Reading Test

 

SOLAR ENERGY

Solar Energy sounds wonderful.
Free Sunlight, Free Energy Free Electricity.
But the cold, hard, facts are not easy to absorb and Solar production of electricity on a small scale (household scale) is a very expensive exercise. In fact it is 100 times more expensive than producing electricity from brown coal or hydro supplies.
And who is paying? We ALL Are.
The government is forking out hundreds of millions of dollars to support the solar industry and households are getting an absurd return of 10 times more than the value of the electricity they are producing.
The end result is higher electricity prices for the rest of the consumers and an absurd belief that solar production is improving the planet.
When you take into account the amount of electricity required to manufacture the solar panels, wiring , glass and metal-work, it takes 3 years to cancel this consumption.
Now we come to the efficiency of production.  
A solar array in a sunny location produces 4 times more electricity that on a rooftop.
This is because the panels can tilt to follow the sun.
A 2kw household system costs a minimum of $2,000 and produces a maximum of 8kw-hr per day.  This is $1.00 per day or $400 per year. It takes 5 years to pay-off the system.
But the interest during this time takes another year.
However most of the electricity required by a household is at night-time, when the panels are not producing and we rely on coal.
Fortunately the introduction of solar has only changed the demand by a few percent but overall, the demand has dropped between 10% and 25% due to LED lighting, solar and reduced usage.
This has led to under utilization of the generators and caused a 10% price-rise.
So, in effect we have not won.
Our electricity bill has not decreased.
But if you think solar, wind, water and tides will reduce the carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, think again.
95% of the carbon diode we produce is absorbed by the sea and used by plankton to produce food for fishes. The remaining 5% is absorbed by trees.
We are talking about the rise in carbon dioxide of 0.1%
Don't you think the natural absorption process can change from 95% to 94% ???
Of course it can.
Our production of carbon dioxide has nothing to do with the rise or fall of carbon dioxide in the air.
We have increased the release of carbon dioxide by 10 times in the past 300 years and yet the rise in atmospheric carbon diode has been less than 1%.
In fact the percentage of carbon dioxide in the air is 0.04%, so 1% rise is actually 0.0401%
if you want to take responsibility for CO2 rise, blame Australia. It is one of the largest pollutants in the world. It sells more than one billion tons of coal and iron ore each year and this represents billions of tome of carbon dioxide.
Agreed, the actual firing is done in China, but the effect surround the world and everyone suffers.
The quality of the air in industrial cities of China makes breathing an impossibility and while the insatiable appetite for steel and cement continues, the pollution will persist.
There are one billion peasant farmers in China and India that are gradually being connected to the electricity grid and the first three items they turn on, are lighting, TV and phone.
This amounts to 3 new electricity generating plants being commissioned each week and this is where the vast majority of the additional coal and gas is being used.
If every one and ever thing was turned off in Australia, the reduction in consumption would be less than 0.1%  
Getting Australians to pay 10% more for electricity and gas, as well as good, to feed the Carbon Emissions tax is just a trick and a lie.
Our effect and impact on the world is miniscule. Less than 1% if everything is turned OFF.
Less than 1% of 0.4% or 0.040001%. This is a percentage that NO-ONE can measure and no-one can point the blame.
Of course the frozen wastelands and glaciers are melting.
Why is Greenland called Greenland. Because it was once GREEN.
The impact of natural conditions outweighs man-made pollution by a factor of 1,000:1.
The release of carbon dioxide and methane through volcanoes and animals, and the absorption of carbon dioxide by marine algae far exceeds the release from the human population.
We only influence a microscopic proportion of the carbon-cycle.
And it only when you know the figures, you can see how much hype has been generated to influence the uninitiated.
Remember Henny Penny:  "The Sky is Falling."

 

Reading Speed:  words per minute.