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

[elektra]

The US could save $5.6B a year if it switched from coal to solar – study​

Feb 7, 2022

Solar makes more financial sense than coal​

The authors of the peer-reviewed study from the University of Surrey in the UK point out that even if no other argument, such as fighting climate change, is accepted for the switch from fossil fuels to renewables, then economics should be reason enough to embrace clean energy....

Ravi Silva, director of the Advanced Technology Institute at the University of Surrey and co-author of the study, said:

Electrek’s Take​

Of course, solar needs to be balanced with other sources of clean energy, such as wind and hydro, and battery storage is an essential part of the mix to regulate supply and demand. But what’s overwhelmingly clear is that coal – and indeed, fossil fuels in general – are not only bad for the environment, they’re also a terrible financial choice. That’s the main thrust of this study..

The US could save $5.6B a year if it switched from coal to solar – study

Electricity sourced from solar is cheaper than sourcing it from coal-fired power plants on a global scale, according to a new study.

electrek.co

That is an opnion piece, not a study. It states what you are to believe.

You claim you link to fact when all you did was link to an opinion piece.

Link to a study jaw yacker

 

[abu afak]

That is an opnion piece, not a study. It states what you are to believe.

You claim you link to fact when all you did was link to an opinion piece.

Link to a study jaw yacker

OK then contradict the opinion with some facts/contrary links
Your turn.
It is not up to me to write a novel.

POST SOME TOPICAL CONTENT
ANY TOPICAL CONTENT.
POST A LINK WHEN ASKED for one of your goofy claims.
LEARN HOW Online debate works.

`

 

[elektra]

OK then contradict the opinion with some facts/contrary links
Your turn.
It is not up to me to write a novel.

POST SOME TOPICAL CONTENT
ANY TOPICAL CONTENT.
POST A LINK WHEN ASKED for one of your goofy claims.
LEARN HOW Online debate works.

I addressed your link to an opinion piece. We are to debate opinions?

Post the study you claim to be citing

 

[abu afak]

No, large solar plants heat the atmosphere to a level that is not natural.

Large solar plants create hot spots

Large solar plants upset the balance of nature, destroying the earth, at the sane time disrupting the natural cycle of heating and cooling.

LINK?
ding say they cool the atmosphere/albedo.
They TURN heat into electric, then mechanical energy REPLACING BURNING OF FOSSIL FUELS.

Did you know "Burning' creates heat, as well as Greenhouse gases which also do.

Burning Fossil Fuels is Releasing hundreds of years of the earth's otherwise benign stored solar energy every day.
Oh Wow!
Oh Wow.

`

 

[elektra]

LINK?
ding say they cool the atmosphere/albedo.
They TURN heat into electric, then mechanical energy

??? Photovoltaic solar does not operate as you state.

Why dont you address or share a specific solar plant you know so much about.

 

[elektra]

LINK?
ding say they cool the atmosphere/albedo.
They TURN heat into electric, then mechanical energy REPLACING BURNING OF FOSSIL FUELS.

Solar does not replace fossil fuels. You could say Natural Gas has largely replaced Coal.

To say Solar has replaced anything is dishonest.

Solar is dependent on fossil fuels

Solar is only manufactured by using the energy and chemicals from fossil fuels

Solar cell manufacturing is a new heavy industry, a new market for fossil fuels and their products.

Solar, build more, build the biggest, use more natural resources, and in return we get a trickle of electricity.

Solar manufacturing is a new source of air pollution, as is wind power, and the cost reflects the amount of natural resources needed.

$100 trillion dollars, cause you have to manufacture that much.

Green energy, the solution to climate change? Destroys the earth.

 

[jc456]

And if I put it in my own words you'll say that's just my opinion.
Catch 22.

No, you Dishonest Low IQ clown, it's on YOU to refute a solid documented link.

The issue is an actual price issue, not a "How".
So a link is the best answer.

But I have explained in many threads in the section.

You are just a Contrary A-hole MAGAt trying to switch all burdens to me while providing no info yourself.

Your game is over Goofy.
Put up some meat or documented refutation loser!


`

well you never said why it would be cheaper. Why is that?

 

[jc456]

No, large solar plants heat the atmosphere to a level that is not natural.

Large solar plants create hot spots

Large solar plants upset the balance of nature, destroying the earth, at the sane time disrupting the natural cycle of heating and cooling.

He's never stated what the radiation rate is off all of those solar panels? Ouch, Must gonna burn our butts.

 

[jc456]

I love it when solar radiation doesn't warm the planet.

It's like magic!!!

Almost as magic as lower albedo not offsetting your imaginary cooling.

I was supposing one could fry eggs on those babies.

 

[themirrorthief]

The US could save $5.6B a year if it switched from coal to solar – study​

Feb 7, 2022

Solar makes more financial sense than coal​

The authors of the peer-reviewed study from the University of Surrey in the UK point out that even if no other argument, such as fighting climate change, is accepted for the switch from fossil fuels to renewables, then economics should be reason enough to embrace clean energy....

Ravi Silva, director of the Advanced Technology Institute at the University of Surrey and co-author of the study, said:

Electrek’s Take​

Of course, solar needs to be balanced with other sources of clean energy, such as wind and hydro, and battery storage is an essential part of the mix to regulate supply and demand. But what’s overwhelmingly clear is that coal – and indeed, fossil fuels in general – are not only bad for the environment, they’re also a terrible financial choice. That’s the main thrust of this study..

