Everything Solar Forum

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 12/30/2024 4:44:00 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Two minor notes. The panels removed by Reagan were actually Domestic hot water panels. Good old flat plates as they were known. When Regan waved his destructive hand, thousands of solar businesses were wiped out back then, in less than 6 months.

Reagan won the election, much like the squatter, by committing Treason, though not in broad daylight, but very much behind the scenes by sabotaging Carter's Iran hostages' deal before the election. There were people high up of course who knew what he did before the election, but kept quite of course. Vested interests as always. 

My point in putting some kind of balance to TM's Rah, Rah spotlight, is not to in any way diminish in intent all these RE initiatives, only to show how easily the FFI can vaporize them in a single flash. I wrote an even more expansive article on RE over the years, back a ways, highlighting many of RE's achievements, though fleeting as a whole.

https://nosidestaken.blogspot.com/2023/03/of-snow-photons-and-silicon.html

Trying to suggest, BTW, that any given person in a "vocation" who's title is the very representation of that vocation, can somehow recount their history completely ignoring the very reason that the position and the very reason they are there is not to be discussed, is a bit silly from many directions.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 12-31-2024 03:35 PM
From: Dennis Garde
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Original Message:
Sent: 12/30/2024 4:44:00 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Two minor notes. The panels removed by Reagan were actually Domestic hot water panels. Good old flat plates as they were known. When Regan waved his destructive hand, thousands of solar businesses were wiped out back then, in less than 6 months.

Reagan won the election, much like the squatter, by committing Treason, though not in broad daylight, but very much behind the scenes by sabotaging Carter's Iran hostages' deal before the election. There were people high up of course who knew what he did before the election, but kept quite of course. Vested interests as always. 

My point in putting some kind of balance to TM's Rah, Rah spotlight, is not to in any way diminish in intent all these RE initiatives, only to show how easily the FFI can vaporize them in a single flash. I wrote an even more expansive article on RE over the years, back a ways, highlighting many of RE's achievements, though fleeting as a whole.

https://nosidestaken.blogspot.com/2023/03/of-snow-photons-and-silicon.html

Trying to suggest, BTW, that any given person in a "vocation" who's title is the very representation of that vocation, can somehow recount their history completely ignoring the very reason that the position and the very reason they are there is not to be discussed, is a bit silly from many directions.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 12-31-2024 03:35 PM
From: Dennis Garde
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Original Message:
Sent: 12/30/2024 4:44:00 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Two minor notes. The panels removed by Reagan were actually Domestic hot water panels. Good old flat plates as they were known. When Regan waved his destructive hand, thousands of solar businesses were wiped out back then, in less than 6 months.

Reagan won the election, much like the squatter, by committing Treason, though not in broad daylight, but very much behind the scenes by sabotaging Carter's Iran hostages' deal before the election. There were people high up of course who knew what he did before the election, but kept quite of course. Vested interests as always. 

My point in putting some kind of balance to TM's Rah, Rah spotlight, is not to in any way diminish in intent all these RE initiatives, only to show how easily the FFI can vaporize them in a single flash. I wrote an even more expansive article on RE over the years, back a ways, highlighting many of RE's achievements, though fleeting as a whole.

https://nosidestaken.blogspot.com/2023/03/of-snow-photons-and-silicon.html

Trying to suggest, BTW, that any given person in a "vocation" who's title is the very representation of that vocation, can somehow recount their history completely ignoring the very reason that the position and the very reason they are there is not to be discussed, is a bit silly from many directions.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 12-31-2024 03:35 PM
From: Dennis Garde
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Original Message:
Sent: 12/30/2024 4:44:00 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

They were flat plates. Some are in a campus museum others may still be in use. Of course, there are much better glycol panels available today. A documentary was made titled "The road not travelled" it tells the story of what happened to those very panels after they were removed from the White House.

Two minor notes. The panels removed by Reagan were actually Domestic hot water panels. Good old flat plates as they were known. When Regan waved his destructive hand, thousands of solar businesses were wiped out back then, in less than 6 months.

Reagan won the election, much like the squatter, by committing Treason, though not in broad daylight, but very much behind the scenes by sabotaging Carter's Iran hostages' deal before the election. There were people high up of course who knew what he did before the election, but kept quite of course. Vested interests as always. 

My point in putting some kind of balance to TM's Rah, Rah spotlight, is not to in any way diminish in intent all these RE initiatives, only to show how easily the FFI can vaporize them in a single flash. I wrote an even more expansive article on RE over the years, back a ways, highlighting many of RE's achievements, though fleeting as a whole.

https://nosidestaken.blogspot.com/2023/03/of-snow-photons-and-silicon.html

Trying to suggest, BTW, that any given person in a "vocation" who's title is the very representation of that vocation, can somehow recount their history completely ignoring the very reason that the position and the very reason they are there is not to be discussed, is a bit silly from many directions.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 12-31-2024 03:35 PM
From: Dennis Garde
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Original Message:
Sent: 12/30/2024 4:44:00 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Bush realized that renewables added a level of security to the property. The Bush ranch is powered by renewables making it less vulnerable to the swings of the fossil fuel industry that built it. Somewhat ironic?

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Agree about generalities. It is a part of trying to make points in paragraphs, rather than writing a book.

Let's compare a specific example - PV and thermal water heating. The solar thermal system has one active moving part, the pump, and possibly a passive moving part, the backflow preventer. The pump and controller require relatively little electricity. Solar efficiency can be 50% or more, while electrical COP is 100 or more. Flat plate solar collectors with black chrome actually increase in efficiency over the first few years as the black chrome ages. The low-power pump tends to last for decades. If you are using a pressurized glycol system, then the glycol and expansion tank will need to be replaced periodically, but a drain-back system eliminates this. Energy storage is inherent and a 200 gallon tank is often used. In my experience, the most common cause of leaks in solar thermal systems is failure to accommodate thermal expansion. This can happen within a multi-panel array and in the supply and return piping. Take care to design for thermal expansion and leaks are unlikely. Collector slope can be designed to provide relatively constant gains throughout the year, so unless the house is unoccupied often, leftover energy is not a significant issue. There is embodied carbon in the components, but low operational carbon.

