Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Nano Technology Thread Pt 2 (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: NanoSolar cost at 30 cents per Watt

Unread postby kublikhan » Fri 21 Dec 2007, 03:40:49

With my quote of $2/watt systems, that is referring to utility grade installations, not residential. Obviously this is still an aggressive price point and I hope they achieve it. But it is not too far outside of what we currently have. FirstSolar has achieved Euro-3.25/watt with a more expensive technology. I would expect nanosolar's numbers to be somewhere between $2/watt and Euro-3.25/watt initially, then gradually fall as production ramps up. About the promises you hear for installed price, be careful to read the fine print. You may hear price per watt in utility grade installations, not residential. Obviously utility will always be cheaper than residential because they have economy of scale on their side.
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/42058.pdf

For the moisture/technical concerns sited, nanosolar's products, now currently shipping, carry a 25 year warranty. I think they have managed to lick any technical problems.
http://www.nanosolar.com/products.htm
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5002
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois

Re: NanoSolar cost at 30 cents per Watt

Unread postby xironman » Fri 21 Dec 2007, 18:46:05

So just how big are these panels? From what I understand some of the lower price panels are a bit larger than a higher efficiency PV. Having put in 3KW of PV the space taken is not small and you really should point them to maximize power generation, especially on a residential scale. So the additional cost of structures and space for supporting the panels should be part of the discussion.
User avatar
xironman
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2007, 03:00:00

Re: Nano Technology

Unread postby eXpat » Wed 21 May 2008, 09:44:21

Studies suggest that nanotubes may cause cancer (mesothelioma) link

Microscopic, high-tech "nanotubes" that are being made for use in a wide variety of consumer products cause the same kind of damage in the body as asbestos does, according to a study in mice that is raising alarms among workplace safety experts and others.

Within days of being injected into mice, the nanotubes -- which are increasingly used in electronic components, sporting goods and dozens of other products -- triggered a kind of cellular reaction that over a period of years typically leads to mesothelioma, a fatal form of cancer, researchers said.
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw

You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand
User avatar
eXpat
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3801
Joined: Thu 08 Jun 2006, 03:00:00

Nanotube Superbatteries

Unread postby TheAntiDoomer » Fri 09 Jan 2009, 11:26:10

Nanotube Superbatteries

Carbon nanotubes can carry and store more charge than other forms of carbon, in part because their nanoscale structure gives them a very large surface area. But conventional methods for making them into films leave significant gaps between individual nanotubes or require binding materials to hold them together. Both approaches reduce the films' conductivity--the ability to convey charge--and capacitance--the ability to store it.
"The human ability to innovate out of a jam is profound.That’s why Darwin will always be right, and Malthus will always be wrong.” -K.R. Sridhar


Do I make you Corny? :)

"expect 8$ gas on 08/08/08" - Prognosticator
User avatar
TheAntiDoomer
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed 18 Jun 2008, 03:00:00

THE Nano Technology Thread Pt 2 (merged)

Unread postby bratticus » Fri 09 Jan 2009, 14:46:20

The films are about 70 percent nanotubes; the rest is empty space, pores that could be used to store lithium or liquid electrolytes in future battery electrodes.


Different packaging for same old stuff.

The capacitance of the MIT films--that is, their ability to store electrical charge--is one of the highest ever measured for carbon-nanotube films, says Shao-Horn.


"for carbon-nanotube films"? What a strange way of not saying how they compare to other technologies.
User avatar
bratticus
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu 12 Jun 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Bratislava

Re: Nanotube Superbatteries

Unread postby outcast » Sat 10 Jan 2009, 02:16:48

Different packaging for same old stuff.



Ok, so how do you suggest we make batteries?
User avatar
outcast
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon 21 Apr 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Nanotube Superbatteries

Unread postby TheDude » Sat 10 Jan 2009, 03:20:58

We have a dedicated thread for these sorts of stories: Future Energy Technology News

Some suspect nanotubes to have potential carcinogenic effects: Study finds Nanotubes pose asbestos-like cancer risk. This may eventually preclude their widespread use. Course as Matt Simmons said (regarding the use of poisonous ammonia as fuel) "people generally don't drink gasoline." Used in well-sealed batteries n-tubes might well be acceptable as a health risk, given the potential benefits.
Cogito, ergo non satis bibivi
And let me tell you something: I dig your work.
User avatar
TheDude
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4896
Joined: Thu 06 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia

Re: Nanotube Superbatteries

Unread postby TheAntiDoomer » Sat 10 Jan 2009, 03:53:56

Used in well-sealed batteries n-tubes might well be acceptable as a health risk, given the potential benefits.


