Global warming tipping points

[ding]

The energy that PV panels turn into electricity will eventually leave the planet. Please tell us how you think it takes that final step away.

Excluding adiabatic processes but the same apples to electricity generated from fossil fuels so waste heat is exactly the same for both cases. Not so for solar radiation. That's not the same in both cases so relative to fossil fuels there will be an incremental cooling effect.

 

[ding]

FLoT

Yes, photons being converted into electricity resulting in less infrared heat is the FLoT in action.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface - photons converted into electricity

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, photons being converted into electricity resulting in less infrared heat is the FLoT in action.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface - photons converted into electricity

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

Yes, photons being converted into electricity resulting in less infrared heat is the FLoT in action.

The electricity being converted back into heat is the part of the FLoT you leave out.

 

[ding]

The electricity being converted back into heat is the part of the FLoT you leave out.

Incorrect. That waste heat is replacing waste heat of electricity generated from fossil fuels so there is no incremental change to the waste heat.

But the photons converted to electricity were responsible for an incremental cooling at the PV cells.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface - photons converted into electricity

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

 

[ReinyDays]

Incorrect. That waste heat is replacing waste heat of electricity generated from fossil fuels so there is no incremental change to the waste heat.

Horsefeathers ... I've left tools in the sun ... and I've left tools in the campfire ... guess which one gave me third degree burns and a cancelled camping trip because stupid dad burnt the living crap out of himself? ...

 

[ding]

Horsefeathers ... I've left tools in the sun ... and I've left tools in the campfire ... guess which one gave me third degree burns and a cancelled camping trip because stupid dad burnt the living crap out of himself? ...

True. I was excluding waste heat from generating the electricity. If we add that in there's even a greater incremental cooling effect from switching to solar power.

 

[ReinyDays]

True. I was excluding waste heat from generating the electricity. If we add that in there's even a greater incremental cooling effect from switching to solar power.

Compared to fossil fuels ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Incorrect. That waste heat is replacing waste heat of electricity generated from fossil fuels so there is no incremental change to the waste heat.

But the photons converted to electricity were responsible for an incremental cooling at the PV cells.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface - photons converted into electricity

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

Incorrect. That waste heat is replacing waste heat of electricity generated from fossil fuels so there is no incremental change to the waste heat.

So you're changing your original, silly claim?

But the photons converted to electricity were responsible for an incremental cooling at the PV cells.

Was that the only reason for the cooling at the panels?

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells.

Moving heat from the panel to the city doesn't cool the planet.
Reflecting less radiation to space certainly does heat the planet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Compared to fossil fuels ...

He's claiming if we stop burning fossil fuels, the planet will cool.

To convince the AGWers, who want to cool the planet, we should keep burning fossil fuels.

 

[Crick]

Excluding adiabatic processes but the same apples to electricity generated from fossil fuels so waste heat is exactly the same for both cases. Not so for solar radiation. That's not the same in both cases so relative to fossil fuels there will be an incremental cooling effect.

Perhaps you could rewrite that line - even use some punctuation - and I could try to see if I could make some sense of it. As it is, I don't have the faintest idea what you're trying to say.

And could someone here tell me what FLoT stands for? Google only suggests Forward Line of Own Troops

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We all agree that it's CO2 on Neptune that causes the 1,500 mph atmospheric winds, right? Because there is simply no other force in Nature that drives climate, correct?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Perhaps you could rewrite that line - even use some punctuation - and I could try to see if I could make some sense of it. As it is, I don't have the faintest idea what you're trying to say.

And could someone here tell me what FLoT stands for? Google only suggests Forward Line of Own Troops

First Law of Thermodynamics.

 

[Crick]

Excluding adiabatic processes but the same apples to electricity generated from fossil fuels so waste heat is exactly the same for both cases. Not so for solar radiation. That's not the same in both cases so relative to fossil fuels there will be an incremental cooling effect.

It seems to me that generating electricity from fossil fuels requires an extremely exothermic reaction that is typically used to boil water to spin turbines to spin generators. All of that puts enormously more waste heat into the environment than does laying PV panels out in the sun. Waste heat is very much NOT the same in both cases.

 

[ding]

So you're changing your original, silly claim?

Incorrect.

 

[ding]

He's claiming if we stop burning fossil fuels, the planet will cool.

To convince the AGWers, who want to cool the planet, we should keep burning fossil fuels.

Incorrect. I am claiming that converting photons into electricity will result in an incremental cooling effect at the solar farms. Which has been proven empirically and confirmed with modeling.

 

[ding]

Was that the only reason for the cooling at the panels?

So glad you finally acknowledged the incremental cooling effect at the solar farms.

 

[ding]

Moving heat from the panel to the city doesn't cool the planet.

Incorrect. That waste heat is replacing waste heat of electricity generated from fossil fuels so there is no incremental change to the waste heat.

 

[ding]

Reflecting less radiation to space certainly does heat the planet.

Even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

 

[ding]

Perhaps you could rewrite that line - even use some punctuation - and I could try to see if I could make some sense of it. As it is, I don't have the faintest idea what you're trying to say.

And could someone here tell me what FLoT stands for? Google only suggests Forward Line of Own Troops

What part could you not understand? Besides the FLoT of course.

 

[ding]

It seems to me that generating electricity from fossil fuels requires an extremely exothermic reaction that is typically used to boil water to spin turbines to spin generators. All of that puts enormously more waste heat into the environment than does laying PV panels out in the sun. Waste heat is very much NOT the same in both cases.

Yes, I would assume 90% efficiency would be a good ball park estimate so 10% heat losses.

Why do you want to cool the planet in the middle of an ice age?