On Monday, September 11, 2000 10:56 AM Michael S. Lorrey
retroman@turbont.net wrote:
> Not neccessarily. Photosynthesis is only 1-3% efficent, and the
theoretical
> limit of the ATP cycle is about 5%, as I recall. Where agriculture based
> generation gets its advantage is that its cheap to grow acres of the
stuff,
> since it does it itself, where silicon cells are expensive to make, even
at
> current industrial rates.
One could also make the plant more efficient in other ways, such as
respiration and the like, making it need less overall energy to live and
more for output. However, I think this is not a practical, short term
solution for energy production, especially to suit current demand.
> The difficulty with grass that generates electricity is conductors. You'd
have
> to run electrical conductors along the ground, and have the grass plants
weave
> themselves into series/parallel networks to conduct energy, with two types
of
> roots that grow toward different metals, like copper and aluminum, so you
can
> draw current from the field to the grid.
I suppose one could make plants than produce chemicals that react to produce
electricity. In essense, most electric production does rely on organic
matter as a primary input -- oil, gas, coal.
But don't you think a more efficient method of get cheap energy would be to
increase oil drilling, especially outside OPEC controlled areas? Also,
fomenting rebellion within OPEC might be another solution. I'm not calling
for military action...
Cheers!
Daniel Ust
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:37:41 MDT