Solar Panels Useless above 85 Degree F.

[Batcat]

Well, isn't this special...

Researchers in England tested five major brands of PV panels and found that they lose 0.35% of their output for each one degree C rise above 77 degrees F. When you consider that these panels only output around 70% of rated value anyway, even in direct sunlight, once you reach about 85degrees F the logarithmic loss becomes very problematic. Many of our solar fields are in desert regions where temperatures generally climb into the 100's daily, meaning they are pretty much a waste of resources to place them there. Your roof top is no different and generally reaches 120 deg F daily. Now these solar panels are clogging up landfills...

Solar Panels Suffer Stunning Failure as Weather Becomes 'Too Hot' for Them to Handle

The Western Journal has retracted this commentary.

www.westernjournal.com

That causes me to wonder why power companies are spending huge sums of money building solar power farms all over Florida and people are putting solar power panels on their roofs.

Right now at 4:30 PM in the panhandle of Florida it is 93°, just another day in the sunshine state.

 

[Billy_Bob]

That causes me to wonder why power companies are spending huge sums of money building solar power farms all over Florida and people are putting solar power panels on their roofs.

Right now at 4:30 PM in the panhandle of Florida it is 93°, just another day in the sunshine state.

Federal subsidies... FREE MONEY...

 

[Batcat]

Federal subsidies... FREE MONEY...

I’m sure that is part of the attraction but I also feel solar panels still work at temperatures above 85°. The power companies are building vast solar farms in Florida. It is often 85° and higher on many spring, summer and fall days in Florida and even during the summer.

Duke Energy 'All-In' On Solar Power. New Florida Solar Farms Will Install 3 Millionth Solar Panel

www.columbiacountyobserver.com

Florida​ Duke Energy 'All-In' On Solar Power. New Florida Solar Farms Will Install 3-Millionth Solar Panel​ Posted July 23, 2021 05:30 am Photo: Duke Energy | Columbia County Observer Graphic ST. PETERSBURG, FL – On Wednesday, July 21, Duke Energy Florida announced the locations of its four newest solar power plants - the latest move in the company’s program to expand its renewable generation portfolio. Columbia Cnty's Econ. Dev. Dir. Glenn Hunter: "Columbia County understands the value of renewable green energy and tries to attract green industries. We are happy that we were the home of Duke's millionth solar panel and are part of its “Smarter Energy Future.” We are glad to be part of the program which looks to preserve the County's and Florida’s unique environment." Duke Energy Florida state president Melissa Seixas said, “We continue investing in utility-scale solar in Florida because our customers deserve a cleaner energy future. These solar plants are the latest milestones in our strategy to deliver reliable, cost-effective, clean energy to our customers.” Duke Energy Florida plans to invest an estimated $1 billion in 10 new solar power plants across Florida, including the four sites announced today. Construction on the four sites will begin in early 2022 and will take approximately 9 to 12 months to complete. Construction of all 10 sites is projected to be finished by late 2024. Combined, the plants will produce about 750 megawatts (MW) of new, cost-effective solar power.

 

[Crick]

Low energy density technology which requires a massive scale to replace fossil fuels, finite life, diminishing performance, affected by temperature. Would require disposing of old panels and remanufacturing of new panels every 25 years or so and that doesn't even factor in demand growth which doubles the magnitude of problem every 25 years. It's not practical and it's not sustainable at scale like fossil fuels are.

Land used for PV installations can still be used for crops, watershed, animal habitat, etc. Land used for fossil-fueled plants cannot.

Every technology has a finite life.

As has been clearly demonstrated in this thread, the performance of PV panels is not significantly affected by temperature extremes.

Old panels can be recycled.

Whatever technology is used to generate electricity has to satisfy demand growth.

So you've got diddly squat.

 

[ding]

Land used for PV installations can still be used for crops, watershed, animal habitat, etc. Land used for fossil-fueled plants cannot.

Every technology has a finite life.

As has been clearly demonstrated in this thread, the performance of PV panels is not significantly affected by temperature extremes.

Old panels can be recycled.

Whatever technology is used to generate electricity has to satisfy demand growth.

