Power the U.S. With Solar Panels!

[ding]

So more energy was absorbed, less was reflected and the farms were cooler.
The points of consumption must ahve been even hotter!

I mean, solar panels have an albedo below 0.1.
Lots of extra heat for the planet.
It might be enough to stop the next ice age!

Until you can tell me that you agree that solar radiation was converted into electricity before it could warm the surface of the planet as the reason for why cooler temperatures were measured or at least provide a different explanation, there's really nothing to discuss.

 

[Leo123]

They are absorbing incoming solar radiation. That is not being absorbed by the surface of the planet. Here's the paper on it.

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

Solar panels are near the surface of the Earth though. Therefore they do heat the surface of the planet. That paper deals with upward emissions.

 

[Leo123]

Until you can tell me that you agree that solar radiation was converted into electricity before it could warm the surface of the planet as the reason for why cooler temperatures were measured or at least provide a different explanation, there's really nothing to discuss.

But longwave does not produce electricity.

 

[ding]

Solar panels are near the surface of the Earth though. Therefore they do heat the surface of the planet. That paper deals with upward emissions.

Then why don't you tell me what measuring 2C cooler temperatures above the six solar farms during daylight hours means.

 

[ding]

But longwave does not produce electricity.

You are getting hung up on semantics. Don't be a Todd.

IN BROAD TERMS...

We can agree that solar panels produce electricity, right? And that they got that electricity from the sun, right? However you want to describe that process is fine with me. It's not relevant to this discussion.

 

[ding]

Solar panels are near the surface of the Earth though. Therefore they do heat the surface of the planet. That paper deals with upward emissions.

The upward emissions are from longwave radiation from the surface of the planet. Which are caused by solar radiation striking the surface of the planet.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Typically to run a house you need 7KWs.

Where do you get that figure? Is it for a family of a certain number? My wife and I have existed quite nicely with a system as small as 3kW and our current one is 5kW which leaves us with a significant excess every month.

That is usually a whole unobstructed roof for a typical middle class house.

A 5kW system isn't that huge.

Only about 15-20 days a year mostly in the summer with very little cloud cover like we had last week with the high pressure over the state will you get anywhere close to 7KWs.

I live in the Pacific Northwest. You are no doubt familiar with our weather. 6 months of pretty much non-stop cloudy and rain.

I maintain a 1000kWh excess month-over-month year round here in the PNW with solar.

The further north you go it would be worse.

I have never lived further north and I'm fine.

Solar for home use is only economically viable for a narrow band in the SW US.

Grossly incorrect.

You seem to have made a near perfect score of getting almost everything wrong.

 

[alang1216]

Other sources?
You mean we should have useful powerplants like coal, nat gas and nuclear, idling during the day and only run them at capacity after the sun sets?

Having smaller coal and natural gas powerplants sounds like a win to me. Less pollution at the very least. I'm pretty sure it will a very long time before we won't need them, even during the day.

 

[Leo123]

Then why don't you tell me what measuring 2C cooler temperatures above the six solar farms during daylight hours means.

It means just what is says, there are cooler temperatures being emitted UPWARD. The heat from long wave radiation is therefore heating the solar array while shading the ground. That doesn't seem to be any kind of significant cooling of the Earth's surface. Just look at the OP's map. If that is correct, solar panel limitation of upward long waves would be negligible.

 

[alang1216]

Free? Solar panels cost a lot. Add in the fact that the corporations building them make them overseas so that they poison brown people, and you are quite simply wrong. They are not "free".

The energy is free. It's not like any powerplant is cheap to build and operate. I'm guessing major portions of every construction come from overseas.

 

[Leo123]

Where do you get that figure? Is it for a family of a certain number? My wife and I have existed quite nicely with a system as small as 3kW and our current one is 5kW which leaves us with a significant excess every month.




A 5kW system isn't that huge.



I live in the Pacific Northwest. You are no doubt familiar with our weather. 6 months of pretty much non-stop cloudy and rain.

I maintain a 1000kWh excess month-over-month year round here in the PNW with solar.



I have never lived further north and I'm fine.



Grossly incorrect.

