>
>     HONESTY
>
>     Engineers are always honest in matters of technology and human
>     relationships.  That's why it's a good idea to keep engineers away
>     from customers, romantic interests, and other people who can't handle
>     the truth.
>
>     Engineers sometimes bend the truth to avoid work.  They say
>     things that sound like lies but technically are not because nobody
>     could be expected to believe them. The complete list of engineer lies
>     is listed below:
>
>     "I won't change anything without asking you first." "I'll return your
>     hard-to-find cable tomorrow."
>     "I have to have new equipment to do my job." "I'm not jealous of your
>     new computer."
>
>
>--
>James Musselman
>President
>Radix/Cobalt Instruments, Inc.
>PO Box 897
>Clovis, CA 93612 USA
>tel 209-297-9000     fax 209-297-9400
>

>At 23:28 26.11.96 -0800, you wrote:
>>; DAY-OF-THE-WEEK CALCULATOR, WRITTEN BY ANDREW WARREN.   ;
>
>>; FOR ANY DATE BETWEEN JANUARY 1 1995 AND DECEMBER 31 1994,
>>
>>-Andy
>
>What?
>
>Does it mean, this routine will never work?
>
>Wolfram
>
>
>
>+-----------------------------------------------------+
>| Wolfram Liebchen                                    |
>| Forschungsinstitut fŸr Optik, TŸbingen, Deutschland |
>| RemoveMEliebchenKILLspamffo.fgan.de                         |
>+-----------------------------------------------------+
>
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan-Erik Soderholm [SMTP:@spam@jan-erik.soderholmRemoveMEEraseMEtelia.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:59 AM
> To:   EraseMEPICLIST@spam@mitvma.mit.edu
> Subject:      Re: OT: Today's potpourri
>
> Now, since we allready are OT, maybe a little mathematics problem
> could in place ?
>
> Consider a sheet of paper, 0.0001 mm thick.
>
> Lets say you fold it in the middle.
>
> Then fold it again in the middle.
>
> How many times do you have to fold the paper before the "stack"
> have passed the Moon (aprox 380.000 km) ?
>
> 1 million times ?
> Or more ?
> Or less ?
>
> The answer surprises most people not familiar with mathematics.
> (And the answer is also given in a well known book :-) )
>
> Jan-Erik Svderholm
> S:t Anna Data
> Sweden.
>

> Each year at this time the Leonid meteorite "storm" arrives.
>
> If you still have a sense of wonder at celestial occurrences and / or
> an enthusiastic batch of children, and don't mind getting up very very
> early, then this event is very worthwhile. If the weather is clear I
> strongly recommend making the effort. I'll send a followup email if any
> significant information comes to hand in the next few days (eg best
> viewing day is a bit uncertain from NZ).
>
> Best viewing is in Europe and North America.
>
> These meteorites are incoming debris which has broken off the comet 55p
> Tempel-Tuttle during its prior passes.
> The two peaks of meteorites due this year broke away in 1767 and 1866
> respectively! but NZ viewers will largely see debris from even older
> passes.
>
> As long as the sky is clear you can expect to see (and even hear *)
> quite a few spectacular meteorites and on a very good year (which this
> may be) you may see a vast number. Experts say that this MAY be the
> last good year for the next 15 or so years. This is more a Northern
> hemisphere event but results here can be very spectacular.
>
> For NZers in Auckland an excellent place to observe from is Glover Park
> in St Heliers (on the cliffs just along from Ladies Bay) . Expect to
> find 100 or so thermos carrying people (plus a few people from the
> Auckland Observatory) lying on rugs and yelling & pointing
> enthusiastically at each new appearance. (I have a friend with teenage
> children who enjoy the spectacle enough to make it an annual event).
> (Follow path from end of ?Waitara Street towards clifftops until you
> trip over people in the dark).
>
> Best sites are those with a clear general northerly view, clear path to
> the horizon and a dark sky. Glover Park meets all these requirements.
> Sites along the East Coast bays may do as well.
>
> Good site for information.
>
>         http://www.icstars.com/Leo2002/Leo2002.html
>
> Excellent site for slightly more technical detail on what is seen when
> and why
>
>         http://star.arm.ac.uk/leonid/encounters.html
>
> There are expected to be two peaks BUT there may well be older debris
> outside these periods and these may give the best viewing.
>
> 1st peak        10pm CST Nov 18th
>                       5pm Nov 19th NZ time
>
> Main peak     4:30am CST Nov 19th
>                        10pm Nov 20th NZ time
>
> To convert US CST to NZ time take off 5 hours and ADD a day!
> eg 10pm on Nov 19 becomes 5pm on Nov 20.
>
> Generally in NZ the "radiant" does not appear until later in the night
> and best viewing is from about 3am until dawn.
> Based on various sites the most probable best viewing days for
> "background" debris are Nov 17/18, Nov 18/19 and possibly Nov 19/20.
>
> ________________________
>
> OTHER SITES:
>
> Where to look
>
>         http://www.ticetboo.demon.co.uk/leonids.htm
>
>
> OK
>             http://www.aanc-astronomy.org/Leonids2002.html
>
>
> Forecast map of meteorite densities
> Not too encouraging for NZ.
> We are at bottom left edge (opposite side to Australia)
>
>         http://homepage2.nifty.com/~baron/leo02forcast.htm
>
> _________________________
>
> * HEARING METEORITES
>
> While it SHOULD be impossible to hear meteorites as you see them due to
> their distance away and the time it takes for sound to travel there is
> a significant body of observed "hearings" by competent observers. The
> mechanism is debated but it is suspected that some form of radio or low
> frequency electrical signal may be produced by the very large energy
> involved in creating the ionised meteorite trail and these signals may
> be detected by the human ear or associated nerve cells.
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
> piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu

