Power the U.S. With Solar Panels!

[surada]

Try again, moron. Please review the thread and show me where I said a fucking word about coal until you claimed to support mining in post#875. I pointed out, correctly, that you and your ilk have used coal mining scars on the earth as a reason to abandon coal. Now that argument doesn't seem to mean much when it supports your bullshit narrative--quit being a lying bitch.

You're FOS. The problem with coal is that all our coal fired power plants are 40 years old and investors aren't interested in building new ones. That may change.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

You are confused.

You have no idea of the Engineering of solar.

You may be hermits but most families consume much more than 3KW.

A family of two. Not THAT bizarre. I thought maybe it would be extensible to show that the lower end of the distribution pulls it down a bit from your original claim.

In the NW there is a lot of hydro power and some nuclear and that keeps the cost lower than in most parts of the US. It would be dumb to put in solar at that high of a latitude with such limited sunshine during half the year when grid electricity is so cheap.

Huh. So not paying an electric bill for about 5 years is "stupid"? Interesting claim.

I think you are over selling your system. I am not calling you a liar but I would have to see it to believe it. I have seen other solar systems and they are usually a disappointment. As an Engineer I have done the calculations with real world inputs (as opposed to salesman inputs) and it never makes sense.

Hey, your argument is with the engineers at the solar companies who scale the output to your last 12 months or so of usage. I'm not the one doing the calculation.

All I know is that in the last 6 years I've paid only ONE electric bill since putting the solar on. Res ipsa loquitur.

 

[Concerned American]

You're FOS. The problem with coal is that all our coal fired power plants are 40 years old and investors aren't interested in building new ones. That may change.

So now you are advocating for the coal mining industry. Is that what you are saying? I wouldn't want to misunderstand you. Run along and take your contradictory shit with you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Again... let me describe to you what something is since you don't have much experience in doing that.

1. Satellites measured upwards long wave radiation over six solar farm sites before and after solar panels were installed.
2. Daytime measurements of upward long wave radiation were 2C cooler after the solar panels were installed.
3. The only possible explanation is that the solar radiation was converted into electricity before it could warm the surface of the planet.

Satellites measured upwards long wave radiation over six solar farm sites before and after solar panels were installed.

Why do you need a satellite? Solar panels are much darker than the Earth's surface.
They reflect much less radiation back into space. Heating the planet. Full stop.

If they're "plugged in" some of the energy they absorb is turned into electricity which may be transported a long distance before it is used. It's possible that the amount of electricity is large enough to cool the area around the panels while still resulting in more heat generated at the point of consumption. Still net heating, not cooling, the planet.

For instance, an area of the surface large enough to be hit with 100 watts of sunlight will absorb 70 watts and reflect 30 watts back into space. Cover that same area with solar panels and only 5 watts is reflected back to space. So far, the Earth is warmed by that extra 25 watts. If 30 watts of electricty is generated and transmitted 100 miles away, the solar farm "keeps" 65 watts, 5 watts fewer than that area kept without the panels. That area is slightly (5 watts, in this example) cooler.

The area 100 miles away, where the electricity is consumed, is 30 watts warmer.

You can keep pointing to the 5 watts cooler and say, "This could cause the glaciers to advance",
but anyone who understands the physics and the math knows that you're wrong.

The only possible explanation is that the solar radiation was converted into electricity before it could warm the surface of the planet.

Cooled slightly, at the panel, warmed much more when the electricity is consumed.

 

[ding]

You are confused.

You have no idea of the Engineering of solar.

You may be hermits but most families consume much more than 3KW.

As emergency hurricane preparedness I have a 2.3KW generator. That will run my refrigerator, a small efficent 5K BTU emergency AC window unit for the bedroom and a few lights. It will not run the major appliances like the washer, stove, dryer, central air or any kind of heat. It is strain just to run the microwave by itself.

I lived on the desert side of Washington state for seven years. More sunshine than the East side. During the summer months with the sun high you could produce a little bit of solar power. However, once fall came you hardly saw the sun until the next Spring.

My neighbor up there had solar panels (non electrical) on his house to heat his swimming pool in the summer and he still had to augment it with a gas heater most of the time.

