Wind Power, is Germany waking up to no lights on?

[EMH]

For the past 3 million years it warms every time the northern hemisphere deglaciates after a glacial period has ended.
View attachment 1200451
View attachment 1200452
View attachment 1200453

The job of the CO2 FRAUD "faux skeptic" is to keep morons believing Earth is warming when it is not.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Satellite measurements above 116 solar farms says otherwise.

Where does the extra energy go that was absorbed by the lower albedo panels?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Replacing the source of electricity generation doesn't change the usage of electricity. It only changes the source. So replacing a source which doesn't capture solar radiation with a source that does capture solar radiation results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

Moving some heat from the panel to the electricity consumer doesn't change the amount of heat.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The job of the CO2 FRAUD "faux skeptic" is to keep morons believing Earth is warming when it is not.

Still no data? *****.

 

[ding]

The job of the CO2 FRAUD "faux skeptic" is to keep morons believing Earth is warming when it is not.

Earth's climate is always changing. I'm not arguing that the rate of warming is unprecedented. I'm arguing that it is natural.

 

[ding]

Where does the extra energy go that was absorbed by the lower albedo panels?

Why can't you understand the 2C cooler daytime temperatures measured by satellites at 116 solar farms takes everything into account? Albedo and converting photons into electricity are taken into account by the measured temperature.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why can't you understand the measured daytime temperatures from satellites at 116 solar farms takes everything into account? Albedo and converting photons into electricity.

If the satellite measurements took everything into account, they would notice the warming at the
site of electricity usage.

Balance the equation.

If there is less energy at the solar farms, where did the energy go?

 

[ding]

Moving some heat from the panel to the electricity consumer doesn't change the amount of heat.

There is no incremental change in waste heat from electricity usage when converting from one source to another. The only change in waste heat is from the generation of electricity.

 

[ding]

If the satellite measurements took everything into account, they would notice the warming at the
site of electricity usage.

Balance the equation.

If there is less energy at the solar farms, where did the energy go?

Replacing the source of electricity generation doesn't change the usage of electricity. It only changes the source. So replacing a source which doesn't capture solar radiation with a source that does capture solar radiation results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Replacing the source of electricity generation doesn't change the usage of electricity. It only changes the source. So replacing a source which doesn't capture solar radiation with a source that does capture solar radiation results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

So replacing a source which doesn't capture solar radiation with a source that does capture solar radiation results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

Striking the panel instead of striking the ground does not reduce the warming from solar radiation.
In fact, because the panel reflects less back into space, the panel results in a net increase of warming.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is no incremental change in waste heat from electricity usage when converting from one source to another.

Which is why looking at the temperature at the solar farm leaves an unbalanced equation.

 

[ding]

So replacing a source which doesn't capture solar radiation with a source that does capture solar radiation results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

Striking the panel instead of striking the ground does not reduce the warming from solar radiation.
In fact, because the panel reflects less back into space, the panel results in a net increase of warming.

The photons from the visible light spectrum are converted into electricity and are not warming the solar panels. That's why the satellites measured temperatures that were 2C cooler during the daytime. At night time the temperature above the solar farms was unchanged because the panels are not converting photons into electricity at night.

Photons from the visible light spectrum are energy but not heat. They produce heat when they strike a surface. Photons which strike the solar panel do not produce heat because they are converted into electricity instead. Conservation of energy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The photons from the visible light spectrum are converted into electricity and are not warming the solar panels. That's why the satellites measured temperatures that were 2C cooler during the daytime. At night time the temperature above the solar farms was unchanged because the panels are not converting photons into electricity at night.

Photons from the visible light spectrum are energy but not heat. They produce heat when they strike a surface. Photons which strike the solar panel do not produce heat because they are converted into electricity instead. Conservation of energy.

The photons from the visible light spectrum are converted into electricity and are not warming the solar panels.

And then when I use the electricity in my home, the planet is heated. Conservation of energy.

 

[ding]

The photons from the visible light spectrum are converted into electricity and are not warming the solar panels.

And then when I use the electricity in my home, the planet is heated. Conservation of energy.

Replacing the source of electricity generation doesn't change the usage of electricity. It only changes the source. So replacing a source which doesn't capture solar radiation with a source that does capture solar radiation results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

 

[ding]

Which is why looking at the temperature at the solar farm leaves an unbalanced equation.

Only to you because you refuse to accept that switching from fossil fuels to solar has no effect on waste heat from electricity usage. It only affects the waste heat from generating electricity.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Replacing the source of electricity generation doesn't change the usage of electricity. It only changes the source. So replacing a source which doesn't capture solar radiation with a source that does capture solar radiation results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

Which doesn't reduce the warming effect of that solar radiation.

 

[ding]

results in a net reduction of solar radiation striking the earth.

Which doesn't reduce the warming effect of that solar radiation.

Locally it does because instead of that visible light photon producing heat when it strikes the panel it produces electricity instead.

As we replace fossil fuels with solar we are replacing generating sources not usage. So replacing a source which doesn't convert visible light photons into electricity with a source that does there is a net reduction of visible light photons warming the planet while electricity usage stays the same.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Locally it does because instead of that visible light photon producing heat when it strikes the panel it produces electricity instead.

As we replace fossil fuels with solar we are replacing generating sources not usage. So replacing a source which doesn't convert visible light photons into electricity with a source that does there is a net reduction of visible light photons warming the planet while electricity usage stays the same.

Yes, the solar panel moves heat from one spot to another.
Moving the heat doesn't cause the planet to cool.

 

[ding]

Yes, the solar panel moves heat from one spot to another.
Moving the heat doesn't cause the planet to cool.

As we replace fossil fuels with solar we are replacing generating sources not usage. So replacing a source which doesn't convert visible light photons into electricity with a source that does there is a net reduction of visible light photons warming the planet while electricity usage stays the same.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

As we replace fossil fuels with solar we are replacing generating sources not usage. So replacing a source which doesn't convert visible light photons into electricity with a source that does there is a net reduction of visible light photons warming the planet while electricity usage stays the same.

Converting visible light into electricity doesn't result in "a net reduction of visible light photons warming the planet".