close, page-17

Jaded, I am not here to TOU, but to discuss DYE which is an exciting product. If it is economic and produces decent power, the sky is the limit. But I see many hurdles.

I have been following the solar power industry for over 30 years, we live in a solar powered house with 2kw of silicon panels on the steel roof. Over the years there have been many claims of cheaper panels, better technology and advances in efficiency. Solar power is still very expensive.

I would love to see our 300sqm roof covered in Dyesol roofing. The comments about walking on the roof, cutting holes in it for antennas, chimneys and satellite dish mounts and also rainwater collection are practical examples. Ongoing access to the roof for chimney maintenance, antenna adjusting, gutter cleaning etc are examples of why you need to walk on the roof. Hail damage, frost, snow and bird attack are more. Long term degredation, leaky junctions setting up galvanic corrosion on metal structures, disposal of materials at structure endlife are some more issues. The "hubby's shed" is 14m by 7m, not to be sneezed at. It is easy to say, these issues are not Dyesol's problem, but for Corus to address, but Dyesol needs to be looking at them too.

If Dyesol can make an economically effective solar generator that can compete costwise per kilowatthour with coal, then the sky is the limit. If it is not economic, it just becomes a very expensive "I am trying to be green" billboard.

We need the people over at CFU to make their bluegen accept input from the Dyesol panels and we can solve the world's problems. Imagine it being cheap, every building will have Dyesol windows and roofs, hooked up to an inverter and feeding into the grid and into a bluegen. Now that's a company I want to own shares in. This could be the 100 bagger.

I appreciate that Dyesol are setting themselves up as the suppliers of the industrial process and raw ingredients, but there has to be some specs around, even the little educational models should have specs.