In the NW there is a lot of hydro power and some nuclear and that keeps the cost lower than in most parts of the US. It would be dumb to put in solar at that high of a latitude with such limited sunshine during half the year when grid electricity is so cheap.

I think you are over selling your system. I am not calling you a liar but I would have to see it to believe it. I have seen other solar systems and they are usually a disappointment. As an Engineer I have done the calculations with real world inputs (as opposed to salesman inputs) and it never makes sense.

Solar is shitty technology with a really shitty payback. In physics their ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Yeah... something smells fishy. Who in their right mind would install solar in the Pacific NW? Cheap hydro, poor sun, 3kW?

 

[ding]

Satellites measured upwards long wave radiation over six solar farm sites before and after solar panels were installed.

The only possible explanation is that the solar radiation was converted into electricity before it could warm the surface of the planet.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm glad you agree with me.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Until you can tell me that you agree that solar radiation was converted into electricity before it could warm the surface of the planet as the reason for why cooler temperatures were measured or at least provide a different explanation, there's really nothing to discuss.

Moving the heat from one spot to another.......isn't net cooling.

 

[ding]

Moving the heat from one spot to another.......isn't net cooling.

It is relative to other generating sources that don't convert solar radiation (heat) into electricity. You know... the sources solar is replacing.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The upward emissions are from longwave radiation from the surface of the planet. Which are caused by solar radiation striking the surface of the planet.

View attachment 660989

163.3 absorbed by surface, 22.9 reflected by surface.

Now cut that reflected number by 2/3rds.

Cooler planet?

 

[ding]

View attachment 661049

163.3 absorbed by surface, 22.9 reflected by surface.

Now cut that reflected number by 2/3rds.

Cooler planet?

Show your math. Make your case. Try actually saying something for once. Prove to us how all that electricity generated from the sun had no other consequences.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Having smaller coal and natural gas powerplants sounds like a win to me. Less pollution at the very least. I'm pretty sure it will a very long time before we won't need them, even during the day.

Having smaller coal and natural gas powerplants sounds like a win to me.

More expensive coal and nat gas plants to cover your unreliable solar.

Sounds like we're paying more for your free solar, not less.

 

[Flash]

Yeah... something smells fishy. Who in their right mind would install solar in the Pacific NW? Cheap hydro, poor sun, 3kW?

View attachment 661047

Methinks the boy is not telling us the truth.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

. The upward long wave radiation - which is a fancy way of saying heat - is radiated from the earth into the atmosphere but since some of the solar radiation (heat) from the sun was converted into electricity the earth didn't absorb as much heat as it would have if no solar panels

Until the long wave radiation from the consumption of the elctricity is added to the equation.

 

[ding]

Methinks the boy is not telling us the truth.

There are a number of us who don't take anything CC says at face value.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You are lost in this conversation. You are arguing semantics. Do you really believe you can capture the energy from the sun without it having any effect whatsoever? Do you even First Law of Thermodynamics?

Do you really believe moving energy from the panel to my house results in less energy?

 

[sparky]

~S~

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What gas is more natural than the most common gas in the universe?

Not uncombined on the Earth.

 

[ding]

Until the long wave radiation from the consumption of the elctricity is added to the equation.

Waste heat from electricity use is the same for all cases. It's in the case of generating electricity from 100% fossil fuels and it's in the case of generating electricity from 100% solar. So you will have exactly the same waste heat in both cases. What won't be the same is solar radiation warming the surface of the planet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not at all. There haven't been any. You've been serving my purpose. I have explained exactly why solar panels have a cooling effect. You on the other hand haven't explained anything. I only care about getting the truth out. See? I'm going to do it again.

1. Satellites measured upwards long wave radiation over six solar farm sites before and after solar panels were installed.
2. Daytime measurements of upward long wave radiation were 2C cooler after the solar panels were installed.
3. The only possible explanation is that the solar radiation was converted into electricity before it could warm the surface of the planet.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356860141_Direct_impact_of_solar_farm_deployment_on_surface_longwave_radiation

I couldn't do this without you.

I have explained exactly why solar panels have a cooling effect.

You're pointing out a local effect. The Earth is a bit bigger.

I couldn't do this without you.

You can make yourself look silly, with zero help from me.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm glad you agree with me.

You can't look at half the equation....without me laughing at you.