Power the U.S. With Solar Panels!

You don't have a background in science, do you?
Sure as hell you don't Ding. Electrical energy gets converted either into heat directly, home heating, stoves, dryers, or mechanical energy with get gets converted into heat via friction, ect. You just keep digging the hole deeper with this highly erroneous line of illogic.
 
Enough to be measured.



Gotta love it when you take things out of context. Here is the whole thing;

"Regardless of the harmful effects of burning fossil fuels on global climate, other energy sources will become more important in the future because fossil fuels could run out by the early twenty-second century given the present rate of consumption. This implies that sooner or later humanity will rely heavily on renewable energy sources. Here we model the effects of an idealized large-scale application of renewable energy on global and regional climate relative to a background climate of the representative concentration pathway 2.6 scenario (RCP2.6; ref. ). We find that solar panels alone induce regional cooling by converting incoming solar energy to electricity in comparison to the climate without solar panels. The conversion of this electricity to heat, primarily in urban areas, increases regional and global temperatures which compensate the cooling effect. However, there are consequences involved with these processes that modulate the global atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes in regional precipitation"
 
Gotta love it when you take things out of context. Here is the whole thing;

"Regardless of the harmful effects of burning fossil fuels on global climate, other energy sources will become more important in the future because fossil fuels could run out by the early twenty-second century given the present rate of consumption. This implies that sooner or later humanity will rely heavily on renewable energy sources. Here we model the effects of an idealized large-scale application of renewable energy on global and regional climate relative to a background climate of the representative concentration pathway 2.6 scenario (RCP2.6; ref. ). We find that solar panels alone induce regional cooling by converting incoming solar energy to electricity in comparison to the climate without solar panels. The conversion of this electricity to heat, primarily in urban areas, increases regional and global temperatures which compensate the cooling effect. However, there are consequences involved with these processes that modulate the global atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes in regional precipitation"
Any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation which does not warm the surface of the planet. The net effect is an effective reduction in solar radiation.
 
Sure as hell you don't Ding. Electrical energy gets converted either into heat directly, home heating, stoves, dryers, or mechanical energy with get gets converted into heat via friction, ect. You just keep digging the hole deeper with this highly erroneous line of illogic.
Most uses of electricity is converted into kinetic or potential energy not heat.

All other energy sources that are used to generate electricity do not capture solar radiation that would have warmed the surface of the planet. So from a budget standpoint that supposed energy conservation is already added to the system without reducing solar radiation that warms the surface of the planet.
 
Why don't you list all the things in your house that don't warm the environment when they use electricity?

Come on, use your engineering experience.
Anything which converts electricity into kinetic or potential energy. Examples would be my air conditioning system and garage door opener.
 
Whooeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I thought Mrs. Elektra was a dumb ass. Yes, solar only meets the rated wattage in direct sunlight. And when you are installing it, you install enough for your needs by calculating how much wattage you will get in a given day. So latitude and climate play a factor. Of course a 400 watt panel does not deliver 400 watts 24/7. That wattage allows you to calculate how much it will generate per day, and, by that, per year. And one more point. You don't need a railroad or pipeline to bring in fuel. It falls out of the sky and is free. And the are not destroying watersheds and aquifers to get that free fuel. However, the proof of the superiority of solar is that the utilities are adapting solar and wind, and shutting down coal plants purely on an economic basis.

So once again you refuse to admit that if you want 500MW of electricity from solar power in AZ that you have to install over 2000 MW of rated capacity.
 
Stop talking nonsense. The only thing that matters is how much electricity comes out of a solar panel in direct sunlight. Also, that square on the map is around 140 miles per side. Elon Musk says it could be done with a square only 100 miles per side. (Though obviously they wouldn't have to be all in one spot) He is a much more intelligent person than you are. So I will believe him over you. In a nanosecond. Earlier I asked you to stop talking nonsense. But I came up with a better idea. Stop leaving any replies in my thread at all.
How much power is needed in MW to run the entire country?

In 2020 we produced about 4000 KW hours of electricity

To get all that from solar we would have to install enough solar panels to produce more than 16000 KW hours.

So how much of that will your little solar array in AZ produce and how are you going to scale that up to meet the expeonentially increased demand if we move to a 100% fossil fuel free electric society?
 
Your air conditioning system doesn't warm the environment around your home?
Post your secret.
What heat that is lost, which is maybe 10%, doesn't heat the surface of the planet, dummy. :)

How long have you believed using electricity causes global warming?
 
lighten up.gif
 
You're adding heat to your neighborhood.
How does that not heat the planet?
There's no back radiation from it.

Why won't you admit that you believe ALL electricity that is used heats the planet? Cause we generate a lot of electricity that does not reduce solar radiation heating the surface of the planet. So in the case where all electricity is generated from solar, that case would have a net reduction in the earth's heat budget.
 
 
Large solar power grids, currently, is a pipe dream. Ridiculously unrealistic.
What IS realistic, is each individual home has it's own system.
Currently it is far too expensive with high cost to maintain. But that would lower significantly if mass produced.
 
There's no back radiation from it.

Why won't you admit that you believe ALL electricity that is used heats the planet? Cause we generate a lot of electricity that does not reduce solar radiation heating the surface of the planet. So in the case where all electricity is generated from solar, that case would have a net reduction in the earth's heat budget.

There's no back radiation from it.

No back radiation from your air conditioner warming your neighborhood?
If you say so. How does that help your claim?

Why won't you admit that you believe ALL electricity that is used heats the planet?

Entropy increases. You're an engineer, you should understand.

So in the case where all electricity is generated from solar, that case would have a net reduction in the earth's heat budget.

If only you had posted 3 sources that agreed with your claim.
I mean, come on, you have to see the humor in the fact that they all disagreed with you.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top