| Author |
Solar Powered Desktop Computer - Tom's Hardware
|
|
| drydem 2007-09-13, 1:25 pm |
| Solar PC: Turning Sunlight into Computing Power
Frank Volkel. September 6, 2007
(1st in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09...diy_solar_powe=
red_pc/
an overview of solar panel technology and industry
Do-It-Yourself Solar-Powered PC
By Bert T=F6pelt ... September 13, 2007 10:36
( 2nd in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09...are_components/
Using readily available components an AMD
Athlon 64 X2 BE-2350 motherboard
desktop using 61w on idle and 115W on
full duty cycle/load.
The final article will cover a step-by-step
description of a solar-powered energy
collection and storage system.
| |
| Anthony Matonak 2007-09-13, 1:25 pm |
| drydem wrote:
> Solar PC: Turning Sunlight into Computing Power Frank Volkel. September 6, 2007
> (1st in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)
> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09...lar_powered_pc/
Much easier with a laptop because they use less power and they
already have batteries.
Anthony
| |
| (PeteCresswell) 2007-09-13, 5:25 pm |
| Per drydem:
>http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09...lar_powered_pc/
One of my reactions was that it would make the project more "real
world" to include some discussion/accommodation of internet
connectivity for the PC in question.
--
PeteCresswell
| |
| bealiba@gmail.com 2007-09-13, 8:25 pm |
| On Sep 14, 1:46 am, drydem <walter_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Solar PC: Turning Sunlight into Computing Power
> Frank Volkel. September 6, 2007
> (1st in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)http://w=
ww.tomshardware.com/2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_sola...
>
> an overview of solar panel technology and industry
>
> Do-It-Yourself Solar-Powered PC
> By Bert T=F6pelt ... September 13, 2007 10:36
> ( 2nd in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)http://=
www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/hardware_components/
>
> Using readily available components an AMD
> Athlon 64 X2 BE-2350 motherboard
> desktop using 61w on idle and 115W on
> full duty cycle/load.
>
> The final article will cover a step-by-step
> description of a solar-powered energy
> collection and storage system.
Is this supposed to impress people. I and many others have been
running our computers off solar power for years.
I think you may have missed the boat.
| |
| wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net 2007-09-13, 8:25 pm |
| On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:18:30 -0000, bealiba@gmail.com wrote:
>On Sep 14, 1:46 am, drydem <walter_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=darkred]
>Is this supposed to impress people. I and many others have been
>running our computers off solar power for years.
I think that one difference between you and THG is that they have a
good reputation. So readers can believe what's presented rather than
having to wonder if the computer uses 59W or 150W. Plus, THG can
afford to use question marks. And of course there's this distinction
as well. http://tinyurl.com/385383
Wayne
| |
| drydem 2007-09-13, 9:25 pm |
| On Sep 13, 4:18 pm, beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 14, 1:46 am, drydem <walter_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>
/www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_sola...[color=darkred]
>
>
//www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/hardware_components/[color=darkred]
>
>
>
> Is this supposed to impress people. I and many others have been
> running our computers off solar power for years.
>
> I think you may have missed the boat.-
Tom's Hardware normally focuses on computer performance. They opted
out of using a notebook which are designed from the top down to be
more
energy efficient because it was less of a challenge and they wanted
to make something with more computing power. This is the first time
I can recall them addressing computing energy efficiency.
My gut reaction was that the full electrical load
of 115w is a tad excessive but Tom's Hardware Group
wants a very fast workstation and they're willing to
build a bigger solar array system to accomodate it.
Yet ISTM if I'm out in the middle of nowhere with
a computer running on batteries and a few
solar panels - I would be thinking more than twice
about wasting any of precious battery power
on anything more than the basics like
internet, email, word processing, and a
power grid monitor. I'm expecting that the cost
the electrical storage system is about half the
cost of a solar panel system.
| |
| bealiba@gmail.com 2007-09-13, 9:25 pm |
| On Sep 14, 11:32 am, drydem <walter_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Sep 13, 4:18 pm, beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_sola...[color=darkred]
>
>
p://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/hardware_components/[color=darkred]
>
>
>
>
>
> Tom's Hardware normally focuses on computer performance. They opted
> out of using a notebook which are designed from the top down to be
> more
> energy efficient because it was less of a challenge and they wanted
> to make something with more computing power. This is the first time
> I can recall them addressing computing energy efficiency.
