One of the more common ignorant propaganda bits coming from the rabid
reen" crowd. At current energy efficiencies, the NET energy production by using current
commercially viable solar cells is close to 0 and at times negative over the effective
life of the cell.
If products such as televisions, DVD players, alarm clocks and mobile-phone chargers can be adapted to meet some of their own power demands via in-built solar panels, "the overall energy saving could be quite significant,"
The energy and environmental impact required in the total
mining+transport+manufacturing+packaging+maintenance+disposal for solar cells (that also lose efficiency over time and the cheaper ones may
last 10 years even when protected and properly
handled) can cancel out any "energy savings".
energy and environmental cost analyses are often missing or incomplete in the divinization of the all-glorious "Green" energy
Solar cell technology does have a vital place in the overall approach to energy production, but in my opinion publicizing projects like this is a complete waste of resources and grossly misleads the public.
The bikini can stay (afterall, it does
save processed fabric costs)...a solar cell bikini is just a waste...esp when it can be used only when it's 100% dry.
edit to add:
My next no doubt highly publicized "G
-solar cell beach volleyball net (but don't accidentally hit the net!)
-solar cell surfboard (but you can't surf while using it for power)
-solar cell sandcastle building bucket (clean before using it for power)
-solar cell 'banana hammock' (as with the bikini...must be 100% dry...and it could get uncomfortable when said bikini walks by)
edit to add:
Also, with "in-built solar panels"
on all the millions of these relatively short-life small devices thrown-out each year, that means you throw-out the solar cells too, and all the energy/resources used to make/etc the cells, at the same time...thus reducing their life-span energy efficiency even more.