You seem to have made a near perfect score of getting almost everything wrong.

A typical electrical service is 200 amps. That translates to about 50KW. Of course we do not always use all that but, that is what it takes to replace full grid power.

 

[Leo123]

The energy is free. It's not like any powerplant is cheap to build and operate. I'm guessing major portions of every construction come from overseas.

No energy is not free. In the case of a solar panel, entropy starts with first use. It will eventually have to be replaced.

 

[alang1216]

That's not the stated aim. I believe the original aim was to eliminate all fossil fuel electrical generation by 2050 in the US and Biden pledged to do it by 2035 (if my memory serves). I don't believe either are practical and can be done. It's just math. And don't get me started on government controlling markets.

We need nuclear. Fusion would be great but fission for now.

 

[alang1216]

No energy is not free. In the case of a solar panel, entropy starts with first use. It will eventually have to be replaced.

The energy is free, converting it to something useful is not but that certainly holds true for every other energy source.

 

[westwall]

The energy is free. It's not like any powerplant is cheap to build and operate. I'm guessing major portions of every construction come from overseas.

No, it isn't. I just laid out the costs. Add to that the fact that you have to constantly clean the panels and you have a constant maintenance cost to fund as well.

 

[Concerned American]

You can buy a solar panel for $60 on Amazon.

Capacity? I can buy a photovoltaic cell that will only turn a 1/4 inch square flag for less than $10 but it ain't good for anything practical.

 

[alang1216]

No, it isn't. I just laid out the costs. Add to that the fact that you have to constantly clean the panels and you have a constant maintenance cost to fund as well.

No, the energy is free. You buy coal and natural gas, you don't buy sunlight. Every type of powerplant requires constant maintenance and there is the cost of the pollution too.

 

[Flash]

Where do you get that figure? Is it for a family of a certain number? My wife and I have existed quite nicely with a system as small as 3kW and our current one is 5kW which leaves us with a significant excess every month.




A 5kW system isn't that huge.



I live in the Pacific Northwest. You are no doubt familiar with our weather. 6 months of pretty much non-stop cloudy and rain.

I maintain a 1000kWh excess month-over-month year round here in the PNW with solar.



I have never lived further north and I'm fine.



Grossly incorrect.

You seem to have made a near perfect score of getting almost everything wrong.

You are confused.

You have no idea of the Engineering of solar.

You may be hermits but most families consume much more than 3KW.

As emergency hurricane preparedness I have a 2.3KW generator. That will run my refrigerator, a small efficent 5K BTU emergency AC window unit for the bedroom and a few lights. It will not run the major appliances like the washer, stove, dryer, central air or any kind of heat. It is strain just to run the microwave by itself.

I lived on the desert side of Washington state for seven years. More sunshine than the East side. During the summer months with the sun high you could produce a little bit of solar power. However, once fall came you hardly saw the sun until the next Spring.

My neighbor up there had solar panels (non electrical) on his house to heat his swimming pool in the summer and he still had to augment it with a gas heater most of the time.

In the NW there is a lot of hydro power and some nuclear and that keeps the cost lower than in most parts of the US. It would be dumb to put in solar at that high of a latitude with such limited sunshine during half the year when grid electricity is so cheap.

I think you are over selling your system. I am not calling you a liar but I would have to see it to believe it. I have seen other solar systems and they are usually a disappointment. As an Engineer I have done the calculations with real world inputs (as opposed to salesman inputs) and it never makes sense.

Solar is shitty technology with a really shitty payback. In physics their ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

 

[Concerned American]

I like fish. Who doesn't?

I don't have a problem with fish. I have a problem with envirowhackos who want to rip out perfectly good hydroelectric dams that have fish ladders because they "feel" that will improve fish populations. That is illogical and a knee jerk reaction. Fish hatcheries have been augmenting fish populations for a hundred years. In addition, these dams provide irrigation for crops and navigable waters for delivery of goods not to mention the recreation and flood control that they provide.

 

[Leo123]

The energy is free, converting it to something useful is not but that certainly holds true for every other energy source.

Yes, and other energy sources (such as petroleum, nat gas) are more easily stored and have more energy potential.