Seems to me to be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has
bolted.
I have run all my computers off solar for as long as I have had
computers.
Despite poor wayes assertions my latest iMac uses 59 watts while being
used for simple word processing and can use as much as 150 watts when
pushed to more demanding work. It was a choice between that and and
eMac that had a higher energy requirement.
>
> My gut reaction was that the full electrical load
> of 115w is a tad excessive but Tom's Hardware Group
> wants a very fast workstation and they're willing to
> build a bigger solar array system to accomodate it.
115 watts sounds high, yes. But then equipment uses what it uses for
the application it is used for. Best to design for the possible load
rather than have not enough energy when you need it. Especially if you
are making money from the computer.
>
> Yet ISTM if I'm out in the middle of nowhere with
> a computer running on batteries and a few
> solar panels - I would be thinking more than twice
> about wasting any of precious battery power
> on anything more than the basics like
> internet, email, word processing, and a
> power grid monitor. I'm expecting that the cost
> the electrical storage system is about half the
> cost of a solar panel system.
Well now, consider this.
A printing company at the end of the grid. Presses being run and an
office full of computers.
Now the owner did not care if the presses ran a bit slow from time to
time due to grid not being up to his demands.
But he put the office on solar. No computer problems, no down time, no
lost data.
So if it comes down to a) being out in the middle of nowhere and you
are making money from your computer and need it to its fullest
capabilities or b) just checking your email. You have to decide how
much you are going to limit your ability to use your computer.
| |
|
| bealiba@gmail.com wrote in
news:1189736019.214051.94850@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:
> On Sep 14, 11:32 am, drydem <walter_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_sola...
> p://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/hardware_components/
>
> Seems to me to be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has
> bolted.
>
> I have run all my computers off solar for as long as I have had
> computers.
>
> Despite poor wayes assertions my latest iMac uses 59 watts while being
> used for simple word processing and can use as much as 150 watts when
> pushed to more demanding work. It was a choice between that and and
> eMac that had a higher energy requirement.
>
> 115 watts sounds high, yes. But then equipment uses what it uses for
> the application it is used for. Best to design for the possible load
> rather than have not enough energy when you need it. Especially if you
> are making money from the computer.
>
> Well now, consider this.
>
> A printing company at the end of the grid. Presses being run and an
> office full of computers.
>
> Now the owner did not care if the presses ran a bit slow from time to
> time due to grid not being up to his demands.
>
> But he put the office on solar. No computer problems, no down time, no
> lost data.
>
> So if it comes down to a) being out in the middle of nowhere and you
> are making money from your computer and need it to its fullest
> capabilities or b) just checking your email. You have to decide how
> much you are going to limit your ability to use your computer.
I use via c3 processor with microATX + 15 inch LCD when I need to run off
solar and it draws a shedload less than any AMD or Intel.
| |
| me@privacy.net 2007-09-14, 1:25 pm |
| bealiba@gmail.com wrote:
>I have run all my computers off solar for as long as I have had
>computers.
Do all of you that are doing this above use laptops
exclusively?
serious question
| |
| drydem 2007-09-15, 9:25 am |
| On Sep 13, 7:13 pm, beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 14, 11:32 am, drydem <walter_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
tp://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_sola...[color=darkred]
>
>
ttp://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/hardware_components/[color=darkred]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Seems to me to be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has
> bolted. I have run all my computers off solar for as long as I have had
> computers.
