> In article <1152221995.063046.266330@s26g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, William.Mook@gmail.com wrote:

>>
>>David Bostwick wrote:

>>> In article <1152200962.567822.166370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,

>> William.Mook@gmail.com wrote:

>>>
>>> [...]

>
> Time you got that new script, mate.
>
> Cheers, Phred.
>
> --
> ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID

> In article <1152221995.063046.266330@s26g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, William.Mook@gmail.com wrote:

>>
>>David Bostwick wrote:

>>> In article <1152200962.567822.166370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,

>> William.Mook@gmail.com wrote:

>>>
>>> [...]
>>>

>>>>We already control the land dude, and have the patents, I can send you
>>>>our plant layout, and detailed design drawings if you wish, and photos
>>>>of our laboratory scale prototypes. You are being pointlessly hard-ass
>>>>just because you think it makes you look smart! lol. In reality,
>>>>you're not being very smart at all. You're just being a smart -ass!
>>>>lol.

>>>
>>> So quit laughing and do it.

>>
>>Why can't I laugh while I do things I love?
>> ...

> In article <1152295927.981636.272870@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, William.Mook@gmail.com wrote:

>>
>>Oz wrote:

>
> [...]
>

>>> Because to me, this looks like a scam...

>>
>>Scams usually involve people asking for money. I have not asked anyone
>>for money, nor have I proposed a structure of investment. So, your
>>comment is just a vicious statement attacking my character. Which
>>tells me a lot about your character - bozo.
>>

>
> Ah, the useful ad hominem argument. Removes all need to present real
> arguments. Requires no real offense to generate, just a perceived threat to
> one's ego. Usually indicates that the user hasn't got a leg to stand on. See
> Godwin's Law.

> William.Mook@gmail.com writes

>>Depends on the details. Just because we can make money, doesn't mean
>>we can make more money than a conventional oil company per barrel. So,
>>that's a factor.

>
> Hahaha...
>
> A good return is all that is required.

> William.Mook@gmail.com wrote:
>

>> It turns out that two innovators have solved this problem. One in
>> Bernie Sater of a company called Photovolt - who produced a Vertical
>> Multi-junction device (VMJ) first for NASA in the 1980s, but has never
>> gotten commercial scale production underway. Another is Bob Swanson of
>> Sun Power - who produced Point Junction or what I call Back Junction
>> device.

>
> So you are still going with vmj. The uninitiated were baited by the term
> 'panel'.

> William.Mook@gmail.com writes

>>
>>A square mile contains 587 panel strings, with access roads at each
>>end, for inter-string interconnect. A total of 374.6 MW peak - and 75
>>MW continuous over a 24 hour day. Delivering over 1,500 MWh per day.
>>
>>A square mile has 645,700 panels each costing $38 a total cost of $24.6
>>million - in quantity. The batteries/electrolyzers cost $7.4 million -
>>a total cost of $32.0 million
>>
>>These are installed costs.
>>
>>We actually get paid to convert the land, so this isn't an issue.
>>
>>There are transmission and wheeling costs, associated with each energy
>>type, which varies by installation - but they do not substantially
>>change the economics described here.
>>
>>The $1.6 billion factory, will achieve these prices, and produce 2 ...

>Depends on the details. Just because we can make money, doesn't mean
>we can make more money than a conventional oil company per barrel. So,
>that's a factor.

>There are risk factors to consider as well at this point.

>
>A square mile contains 587 panel strings, with access roads at each
>end, for inter-string interconnect. A total of 374.6 MW peak - and 75
>MW continuous over a 24 hour day. Delivering over 1,500 MWh per day.
>
>A square mile has 645,700 panels each costing $38 a total cost of $24.6
>million - in quantity. The batteries/electrolyzers cost $7.4 million -
>a total cost of $32.0 million
>
>These are installed costs.
>
>We actually get paid to convert the land, so this isn't an issue.
>
>There are transmission and wheeling costs, associated with each energy
>type, which varies by installation - but they do not substantially
>change the economics described here.
>
>The $1.6 billion factory, will achieve these prices, and produce 2
>square miles every 2.8 days. ...

>Oz wrote about Mok Industries solar plans:

>> If anyone of any importance believed your figures they you wouldn't need
>> to worry about SPR or USAf or USN because you would be buried in venture
>> capital ...

>
>Study history, Oz! Lots of examples of difficulties in launching new
>concepts. When Ross Perot started EDS with the (then) revolutionary
>idea of selling integrated business solutions, he was IBM's most
>successful salesman but he could not even sell IBM on the idea. He got
>doors slammed in his face something like 70 times before he made his
>first sale. Then went on to make billions.