Solar is now ‘Cheapest Electricity in History’, confirms IEA

[Captain Caveman]

You contribute NOTHING Topic to this thread.
You are a Juvenile 12 IQ RW Troll.
Post ON topic or go **** yourself you clown.
`

Listen paedo, sort yourself out.

 

[jbrownson0831]

You contribute NOTHING Topic to this thread.
You are a Juvenile 12 IQ RW Troll.
Post ON topic or go **** yourself you clown.
`

I exterminate Dimmer cockroaches....scat under the refrigerator with you!

 

[Captain Caveman]

Hello Old Rocks!

Old Rocks doesn't own an EV but for some strange reason, licks the fucking arse off them for some strange reason. Probs not a bright chap.

 

[TNHarley]

Cool. Where is solar on dependability?

 

[jbrownson0831]

Old Rocks doesn't own an EV but for some strange reason, licks the fucking arse off them for some strange reason. Probs not a bright chap.

He sure is the Chatty Cathy for Musk propaganda.

 

[abu afak]

Listen paedo, sort yourself out.

He sure is the Chatty Cathy for Musk propaganda.

If Poopeyman dumass wasn't in the White House, the cost of gas would be much much less and we could continue our own production.

Old Rocks doesn't own an EV but for some strange reason, licks the fucking arse off them for some strange reason. Probs not a bright chap.

I exterminate Dimmer cockroaches....scat under the refrigerator with you!

The topic here is Solar energy getting to be the cheapest. (or not)
Post ON TOPIC or leave.
Period.

This board is overwhelmed by 12 IQ Juvenile Right Wing Trolls.
Making it impossible to have any discussion/debate.
And they just stopped in to RUIN/degrade another thread. (and the purpose of USMB. Tho RW Trolling Is USMB)
`

 

[AZrailwhale]

Most companies now a days provide a 20 year payment plan making the monthly payments less than what many people pay for there current electricity. I just set up a unit for my mother cut her month payments in half

Does that include the power she still has to buy from the utility in inclement weather and at night? I bought my panels outright and in the hot part of the year it barely cuts my bills in half. People that lease their panels don't save very much money at all.

 

[jbrownson0831]

The topic here is Solar energy getting to be the cheapest. (or not)
Post ON TOPIC or leave.
Period.

`

I did....too expensive and too costly to even implement. Fossil fuels will never go away...now back under the refrigerator.

 

[Captain Caveman]

The topic here is Solar energy getting to be the cheapest. (or not)
Post ON TOPIC or leave.
Period.

`

I suggest you leave the forum, do the members a favour.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Solar power means, you might get enough juice in an EV over two days charge to get to the shop and back, if you're lucky.

If you have a fortune in the bank and the roof of your house is the size of a football pitch, you might get enough panels to make it possible to boil a kettle to make a cup of tea

 

[elektra]

AGAIN you blind/stupid last-wording Clown
You deflected and lost/Didn't even address the Title topic: "Cheapest electricity."
and in fact solar and other renewables ARE "displacing fossil fuels." if not being able to eliminate them completely.
WRONG AGAIN!

Again:

""Maybe you should look at thread title for what is a "deflection" or not.​

The topic is the increasingly lower CO$T of solar relative to Fossil fuels not the components/or pollution therefrom.​

You Deflected what you could not even debate.[/U]​

You LOST.​

​

And even on that deflected diversion, I indulged/engaged, and you LOST THAT TOO, as obviously the need of coal/carbon for PART of the Solar process is still better pollution-wise than going to an ALL COAL plant all the time. Duh.​

Beat you any way you want/turn.​

​

It/you was always an obvious loser but you wanted a source (really trying to win with the 'demand detail Fallacy' of what itself was a deflection!) and gave you a great source with numbers.​

As if it needed one to prove either point to anyone with a 3 digit IQ.​

No, Dumbass! You are deflecting.

POLYSILCON is what solar panels are made from and thus the topic of your OP.

Need we dumb it down for you and simply call it, "light gathering stuff".

And again! Solar Panels do not displace nor replace or lessen the use of Fossil fuels in any way shape or form. Solar Panels do increase the use of Fossil fuels.