ISTM THG realizes that the trend of rising electricity cost is going
to make it harder for people to justify the hi performance hi energy
computing that has been their focus for all these years. IMHO
it will be interesting to see what kind of power storage system they
come up with (and whether they do any long term review of its
reliablity and cost over time). What makes THG so interesting
to many is they not only provide a significant array of laboratory
measurements for each device and component by which they
make comparsions but they are very open about their methodology
by which they make those measurements. Engineering design is
always about compromises of which no one compromise is
guaranteed to be of everyone's liking.
While the move away from hi energy computing for AMD and Intel
has been going on for the last few years --- only the low end
peformance computer systems, e.g. Intel Celeron M, are really
energy efficient while the hi end performance computer systems
by Intel and AMD are still very much energy hogs - albeit today's
current hi end performance platforms use much less energy
per cycle than previous hi end performance computing platforms.
AMD and Intel computer system are using less electrical power
because neither manufacturer were able to increase performance
any longer by increasing electrical power loads ( via overclocking).
Both realized that inorder to boast performance they would have to
lower the electrical power levels to reduce the EMF noise and
increase the level of multitasking within their respective computer
architectures.
>
>
> 115 watts sounds high, yes. But then equipment uses what it uses for
> the application it is used for. Best to design for the possible load
> rather than have not enough energy when you need it. Especially if you
> are making money from the computer.
Yes,
when the computer is a key component in a
business operation, e.g. printing service, that is
making money the ROI calcuation is very different
from that of an undergrad at a local university or
a farmer keeping track of the price of soybeans or
a housewife shopping on ebay.
| |
| bealiba@gmail.com 2007-09-15, 5:25 pm |
| On Sep 15, 2:08 am, m...@privacy.net wrote:
> beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Do all of you that are doing this above use laptops
> exclusively?
>
> serious question
My last two upgrades have been desktops.
| |
| me@privacy.net 2007-09-17, 5:25 pm |
| bealiba@gmail.com wrote:
>On Sep 15, 2:08 am, m...@privacy.net wrote:
>
>My last two upgrades have been desktops.
OK
Reason I ask is as much as I can see how laptops more
suited for off grid living..... I'm STILL a big fan of
a desktop!!
Wondering if it possible to use a desktop in off grid
fashion successfully?
| |
| me@privacy.net 2007-09-17, 5:25 pm |
| drydem <walter_lee@my-deja.com> wrote:
>only the low end
>peformance computer systems, e.g. Intel Celeron M, are really
>energy efficient while the hi end performance computer systems
>by Intel and AMD are still very much energy hogs
Is this true of the core 2 duo chips for desktops as
well? They are energy hogs in reality?
| |
| Eeyore 2007-09-17, 5:25 pm |
|
me@privacy.net wrote:
> bealiba@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> OK
>
> Reason I ask is as much as I can see how laptops more
> suited for off grid living..... I'm STILL a big fan of
> a desktop!!
>
> Wondering if it possible to use a desktop in off grid
> fashion successfully?
Well ........... if you don't need a hugely powerful PC (consider an OS other
than Windows) there are plenty of low power options available.
VIA's C3 CPU needs only 11 watts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_po...sipation#VIA_C3
Graham
| |
| drydem 2007-09-17, 5:25 pm |
| On Sep 17, 2:34 pm, m...@privacy.net wrote:
> drydem <walter_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Is this true of the core 2 duo chips for desktops as
> well? They are energy hogs in reality?
If you go to AMD and Intel's websites you can get the
full power load of each cpu they make; it seems you
have to dig deep to get the thermal power spec though.
The entire power usage is not only important energy
wise but because it is needed to design the cooling
system for the CPU/motherboard. The core 2 duo
uses less per cycle than the core duo ( previous generation).
The reason I have such a demanding outlook on power
efficiency is because of today's low capacity power
storage systems. Couple with the hi cost of battery
systems and the trend for higher energy cost - it
makes me think twice justifying higher computer
power at the expense of higher cost.
| |
| wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net 2007-09-17, 5:25 pm |
| On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:34:17 -0500, me@privacy.net wrote:
>drydem <walter_lee@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>
>Is this true of the core 2 duo chips for desktops as
>well? They are energy hogs in reality?
