1. No it doesn’t. Wind loads are most destructive to roofs in suction, and roof “blow off”. You put a wing on a roof and you’ve just doubled your uplift loads. Ever hear of a biplane?
2. Your argument pages back was to put these things in the desert to avoid displacing farmland and forests. Up goes the price of food and down goes wildlife and trees. Our current grid is AC. If you want a DC line it has to be separate from the grid. And again the longest DC line is 800 miles, and you are proposing 2000 miles.
3. 20 years is a long time to wait for something that may never happen. Why not drill for oil and build nukes, both proven technologies, while we wait?
4. Why not just burn the methane that we have now? It’s going to leak out of the ground anyway, and if we don’t burn it, is 20 times more harmful as a greenhouse gas than the CO2 released when burned. And we won’t have to have huge algae tanks, or polluted water in lakes or lagoons where we’re growing the stuff.

I don't think that the argument that humans are or are not causing global warming, or if it is warming, is important. Sound solutions to energy independence can reduce so-called greenhouse gasses regardless. These include nuclear power, and exploitation of natural gas. Since environmentalist don’t embrace these technologies, it points to a hidden agenda.

I'll draw a picture for you. A bi-plane has two set of wings, both have wind that can pass over them so that both sets can generate lift. In the case of the solar panels, there is no gap for the wind to go over the roof, the solar panel shields it.

No, my arguement was that the desert is one place to put them, there are just about infinate locations for thousands of micro power plants and all that.

How long do you think it would take to build 400 nuclear power plants like you suggested eariler? Drilling would take 5-10 on it's own.

[/quote]4. Why not just burn the methane that we have now? It’s going to leak out of the ground anyway, and if we don’t burn it, is 20 times more harmful as a greenhouse gas than the CO2 released when burned. And we won’t have to have huge algae tanks, or polluted water in lakes or lagoons where we’re growing the stuff.[/QUOTE

There's no reason not to, but that is not a reason not to make the algae tanks. The more energy we have (meaning not limiting any except those that absolutely should be), the cheaper the energy will be, and the more sources (types of sources) that we have, the less likely a monopoly can form and should something unforseeible accure regarding one type of power, the easier it is to adjust.

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

At no wind angle does the wind cause a 'double' surface. The roof is either sheltered from the wind (and so does not feel it's force) or the lift from high and low pressures won't effect the panel.

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

You actually made that diagram. I for one, think that's so cute lol.

That's dedicated, man.

__________________

People will adapt, yes. GLobal Warming isn't going to extinct humanity. It will cause a pile of problems, though.

__________________

Yes we will adapt, by changing our key power sources, that is how we will adapt. You should all know what happens to species that don't adapt...

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

Wow. I don't recall having read something so absurd. Think about that sentance for a bit Chan.

I take it Earth is adapting to us, by getting very sick.

Is it sick or merely undergoing change? The problem is that you're using some point in the past as the standard against which to measure what's going on instead of looking forward.

Do we say that a species adapting to changes in its environment is sick or that it is undergoing adaptation?

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

So, could it not also be that the planet will adapt to our adaptations?

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."