 

[abu afak]

No Dumbass! You are deflecting. POLYSILCON is what solar panels are made from and thus the topic of your OP. Need we dumb it down for you and simply call it, "light gathering stuff". And again! Solar Panels do not displace nor replace or lessen the use of Fossil fuels in any way shape or form. Solar Panels do increase the use of Fossil fuels.

The TOPIC is that 'Solar Produces the Cheapest Electric', ie, Solar Power Plants.
You have NOT even addressed the the TOPIC/Thread TITLE!
(while accusing me of 'dodging.' LOFL, Retard.)
You are TOO STUPID to read the Simplest topic and TOO DISHONEST so try and change that topic.
YOU LOST and are embarrassing yourself.

And of course Solar power plants ARE Replacing Fossil Fuel ones in this country/others and have been for years. As well as solar panels on single residences to some degree.
WTF!

You LOSE AGAIN keeping your 0-fer Perfect.


`

 

[elektra]

The TOPIC is that 'Solar Produces the Cheapest Electric', ie, Solar Power Plants.
You have NOT even addressed the the TOPIC/Thread TITLE!
(while accusing me of 'dodging.' LOFL, Retard.)
You are TOO STUPID to read the Simplest topic and TOO DISHONEST so try and change that topic.
YOU LOST and are embarrassing yourself.

And of course Solar power plants ARE Replacing Fossil Fuel ones in this country/others and have been for years. As well as solar panels on single residences to some degree.
WTF!

You LOSE AGAIN keeping your 0-fer Perfect.

In discussing SOLAR, I can not discuss the polysilicon which is thee most expensive part of Solar and the most energy extensive process.

Thank you for clarifying that you will not discuss POLYSILICON because you believe it has nothing to do with Solar.

You are the dumbest person to ever post, I thought old crock and crick were stupid, but you make them look like Einstein.

we shall not discuss polysilicon in solar threads
we shall not discuss polysilicon in solar threads
we shall not discuss polysilicon in solar threads

 

[abu afak]

In discussing SOLAR, I can not discuss the polysilicon which is thee most expensive part of Solar and the most energy extensive process.

Thank you for clarifying that you will not discuss POLYSILICON because you believe it has nothing to do with Solar.

You are the dumbest person to ever post, I thought old crock and crick were stupid, but you make them look like Einstein.

we shall not discuss polysilicon in solar threads
we shall not discuss polysilicon in solar threads
we shall not discuss polysilicon in solar threads

Again x5 (and maybe 20 posts of yours)
You have Not even addressed the thread and it's stated premise and ironically accuse me of 'dodging' you!
All the while deflecting with a Detail of production of solar panels (polysilicon), which obviously does NOT affect that OP premise that Solar has produced the cheapest electric.
Gameover. 1.

IOW and AGAIN
2. You are an OCD lunatic with an obsession because you found some detail about production which does not affect whether solar is the cheapest....
(not to mention much cleaner)

3. You do not understand (or are disingenuous, or more likely Psychotic) that ONE day of smelting with coal to produce a solar panel that runs 20 years (7300 days) is not only more efficient but Obviously cleaner than burning coal as a fuel all day every day in it's place.

4. NONETHELESS (and unlike you) I did Indulge your concern/PolySilicon and More with a highlighted article from Scientific American which showed that despite using a bit of coal, solar was much more efficient, and much, much, less polluting.
No answer.

5. So one the one hand, you are so ****** crazy (obsessed with this production detail you found years ago) you haven't touched the OP/Title.
On the other, I blew your idea that it somehow invalidated Solar v Coal.

6. In your last before this you said solar wasn't displacing fossil fuels!!!! in fact you claimed it was increasing their use!!
That's right. Again with the Fallacy that ONE day of smelting polyS doesn't let it run for 20 years, and in fact Solar IS replacing Fossil fuel plants.
One coal plant alone can produce enough PolyS for millions of panels: many, many whole solar plants which will AND IS replacing Fossil Fuel ones.
Another ABSOLUTELY GONZO LUNATIC CLAIM.
Are they Lies or Just abject STUPIDITY?
Sad to say probably the latter.

7. NUMBERED for easy Non-evasive replies.
Let's see if you can do it.
LOFL.

and oh, 8.
I am hardly the "stupidest" here and perhaps (as we can see) about the Smartest.
I mainly post in the Sci section while the fakes/MAGA 'science' guys like you and 20 more Only post their 'science' in the political 'environment' section.
I am a Mensa member and also in the more elite group above it - Intertel - that is twice as selective. Talking to you is like talking to a 12 year old in both maturity and intellect/Intel-lacked.