PV has low solar efficiency, 10-15% initially, with output decreasing around 1% per year. For this reason, heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) are often used to boost efficiency. Installation in a heated space in a heating-dominated climate means that the HPWH is drawing heat from the space. The average COP of HPWHs is 1.8-2.5 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760) If the space is heated with a heat pump with COP of 2.5, then a HPWH with COP of 2.5 has an overall electrical COP of about 1.5, making overall solar efficiency 15-23%. Refrigerants in heat pumps are especially high carbon, accounting for around 20% of total life-cycle carbon. HPWHs have one moving part, the compressor, but HPWHs are claimed to last only 10-15 years. I have heard of a system that required two replacements in three years. PV also has failure modes. Hail damage is probably not more than for thermal, which is pretty low. Microinverters, though, are notorious for failure. A colleague has replaced about half in three different batches over ten years, and expects to have to replace the rest at some point. Unless you are using a timer to limit water heating to only when PV is producing electricity, then an apples-to-apples comparison requires batteries to offset at least part of the fossil-derived utility electricity that the HPWH uses more of than solar thermal. Batteries have high embodied carbon and don't last terribly long. HPWHs are available up to 80 gallons, so less low-carbon storage in water to last through the night.

If I were in a cooling-dominated climate, I would consider PV/HPWH/batteries because the heat that the HPWH draws from the space would usually be a benefit. On the other hand, PV efficiency decreases with ambient temperature, while solar thermal efficiency increases. It would be a hard choice that might also depend on how renewable the local grid is, i.e., if I could justify foregoing the batteries.

An important decision criterion for many these days is low life-cycle carbon. Solar efficiency, COP, upfront carbon, and replacement of parts that do not last for the life of the building are all significant factors. Trying not to generalize here, but that favors solar thermal over PV/HPWH/batteries in most US climates and utility situations.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 08:11 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 06:51 AM
From: David Hrivnak
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

------------------------------
David Hrivnak
SalesEngineering
EcoLogical part time

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 11:55 PM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 12:20 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 12-30-2024 02:43 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

To keep this short which I will fail at, you mention in ST allot of issues but gloss over the frequencies and related problems that they create. Fluid leaks are not just fluid leaks from pipes, so fix pipe. The damage that CAN result from said leak can be extensive. Pumps can last decades, but I have had then fail in 5. For me ST collector efficiency as a comparison to PV efficiency is a non brainer. However your PV efficiencies are under rated. Should be at least 18% to 20% today, depending on all downstream equip.. Drain back has its own problems and efficiency loss due to an extra XCHANGR and another storage tank usually on top. I personally prefer for less O&M and freeze safety, glycol and external SS flat plate exchangers, like used for Beer coolers, resulting in twin pumps. COP for ST are obscene in a good direction. 

If you have SDHW, heat pump water heaters and de-superheaters for geo, make no sense. PV still makes sense for all non heating loads, which if you have EV's will far exceed heating and cooling requirements. My biggest loads are non thermal at this point (3 EV's) and allot of computers.

Embedded carbon for me is kind of a non issue for systems that have long time frame use. Housing lasting for 50-100 years, or more in special cases, cars at 100,000 miles plus, etc.. Short term (Plastics single use, very important) are a disgrace on embedded C. Etc.

Hay! I kept it short...

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 03:00 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Agree about generalities. It is a part of trying to make points in paragraphs, rather than writing a book.

Let's compare a specific example - PV and thermal water heating. The solar thermal system has one active moving part, the pump, and possibly a passive moving part, the backflow preventer. The pump and controller require relatively little electricity. Solar efficiency can be 50% or more, while electrical COP is 100 or more. Flat plate solar collectors with black chrome actually increase in efficiency over the first few years as the black chrome ages. The low-power pump tends to last for decades. If you are using a pressurized glycol system, then the glycol and expansion tank will need to be replaced periodically, but a drain-back system eliminates this. Energy storage is inherent and a 200 gallon tank is often used. In my experience, the most common cause of leaks in solar thermal systems is failure to accommodate thermal expansion. This can happen within a multi-panel array and in the supply and return piping. Take care to design for thermal expansion and leaks are unlikely. Collector slope can be designed to provide relatively constant gains throughout the year, so unless the house is unoccupied often, leftover energy is not a significant issue. There is embodied carbon in the components, but low operational carbon.

PV has low solar efficiency, 10-15% initially, with output decreasing around 1% per year. For this reason, heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) are often used to boost efficiency. Installation in a heated space in a heating-dominated climate means that the HPWH is drawing heat from the space. The average COP of HPWHs is 1.8-2.5 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760) If the space is heated with a heat pump with COP of 2.5, then a HPWH with COP of 2.5 has an overall electrical COP of about 1.5, making overall solar efficiency 15-23%. Refrigerants in heat pumps are especially high carbon, accounting for around 20% of total life-cycle carbon. HPWHs have one moving part, the compressor, but HPWHs are claimed to last only 10-15 years. I have heard of a system that required two replacements in three years. PV also has failure modes. Hail damage is probably not more than for thermal, which is pretty low. Microinverters, though, are notorious for failure. A colleague has replaced about half in three different batches over ten years, and expects to have to replace the rest at some point. Unless you are using a timer to limit water heating to only when PV is producing electricity, then an apples-to-apples comparison requires batteries to offset at least part of the fossil-derived utility electricity that the HPWH uses more of than solar thermal. Batteries have high embodied carbon and don't last terribly long. HPWHs are available up to 80 gallons, so less low-carbon storage in water to last through the night.

If I were in a cooling-dominated climate, I would consider PV/HPWH/batteries because the heat that the HPWH draws from the space would usually be a benefit. On the other hand, PV efficiency decreases with ambient temperature, while solar thermal efficiency increases. It would be a hard choice that might also depend on how renewable the local grid is, i.e., if I could justify foregoing the batteries.