>                Tuesday, November 12, 2002  3:45:50 PM
>
> Hello Jan-Erik,
>
> Tuesday, November 12, 2002, 5:59:09 AM, you wrote:
>
> JES> Now, since we allready are OT, maybe a little mathematics problem
> JES> could in place ?
>
> JES> Consider a sheet of paper, 0.0001 mm thick.
>
> JES> Lets say you fold it in the middle.
>
> JES> Then fold it again in the middle.
>
> JES> How many times do you have to fold the paper before the "stack"
> JES> have passed the Moon (aprox 380.000 km) ?
>
>
> Well, 380E3 / 0.0001E-3 = 3.8E12
>
> Every time you fold the paper, it follow the 2 exponential to "n"
> rule, so:
>
>       n log 2 = log 3.8E12 => n = log 3.8E12 / log 2
>
>       n =  41.78, where n is the number of times you have to fold the
>       paper.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Martin Leg
> spamBeGonemleg@spam@arnet.com.ar
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
> RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

>
> *>The answer surprises most people not familiar with mathematics.
> *>(And the answer is also given in a well known book :-) )
>
> Yes but I like the story with the prince of (Persia, India ?) and the
> man who invented the game of chess, and asked as reward for one rice
> grain on the first square of the chessboard, two on the second, four on
> the third etc. If for nothing else, because it works out to a LARGER
> NUMBER. So I win ;-).
>
> Peter
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
> [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

>Did you know that a light year is 5, 865, 696, 000. 000 statute miles.
>
>That is the equivalent of  2, 221, 854, 545 trips between Boise, Idaho and
>Orlando, Florida.  That many trips would take 49, 374, 545 hours, which is
>equal to  5636 years. It would wear out about 22,218 automobiles and about
>63, 481 sets of tires.
>
>Under the circumstances, why would anyone even want to start such a project?
>
>Sid Weaver
>Senior Potpourri Dispenser
>Southeastern segment
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
>email RemoveMElistservspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

> give me CRC error.. I give up. If someone download and install it
> sucessfully please say something.
>
> Regards,
> Ricardo Reis
>
>
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: pic microcontroller discussion list [spam_OUTPICLISTSTOPspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU] Em
> nome de WH Tan
> Enviada: terça-feira, 29 de Junho de 2004 1:20
> Para: RemoveMEPICLISTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Assunto: Re: [PIC:] MPLAB IDE v6.6 released today
>
> Hi Ken,
> Thanks for the information.
>
> Just want to ask have you successfully download & install v6.60? The
> download problem we have last time was gone?
>
> Thanks & regards,
> WH Tan
>