The US could save $5.6B a year if it switched from coal to solar – study

Electricity sourced from solar is cheaper than sourcing it from coal-fired power plants on a global scale, according to a new study.

electrek.co

know we know why those clever chinese are building coal plants at record pace

 

[ding]

No, large solar plants heat the atmosphere to a level that is not natural.

Large solar plants create hot spots

Incorrect.

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

 

[elektra]

Incorrect.

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

Oh, we are playing the game,

Google Deck of Cards, my turn, I see your link and raise you one. My search trumps yours. This study is actual experiments and obversations in nature whereas you presented us with results from a programmed computer model

The Photovoltaic Heat Island Effect: Larger solar power plants increase local temperatures - PubMed

While photovoltaic (PV) renewable energy production has surged, concerns remain about whether or not PV power plants induce a "heat island" (PVHI) effect, much like the increase in ambient temperatures relative to wildlands generates an Urban Heat Island effect in cities. Transitions to PV...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

we examined the PVHI empirically with experiments that spanned three biomes. We found temperatures over a PV plant were regularly 3-4 °C warmer than wildlands at night, which is in direct contrast to other studies based on models

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

know we know why those clever chinese are building coal plants at record pace

And the Germans can't stop using coal.......

Germany: Coal tops wind as primary electricity source​

In the first half of 2021, coal shot up as the biggest contributor to Germany's electric grid, while wind power dropped to its lowest level since 2018. Officials say the weather is partly to blame.

Germany: Coal tops wind as primary electricity source | DW | 13.09.2021

In the first half of 2021, coal shot up as the biggest contributor to Germany's electric grid, while wind power dropped to its lowest level since 2018. Officials say the weather is partly to blame.

www.dw.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Oh, we are playing the game,

Google Deck of Cards, my turn, I see your link and raise you one. My search trumps yours. This study is actual experiments and obversations in nature whereas you presented us with results from a programmed computer model

The Photovoltaic Heat Island Effect: Larger solar power plants increase local temperatures - PubMed

While photovoltaic (PV) renewable energy production has surged, concerns remain about whether or not PV power plants induce a "heat island" (PVHI) effect, much like the increase in ambient temperatures relative to wildlands generates an Urban Heat Island effect in cities. Transitions to PV...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

we examined the PVHI empirically with experiments that spanned three biomes. We found temperatures over a PV plant were regularly 3-4 °C warmer than wildlands at night, which is in direct contrast to other studies based on models

Poor ding thinks that if you move 100 watts from a panel to the city, you've cooled the planet by 100 watts.

 

[abu afak]

Solar does not replace fossil fuels. You could say Natural Gas has largely replaced Coal.
To say Solar has replaced anything is dishonest.
Solar is dependent on fossil fuels
Solar is only manufactured by using the energy and chemicals from fossil fuels

Solar cell manufacturing is a new heavy industry, a new market for fossil fuels and their products.

Solar, build more, build the biggest, use more natural resources, and in return we get a trickle of electricity.

Solar manufacturing is a new source of air pollution, as is wind power, and the cost reflects the amount of natural resources needed.

$100 trillion dollars, cause you have to manufacture that much.

Green energy, the solution to climate change? Destroys the earth.

DUH!
Yes the first solar panel/panels were produced by fossil fuel plants but Gradually more of the Energy to make them will come from.. solar plants themselves.
DUH!
One Fossil fuel plant can turn out enough energy for panels to build 50? Solar plants in a year, each eventually producing the energy themselves.
Yes they also need some Chems, and I believe coke.

You are not debatable due to IQ deficit.
`
`

 

[elektra]

DUH!
Yes the first solar panel/panels were produced by fossil fuel plants but Gradually more of the Energy to make them will come from.. solar plants themselves.

How?

 

[elektra]

One Fossil fuel plant can turn out enough energy for panels to build 50? Solar plants in a year, each eventually producing the energy themselves.
`

50 solar plants a year, each 2 square miles, and how many years of this manufacturing do you need. The solar industry says at least 50 years.

5000 square miles of solar plants?

And you claimed just at the Four Corners we can produce all the electricity we need?

Maybe one fossil fuel plant can turn out that kind of energy, maybe. But, in ten years so many solar panels will be failing that you wont be able to replace them all let alone build new ones.

It is not electricity that is a problem, it is not electricity that I stated polysilcon manufacturing is reliant on, I stated Fossil Energy, that would be in the form of carbon in order to increase the heat. Carbon comes from fossil fuels, Oil or Natural Gas, even Tar Sands.

 

[elektra]

You are not debatable due to IQ deficit.

Yes, you can not debate me because of your IQ deficit. Finally we agree.

I hope it felt good to get that off your chest.

 

[ding]

Oh, we are playing the game,

Google Deck of Cards, my turn, I see your link and raise you one. My search trumps yours. This study is actual experiments and obversations in nature whereas you presented us with results from a programmed computer model

The Photovoltaic Heat Island Effect: Larger solar power plants increase local temperatures - PubMed

While photovoltaic (PV) renewable energy production has surged, concerns remain about whether or not PV power plants induce a "heat island" (PVHI) effect, much like the increase in ambient temperatures relative to wildlands generates an Urban Heat Island effect in cities. Transitions to PV...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

we examined the PVHI empirically with experiments that spanned three biomes. We found temperatures over a PV plant were regularly 3-4 °C warmer than wildlands at night, which is in direct contrast to other studies based on models

Not a game. Conservation of energy. Any solar radiation converted into electricity is solar radiation that does not warm the surface of the planet. It's just math.

 

[ding]

Poor ding thinks that if you move 100 watts from a panel to the city, you've cooled the planet by 100 watts.

Do you even adiabatic processes and incremental analysis?