An important decision criterion for many these days is low life-cycle carbon. Solar efficiency, COP, upfront carbon, and replacement of parts that do not last for the life of the building are all significant factors. Trying not to generalize here, but that favors solar thermal over PV/HPWH/batteries in most US climates and utility situations.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 08:11 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 06:51 AM
From: David Hrivnak
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

------------------------------
David Hrivnak
SalesEngineering
EcoLogical part time

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 11:55 PM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 12:20 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 12-30-2024 02:43 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Good job keeping it short! I will try to do the same.

To compare to 50% system efficiency for ST, we need system efficiency for PV. With panel efficiency of 20-24% and balance-of-system efficiency of 80%, that is 16-19%, so higher than my original estimate, but still lower than for ST.

David,

The link I provided describes real-world measurements of HPWH efficiency, which are lower than nameplate efficiency.

This link (https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.2744) summarizes 110,000 measurements of age degradation, and finds 0.6 - 1% per year across several PV technologies. They also note large differences in measured versus nameplate degradation rates.

Capitalism and marketing at work.

To keep this short which I will fail at, you mention in ST allot of issues but gloss over the frequencies and related problems that they create. Fluid leaks are not just fluid leaks from pipes, so fix pipe. The damage that CAN result from said leak can be extensive. Pumps can last decades, but I have had then fail in 5. For me ST collector efficiency as a comparison to PV efficiency is a non brainer. However your PV efficiencies are under rated. Should be at least 18% to 20% today, depending on all downstream equip.. Drain back has its own problems and efficiency loss due to an extra XCHANGR and another storage tank usually on top. I personally prefer for less O&M and freeze safety, glycol and external SS flat plate exchangers, like used for Beer coolers, resulting in twin pumps. COP for ST are obscene in a good direction. 

If you have SDHW, heat pump water heaters and de-superheaters for geo, make no sense. PV still makes sense for all non heating loads, which if you have EV's will far exceed heating and cooling requirements. My biggest loads are non thermal at this point (3 EV's) and allot of computers.

Embedded carbon for me is kind of a non issue for systems that have long time frame use. Housing lasting for 50-100 years, or more in special cases, cars at 100,000 miles plus, etc.. Short term (Plastics single use, very important) are a disgrace on embedded C. Etc.

Hay! I kept it short...

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 03:00 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Agree about generalities. It is a part of trying to make points in paragraphs, rather than writing a book.

Let's compare a specific example - PV and thermal water heating. The solar thermal system has one active moving part, the pump, and possibly a passive moving part, the backflow preventer. The pump and controller require relatively little electricity. Solar efficiency can be 50% or more, while electrical COP is 100 or more. Flat plate solar collectors with black chrome actually increase in efficiency over the first few years as the black chrome ages. The low-power pump tends to last for decades. If you are using a pressurized glycol system, then the glycol and expansion tank will need to be replaced periodically, but a drain-back system eliminates this. Energy storage is inherent and a 200 gallon tank is often used. In my experience, the most common cause of leaks in solar thermal systems is failure to accommodate thermal expansion. This can happen within a multi-panel array and in the supply and return piping. Take care to design for thermal expansion and leaks are unlikely. Collector slope can be designed to provide relatively constant gains throughout the year, so unless the house is unoccupied often, leftover energy is not a significant issue. There is embodied carbon in the components, but low operational carbon.

PV has low solar efficiency, 10-15% initially, with output decreasing around 1% per year. For this reason, heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) are often used to boost efficiency. Installation in a heated space in a heating-dominated climate means that the HPWH is drawing heat from the space. The average COP of HPWHs is 1.8-2.5 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760) If the space is heated with a heat pump with COP of 2.5, then a HPWH with COP of 2.5 has an overall electrical COP of about 1.5, making overall solar efficiency 15-23%. Refrigerants in heat pumps are especially high carbon, accounting for around 20% of total life-cycle carbon. HPWHs have one moving part, the compressor, but HPWHs are claimed to last only 10-15 years. I have heard of a system that required two replacements in three years. PV also has failure modes. Hail damage is probably not more than for thermal, which is pretty low. Microinverters, though, are notorious for failure. A colleague has replaced about half in three different batches over ten years, and expects to have to replace the rest at some point. Unless you are using a timer to limit water heating to only when PV is producing electricity, then an apples-to-apples comparison requires batteries to offset at least part of the fossil-derived utility electricity that the HPWH uses more of than solar thermal. Batteries have high embodied carbon and don't last terribly long. HPWHs are available up to 80 gallons, so less low-carbon storage in water to last through the night.

If I were in a cooling-dominated climate, I would consider PV/HPWH/batteries because the heat that the HPWH draws from the space would usually be a benefit. On the other hand, PV efficiency decreases with ambient temperature, while solar thermal efficiency increases. It would be a hard choice that might also depend on how renewable the local grid is, i.e., if I could justify foregoing the batteries.

An important decision criterion for many these days is low life-cycle carbon. Solar efficiency, COP, upfront carbon, and replacement of parts that do not last for the life of the building are all significant factors. Trying not to generalize here, but that favors solar thermal over PV/HPWH/batteries in most US climates and utility situations.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 08:11 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 06:51 AM
From: David Hrivnak
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

------------------------------
David Hrivnak
SalesEngineering
EcoLogical part time

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 11:55 PM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 12:20 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 12-30-2024 02:43 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Thanks Keith, unfortunately the link does not seem to work for me.  That said if you compare the energy labels on the Rheem HP water heater today I see a 1/3 cost of usage so call it a COP of 3.  I also have thermal, prewater heater that in 25 years, I have had to replace the tanks twice,  and the glass plating once.  Part of it may be sub par do-it yourself, but so far the costs have been much higher than my HP water heater.  Inverters today are better than 95% efficiency so when combined with 21% efficient panels I can see 20%, but in many cases, who cares as there is often plenty of roof space.   But given the COP of 3 that is 60% overall.   My thermal preheater, is about the size of two panels and weighs some 700 lbs.  Two solar panels weigh in at 85 lbs.  So easy to add a third or a 4th if needed if I need more than "60%" efficiency i currently enjoy.   Then I found there are some side benefits as well.  Now in NE TN summer heating is now greater than winter heating loads.  So the HP water heater helps with summer cooling, and it does some dehumidification.  And it replaced a gas water heater so I was able to plug the 3" vent hole in the roof, saving some heat losses in the winter.  Note I have had thermal hot water and passive solar homes for 39 years now.  PV for 11.5 years.  So I am not a newbe.  I am an engineer who has been doing this all my professional life.  Yes thermal has a place.  But I fully believe PV is better in most use cases.  