`

 

[elektra]

Again x5 (and maybe 20 posts of yours)
You have Not even addressed the thread and it's stpated premise and ironically accuse me of 'dodging' you!

Everything I stated you ignore and refuse to discuss.

Your premise is false. There is no discussion of false prmesis.

Every single part of solar is subsidized. From the millions of acres of land solar requires to the manufacturing in third world countries and China.

You are stooge for government. You are not your own man/women.

You refuse to discuss polysilicon hence you refuse to discuss solar. Your knowledge is so shallow the only thing being stated is this thread is your predilection for trolling and flaming.

A Democrat stooge, not your own man (if you are a man at all). Your thread is a joke of insults.

 

[DudleySmith]

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

2 cents is definitely not cheaper, so that's a fake story right there. The production of nuclear is much cheaper than that per Kw/hr..

 

[abu afak]

2 cents is definitely Not cheaper, so that's a Fake story right there. The production of nuclear is much cheaper than that per Kw/hr..

Solar power got cheap. So why aren’t we using it more?​

It turns out there’s a lot of inertia built into the energy system.
Oct 8, 2021

Solar power got cheap. So why aren’t we using it more?

The cost of renewable energy, and solar in particular, has plummeted in the last decade. So why has there not been a green revolution?

www.popsci.com

""Solar, in particular, has cheapened at a blistering pace. Just 10 years ago, it was the most expensive option for building a new energy development. Since then, that cost has dropped by 90%, according to data from the Levelized Cost of Energy Report and as highlighted recently by Our World in Data. Utility-scale solar arrays are now the least costly option to build and operate."

`

 

[elektra]

Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA

Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA

The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

www.carbonbrief.org

""The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

That is according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020. The 464-page outlook, published today by the IEA, also outlines the “extraordinarily turbulent” impact of coronavirus and the “highly uncertain” future of global energy use over the next two decades....."

False premise with a link to nowhere.

You link to website making claims about a document from another website.

What a joke. This is nothing more than bullshit, we have a dumbass making believe he/she understands posting crap on this website from another website.

Follow the link on this website to another website and that other website is dictating what we are to believe what another website says.

Go to that third website and there are more links to follow if one wants to read the supposed report. Good luck finding the report because there are many more links to follow.

Starting an OP based on heresey, with no quotes from the source is amateur.

 

[abu afak]

False premise with a link to nowhere.
You link to website making claims about a document from another website.
What a joke. This is nothing more than bullshit, we have a dumbass making believe he/she understands posting crap on this website from another website.
Follow the link on this website to another website and that other website is dictating what we are to believe what another website says.
Go to that third website and there are more links to follow if one wants to read the supposed report. Good luck finding the report because there are many more links to follow.
Starting an OP based on heresey, with no quotes from the source is amateur.

Empty criticism (juvenile hostility) and you have NO refutation/your own info, and St!ll have never even attempted to address the OP/Title/Topic!
19 posts/WHIFFS.

You're a pathetic little loser, who used a RW conspiracy website earlier in this thread. (among other no-name trash) now trying to bash my links. LOFL.

My link OTOH?

Wiki:​

​

Popular Science (also known as PopSci) is an American digital magazine carrying popular science content, which refers to articles for the general reader on science and technology subjects. Popular Science has won over 58 awards, including the American Society of Magazine Editors awards for its journalistic excellence in 2003 (for General Excellence), 2004 (for Best Magazine Section), and 2019 (for Single-Topic Issue). With roots beginning in 1872,[2] Popular Science has been translated into over 30 languages and is distributed to at least 45 countries.​

[....]​

​

You've Been GUTTED.​

You're a joke and emptily hostile juvenile FRAUD.​

`​

 

[BrunoGenovese]

Although anybody who's been looking at news about solar power over the years knows that it has become the cheapest.

That is not the bid deal it would seem though.

1) The numbers probably include equipment and maintenance, but I don't know if the numbers include the cost of the land. Solar requires quite a bit of space.

2) A lot of the cost of coal power plants is in the plant itself. Are there numbers for just maintenance + coal consumed?

So incentives are probably still needed. I suspect the cheapest way is to continue giving credits for putting solar panels on homes.