Our low-end Dell with an AMD 64 X2 3600 processor and an integrated
graphics controller is nominally 65W for the box, measured running on
an Exeltech sine wave inverter. Older AMD 2000 and Athlon XP2800,
both with AGP cards, are more like 85W.
Wayne
| |
| Hugemoth 2007-09-17, 8:25 pm |
| You can use any laptop or desktop you like. I have both a laptop and a
desktop with an old CRT screen. The desktop just uses more power.
Q (off grid)
me@privacy.net wrote:
> Reason I ask is as much as I can see how laptops more
> suited for off grid living..... I'm STILL a big fan of
> a desktop!!
>
> Wondering if it possible to use a desktop in off grid
> fashion successfully?
| |
| drydem 2007-09-18, 9:25 am |
| On Sep 17, 3:21 pm, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:34:17 -0500, m...@privacy.net wrote:
>
>
>
> Our low-end Dell with an AMD 64 X2 3600 processor and an integrated
> graphics controller is nominally 65W for the box, measured running on
> an Exeltech sine wave inverter. Older AMD 2000 and Athlon XP2800,
> both with AGP cards, are more like 85W.
>
> Wayne
When I think of energy requirements I think about many wet cell
batteries
I would need to run the system for 4 or 5 hours continuously at night,
so
the difference between a 70w and 90W system would be converted to a
question of what is the cost and space requirements needed to handle
280W verses 360W?
| |
| me@privacy.net 2007-09-18, 1:25 pm |
| drydem <walter_lee@my-deja.com> wrote:
>The reason I have such a demanding outlook on power
>efficiency is because of today's low capacity power
>storage systems. Couple with the hi cost of battery
>systems and the trend for higher energy cost - it
>makes me think twice justifying higher computer
>power at the expense of higher cost.
Understood
Same idea here as well.
Id go with lowest power CPU even if it means less
overall computing power.
Sounds like celeron is it, right?
| |
| wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net 2007-09-18, 1:25 pm |
| On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 07:04:26 -0700, drydem <walter_lee@my-deja.com>
wrote:
>On Sep 17, 3:21 pm, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>
>
>When I think of energy requirements I think about many wet cell
>batteries
>I would need to run the system for 4 or 5 hours continuously at night,
>so
>the difference between a 70w and 90W system would be converted to a
>question of what is the cost and space requirements needed to handle
>280W verses 360W?
It's worse than that. There are inefficiencies when charging,
discharging, and inverting. You can eliminate or reduce the first two
by running loads when your energy source(s) (solar or wind usually) is
online (if/when that's practical). You can eliminate the third by
powering the computer with DC. Which is relatively easy with a laptop,
more problematic with a desktop. Laptops can deliver a false economy
though - they cost more to buy and each time you upgrade. We use 3
different machines, and each has been upgraded multiple times. Every
time the main computer was upgraded, some of the old components were
recycled into the other machines. If we'd used laptops all these years
then I'm sure that we'd have spent more in the long run than the extra
PV cost us to power desktops. Not to mention the aggravation of
working with smaller screens and keyboards etc. Everyone's different
though, and lots of folks prefer laptops, need the portability, or
can't afford the extra energy of an equivalent-performance desktop.
It's much the same with other off-grid choices, such as regular fridge
versus Sunfrost.
Wayne
| |
| David Williams 2007-09-18, 1:25 pm |
| -> Id go with lowest power CPU even if it means less
-> overall computing power.
There's a tradeoff between power usage and computing speed. Faster
processors tend to use more power, but the total energy they use to
perform a set of operations may be less than is taken by a slower
processor using less power.
dow
| |
|
| me@privacy.net wrote in news:1thte31rq60cpq2pevadu5kipsgjjskt06@4ax.com:
> bealiba@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> OK
>
> Reason I ask is as much as I can see how laptops more
> suited for off grid living..... I'm STILL a big fan of
> a desktop!!