Good job keeping it short! I will try to do the same.

To compare to 50% system efficiency for ST, we need system efficiency for PV. With panel efficiency of 20-24% and balance-of-system efficiency of 80%, that is 16-19%, so higher than my original estimate, but still lower than for ST.

David,

The link I provided describes real-world measurements of HPWH efficiency, which are lower than nameplate efficiency.

This link (https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.2744) summarizes 110,000 measurements of age degradation, and finds 0.6 - 1% per year across several PV technologies. They also note large differences in measured versus nameplate degradation rates.

Capitalism and marketing at work.

To keep this short which I will fail at, you mention in ST allot of issues but gloss over the frequencies and related problems that they create. Fluid leaks are not just fluid leaks from pipes, so fix pipe. The damage that CAN result from said leak can be extensive. Pumps can last decades, but I have had then fail in 5. For me ST collector efficiency as a comparison to PV efficiency is a non brainer. However your PV efficiencies are under rated. Should be at least 18% to 20% today, depending on all downstream equip.. Drain back has its own problems and efficiency loss due to an extra XCHANGR and another storage tank usually on top. I personally prefer for less O&M and freeze safety, glycol and external SS flat plate exchangers, like used for Beer coolers, resulting in twin pumps. COP for ST are obscene in a good direction. 

If you have SDHW, heat pump water heaters and de-superheaters for geo, make no sense. PV still makes sense for all non heating loads, which if you have EV's will far exceed heating and cooling requirements. My biggest loads are non thermal at this point (3 EV's) and allot of computers.

Embedded carbon for me is kind of a non issue for systems that have long time frame use. Housing lasting for 50-100 years, or more in special cases, cars at 100,000 miles plus, etc.. Short term (Plastics single use, very important) are a disgrace on embedded C. Etc.

Hay! I kept it short...

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 03:00 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Agree about generalities. It is a part of trying to make points in paragraphs, rather than writing a book.

Let's compare a specific example - PV and thermal water heating. The solar thermal system has one active moving part, the pump, and possibly a passive moving part, the backflow preventer. The pump and controller require relatively little electricity. Solar efficiency can be 50% or more, while electrical COP is 100 or more. Flat plate solar collectors with black chrome actually increase in efficiency over the first few years as the black chrome ages. The low-power pump tends to last for decades. If you are using a pressurized glycol system, then the glycol and expansion tank will need to be replaced periodically, but a drain-back system eliminates this. Energy storage is inherent and a 200 gallon tank is often used. In my experience, the most common cause of leaks in solar thermal systems is failure to accommodate thermal expansion. This can happen within a multi-panel array and in the supply and return piping. Take care to design for thermal expansion and leaks are unlikely. Collector slope can be designed to provide relatively constant gains throughout the year, so unless the house is unoccupied often, leftover energy is not a significant issue. There is embodied carbon in the components, but low operational carbon.

PV has low solar efficiency, 10-15% initially, with output decreasing around 1% per year. For this reason, heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) are often used to boost efficiency. Installation in a heated space in a heating-dominated climate means that the HPWH is drawing heat from the space. The average COP of HPWHs is 1.8-2.5 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760) If the space is heated with a heat pump with COP of 2.5, then a HPWH with COP of 2.5 has an overall electrical COP of about 1.5, making overall solar efficiency 15-23%. Refrigerants in heat pumps are especially high carbon, accounting for around 20% of total life-cycle carbon. HPWHs have one moving part, the compressor, but HPWHs are claimed to last only 10-15 years. I have heard of a system that required two replacements in three years. PV also has failure modes. Hail damage is probably not more than for thermal, which is pretty low. Microinverters, though, are notorious for failure. A colleague has replaced about half in three different batches over ten years, and expects to have to replace the rest at some point. Unless you are using a timer to limit water heating to only when PV is producing electricity, then an apples-to-apples comparison requires batteries to offset at least part of the fossil-derived utility electricity that the HPWH uses more of than solar thermal. Batteries have high embodied carbon and don't last terribly long. HPWHs are available up to 80 gallons, so less low-carbon storage in water to last through the night.

If I were in a cooling-dominated climate, I would consider PV/HPWH/batteries because the heat that the HPWH draws from the space would usually be a benefit. On the other hand, PV efficiency decreases with ambient temperature, while solar thermal efficiency increases. It would be a hard choice that might also depend on how renewable the local grid is, i.e., if I could justify foregoing the batteries.

An important decision criterion for many these days is low life-cycle carbon. Solar efficiency, COP, upfront carbon, and replacement of parts that do not last for the life of the building are all significant factors. Trying not to generalize here, but that favors solar thermal over PV/HPWH/batteries in most US climates and utility situations.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 08:11 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 06:51 AM
From: David Hrivnak
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

------------------------------
David Hrivnak
SalesEngineering
EcoLogical part time

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 11:55 PM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 12:20 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 12-30-2024 02:43 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

David,

You are still using nameplate efficiency, which studies have shown to be optimistic.

Not sure exactly where you are, but this link (https://www.appalachianpower.com/savings/home/temperature/temperature-monthly-history?station=TRI&stationname=Bristol%20TN&year=2024) shows that Bristol, TN had 3488 heating degree F days and 1343 cooling degree F days for 2024. It will be a long time (hopefully) before summer cooling exceeds winter heating.

How renewable is your local grid? Do you use a timer so that you are heating water only with your own onsite PV?