So you've got diddly squat.

You asked me and I told you. The fact that it hasn't replaced fossil fuels or installed battery backup so that it can replace fossil fuels says the obstacles are far more formidable than you would have others believe.

 

[Crick]

You asked me and I told you. The fact that it hasn't replaced fossil fuels or installed battery backup so that it can replace fossil fuels says the obstacles are far more formidable than you would have others believe.

It IS replacing fossil fuels and at a tremendous pace. That you think it should have replaced a 150 year old system so in a handful of years only tells me your goalposts are on wheels and that you're just not very bright.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It IS replacing fossil fuels and at a tremendous pace. That you think it should have replaced a 150 year old system so in a handful of years only tells me your goalposts are on wheels and that you're just not very bright.

Any poor Germans going to freeze to death this winter because of this
awesome replacement at a tremendous pace?

 

[ding]

It IS replacing fossil fuels and at a tremendous pace. That you think it should have replaced a 150 year old system so in a handful of years only tells me your goalposts are on wheels and that you're just not very bright.

If fossil fuels are the only way to meet the base load they aren't. And without battery backup renewables will never replace fossil fuels. The best you can say is renewables will augment fossil fuels. Renewables aren't practical for baseloading the power grid. It's too big of a scale for such a low energy density technology which can only generate intermittently.

 

[ding]

And you're confused about what albedo means.

Not at all. Albedo affects how much solar radiation is absorbed by the surface.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface

The lower albedo is how they maximize their capture of photons to convert photons into electricity before the photons can produce heat. You are leaving out the photons being converted into electricity.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface - photons converted into electricity

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not at all. Albedo affects how much solar radiation is absorbed by the surface.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface

The lower albedo is how they maximize their capture of photons to convert photons into electricity before the photons can produce heat. You are leaving out the photons being converted into electricity.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface - photons converted into electricity

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

Albedo affects how much solar radiation is absorbed by the surface

And that's why the panels warm the planet.
Whether they're plugged into the grid and ship some energy to a city or whether they are unplugged and just absorbing more solar radiation.

You are leaving out the photons being converted into electricity.

And you're leaving out conservation of energy.
Every watt cooler at the panel is a watt warmer where the electricity is consumed.

 

[Crick]

Not at all. Albedo affects how much solar radiation is absorbed by the surface.

Albedo is actually a measure of how much solar radiation is reflected by the surface of a planet or moon.

 

[ding]

Albedo is actually a measure of how much solar radiation is reflected by the surface of a planet or moon.

And what is not reflected is absorbed. The point still stands...

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

 

[ding]

Albedo affects how much solar radiation is absorbed by the surface

And that's why the panels warm the planet.
Whether they're plugged into the grid and ship some energy to a city or whether they are unplugged and just absorbing more solar radiation.

You are leaving out the photons being converted into electricity.

And you're leaving out conservation of energy.
Every watt cooler at the panel is a watt warmer where the electricity is consumed.

Incrementally there is no change in waste heat regardless of how the electricity was generated so there is no change in the waste heat energy balance. Not so for solar radiation. Photons were converted into electricity that would have otherwise produced warming.

As for panels warming the planet six solar farms had reduced infrared heat, not more.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Incrementally there is no change in waste heat regardless of how the electricity was generated so there is no change in the waste heat energy balance. Not so for solar radiation. Photons were converted into electricity that would have otherwise produced warming.

As for panels warming the planet six solar farms had reduced infrared heat, not more.

Photons were converted into electricity that would have otherwise produced warming.

Photons converted into electricity still produced warming.

 

[ding]

Photons were converted into electricity that would have otherwise produced warming.

Photons converted into electricity still produced warming.

Which replaces the warming from the waste heat of electricity generated from fossil fuels so no incremental heat there.

But the photons converted to electricity were responsible for an incremental cooling at the PV cells.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface - photons converted into electricity

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Which replaces the warming from the waste heat of electricity generated from fossil fuels so no incremental heat there.