>
> I try to download 2 times, but when i was decompressing the file, allways
> give me CRC error.. I give up. If someone download and install it
> sucessfully please say something.
>
> Regards,
> Ricardo Reis
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: pic microcontroller discussion list [TakeThisOuTPICLISTspamRemoveMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU] Em
> nome de WH Tan
> Enviada: terça-feira, 29 de Junho de 2004 1:20
> Para: KILLspamPICLISTspamspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Assunto: Re: [PIC:] MPLAB IDE v6.6 released today
>
> Hi Ken,
> Thanks for the information.
>
> Just want to ask have you successfully download & install v6.60? The
> download problem we have last time was gone?
>
> Thanks & regards,
> WH Tan
>

> On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 22:05:41 -0400, Tom Smith wrote:
>
> > The zip file is indeed stuffed and hasn't been fixed
> as of 0300 GMT.
>
> Or, indeed, twenty hours later!
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Howard Winter
> St.Albans, England
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
> TakeThisOuTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestmitvma.mit.edu
>

> give me CRC error.. I give up. If someone download and install it
> sucessfully please say something.
>
> Regards,
> Ricardo Reis
>
>
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: pic microcontroller discussion list [PICLISTSTOPspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU] Em
> nome de WH Tan
> Enviada: terça-feira, 29 de Junho de 2004 1:20
> Para: PICLISTSTOPspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Assunto: Re: [PIC:] MPLAB IDE v6.6 released today
>
> Hi Ken,
> Thanks for the information.
>
> Just want to ask have you successfully download & install v6.60? The
> download problem we have last time was gone?
>
> Thanks & regards,
> WH Tan
>

> give me CRC error.. I give up. If someone download and install it
> sucessfully please say something.
>
> Regards,
> Ricardo Reis
>
>
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: pic microcontroller discussion list [spam_OUTPICLISTTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU] Em
> nome de WH Tan
> Enviada: terça-feira, 29 de Junho de 2004 1:20
> Para: .....PICLIST.....RemoveMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Assunto: Re: [PIC:] MPLAB IDE v6.6 released today
>
> Hi Ken,
> Thanks for the information.
>
> Just want to ask have you successfully download & install v6.60? The
> download problem we have last time was gone?
>
> Thanks & regards,
> WH Tan
>

> Chernobyl tragedy - April 26, 1986 - 20 years ago today... Has it been
> that
> long?
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/europe/2006/chernobyl/default.stm
>
> -- Mark
>
> Doesn't matter what your business card says...
> We're all in the results business.
>
>
>

>> Chernobyl tragedy - April 26, 1986 - 20 years ago today...
>> Has it been that long?
>>
>> news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/europe/2006/chernobyl/default.stm
>>
>> -- Mark
>>
>>    
>
> And the grass is still growing around the site, the deer come and graze, and
> have babies, the trees are growing... The local villagers are (now) dying at
> normal rates.
>  

> Yes, thousands died. Between 4 and 90 thousand depending on who you listen
> to. And if we build more plants, even though they would undoubtedly be safer
> than the horrible design of Chernobyl, it is entirely possible that another
> failure could happen and thousands more could die. But it is a drop in the
> bucked compared to the millions who have died as a result of our use of
> fossil fuels. Look at the number of deaths due to pollution from oil and
> coal burning. Think about global warming (unless you are still one of the
> nut cases that deny it exists). New Orleans alone. Add in the thousands who
> have died in wars to protect our supply of oil. All the 9/11 deaths. All
> from oil.
>  

> Imagine a 10 square mile area of the Arizona desert - probably Indian
> land, since there is so much unused. Rainfall here
> is less than 5 inches a year, and the sun shines with incredible
> intensity here all year long. Concentrate sunlight with simple
> parabolic mirrors made of stainless steel, and heat water into steam,
> and spin turbines. Just like a nuke plant, but no nuclear
> material, no containment vessel,  no spent fuel. Disadvantages? Well,
> the sun goes down every day, but there is a simple
> solution for that too. Here's MY list:
>
> 1. We have calculated that a solar plant that can capture 5 square miles
> of desert sunlight will generate enough electricity to
> meet the electrical needs of the USA even as the needs expand for the
> next 50 years.