Thanks Keith, unfortunately the link does not seem to work for me.  That said if you compare the energy labels on the Rheem HP water heater today I see a 1/3 cost of usage so call it a COP of 3.  I also have thermal, prewater heater that in 25 years, I have had to replace the tanks twice,  and the glass plating once.  Part of it may be sub par do-it yourself, but so far the costs have been much higher than my HP water heater.  Inverters today are better than 95% efficiency so when combined with 21% efficient panels I can see 20%, but in many cases, who cares as there is often plenty of roof space.   But given the COP of 3 that is 60% overall.   My thermal preheater, is about the size of two panels and weighs some 700 lbs.  Two solar panels weigh in at 85 lbs.  So easy to add a third or a 4th if needed if I need more than "60%" efficiency i currently enjoy.   Then I found there are some side benefits as well.  Now in NE TN summer heating is now greater than winter heating loads.  So the HP water heater helps with summer cooling, and it does some dehumidification.  And it replaced a gas water heater so I was able to plug the 3" vent hole in the roof, saving some heat losses in the winter.  Note I have had thermal hot water and passive solar homes for 39 years now.  PV for 11.5 years.  So I am not a newbe.  I am an engineer who has been doing this all my professional life.  Yes thermal has a place.  But I fully believe PV is better in most use cases.  

Good job keeping it short! I will try to do the same.

To compare to 50% system efficiency for ST, we need system efficiency for PV. With panel efficiency of 20-24% and balance-of-system efficiency of 80%, that is 16-19%, so higher than my original estimate, but still lower than for ST.

David,

The link I provided describes real-world measurements of HPWH efficiency, which are lower than nameplate efficiency.

This link (https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.2744) summarizes 110,000 measurements of age degradation, and finds 0.6 - 1% per year across several PV technologies. They also note large differences in measured versus nameplate degradation rates.

Capitalism and marketing at work.

To keep this short which I will fail at, you mention in ST allot of issues but gloss over the frequencies and related problems that they create. Fluid leaks are not just fluid leaks from pipes, so fix pipe. The damage that CAN result from said leak can be extensive. Pumps can last decades, but I have had then fail in 5. For me ST collector efficiency as a comparison to PV efficiency is a non brainer. However your PV efficiencies are under rated. Should be at least 18% to 20% today, depending on all downstream equip.. Drain back has its own problems and efficiency loss due to an extra XCHANGR and another storage tank usually on top. I personally prefer for less O&M and freeze safety, glycol and external SS flat plate exchangers, like used for Beer coolers, resulting in twin pumps. COP for ST are obscene in a good direction. 

If you have SDHW, heat pump water heaters and de-superheaters for geo, make no sense. PV still makes sense for all non heating loads, which if you have EV's will far exceed heating and cooling requirements. My biggest loads are non thermal at this point (3 EV's) and allot of computers.

Embedded carbon for me is kind of a non issue for systems that have long time frame use. Housing lasting for 50-100 years, or more in special cases, cars at 100,000 miles plus, etc.. Short term (Plastics single use, very important) are a disgrace on embedded C. Etc.

Hay! I kept it short...

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 03:00 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Agree about generalities. It is a part of trying to make points in paragraphs, rather than writing a book.

Let's compare a specific example - PV and thermal water heating. The solar thermal system has one active moving part, the pump, and possibly a passive moving part, the backflow preventer. The pump and controller require relatively little electricity. Solar efficiency can be 50% or more, while electrical COP is 100 or more. Flat plate solar collectors with black chrome actually increase in efficiency over the first few years as the black chrome ages. The low-power pump tends to last for decades. If you are using a pressurized glycol system, then the glycol and expansion tank will need to be replaced periodically, but a drain-back system eliminates this. Energy storage is inherent and a 200 gallon tank is often used. In my experience, the most common cause of leaks in solar thermal systems is failure to accommodate thermal expansion. This can happen within a multi-panel array and in the supply and return piping. Take care to design for thermal expansion and leaks are unlikely. Collector slope can be designed to provide relatively constant gains throughout the year, so unless the house is unoccupied often, leftover energy is not a significant issue. There is embodied carbon in the components, but low operational carbon.

PV has low solar efficiency, 10-15% initially, with output decreasing around 1% per year. For this reason, heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) are often used to boost efficiency. Installation in a heated space in a heating-dominated climate means that the HPWH is drawing heat from the space. The average COP of HPWHs is 1.8-2.5 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760) If the space is heated with a heat pump with COP of 2.5, then a HPWH with COP of 2.5 has an overall electrical COP of about 1.5, making overall solar efficiency 15-23%. Refrigerants in heat pumps are especially high carbon, accounting for around 20% of total life-cycle carbon. HPWHs have one moving part, the compressor, but HPWHs are claimed to last only 10-15 years. I have heard of a system that required two replacements in three years. PV also has failure modes. Hail damage is probably not more than for thermal, which is pretty low. Microinverters, though, are notorious for failure. A colleague has replaced about half in three different batches over ten years, and expects to have to replace the rest at some point. Unless you are using a timer to limit water heating to only when PV is producing electricity, then an apples-to-apples comparison requires batteries to offset at least part of the fossil-derived utility electricity that the HPWH uses more of than solar thermal. Batteries have high embodied carbon and don't last terribly long. HPWHs are available up to 80 gallons, so less low-carbon storage in water to last through the night.

If I were in a cooling-dominated climate, I would consider PV/HPWH/batteries because the heat that the HPWH draws from the space would usually be a benefit. On the other hand, PV efficiency decreases with ambient temperature, while solar thermal efficiency increases. It would be a hard choice that might also depend on how renewable the local grid is, i.e., if I could justify foregoing the batteries.

An important decision criterion for many these days is low life-cycle carbon. Solar efficiency, COP, upfront carbon, and replacement of parts that do not last for the life of the building are all significant factors. Trying not to generalize here, but that favors solar thermal over PV/HPWH/batteries in most US climates and utility situations.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 08:11 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 06:51 AM
From: David Hrivnak
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

------------------------------
David Hrivnak
SalesEngineering
EcoLogical part time

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 11:55 PM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 12:20 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 12-30-2024 02:43 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

My home may be an anomaly as I designed it as passive solar.  So compared to a typical house we get more winter solar gain and a lot less gain in the summer.  Three of the last 4 years my PV array has produced more power than the house AND cars have used making us a net exporter of power.   https://www.amazon.com/Driving-Net-Stories-Carbon-Future/dp/0692143831

David,

You are still using nameplate efficiency, which studies have shown to be optimistic.