But the photons converted to electricity were responsible for an incremental cooling at the PV cells.

absorbed by surface = incoming solar radiation - reflected by clouds and atmosphere - absorbed by atmosphere - reflected by surface - photons converted into electricity

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.

Which replaces the warming from the waste heat of electricity generated from fossil fuels so no incremental heat there.

Changing your stupid claim?

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells

Doesn't offset anything. Moves some of the heat to the point of use.

 

[elektra]

Land used for PV installations can still be used for crops, watershed, animal habitat, etc. Land used for fossil-fueled plants cannot.

land used for PV installations can not be used for crops and is not used for crops.

Fossil fuel plants? Are you going to compare one fossil fuel plant on acres of land compared to solar plants that require 100 sq miles and at that, the solar plant still cant produce electricity except for about 4 good hours a day.

Diddly squat? You can't see the stupidity, the ignorance, in your post.

Land used for Fossil Fuel plants, saves 1,000's of square miles of land that will be destroyed by solar. 22,000 square miles at the very least according to your buddy abu afk

 

[abu afak]

land used for PV installations can not be used for crops and is not used for crops.

Fossil fuel plants? Are you going to compare one fossil fuel plant on acres of land compared to solar plants that require 100 sq miles and at that, the solar plant still cant produce electricity except for about 4 good hours a day.

Diddly squat? You can't see the stupidity, the ignorance, in your post.

Land used for Fossil Fuel plants, saves 1,000's of square miles of land that will be destroyed by solar. 22,000 square miles at the very least according to your buddy abu afk

You and the ldiot Billy_Bob are so GD Stoooopid it's unbelievable.
You MAGAt HACKS need to resign for your stupidity.
This thread is a Giant embarrassment in which a LOL 'Physicist' made an obviously (to a teenager) False claim from a Conspiracy website/article.
100% FALSE claim that Solar panels are "Useless" above 85 degrees!!!
What a F***ing moron!
Like they don't use panels in hot areas! DOH!

You continue you LOW IQ Political CLOWN.

It so easy these days too. You STOOPID MFer!

​

How much do farmers get paid to host wind turbines?​

https://www.windustry.org › how_much_do_farmers_get...
Wind lease terms vary quite a bit, but general rules of thumb are: $4,000 to $8,000 per turbine, $3,000 to $4,000 per megawatt of capacity, or 2-4% of gross revenues. Larger turbines should translate to larger payments.

Wind energy gives American farmers a new crop ... - USA Today​

https://www.usatoday.com › news › nation › 2020/02/16
Feb 16, 2020 — Wind energy is cheap and growing. The phrase "wind farm" is confusing because wind farms don't look much like farms, or even traditional power ...

How Much Money Does a Farmer Make for a Wind Turbine?​

https://sciencing.com › Science › Physics › Energy
Jan 9, 2018 — A farmer would earn $10,000 from a two-megawatt turbine with a $5,000 per megawatt per year payment. Wind turbine contracts are very long term ...

For Ohio farmers, wind turbine revenue helps take the sting ...​

https://energynews.us › 2019/10/31 › for-ohio-farmers-...
Oct 31, 2019 — Overall, wind farms in Ohio pay an estimated $1 million to $5 million a year to landowners, said spokesperson Evan Vaughan at the American Wind ...

'The sound of money': Wind energy is booming in deep-red ...​

‘The sound of money’: Wind energy is Booming in deep-Red Republican states​

https://abc17news.com › cnn-us-politics › 2022/04/22
Apr 22, 2022 — The Traverse wind farm is made up of 356 turbines — each rising about 300 feet above the ground and spread out across 220,000 acres. The ...

`

 

[ding]

Changing your stupid claim?

The incremental cooling effect I have been discussing has always been relative to fossil fuels. Glad you could catch up.

 

[ding]

Doesn't offset anything. Moves some of the heat to the point of use.

Which replaces waste heat from electricity generated from fossil fuels which didn't convert photons into electricity which would have otherwise produced heat.

So even though the panels may reflect less solar radiation, the photons being converted into electricity more than offset the increased solar radiation absorbed by the lower albedo PV cells. Which is why there was less infrared heat emitted at the solar farms after the panels were installed.