Exactly dude, every tech, energy source, etc is going to pose some sort of safety risk, the key is just to mitigate that risk to an acceptable level. In the case of nanotube batteries like you said simply incasing them should do that trick.
"The human ability to innovate out of a jam is profound.That’s why Darwin will always be right, and Malthus will always be wrong.” -K.R. Sridhar


Do I make you Corny? :)

"expect 8$ gas on 08/08/08" - Prognosticator
User avatar
TheAntiDoomer
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed 18 Jun 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Nanotube Superbatteries

Unread postby outcast » Sat 10 Jan 2009, 04:42:11

TheDude wrote:We have a dedicated thread for these sorts of stories: Future Energy Technology News

Some suspect nanotubes to have potential carcinogenic effects: Study finds Nanotubes pose asbestos-like cancer risk. This may eventually preclude their widespread use. Course as Matt Simmons said (regarding the use of poisonous ammonia as fuel) "people generally don't drink gasoline." Used in well-sealed batteries n-tubes might well be acceptable as a health risk, given the potential benefits.



It's not like people would be cracking the stuff open and sniffing the nanotubes. As long as sufficient precautions are taken on the manufacturing end then there really should be no problem.
User avatar
outcast
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon 21 Apr 2008, 03:00:00

Study Uncovers Mesothelioma Link to Nanotechnology

Unread postby mintdollar » Thu 19 Feb 2009, 22:07:47

Study Uncovers Mesothelioma Link to Nanotechnology
Mesothelioma has long been linked to the inhalation and exposure to asbestos fibers and dust, so when scientists uncovered an additional potential cause for this incurable form of lung cancer, the unthinkable became a reality.

According to researchers based out of the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington D.C., the early 90’s development of carbon nanotubes has been an amazing feat for technological applications, however, it has not gone without its price. Specifically,
carbon nanotubes may be causing harm to the human body in the form of mesothelioma cancer.

If the
carbon nanotubes are introduced into the wrong environment, the development of lesions and inflammation of the lungs occurs - symptoms similar to that of mesothelioma cancer and asbestos exposure. Researchers uncovered the finding through exposure of carbon nanotubes to animals.

Dr. Andrew Maynard, who published a study in the journal Nature Nanotechnology, described the use of nanotubes and the potential link to
mesothelioma cancer. He said that currently, nanotubes are being implemented because of their awesome abilities at conducting heat and electricity. Mostly, Dr. Maynard explains, the nanotubes are being implemented into sports equipment. He said that there are no regulations as to where nanotubes can be implemented and there are currently no requirements for the use of nanotubes to be disclosed to the general public.

What Are Nanotubes?
http://waronyou.com/topics/study-uncove ... echnology/
User avatar
mintdollar
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue 23 Dec 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Study Uncovers Mesothelioma Link to Nanotechnology

Unread postby oxj » Fri 20 Feb 2009, 00:12:26

It's not surprising. Asbestos causes cancer through a pathway which isn't dependent on its specific chemical properties (as compared to something like benzo-[a]-pyrene) as much as its physical properties... The asbestos is there, gets stuck in a white blood cell and because of its inert nature, cannot be removed, and thereby contributes to chronic inflammation which causes cellular division, the resultant amplification of any genetic error and consequently cancer. Likewise, carbon nanotubes are small like asbestos, are inert to the action of white blood cells (peroxide, perchlorates and enzymes are inert against carbon) and will trigger the same chronic inflammation pathways.

Once again, medicine doesn't believe something which happens in vitro until it can be demonstrated in vivo. Meanwhile, so many will pay with the expected but unproven side effects.
User avatar
oxj
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon 05 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: The field

Re: THE Nano Technology Thread (merged)

Unread postby pablonite » Mon 15 Feb 2010, 11:32:55

Dangerous Nanoparticles Can be Transported by Insects
http://www.naturalnews.com/028147_nanop ... sects.html
Prior studies have found that a variety of nanoparticles may pose toxic and other harmful effects, moving through cellular membranes and past other bodily defenses with ease. Few studies have looked directly at how the particles affect whole organisms, however.

In the current study, researchers exposed both adult and larval fruit flies to carbon nanoparticles just over 1/5,000th the width of a human hair. While larvae were apparently unaffected by consuming food containing the particles, adult flies became incapacitated or died when the particles "adhered extensively to fly surfaces and overwhelmed natural grooming mechanisms." More notably, the researchers observed the transfer of nanoparticles between contaminated and uncontaminated flies, raising the specter that a spill from a nanoparticle manufacturing facility could easily lead to the spread of nanoparticles throughout the environment.

Currently there is no regulation of nanotechnology in the United States, and nanoparticles are already used in the manufacture of products as varied as sporting equipment, sunscreens and other cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and electronics.

Hmmm, it sure would be interesting to see a nanoparticle containment team attempting to deal with a nanoparticle spill?

The skin, our largest organ, is a very refined piece of evolution, designed and tested over hundreds of thousands of years to act as a filter and barrier between our internal organs, blood and guts and the environment. It is a fine balance between allowing out bodies to perspire and allowing contaminants in. Something to think about before you go rubbing nanoparticles all over your skin found in so many of the latest cosmetics. As far as the other industries where they are being employed we are not getting a choice.
User avatar
pablonite
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 723
Joined: Sun 28 Sep 2008, 03:00:00

Re: THE Nano Technology Thread Pt 2 (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 25 Mar 2014, 10:01:28

Time-machine Tuesday, Nanotechnology was going to save us all. Strangely I never see any news about it any more like I did 5 or 10 years ago when it was all the rage.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA


Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 57 guests