Not sure exactly where you are, but this link (https://www.appalachianpower.com/savings/home/temperature/temperature-monthly-history?station=TRI&stationname=Bristol%20TN&year=2024) shows that Bristol, TN had 3488 heating degree F days and 1343 cooling degree F days for 2024. It will be a long time (hopefully) before summer cooling exceeds winter heating.

How renewable is your local grid? Do you use a timer so that you are heating water only with your own onsite PV?

Thanks Keith, unfortunately the link does not seem to work for me.  That said if you compare the energy labels on the Rheem HP water heater today I see a 1/3 cost of usage so call it a COP of 3.  I also have thermal, prewater heater that in 25 years, I have had to replace the tanks twice,  and the glass plating once.  Part of it may be sub par do-it yourself, but so far the costs have been much higher than my HP water heater.  Inverters today are better than 95% efficiency so when combined with 21% efficient panels I can see 20%, but in many cases, who cares as there is often plenty of roof space.   But given the COP of 3 that is 60% overall.   My thermal preheater, is about the size of two panels and weighs some 700 lbs.  Two solar panels weigh in at 85 lbs.  So easy to add a third or a 4th if needed if I need more than "60%" efficiency i currently enjoy.   Then I found there are some side benefits as well.  Now in NE TN summer heating is now greater than winter heating loads.  So the HP water heater helps with summer cooling, and it does some dehumidification.  And it replaced a gas water heater so I was able to plug the 3" vent hole in the roof, saving some heat losses in the winter.  Note I have had thermal hot water and passive solar homes for 39 years now.  PV for 11.5 years.  So I am not a newbe.  I am an engineer who has been doing this all my professional life.  Yes thermal has a place.  But I fully believe PV is better in most use cases.  

Good job keeping it short! I will try to do the same.

To compare to 50% system efficiency for ST, we need system efficiency for PV. With panel efficiency of 20-24% and balance-of-system efficiency of 80%, that is 16-19%, so higher than my original estimate, but still lower than for ST.

David,

The link I provided describes real-world measurements of HPWH efficiency, which are lower than nameplate efficiency.

This link (https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.2744) summarizes 110,000 measurements of age degradation, and finds 0.6 - 1% per year across several PV technologies. They also note large differences in measured versus nameplate degradation rates.

Capitalism and marketing at work.

To keep this short which I will fail at, you mention in ST allot of issues but gloss over the frequencies and related problems that they create. Fluid leaks are not just fluid leaks from pipes, so fix pipe. The damage that CAN result from said leak can be extensive. Pumps can last decades, but I have had then fail in 5. For me ST collector efficiency as a comparison to PV efficiency is a non brainer. However your PV efficiencies are under rated. Should be at least 18% to 20% today, depending on all downstream equip.. Drain back has its own problems and efficiency loss due to an extra XCHANGR and another storage tank usually on top. I personally prefer for less O&M and freeze safety, glycol and external SS flat plate exchangers, like used for Beer coolers, resulting in twin pumps. COP for ST are obscene in a good direction. 

If you have SDHW, heat pump water heaters and de-superheaters for geo, make no sense. PV still makes sense for all non heating loads, which if you have EV's will far exceed heating and cooling requirements. My biggest loads are non thermal at this point (3 EV's) and allot of computers.

Embedded carbon for me is kind of a non issue for systems that have long time frame use. Housing lasting for 50-100 years, or more in special cases, cars at 100,000 miles plus, etc.. Short term (Plastics single use, very important) are a disgrace on embedded C. Etc.

Hay! I kept it short...

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 03:00 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Agree about generalities. It is a part of trying to make points in paragraphs, rather than writing a book.

Let's compare a specific example - PV and thermal water heating. The solar thermal system has one active moving part, the pump, and possibly a passive moving part, the backflow preventer. The pump and controller require relatively little electricity. Solar efficiency can be 50% or more, while electrical COP is 100 or more. Flat plate solar collectors with black chrome actually increase in efficiency over the first few years as the black chrome ages. The low-power pump tends to last for decades. If you are using a pressurized glycol system, then the glycol and expansion tank will need to be replaced periodically, but a drain-back system eliminates this. Energy storage is inherent and a 200 gallon tank is often used. In my experience, the most common cause of leaks in solar thermal systems is failure to accommodate thermal expansion. This can happen within a multi-panel array and in the supply and return piping. Take care to design for thermal expansion and leaks are unlikely. Collector slope can be designed to provide relatively constant gains throughout the year, so unless the house is unoccupied often, leftover energy is not a significant issue. There is embodied carbon in the components, but low operational carbon.

PV has low solar efficiency, 10-15% initially, with output decreasing around 1% per year. For this reason, heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) are often used to boost efficiency. Installation in a heated space in a heating-dominated climate means that the HPWH is drawing heat from the space. The average COP of HPWHs is 1.8-2.5 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760) If the space is heated with a heat pump with COP of 2.5, then a HPWH with COP of 2.5 has an overall electrical COP of about 1.5, making overall solar efficiency 15-23%. Refrigerants in heat pumps are especially high carbon, accounting for around 20% of total life-cycle carbon. HPWHs have one moving part, the compressor, but HPWHs are claimed to last only 10-15 years. I have heard of a system that required two replacements in three years. PV also has failure modes. Hail damage is probably not more than for thermal, which is pretty low. Microinverters, though, are notorious for failure. A colleague has replaced about half in three different batches over ten years, and expects to have to replace the rest at some point. Unless you are using a timer to limit water heating to only when PV is producing electricity, then an apples-to-apples comparison requires batteries to offset at least part of the fossil-derived utility electricity that the HPWH uses more of than solar thermal. Batteries have high embodied carbon and don't last terribly long. HPWHs are available up to 80 gallons, so less low-carbon storage in water to last through the night.

