3 ms·
Sounds way, way too good to be true. This would be like saying you found a way to make nuclear fusion work.
by daniel-cussen 19y ago
Sounds way, way too good to be true. This would be like saying you found a way to make nuclear fusion work.
- eru 19y agoThe article says that it will be cheaper than coal. That should be quite possible. Not that the energy will be free.
- paul 19y agoNuclear fusion does work. This is just about capturing the energy :)
- qaexl 19y agoThat's a very interesting reaction. I find it interesting that a lot of people get suspicious over a 'good thing'. Part of the culture, I guess. I've been hearing about Google investing into alternative energy projects, including Nanosolar and a (non-torrodial) fusion group that was formerly funded by the government. I've been hearing these rumors for the past two years or so. I heard about the Nanosolar bit right when Google was building all those datacenters, including the one in Washington (or Oregon?) near that huge power plant. I had also heard that Sergey Brin, Larry Page, and Page's brother, Carl Page funded Nanosolar. You know, right after the Google IPO and Carl Page sold his company to Yahoo. (Though they supposedly invested a few years before the payday, so ... ). All of this is hearsay, of course. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/06/google_founders.php http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/06/google_founders.php Here's the bottom line. Nanosolar has hungry customers beating down their door. Like the NYTimes article says, why should they be making a big media fuss right now? Why do they need to prove to the world about those figures? It actually reminds me pre-IPO Google.com. "Come see for yourself."