it makes economic sense to install solar farms along all 2,000 miles (or so) of those transmission lines .
Please don't get me started on the shortsightedness of widespread use of solar panels in the middle of an ice age. Please, please, please, please.
Energy is conserved ... solar panels won't destroy it ... if anything, solar panels would increase surface temperatures ... retaining that energy for longer periods of time ... if you'll notice, solar panels look black to the naked eye ... desert sands are tanish to white ... think rural Nevada ...
I disagree. First of 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. Secondly, whatever energy you might think is being conserved through the use of electricity will not heat the surface of the planet. And lastly, much of the energy that you believe is conserved is being conserved by doing mechanical work (kinetic or potential) and will not heat the surface of the earth.
Given the hysteria over the use of fossil fuels and climate, one would think that my claim would not be dismissed off hand. Especially since we are in the middle of an ice age with the planet so uniquely configured for glacial cycles and us being only 120 ppm from extensive northern hemisphere continental glaciation.
As a simple experiment ... measure the air temperature just above a solar panel and compare that to the temperature just above an adjacent patch of lawn ... do you predict the solar panel will be cooler? ... or will it be warmer? ...
It's like you don't even FLoT. Any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation that does not heat the surface of the planet.
This study considers how large-scale application of solar panels will affect climate. Electricity generation leads to regional cooling but this is countered by the power's use, affecting global circulation patterns with changes in regional rainfall.
ui.adsabs.harvard.edu
"...We find that solar panels alone induce regional cooling by converting incoming solar energy to electricity in comparison to the climate without solar panels..."
From your link:
"The conversion of this electricity to heat, primarily in urban areas, increases regional and global temperatures which compensate the cooling effect."
Thank you for providing the citation to back up MY claims, not yours, MINE ... ha ha ha ha ha ...
Yes ... I used the the word "curtail" above as this word has the clear connotation of "using less" ... whereas I also used the word "converse" in this context to mean "cannot be created nor destroyed" ... as in the 1st Law of Thermodynamics; aka the Law of Conservation of Energy ...
The problem with your argument is what happens to the electrical energy once it's converted from solar energy? ... we're only addressing 200 W of the 1,000 W received ... and that's just the square meter of solar panel ... there's likely another square meter of space between the solar panels ... so this averages out to only 100 W ... assuming the area between solar panels is covered with asphalt or some other black surface ... if it's concrete or desert white sands, then more solar energy is reflected back out into space than is converted to electricity ...
Then what happens to the electrical energy? ... no point in keeping it there at the solar panel ... we run metallic wires to our homes ... and all metals have electrical resistance ... and resistance coverts electrical energy back into radiative energy in the IR band (
i.e. heat) ... what are we doing we the electricity in our homes? ... refrigerators and A/C's spew hot air, water heaters are energy whores, what do stoves and ovens do? ... ask your grandparents how hot incandescent light bulbs ran ...
As your link clearly states ... the
net energy change is zero ... solar panels have no impact on average global temperatures ... whatever cooling at the solar farm is offset by heating where the electricity is used ...
Not that I'm a big fan of solar farms ... there are a few places these make economic sense, but for the most part they don't ... I'm advocating the solar installation on top of the typical single family dwelling ... "think globally, act locally" ... here, this localized cooling effect is beneficial ... direct sunlight is what ruins three-tab roofing shingles ... solar panels need replacing every so often, so does your roof ... and every homeowner should be intimately aware of how much re-roofing costs ... I can't even touch a modest roof for less than $15,000 ... and extra $2,000 for new solar panels is nothing ... (re-roofing is a great DIY project, but you gotta gotta follow the directions printed on the shingle packages ... to the letter ... and for God's sake, don't fall) ...
BPA runs their transmission lines over land where it takes 20 acres to range one cow ... and you'll have to haul water in from 30 miles away everyday or that cow is going to die rather quickly ... the economy of scale starts at 12 sections ... in other words, barren wasteland ... and you're worried about ice sheets in Canada 20,000 years from now? ...
By the way, do you include seismic refits in the Permian Basin in your cost/benefit calculations on fracking in the region? ... wrapping 1/4" steel around all the load bearing concrete piers everyplace ... didn't think so ...