If I were in a cooling-dominated climate, I would consider PV/HPWH/batteries because the heat that the HPWH draws from the space would usually be a benefit. On the other hand, PV efficiency decreases with ambient temperature, while solar thermal efficiency increases. It would be a hard choice that might also depend on how renewable the local grid is, i.e., if I could justify foregoing the batteries.

An important decision criterion for many these days is low life-cycle carbon. Solar efficiency, COP, upfront carbon, and replacement of parts that do not last for the life of the building are all significant factors. Trying not to generalize here, but that favors solar thermal over PV/HPWH/batteries in most US climates and utility situations.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 08:11 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-07-2025 06:51 AM
From: David Hrivnak
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

------------------------------
David Hrivnak
SalesEngineering
EcoLogical part time

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 11:55 PM
From: william fitch
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: 01-06-2025 12:20 PM
From: M Keith Sharp
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

------------------------------
M Keith Sharp
Emeritus Professor
Louisville KY

Original Message:
Sent: 12-30-2024 02:43 AM
From: Timothy Mcbride
Subject: Jimmy Carter's environmental legacy set the foundation for today's climate action

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Agree about generalities. It is a part of trying to make points in paragraphs, rather than writing a book.

Let's compare a specific example - PV and thermal water heating. The solar thermal system has one active moving part, the pump, and possibly a passive moving part, the backflow preventer. The pump and controller require relatively little electricity. Solar efficiency can be 50% or more, while electrical COP is 100 or more. Flat plate solar collectors with black chrome actually increase in efficiency over the first few years as the black chrome ages. The low-power pump tends to last for decades. If you are using a pressurized glycol system, then the glycol and expansion tank will need to be replaced periodically, but a drain-back system eliminates this. Energy storage is inherent and a 200 gallon tank is often used. In my experience, the most common cause of leaks in solar thermal systems is failure to accommodate thermal expansion. This can happen within a multi-panel array and in the supply and return piping. Take care to design for thermal expansion and leaks are unlikely. Collector slope can be designed to provide relatively constant gains throughout the year, so unless the house is unoccupied often, leftover energy is not a significant issue. There is embodied carbon in the components, but low operational carbon.

PV has low solar efficiency, 10-15% initially, with output decreasing around 1% per year. For this reason, heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) are often used to boost efficiency. Installation in a heated space in a heating-dominated climate means that the HPWH is drawing heat from the space. The average COP of HPWHs is 1.8-2.5 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760) If the space is heated with a heat pump with COP of 2.5, then a HPWH with COP of 2.5 has an overall electrical COP of about 1.5, making overall solar efficiency 15-23%. Refrigerants in heat pumps are especially high carbon, accounting for around 20% of total life-cycle carbon. HPWHs have one moving part, the compressor, but HPWHs are claimed to last only 10-15 years. I have heard of a system that required two replacements in three years. PV also has failure modes. Hail damage is probably not more than for thermal, which is pretty low. Microinverters, though, are notorious for failure. A colleague has replaced about half in three different batches over ten years, and expects to have to replace the rest at some point. Unless you are using a timer to limit water heating to only when PV is producing electricity, then an apples-to-apples comparison requires batteries to offset at least part of the fossil-derived utility electricity that the HPWH uses more of than solar thermal. Batteries have high embodied carbon and don't last terribly long. HPWHs are available up to 80 gallons, so less low-carbon storage in water to last through the night.

If I were in a cooling-dominated climate, I would consider PV/HPWH/batteries because the heat that the HPWH draws from the space would usually be a benefit. On the other hand, PV efficiency decreases with ambient temperature, while solar thermal efficiency increases. It would be a hard choice that might also depend on how renewable the local grid is, i.e., if I could justify foregoing the batteries.

An important decision criterion for many these days is low life-cycle carbon. Solar efficiency, COP, upfront carbon, and replacement of parts that do not last for the life of the building are all significant factors. Trying not to generalize here, but that favors solar thermal over PV/HPWH/batteries in most US climates and utility situations.

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------

Keith sorry to disagree, but I must.  PV is 20-24% efficient these days.  with a degradation of .08% a year.  So very different than your numbers.  And the COP of my HP Water heater is right at 4 as the energy star label is 1/4 that it's electric cousin.  And now instead of 1 40 or 50 gallon tank I need to find room for another 200 gallon tank?  So yes, for most people I believe PV with a HP water heater is the lower cost option.

Agree about generalities. It is a part of trying to make points in paragraphs, rather than writing a book.

Let's compare a specific example - PV and thermal water heating. The solar thermal system has one active moving part, the pump, and possibly a passive moving part, the backflow preventer. The pump and controller require relatively little electricity. Solar efficiency can be 50% or more, while electrical COP is 100 or more. Flat plate solar collectors with black chrome actually increase in efficiency over the first few years as the black chrome ages. The low-power pump tends to last for decades. If you are using a pressurized glycol system, then the glycol and expansion tank will need to be replaced periodically, but a drain-back system eliminates this. Energy storage is inherent and a 200 gallon tank is often used. In my experience, the most common cause of leaks in solar thermal systems is failure to accommodate thermal expansion. This can happen within a multi-panel array and in the supply and return piping. Take care to design for thermal expansion and leaks are unlikely. Collector slope can be designed to provide relatively constant gains throughout the year, so unless the house is unoccupied often, leftover energy is not a significant issue. There is embodied carbon in the components, but low operational carbon.