> No, more misconceptions. This energy was trapped when the original
> star-stuff was created after the "Big Bang". When
> we tinker with it and generate electricity, we release enormous amounts
> of heat. And more heat we DO NOT
> need. Remember the one about global warming?
>
> > Or keep breathing poisoned air and deal with the storms, rising oceans, and
> > OPEC.
> >  
> Again, a short list of serious problems with nuclear power generation:
>
> 1. The fuel is costly to acquire and concentrate enough to be made
> useable. Sources of yellow cake are becoming
> harder and harder (Do ya think maybe that "harder to find"  = higher
> costs?) to locate. The best source now is
> Nigeria... an ISLAMIC country. Sounds like costly oil all over again,
> doesn't it?  We just CAN'T catch a break, can
> we?



> 2. Despite a lot of interesting ideas, storing spent fuel long enough
> for it to be rendered inert still seems to be insolvable.
> Hasn't been solved in 60 years. well, maybe we will get lucky somehow.

>> Chernobyl tragedy - April 26, 1986 - 20 years ago today... Has it
>> been that long?
>>
>> news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/europe/2006/chernobyl/default.stm
>>
>> -- Mark
>>
>>    
>
> And the grass is still growing around the site, the deer come and
> graze, and
> have babies, the trees are growing... The local villagers are (now)
> dying at
> normal rates.  

> Yes, thousands died. Between 4 and 90 thousand depending on who you
> listen
> to. And if we build more plants, even though they would undoubtedly be
> safer
> than the horrible design of Chernobyl, it is entirely possible that
> another
> failure could happen and thousands more could die. But it is a drop in
> the
> bucked compared to the millions who have died as a result of our use of
> fossil fuels. Look at the number of deaths due to pollution from oil and
> coal burning. Think about global warming (unless you are still one of the
> nut cases that deny it exists). New Orleans alone. Add in the
> thousands who
> have died in wars to protect our supply of oil. All the 9/11 deaths. All
> from oil.
>  

> The danger of nuclear power, while certainly serious, has been massively
> over stated.  Perhaps by vested interests who decided that other
> sources of
> energy would be more profitable for them? How many people have been
> injured
> by a well designed nuke plant? Um... That would be... ZERO. Three Mile
> melted down and no-one died. Same basic class of failure as what
> happened at
> Chernobyl. If you build them right, they are much less likely to be
> unsafe.
> On the other hand, the damage of using coal and oil is inherent in the
> source (Strip mining / OPEC) and in the process of using it (burning with
> air).
>  

> For interesting reading about energy "solutions", look
> up Freeman Dyson's theories about levels of civilization.
> This is from a distant memory, so don't be too hard on me.
> A level zero civilization uses fossil fuels, nuclear energy,
> and maybe some solar.  A level 1 civilization uses ALL of
> the energy which is incident upon its homeworld.  A level
> 2 civilization uses ALL the energy which escapes its
> primary.  A level 3 civilization uses all of the energy which
> escapes from its local stellar cluster.
>
> So on a galactic scale, we aren't much better than
> cavemen roasting mastodons over fire that has to be
> kept rather than created!
>  

> Also continue (dragging the conversation in a (hopefully)
> less inflammatory direction) to consider that any
> civilization above level one would be, for all intents and
> purposes, largely invisible to outside observers.  After
> all, we can't see its primary (or local cluster), and any
> energy radiated would be in the form of heat which
> would red shift as they move away from us, causing it
> to look even less like what we're looking for as likely
> ET candidates.  So there could be tens of thousands
> of these civilizations all around us and we'd never know...
>
>  

