Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So it is only gov't subsidies that lowered the cost of solar? I doubt that and I don't think you'll produce any evidence to back that up. Government subsidies may end but the technology will continue to develop.
Are solar panels somehow unique or should we import no manufactured goods? What about raw materials, should we refuse to import them too? Works great for N. Korea.Not entirely. Shifting production away from first world countries with environmental laws and protections, to third world countries with none, was the biggest cause, but do you really want to poison brown people?
Or are you saying it's ok to poison brown people?
That is why you build them smaller.Running a gas or coal power plant only part of the day makes it more expensive.
Yes you are.I'm not the one who claimed there was an economy of scale.
It didn't increase waste energy. It just replaced one generating source with another.Energy didn't move from the solar farm to the point of use?
Correct.There's approximately 18tWh of continuous waste heat from electricity in the world. Hardly any of it comes from solar.
That is why you build them smaller.
It didn't increase waste energy. It just replaced one generating source with another.
If you build it smaller you will have to run it full time since, ideally, solar would be the difference between a large and small plant. If there is too much power in the system I'm sure the excess could be sold or stored.It doesn't matter if you built it smaller, it's still more expensive to only run part time.
Again... 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.Who said it increased waste energy?
It moved heat from one spot to another.
That doesn't cool the Earth no matter how bad you are at physics.
If you build it smaller you will have to run it full time since, ideally, solar would be the difference between a large and small plant. If there is too much power in the system I'm sure the excess could be sold or stored.
Again... 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.
I'm not sure why the solar output would drop to zero unless you mean nighttime, a small plant can provide enough power at night when demand is low.If your solar output drops to zero, how can the full-time, smaller plant be enough?
Except for the solar radiation that was converted into electricity.The solar radiation hitting the planet is the same.
You mean converted into electricity.With a lower albedo, more is retained, not less.
I'm not sure why the solar output would drop to zero unless you mean nighttime, a small plant can provide enough power at night when demand is low.
Where I live utilities have to be able to generate enough to satisfy peak demand, mainly hot, summer days. That is where solar panels can offer their best economy.
Except for the solar radiation that was converted into electricity.
You mean converted into electricity.
If sized correctly, yes.You said that the plant was going to run non-stop.
Does that mean its output plus solar are enought to power the area?