PV has low solar efficiency, 10-15% initially, with output decreasing around 1% per year. For this reason, heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) are often used to boost efficiency. Installation in a heated space in a heating-dominated climate means that the HPWH is drawing heat from the space. The average COP of HPWHs is 1.8-2.5 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760) If the space is heated with a heat pump with COP of 2.5, then a HPWH with COP of 2.5 has an overall electrical COP of about 1.5, making overall solar efficiency 15-23%. Refrigerants in heat pumps are especially high carbon, accounting for around 20% of total life-cycle carbon. HPWHs have one moving part, the compressor, but HPWHs are claimed to last only 10-15 years. I have heard of a system that required two replacements in three years. PV also has failure modes. Hail damage is probably not more than for thermal, which is pretty low. Microinverters, though, are notorious for failure. A colleague has replaced about half in three different batches over ten years, and expects to have to replace the rest at some point. Unless you are using a timer to limit water heating to only when PV is producing electricity, then an apples-to-apples comparison requires batteries to offset at least part of the fossil-derived utility electricity that the HPWH uses more of than solar thermal. Batteries have high embodied carbon and don't last terribly long. HPWHs are available up to 80 gallons, so less low-carbon storage in water to last through the night.

If I were in a cooling-dominated climate, I would consider PV/HPWH/batteries because the heat that the HPWH draws from the space would usually be a benefit. On the other hand, PV efficiency decreases with ambient temperature, while solar thermal efficiency increases. It would be a hard choice that might also depend on how renewable the local grid is, i.e., if I could justify foregoing the batteries.

An important decision criterion for many these days is low life-cycle carbon. Solar efficiency, COP, upfront carbon, and replacement of parts that do not last for the life of the building are all significant factors. Trying not to generalize here, but that favors solar thermal over PV/HPWH/batteries in most US climates and utility situations.

I tend to dislike general conclusions, most given for convince and expediency reasons, understandability. Solar thermal really is a case by case decision. An example. A commercial laundromat is an excellent usage given the right site and building parameters for solar thermal. A classic case of "size (LOAD) matters". And so on and so on.... If you have advanced DYI skills, solar thermal my be the better choice. Obviously rules and regs of a given location matter as well, for both choices, along with climate. The colder the climate the more thermal gains comparatively, generally. HP efficiencies are better for cooling than heating. Geothermal changes this dynamic a bit of course. 

Round and round the Merry-Go-Round goes....

Very well said William, and this follows my experiences including designing two passive solar homes and some 75 PV solar systems.  Thrice now I have been involved with some thermal solar for hot water.  ALL three have developed leaks within 6 years or less, and two systems removed.  Yet my 11.5 year solar PV keeps on producing electricity.  And it is far cheaper to marry solar PV and a Heat Pump Water Heater than to use thermal solar for water heating.

Despite my business is technically Solar Thermal, I have to disagree a little bit with you. PV has Lower O&M than Solar Thermal. Additionally PV is never going to leak all over your roof or floor due to plumbing failures. Both system use electricity, but only thermal (Other than solar hot air) has the liquid overhead. PV is wiring. Thermal is wiring and plumbing. Speaking of active systems here.

Second from a production measure, PV output can be easily measured and conveyed to other sources for information and systems choices in KW and KWH. Solar thermal is far more "fuzzy" in terms of end BTU's delivered calculated. Additionally you can grid tie PV. Thermal, practically speaking with the exception of district heating, you can not grid tie. This was a HUGE factor (Among many) that allowed PV to step in as the new Gorilla and replace the weak foothold thermal had in the US. There were other "business oriented" LARGE reasons as well. But, the "physical side" you can not ignore.

I like all the passive "super insulation" constructs you promote. But at a practical level BEYOND the basics, Basic air infiltration, basic better insulation, some mass consideration, is very worthwhile. Easier to expense for BTU's not lost or gained than to have the problem and try to fix it with more energy. Allot like CO2 Global heating in certain ways. Better to not put than get rid of. But unfortunately all the more advanced "constructions" are really only practical for new housing. Trying to do the more advanced constructions is highly invasive to the interior of the "lived in" house, and very expensive as retro, to name a few practical problems and wide spread demographic expertise regarding such.

Anyway, did not want to run long on this, so just a note....

Thanks, Timothy, for the pictures and links about Jimmy Carter. His heart and mind were always in the right place. An inspiration to us all.

It is such a shame that our domestic solar thermal market crashed. Yes, PV produces electricity that can be used for just about anything, but solar thermal is typically higher efficiency and lower carbon. Also important is that thermal energy is easier, safer, cleaner and more reliable to store than electrical energy.

"At the time that Jimmy Carter was president, his biggest concern was energy security," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University.

In 1977, the U.S. was importing 8.81  million barrels of petroleum a day, mostly from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or the OPEC cartel. That made the U.S. vulnerable during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which led to long lines at gas stations.

In a 1978 speech Carter did recognize the polluting nature of coal by announcing a commission on the coal industry. "Ultimately, we will learn to harness the energy of the Sun and the oceans with fusion power to meet our energy needs. But for now, we have no choice but to continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, and coal is our most abundant fossil fuel," Carter said.

But even Verleger comes back to Carter's work advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy.

"Carter really started the ball rolling, created many of the ideas that are now coming to the fore. And that's good. The downside in terms of environment was the emphasis on coal," Verleger says.

"Today, in directly harnessing the power of the sun, we're taking the energy that God gave us, the most renewable energy that we will ever see, and using it to replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels," Carter said.

By the end of the 20th century, Carter wanted the U.S. to get "20% of all the energy we use from the sun. The country still hasn't reached that goal, though more than 80% of new generating capacity this year is expected to come from solar and battery storage.

In 2023, solar energy accounted for about 5.6% of the electricity generated in the United States. This is up from 4.8% in 2022.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, died at his home in Plains, Georgia on Sunday - December 29th, 2024 - He was 100.

President Jimmy Carter played a major role in starting this clean energy revolution that just may someday save our world. 

Thanks Jimmy for all you did,   

Safe Journeys,  Godspeed into the Sun

Jimmy Carter's Environmental Legacy

When the Obama administration installed new solar panels on the roof in 2013, they were well aware of the symbolism of their actions. President Obama was actually the third US President to install solar. President George W. Bush was the first to install a solar electric system at the White House, powering parts of the White House grounds, but he did so quietly. A second installation by Bush helped warm the presidential swimming pool.

------------------------------
Timothy Mcbride
CEOOwner
Sol-Era R & D
------------------------------