> The entirety of the high-level radioactive waste in the whole
> world from
> *all* sources, including the massive amounts of waste developed to
> support the nuclear weapons programs, would fit in an office building.
>
> Up in Yellowknife where my parents live, there is that much volume of
> highly toxic arsenic-trioxide sitting underground from a *single* gold
> mine. Did I mention the damn stuff is water-soluble too?
>
> Source: nwt-tno.inac-ainc.gc.ca/giant/atg_e.html
>
> Not to imagine the huge amounts of other far more deadly stuff than
> arsenic that get dumped... Nuclear waste is the least of our concerns.
> >From a waste handlers perspective, it's really easy to work
> with because
> it's trivial to detect, if it's dangerous, a Geiger counter will start
> beeping. Done. Seal it off. If it's really dangerous, IE hot, it must
> have a short half-life, so soon (IE decades) it'll be a whole
> lot safer
> than it was.
>
> That arsenic mentioned above has to be sealed for eternity, it will
> *never* become safe. Ever. The same is true for anything containing
> heavy metals, like lead. Nuclear waste is pretty tame stuff by
> comparison.

> Imagine a 10 square mile area of the Arizona desert -
> probably Indian land, since there is so much unused. Rainfall
> here is less than 5 inches a year, and the sun shines with
> incredible intensity here all year long. Concentrate sunlight
> with simple parabolic mirrors made of stainless steel, and
> heat water into steam, and spin turbines. Just like a nuke
> plant, but no nuclear material, no containment vessel,  no
> spent fuel. Disadvantages? Well, the sun goes down every day,
> but there is a simple solution for that too. Here's MY list:
>
> 1. We have calculated that a solar plant that can capture 5
> square miles of desert sunlight will generate enough
> electricity to meet the electrical needs of the USA even as
> the needs expand for the next 50 years.
>
> 2. Excessive capacity will be used to breakdown water into
> oxygen and hydrogen, which will be first stored to generate
> heat for running some turbines at night, providing the grid
> with energy during the night. Excess hydrogen will be shipped
> to special "gas stations" that will provide fuel for the
> thing that will power cars.  AND this hydrogen will be CHEAP.
> The burning of hydrogen and oxygen produces ONLY water, NO
> carbon dioxide.
>
> 3. No extra heat is created when using solar energy, as it
> would have fallen on the desert anyway. Its OUR sunlight, not
> imported from Saudi Arabia.
>
> 4. There is absolutely NOTHING about solar energy used in
> this way that is complex or leading edge. Nothing tricky in
> any way, except MAYBE making sure the mirrors don't
> accidentally point toward an airplane flying over...
>
> No, instead of doing it right, the American public is being
> "forced" to use nuclear power because "its our best hope".
> I sure hope people wise up. This isn't being pushed much
> because it is just too simple for words...

> >> Chernobyl tragedy - April 26, 1986 - 20 years ago today...
> >> Has it been that long?
> >
> >The local villagers are (now) dying at normal rates.
>
> Not sure about that. Don't have any figures to back it up, but there are
> charities here in the UK that bring a load of children from that area over
> for a holiday each summer. Part of the thing is to let them have fun away
> from the contaminated area, and have food that is known to not be
> contaminated.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: spamBeGonepiclist-bouncesRemoveMEmit.edu [.....piclist-bouncesEraseMEmit.edu]
>Sent: 27 April 2006 14:33
>To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
>Subject: Re: [OT] Chernobyl - 20 years ago today
>
>
>Gerhard,
>
>On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:17:58 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
>
>> James Newtons Massmind wrote:
>>
>>...
>> > But the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
>>
>> Ouch... why is it that this fallacy is so popular? Haven't
>there been
>> enough examples yet to show that this doesn't work?
>
>Hear Hear!  This ludicrously simplistic view (and its other
>forms) have lead to so many foreign policy
>catastrophes in the past, that surely it's time so scrap it?
>
>> Funny that nobody mentioned the IMO biggest energy source: more
>> efficient use.
>>
>> US total consumption: 100 P BTU/year, or 350 GJ/person/year
>> Germany total consumption: 14 P BTU/year, or 200 GJ/person/year
>
>Errr... some problem with the arithmetic here, I'm afaid!
>
>If 100 P BTU = 350 GJ (and I haven't worked it out) then 14 P
>BTU must be 49 GJ.

> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Ewhost wrote:
>
>  
>> hrm i recall this site being proven a fake or atleast the majority of the
>> story a fake, the images are real.
>>    
>
> Which part of the story is fake ? That site is mostly pictures.
>
> Peter
>  

> >> US total consumption: 100 P BTU/year, or 350 GJ/person/year
> >> Germany total consumption: 14 P BTU/year, or 200 GJ/person/year
> >
> >Errr... some problem with the arithmetic here, I'm afaid!
> >
> >If 100 P BTU = 350 GJ (and I haven't worked it out) then 14 P
> >BTU must be 49 GJ.
>
>
> Howard,
>
> I assumed that the P BTU figure is the total energy consumption for the entire country and the number in GJ

> >> US total consumption: 100 P BTU/year, or 350 GJ/person/year
> >> Germany total consumption: 14 P BTU/year, or 200 GJ/person/year
> >
> > Errr... some problem with the arithmetic here, I'm afaid!
> >
> > If 100 P BTU = 350 GJ (and I haven't worked it out) then 14 P BTU must be 49 GJ.
>
> Errr... some problem with the reading here, I'm afraid :)
>
> You just missed out on a crucial part of the dimensions. The US total
> consumption is 100 P BTU *per year*, or 350 GJ *per person per year*.

>
> > > hrm i recall this site being proven a fake or atleast the
> > majority of
> > > the story a fake, the images are real.
> >
> > Which part of the story is fake ? That site is mostly pictures.
>
> She rode through the area on her bike. The pictures of the road are from
> that. Then she took an official tour and the pictures OFF the road are from
> that. She didn't clearly state which pictures are from where. Some people
> decided that this was "fake".
>
> Just another amazing rumor that makes nuke power look bad and oil look
> better by comparison.
>
> Like that bit about how solar panels take more power to build than they
> produce in their life time.
>
> And that windmills kill birds. Which by the way, is absolutely bull pucky.
>
> ' wonder how these get started? Who starts them? Who would benefit from
> them?
>
>
> Where are the rumors about more people dying from breathing the pollution
> put out by oil and coal fired generation plants than have died smoking
> cigarettes? **

> Like that bit about how solar panels take more power to build than they
> produce in their life time.
>
> And that windmills kill birds. Which by the way, is absolutely bull pucky.
>
> ' wonder how these get started? Who starts them? Who would benefit from
> them?
>
>
> Where are the rumors about more people dying from breathing the pollution
> put out by oil and coal fired generation plants than have died smoking
> cigarettes? **
>
>  

> And that windmills kill birds. Which by the way, is absolutely bull pucky.
>
> ' wonder how these get started? Who starts them? Who would benefit from
> them?
>
>
> Where are the rumors about more people dying from breathing the pollution
> put out by oil and coal fired generation plants than have died smoking
> cigarettes? **
>
> ---
> James.
>
> ** I have no idea if that is true, but I felt like trying to start a rumor
> for the other side.
>
>  

> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 01:52:32PM -0700, Bob Axtell wrote:
>  
>>> She rode through the area on her bike. The pictures of the road are from
>>> that. Then she took an official tour and the pictures OFF the road are from
>>> that. She didn't clearly state which pictures are from where. Some people
>>> decided that this was "fake".
>>>
>>> Just another amazing rumor that makes nuke power look bad and oil look
>>> better by comparison.
>>>
>>> Like that bit about how solar panels take more power to build than they
>>> produce in their life time.
>>>  
>>>      
>> Oops, I missed this one. Yes, if the standard process is used (slices of
>> 6" silicon crystal wafers), the crystal
>> is made by many kilowatts of careful heating and crystal growing. So
>> that one is SORTA true.
>>    
>
> Of course, aparently up until recently, solar panels were almost
> exclusively made using recycled wafer material that would have otherwise
> been thrown out anyway.
>
> So definetely a win, even if technically *maybe* more energy was used.
>
>