Renewables made up 92% of new generating capacity in the U.S. in the first half of 2021

Don't know. The authority for my beliefs are the results from Aixue Hu's modeling. That and the results make sense. Energy that would have heated the surface of the planet is being converted into electricity. That's a hard number. We don't have to guess what that number is. We can measure it. Everything else is modeling.

Don't know.

What's the albedo?

Energy that would have heated the surface of the planet is being converted into electricity.

Ok. Let's run some numbers.

100 watts hits the Earth, 30% is bounced back, 70 watts is heat.

With me so far? Any changes you want to make to my numbers?
 
Don't know.

What's the albedo?

Energy that would have heated the surface of the planet is being converted into electricity.

Ok. Let's run some numbers.

100 watts hits the Earth, 30% is bounced back, 70 watts is heat.

With me so far? Any changes you want to make to my numbers?
If you don't mind, I think I'm going to go with Aixue Hu 's model results. He's a climate change research scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
 
Is the math too complicated for you?
If that's what you want to believe, go for it. There have been models posted both ways. I prefer to agree with the model that matches with what should be able to be solved through inspection which is that any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation that does not warm the surface of the planet. That is a 100% true statement. Everything else is conjecture.
 
If that's what you want to believe, go for it. There have been models posted both ways. I prefer to agree with the model that matches with what should be able to be solved through inspection which is that any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation that does not warm the surface of the planet. That is a 100% true statement. Everything else is conjecture.

If that's what you want to believe, go for it.

I can understand why discussing actual numbers makes you uncomfortable.

You're starting to realize your error.

any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation that does not warm the surface of the planet.

Not at that moment. But very shortly afterwards it's heat.
 
If that's what you want to believe, go for it.

I can understand why discussing actual numbers makes you uncomfortable.

You're starting to realize your error.

any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation that does not warm the surface of the planet.

Not at that moment. But very shortly afterwards it's heat.
What part of "if that's what you want to believe, go for it" did you not understand?

Ummmm.... in all cases (electrical generation that doesn't reduce solar radiation and electrical generation that does reduce solar radiation).
 
What part of "if that's what you want to believe, go for it" did you not understand?

Ummmm.... in all cases (electrical generation that doesn't reduce solar radiation and electrical generation that does reduce solar radiation).

You started out so strong, now you're ending with a whimper.

Glad you can now see the light, even though you won't admit it.
 
What part of "if that's what you want to believe, go for it" did you not understand?

Ummmm.... in all cases (electrical generation that doesn't reduce solar radiation and electrical generation that does reduce solar radiation).

Tell me more about conservation of energy. LOL!
 
You started out so strong, now you're ending with a whimper.

Glad you can now see the light, even though you won't admit it.
I don't see how you made that leap in logic. Widespread use of solar is a BFI. It will have a cooling effect on the planet.
 
Last edited:
I don't see how you made that leap in logic. Widespread use of solar is a BFI. It will have a cooling effect on the planet.

Let's keep looking at the numbers. If the Earth's albedo is 0.30, the 100 watts of solar energy that hits our parcel turns into 70 watts of heat and 30 watts returns to space. If a fairly typical solar panel is on that parcel and has an albedo of 0.05, only 5 watts returns to space.

95 watts are left and let's assume the efficiency of the solar cell is 20%.
19 watts become electricity and 76 watts are heat.
I'll do the math for ding (because it looks like he needs the help).

Earth returns 30 watts to space, 70 watts remain as heat.
Solar panel returns 5 watts, 76 watts is heat and 19 watts is electricity.
I'm gonna say that most (or all) of the 19 watts will eventually turn into heat.

Which scenario results in more heat?
I'll give ding a hint........what's larger, 95 or 70?
 
Any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation that will not heat the surface of the planet. It's a material balance.

Widespread use of solar is a BFI. It will have a cooling effect on the planet.

Solar will cool the planet. Good!
(love when they get caught in another debate and unwitttingly out the truth)

and what effect will Burning millions of years of stored solar energy in the form of Coal and other Fossil Fuels have?
In both direct heating, and forming trapping GHGs?
`
 
Let's keep looking at the numbers. If the Earth's albedo is 0.30, the 100 watts of solar energy that hits our parcel turns into 70 watts of heat and 30 watts returns to space. If a fairly typical solar panel is on that parcel and has an albedo of 0.05, only 5 watts returns to space.

95 watts are left and let's assume the efficiency of the solar cell is 20%.
19 watts become electricity and 76 watts are heat.
I'll do the math for ding (because it looks like he needs the help).

Earth returns 30 watts to space, 70 watts remain as heat.
Solar panel returns 5 watts, 76 watts is heat and 19 watts is electricity.
I'm gonna say that most (or all) of the 19 watts will eventually turn into heat.

Which scenario results in more heat?
I'll give ding a hint........what's larger, 95 or 70?
You should have done this in the first place. It would have saved you some time.

Of course I would have just said what I already told you... the only solid number is what was converted into electricity. Everything else is conjecture and I choose to go with the guy from the National Center for Atmospheric Research who conducted a study and wrote a paper that was published in Nature Climate Change.
 
Solar will cool the planet. Good!
(love when they get caught in another debate and unwitttingly out the truth)

and what effect will Burning millions of years of stored solar energy in the form of Coal and other Fossil Fuels have?
In both direct heating, and forming trapping GHGs?
`
That's not a good idea when we are 3 million years into an ice age where a significant portion of land in the northern hemisphere is covered in ice and snow every winter every year. All it takes is one bad winter followed by one weak summer to increase northern hemisphere albedo and thus start a chain reaction through negative feedback. That would fix your little red wagon.
 
You should have done this in the first place. It would have saved you some time.

Of course I would have just said what I already told you... the only solid number is what was converted into electricity. Everything else is conjecture and I choose to go with the guy from the National Center for Atmospheric Research who conducted a study and wrote a paper that was published in Nature Climate Change.

Of course I would have just said what I already told you... the only solid number is what was converted into electricity. Everything else is conjecture

The Earth's albedo is conjecture?
The solar panel's albedo is conjecture?
The solar panel's efficiency is conjecture?
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is conjecture?
 
Of course I would have just said what I already told you... the only solid number is what was converted into electricity. Everything else is conjecture

The Earth's albedo is conjecture?
The solar panel's albedo is conjecture?
The solar panel's efficiency is conjecture?
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is conjecture?
Stop being silly. You do understand the difference between direct measurements and estimates, right?

Did I hurt your feelings or something? This isn't that complicated. You have my link. What's your objective here?
 
Stop being silly. You do understand the difference between direct measurements and estimates, right?

Did I hurt your feelings or something? This isn't that complicated. You have my link. What's your objective here?

You referring to the direct measurements you posted when you claimed solar panels
cool the planet?

Did I hurt your feelings or something?

No, your confusion did not hurt my feelings.

Does my illustration of your error hurt your feelings?
 
You referring to the direct measurements you posted when you claimed solar panels
cool the planet?

Did I hurt your feelings or something?

No, your confusion did not hurt my feelings.

Does my illustration of your error hurt your feelings?
Direct measurement of energy converted into electricity ;)

I'm totally good. I'm just pointing out you are the one doing the daving here. So what are you trying to accomplish?
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top