----- Original Message -----
From: "Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLBD/BGM/SVM/SGM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 3:52 AM
Subject: RE: Times have changed, 'green' sells products L3
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: Ronn Blankenship
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Verzonden: Sunday, July 15, 2001 7:12 PM
> > Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Onderwerp: Re: Times have changed, 'green' sells products L3
>
> > Many of the same reasons apply to many others in both Europe and the
> > US, thus cutting down the potential benefits of solar power because a
> > lot of people will be unable to install them because they live in
> > apartments.
>
> But then, what is to stop them for getting together and ask the owner of
the
> building to install solar panels on the roof of the building? Could even
be
> relatively cheap because the installation costs can be shared by all the
> households in the building.
The installation cost per watt would not be cheaper.
> I'll admit that it's a lot of money for many people, but I expect the
costs
> to go down in the next 5-10 years, and efficiency of solar panels will go
> up. As with all technology, quality improves and prices drop after a
while.
> Don't believe it? Just look at what a personal computer cost 10 years ago
> (and how little computer power it had), and compare it to the computing
> power you can get today for significantly less money.
>
You happened to pick the one shining example of drop in cost/performance of
all the examples of modern technology that I've seen. Many many
technologies haven't taken off at all because the cost has not got down to
practicality.
The best example of this is space flight. Governments have poured billions
upon billions into space flight, and the cost per pound has not gone down
very much. I'm guessing its not down more than a factor of 2 in 25 years.
Back when I was a kid, the Concord was to be the wave of the future. When
the American government cancelled its support of the SST, it was suppose to
be a giving up of technological leadership. No second generation SST has
been built, and the Concord is a high priced curiosity, IMHO.
I don't know the Dutch equivalent, but in the US there are magazines like
Popular Science and Popular Mechanics that have touted wonderful new
technologies for decades. Some bear fruit; most don't. All were described
as "just around the corner." Having believed in some of that as a kid, and
watching my hopes for the new technology being spoiled was the first step in
realizing that all new technology that will soon be cheap won't.
The second, and most important, step was having a job developing new
technology. Some things that look easy, aren't; and improvements often come
from technologies one would not have thought about 5 years earlier. Its a
lot harder to make things cost effective than it seems.
One other worthwhile point. Massive government technology programs are
often not cost effective. Research is different, government sponsored
research has a great track record. But, when the government spent a couple
hundred million on oil well logging, they didn't have as good a track record
as a company that spent a few million.
Dan M.
> I predict that 10 years from now, the biggest part of the cost will be the
> costs of installing the system, not the materials itself.
>
>
I'd be happy to take the bet, if it is one. I'll bet a case of beer (24
bottles) against 1 beer.
Dan M.