>
> Wondering if it possible to use a desktop in off grid
> fashion successfully?
another giant hog is the video card.. for all your monster games. If all
you want to do is read some email, do some word processing etc you can
make a very efficient desktop. If you want to play [insert latest awsome
graphic intense game here] thats where the energy sucking comes in.
| |
| me@privacy.net 2007-09-19, 1:25 pm |
| z <z@yada.yada.com> wrote:
>another giant hog is the video card.. for all your monster games. If all
>you want to do is read some email, do some word processing etc you can
>make a very efficient desktop. If you want to play [insert latest awsome
>graphic intense game here] thats where the energy sucking comes in.
ok thanks
I didn't know that abt video cards
I'm NOT a gamer...so onboard video works fine for me!
| |
|
| me@privacy.net wrote in news:4ap2f3l20665fb3sqmsg7k39fvp8cnvqp8@4ax.com:
> z <z@yada.yada.com> wrote:
>
>
> ok thanks
>
> I didn't know that abt video cards
>
> I'm NOT a gamer...so onboard video works fine for me!
>
I'd check out the VIA C7-D processor with mini-atx form factor
motherboard
http://www.digitimes.com/Background...sp?datePublish=
2007/08/22&pages=PR&seq=202
average power consumption is 25 watts (they say), with audio and video
built in. If you are comforatable building your own system that would
make a great starting point.
Some makers are putting together systems based around this: for example
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicat...em-details.asp?
EdpNo=3227075&CatId=2630
this one says 20 watts max.
I bet that kicks the shit out of anything THW comes up with power wise --
but again, it would suck nards to play games on. Regular use i'd be fine
tho
| |
|
|
| bealiba@gmail.com 2007-09-20, 3:25 am |
| On Sep 18, 4:30 am, m...@privacy.net wrote:
> beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
> OK
>
> Reason I ask is as much as I can see how laptops more
> suited for off grid living..... I'm STILL a big fan of
> a desktop!!
>
> Wondering if it possible to use a desktop in off grid
> fashion successfully?
Been doing it for years.
| |
|
|
|
| me@privacy.net wrote in news:i825f3tuc9hv45pke9borjrdq3ibb67vlk@4ax.com:
>
> wow
>
> thanks!
>
> price is right too!!
>
Yeah looks OK. You might want to spring for more memory on that one though
... like 1 gig at least (which won't suck any more power, but the comp will
run a lot smoother)
that was just the first one I found using that chip -- i'm sure there are
others
| |
| drydem 2007-09-25, 1:25 pm |
| this stuff is so cool....
you gotta see this...
On Sep 13, 8:46 am, drydem <walter_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Solar PC: Turning Sunlight into Computing Power
> Frank Volkel. September 6, 2007
> (1st in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)http://w=
ww.tomshardware.com/2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_sola...
>
> an overview of solar panel technology and industry
>
> Do-It-Yourself Solar-Powered PC
> By Bert T=F6pelt ... September 13, 2007 10:36
> ( 2nd in a series of 3 articles of powering a PC via solar panels)http://=
www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/hardware_components/
>
> Using readily available components an AMD
> Athlon 64 X2 BE-2350 motherboard
> desktop using 61w on idle and 115W on
> full duty cycle/load.
>
> The final article will cover a step-by-step
> description of a solar-powered energy
> collection and storage system.
DYI Solar-Powered PC Solar Components
-- A Positional Tracking Solar Array
Daniel Schuhmann. Tom's Hardware Group (22 pages)
September 25, 2007 07:44
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09...diy_solar_powe=
red_pc/
summary:
THG PV solar array consist of two 130W solar panels.
Each solar panel is on a turntable which automatically
orients the the solar panel to the sun's rays via a
series of cables and pulley blocks. The cable is powered
by an improvised system using a counterweight on one
side and an remotely controlled electric screwdriver
on the other. THG uses a thicker wire gauge 16mm^2
and limits the length of cabling to increase power
transmission efficiency and decrease power loss thru
the cabling. THG is using Wagner Solar ProStar-15
solar charge controller which can handle up to 15A
per battery (190W). THG is using a Sonnenschein/Exide
Technologies 12V lead acid battery with a capacity of
130Ah (1560Wh). The battery charging efficiency is
estimated to be about 80%.
