Solar panels and sheep

[ding]

Hurt, you are taking this way to personal. You cant hurt me, you are an idiot who did not read your link. Of course now that you established you are a fool you are desperately cherry picking and still failing

Seems little ding-a-ling cant read the link
Despite the removal of energy by electricity production, the modules increased daytime net radiation

Cherry picking won't change the measurements of the satellites or the conclusion of the study.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There's nothing for me to argue until you say that you believe that 100% of the electricity that is used (including electricity that was used to perform work), heats the surface of planet

Why does it have to be 100%? What if it's 99%? Am I still right?
Am I wrong if it's only 98%? Why?

 

[ding]

Why does it have to be 100%? What if it's 99%? Am I still right?
Am I wrong if it's only 98%? Why?

Because you need to clearly state your belief like I have done. Because there's no need to debate your belief until you say that you believe that 100% of the electricity that is used (including electricity that was used to perform work), heats the surface of planet exactly like visible light striking the surface of the planet.

Unless of course you believe that there is an incremental change in waste heat from electricity usage from solar displacing fossil fuels. Because if you do then we can debate that now.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Because you need to clearly state your belief like I have done. Because there's no need to debate your belief until you say that you believe that 100% of the electricity that is used (including electricity that was used to perform work), heats the surface of planet exactly like visible light striking the surface of the planet.

Unless of course you believe that there is an incremental change in waste heat from electricity usage from solar displacing fossil fuels. Because if you do then we can debate that now.

My clearly stated belief is that moving energy from a solar field to a home doesn't result in net cooling of the planet.

Like my belief that moving energy from my freezer to the condenser coils doesn't result in net cooling of my home (or the planet).

Now if you can show that some tiny amount of the solar electricity does some amount of work that isn't heating the planet like the original photons would have heated the planet, post up that data and we can see if you have a valid claim.

 

[ding]

My clearly stated belief is that moving energy from a solar field to a home doesn't result in net cooling of the planet.

Like my belief that moving energy from my freezer to the condenser coils doesn't result in net cooling of my home (or the planet).

Now if you can show that some tiny amount of the solar electricity does some amount of work that isn't heating the planet like the original photons would have heated the planet, post up that data and we can see if you have a valid claim.

That's incomplete. I have no need to debate you until you say that you believe that 100% of the electricity that is used (including electricity that was used to perform work), heats the surface of planet exactly like visible light striking the surface of the planet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's incomplete. I have no need to debate you until you say that you believe that 100% of the electricity that is used (including electricity that was used to perform work), heats the surface of planet exactly like visible light striking the surface of the planet.

Let's assume it's 99% instead of 100%.
Show how that will be a good way to cause a new ice age.

 

[ding]

Let's assume it's 99% instead of 100%.
Show how that will be a good way to cause a new ice age.

Do you believe that the waste heat from electricity usage heats the surface of the planet exactly like visible light striking the surface of the planet?

Are you assuming that solar power displaces power from fossil fuels?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Do you believe that the waste heat from electricity usage heats the surface of the planet exactly like visible light striking the surface of the planet?

Not exactly. No.

 

[ReinyDays]

My clearly stated belief is that moving energy from a solar field to a home doesn't result in net cooling of the planet.

Like my belief that moving energy from my freezer to the condenser coils doesn't result in net cooling of my home (or the planet).

Now if you can show that some tiny amount of the solar electricity does some amount of work that isn't heating the planet like the original photons would have heated the planet, post up that data and we can see if you have a valid claim.

ding doesn't understand blackbody radiation ... try to forgive him ... math is hard, even for conservatives ...

 

[ding]

Not exactly. No.

Are you assuming that solar power displaces electrical generation from fossil fuels?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Are you assuming that solar power displaces electrical generation from fossil fuels?

I'm assuming nothing of the sort.

 

[ding]

I'm assuming nothing of the sort.

Why not?

 

[ding]

ding doesn't understand blackbody radiation ... try to forgive him ... math is hard, even for conservatives ...

But I do understand incremental analyses.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why not?

It has nothing to do with your claim.

 

[ding]

ding doesn't understand blackbody radiation ... try to forgive him ... math is hard, even for conservatives ...

Do you believe the IPCC's outputs from their blackbody radiation models?

 

[ding]

It has nothing to do with your claim.

Sure it does. Why do you believe it doesn't?

 

[ding]

Gotta jet. Contractors are here. We're taking down a load bearing wall today. Gotta see the installation of the beam.

 

[elektra]

Cherry picking won't change the measurements of the satellites or the conclusion of the study.

Here is another quote from your study;
Our method for quantifying SF impacts has uncertainties and limitations.

 

[elektra]

Based on satellite remote sensing data, our assessment of 116 SF around the world provided new ...

Wrong again
Ding-a-ling
It is amazing the amount of errors dingling made in one reply
This "study" did not study one solar farm (SF?)
The study studied another study. The study that this study studied, studied another study.

The studies go back to at least 2003. Pretty old data.

116 solar farms were not studied by this study, another study was studied.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sure it does. Why do you believe it doesn't?

Here is what I think your claim means.
Please correct me if I'm misstating it.

100 watts of sunlight hits an area on Earth. This warms the Earth by X amount.

If we intercept that 100 watts of sunlight with a solar panel, some amount of electricity is generated and somehow this causes the Earth, as a system, to warm by some amount less than X. Is that right?

And the evidence to support your claim is that the temperature above a solar farm is lower than it was before the solar farm was built.

Does that sum it up?