The US could Save $5.6B a year if it Switched from Coal to Solar – study

[Toddsterpatriot]

The reduction in upward longwave radiation is due to solar panels reflecting heat back into space

Solar panels reflect less back to space. A lot less.

 

[ding]

Right. Burning coal doesn't cool the planet. Using solar doesn't cool the planet.

Burning coal does not reduce the upward longwave radiation. Solar panels do.

 

[ding]

Solar panels reflect less back to space. A lot less.

And yet... Satellites measured reduced upward longwave radiation in 6 solar farms. With such reduction in upward longwave radiation being consistent with previous in-situ measurements.

Land Surface Temperature (LST) is derived from thermal infrared radiance measured using space-borne radiometers. Compared to adjacent regions without changes before and after solar farm constructions, the solar farm sites have reduced outgoing radiances in three MODIS infrared window channels. Such reduction in upward longwave radiation is consistent with previous in-situ measurements. The MYD11A2 results show constant emissivities before and after solar farm constructions because its land type classification algorithm is not aware of the presence of solar farms. The estimated daytime and nighttime LST reduction due to solar farm deployment are ~1-4K and ~0.2-0.9K, respectively.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...farm_deployment_on_surface_longwave_radiation

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm not the one denying satellite measurements of reduced upward longwave radiation due to solar panels. You are.

I would never deny that a reduction at the panel is offset by an increase at point of use.
That conservation thing again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I am arguing that satellites have measured reduced upward longwave radiation due to solar farms. You are the one arguing that that does not matter because that heat will be returned by using electricity.

No net reduction. Correct.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Again... Satellites measured reduced upward longwave radiation in 6 solar farms.

What did they measure 100 miles away? At the house?

 

[ding]

I would never deny that a reduction at the panel is offset by an increase at point of use.
That conservation thing again.

That's exactly what you were arguing before.

 

[ding]

No net reduction. Correct.

That's an incorrect way of looking at it. Whatever heat you believe is released from using electricity from solar power would be released from using electricity from fossil fuels, but only electricity generated from solar power reduces the longwave radiation. So trying to argue that conservation of energy is responsible for returning the heat not reflected back into space and therefore does not lead to an incremental cooling is a false comparison because relative to the case of generating electricity from fossil fuels there is an incremental decrease in longwave radiation but there is no change or difference in the heat released from using electricity because it's the same in both cases.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's an incorrect way of looking at it. Whatever heat you believe is released from using electricity from solar power would be released from using electricity from fossil fuels, but only electricity generated from solar power reduces the longwave radiation. So trying to argue that conservation of energy is responsible for returning the heat not reflected back into space and therefore does not lead to an incremental cooling is a false comparison because relative to the case of generating electricity from fossil fuels there is an incremental decrease in longwave radiation but there is no change or difference in the heat released from using electricity because it's the same in both cases.

Who is arguing that not burning coal or nat gas will cause a new ice age?

Why do you keep repeating your "reduces the longwave radiation" mistake?

 

[ding]

What did they measure 100 miles away? At the house?

Satellites measured reduced upward longwave radiation in 6 solar farms. With such reduction in upward longwave radiation being consistent with previous in-situ measurements.

 

[Batcat]

To do this right, we are going to have to switch our whole grid from point source to distributed. That will require a decade or more of work. Then there is the building of the grid into areas with high solar and wind potential. The building of energy storage, batteries, pumped hydro, liquid air, ect. that will require the work of many different disciplines. Yes, some trades and disciplines will suffer. How many people are crying about buggy whip manufacturers today?

So we go solar and a big volcano blows up and we have another year without a summer. However this time we also have a year without enough sun to provide us with electricity.

Year Without a Summer - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's exactly what you were arguing before.

You were arguing, "reduction at the panel, no increase at point of use".

Change your mind?

 

[ding]

Who is arguing that not burning coal or nat gas will cause a new ice age?

No one I know of.

Why do you keep repeating your "reduces the longwave radiation" mistake?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No one I know of.

View attachment 609970

Where's the measurement of the house in those charts?

 

[ding]

You were arguing, "reduction at the panel, no increase at point of use".

Change your mind?

That's not what I argued. That's what you think I argued. That's because you don't understand how to do an incremental analysis. You keep arguing that the reduction in upward longwave radiation doesn't matter because heat will eventually be returned but ignore that that happens no matter what. It's the exact same for any type of electrical generation. But only solar reduces the upward longwave radiation so relative to other generating sources solar will have an incremental cooling effect. Can't explain it any simpler than that.

 

[ding]

Where's the measurement of the house in those charts?

You should write a paper about that.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You keep arguing that the reduction in upward longwave radiation doesn't matter because heat will eventually be returned but ignore that that happens no matter what.

I keep arguing there is no net reduction of upward longwave radiation due to solar power.

 

[ding]

I keep arguing there is no net reduction of upward longwave radiation due to solar power.

And yet satellites measured a reduction in upward longwave radiation due to the existence of solar farms, so how do you reconcile your statement with that?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And yet satellites measured a reduction in upward longwave radiation due to the existence of solar farms,

No they didn't. They weren't measuring longwave radiation anywhere but at the solar farms.
If you move 100 watts from the farm to a home, net heat is unchanged.

 

[ding]

No they didn't. They weren't measuring longwave radiation anywhere but at the solar farms.
If you move 100 watts from the farm to a home, net heat is unchanged.

They used time lapsed thermal infrared radiance measured by space-borne radiometers before and after solar farm constructions for six solar farms.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356860141_Direct_impact_of_solar_farm_deployment_on_surface_longwave_radiation