The solar array and storage power system cost $3800.
-------
THG Solar Powered PC - Live TEst
- Solar Panels, Solar PC, Battery, Cameras,
Stats, more stats, weather, and help/FAQs.
http://www.tomshardware.com/howto/h...r-pc-live-test/
This web page displays the THG solar power system's
current status. On 9/24/2007 it generated 1308Wh..
comments:
wowsers. I'm impressed!
| |
| wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net 2007-09-25, 8:25 pm |
| On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 07:42:45 -0700, drydem <walter_lee@my-deja.com>
wrote:
>this stuff is so cool....
>you gotta see this...
>DYI Solar-Powered PC Solar Components
>-- A Positional Tracking Solar Array
>Daniel Schuhmann. Tom's Hardware Group (22 pages)
>September 25, 2007 07:44
>http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09...lar_powered_pc/
Somebody should tell those guys about Duane Johnson's $24 tracker
controller kit. http://www.redrok.com/led3xassm.htm#led3xforsale And
how to weld. ;-) That wood-rope-drill tracker contraption is
innovative though.
Wayne
| |
| Duane C. Johnson 2007-09-26, 3:25 am |
| Hi Wayne;
Wayne wrote:
> drydem <walter_lee@my-deja.com> wrote:
Looks like they had fun doing it.
[color=darkred]
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09...lar_powered_pc/
[color=darkred]
> Somebody should tell those guys about Duane Johnson's
> $24 tracker controller kit.
> http://www.redrok.com/led3xassm.htm#led3xforsale
Thanks for the plug!
BTW, check out this nice small scale tracking mount:
http://www.redrok.com/led3xassm.htm#dg240
It should be capable of supporting about 13ft^2 of
PV panels.
> And how to weld. ;-)
> That wood-rope-drill tracker contraption is
> innovative though.
> Wayne
Duane
--
Home of the $35 Solar Tracker Receiver
http://www.redrok.com/led3xassm.htm [*]
Powered by \ \ \ //|
Thermonuclear Solar Energy from the Sun / |
Energy (the SUN) \ \ \ / / |
Red Rock Energy \ \ / / |
Duane C. Johnson Designer \ \ / \ / |
1825 Florence St Heliostat,Control,& Mounts |
White Bear Lake, Minnesota === \ / \ |
USA 55110-3364 === \ |
(651)426-4766 use Courier New Font \ |
redrok@redrok.com (my email: address) \ |
http://www.redrok.com (Web site) ===
| |
| Duane C. Johnson 2007-09-26, 9:25 am |
| Hi Wayne;
Wayne wrote:
> drydem <walter_lee@my-deja.com> wrote:
Looks like they had fun doing it.
[color=darkred]
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09...lar_powered_pc/
[color=darkred]
> Somebody should tell those guys about Duane Johnson's
> $24 tracker controller kit.
> http://www.redrok.com/led3xassm.htm#led3xforsale
Thanks for the plug!
BTW, check out this nice small scale tracking mount:
http://www.redrok.com/led3xassm.htm#dg240
It should be capable of supporting about 13ft^2 of
PV panels.
> And how to weld. ;-)
> That wood-rope-drill tracker contraption is
> innovative though.
> Wayne
Duane
--
Home of the $35 Solar Tracker Receiver
http://www.redrok.com/led3xassm.htm [*]
Powered by \ \ \ //|
Thermonuclear Solar Energy from the Sun / |
Energy (the SUN) \ \ \ / / |
Red Rock Energy \ \ / / |
Duane C. Johnson Designer \ \ / \ / |
1825 Florence St Heliostat,Control,& Mounts |
White Bear Lake, Minnesota === \ / \ |
USA 55110-3364 === \ |
(651)426-4766 use Courier New Font \ |
redrok@redrok.com (my email: address) \ |
http://www.redrok.com (Web site) ===
|
|
|
|