger:
Calling this eco is like calling a Rube Goldberg machine efficient. Just because it uses solar panels doesn't mean it's environmentally friendly.
All that plastic and metal, on top of that driving out to the desert and back, not to mention all the materials consumed in designing it, to do with solar power in a few hours what you can do better in a couple minutes at home with a pair of scissors and a hole-punch.

Wow, you are so missing the point. This guy is doing proof of concepts. Of course it would take resources to set up, but once it is, you could use nothing but solar energy to do what factories are burning fossil fuels to do. Indefinitely.
Of course his machines are very crude, but his goal is to get people thinking about utilizing free and abundant resources of the desert. Others can refine the ideas however they might want to apply it.

>> ^messenger:

Calling this eco is like calling a Rube Goldberg machine efficient. Just because it uses solar panels doesn't mean it's environmentally friendly.
All that plastic and metal, on top of that driving out to the desert and back, not to mention all the materials consumed in designing it, to do with solar power in a few hours what you can do better in a couple minutes at home with a pair of scissors and a hole-punch.


Wow, you are so missing the point. This guy is doing proof of concepts. Of course it would take resources to set up, but once it is, you could use nothing but solar energy to do what factories are burning fossil fuels to do. Indefinitely.

Of course his machines are very crude, but his goal is to get people thinking about utilizing free and abundant resources of the desert. Others can refine the ideas however they might want to apply it.

Another thermodynamic possibility for reducing global mean temperature is using wind/solar power to shoot giant lasers into space. But it may be a wash due to solar power's effect on albedo and wind power's effect on convection. Hydroelectric power would be legit for that but not available in sufficient quantity to make a difference.

Your video, Solar Sinter - a solar-powered 3D glass printer, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by arvana.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by chicchorea. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Solar-Sinter-a-solar-powered-3D-glass-printer

dupeof=videosift.com/video/Solar-Sinter-a-solar-powered-3D-glass-printer
sorry @arvana

Calling this * eco is like calling a Rube Goldberg machine efficient. Just because it uses solar panels doesn't mean it's environmentally friendly.

All that plastic and metal, on top of that driving out to the desert and back, not to mention all the materials consumed in designing it, to do with solar power in a few hours what you can do better in a couple minutes at home with a pair of scissors and a hole-punch.

Theoretically yes, but the efficiency would be terrible with current tech.

If only relying on radiative cooling then the condenser would need to be huge just to cool something the size of a house. Of course, the hotter the coils, the more heat transfer there would be.

Then the radiation would need to be transmitted through the atmosphere. That would heat some of the air along the way, reducing the efficiency of the transfer and further increasing the amount of cooling needed to offset global warming (clouds wouldn't help either).

There's also the fact that the entire process consumes a lot of power to compress the coolant. Currently much of that power comes from sources that emit greenhouse gasses, reducing the net efficiency of the cooling offset. The machinery itself also creates heat, which would need to be offset with additional cooling.

I don't think her idea was "stupid"... she just doesn't understand the difficulties and cost involved. If we had unlimited solar power and extremely efficient large-scale AC farms then it might work, but there's also the unknown side effects of localized cooling on wildlife and the hydrological cycle.

It's a neat idea, and I'd love to run the numbers on it sometime for fun, but it's currently impractical and possibly counter-productive with our current capabilities.

In reply to this comment by jwray:
Ordinary air conditioners could only increase global mean temperature due to the law of conservation of energy. But if the condenser coils are in a vacuum surrounded by glass on top and a mirror on the bottom, then they just radiate into space.

this is some stupid shit waist of time and money.

I think air transport of the future is more likely to be huge zeplins that are solar powered and what have you , travel at around 120mph max but what they lose in speed they make up with decent sized rooms cheaper tickets and things like meeting rooms and bradband internet .

plans will probably still be used but they will be specifcaly for geting from a-to b really fast and so they will be optimized in that direction , but will also be one of the most expensive ways to travel due to fule costs.

I think this is what you wanted to say... >> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

I did not watch the video or bother to understand anything about this type of solar power generation.

It'd be nice if solar power was efficient. It isn't being widely adopted because of a simple fact... It isn't efficient, effective, reliable, or cheap. Solar power is unable to generate energy 12 hours out of every day. Of the 12 hours of possible power generation, only 6 are 'peak'. In order to geneate the power required to satisfy a human population, you need to have a solar array that exceeds the peak power requirements of that population by at least 300%. But even then you need to store a solid chunk of that power for when the sun is not up. That power must be stored in batteries, which are expensive and take a lot of toxic metals. Plus solar cells and batteries don't last forever. Cells have to be replaced every 10 to 15 years. Batteries have to be replaced every 5 years or so. Replacement & maintainance of solar send its costs through the roof, and make it far less efficient than almost ANY other power source except.

I know that there are a lot of people that really really REALLY want solar power to be 'the thing'. But come on. Solar power as a means of electrical production has existed for over 120 years. No one has ever come up with a plan that can make it even remotely viable as a power source that can satisfy industrial & municipal power needs. It is a romantic idea, but that's all.