Power the U.S. With Solar Panels!

[ding]

Ding thinks lowering the albedo of the surface results in a "reduction of incoming solar radiation"

Hilarious!!!

The lower albedo was more than offset by the conversion of photons into electricity. Which is why less infrared radiation was measured at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Incorrect. Less infrared radiation was measured at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

I already explained that air circulation over, under, between solar panel installations carries away heat faster than heat is carried away from bare ground.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The lower albedo was more than offset by the conversion of photons into electricity. Which is why less infrared radiation was measured at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

Moving energy to the city doesn't "offset" the increase in retained energy.
It's a First Law thing.

 

[ding]

Ding thinks lowering the albedo of the surface results in a "reduction of incoming solar radiation"

Hilarious!!!

Ding believes that converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise resulted in producing warming reduces the energy that warms the surface of the planet and that’s why less infrared radiation was measured at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

 

[ding]

Moving energy to the city doesn't "offset" the increase in retained energy.
It's a First Law thing.

I believe the widespread use of solar power is a bad idea in the middle of an ice age because converting photons into electricity reduces the effective solar radiation the earth receives. It’s based upon satellite measurements which measured less infrared radiation being emitted at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

You believe that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total and that only the friction created from doing that work created heat. Furthermore what heat that is created from electricity usage doesn’t heat the surface of the planet. It heats the surrounding air. And what heat that is close to the surface doesn’t heat the surface like photons do. It radiates in all directions. So a good portion of that heat does not heat the surface of the planet.

And lastly even if waste heat from electricity usage heated the surface in exactly the same way as photons do that there would still be an incremental cooling effect because the waste heat is the same in both cases. Replacing fossil fuels with solar does not increase the amount of waste heat generated. But the generation of electricity effectively reduces the incoming solar radiation by converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise produced heat.

 

[ding]

I already explained that air circulation over, under, between solar panel installations carries away heat faster than heat is carried away from bare ground.

The widespread use of solar power is a bad idea in the middle of an ice age because converting photons into electricity reduces the effective solar radiation the earth receives. It’s based upon satellite measurements which measured less infrared radiation being emitted at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total and that only the friction created from doing that work created heat. Furthermore what heat that is created from electricity usage doesn’t heat the surface of the planet. It heats the surrounding air. And what heat that is close to the surface doesn’t heat the surface like photons do. It radiates in all directions. So a good portion of that heat does not heat the surface of the planet.

And lastly even if waste heat from electricity usage heated the surface in exactly the same way as photons do that there would still be an incremental cooling effect because the waste heat is the same in both cases. Replacing fossil fuels with solar does not increase the amount of waste heat generated. But the generation of electricity effectively reduces the incoming solar radiation by converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise produced heat.

 

[ding]

45% of the incoming solar radiation comes from photons (light).

100% of the incoming solar radiation comes from photons, moron.

Incorrect.

Of the sunlight that reaches Earth's surface, 54% is already heat (infrared), 45% is visible light, and about 1% at shorter wavelengths (ultraviolet).

Thermal Energy from Light

Modern society is built on the consumption of fossil fuels, mostly petroleum (oil), natural gas, and coal. The decaying of plants and animals that lived millions of years ago created these fossil fuels. As the ...

serc.carleton.edu

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ding believes that converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise resulted in producing warming reduces the energy that warms the surface of the planet and that’s why less infrared radiation was measured at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

Retaining 35% more solar energy means a warmer planet.

 

[ding]

Todd practices the time honored cultural Marxist practice of critical theory.

He doesn’t have beliefs he only can criticize what he doesn’t believe.

He can’t actually state what something is in a sequential logical fashion. He can only state what he believes it isn’t.

 

[ding]

Retaining 35% more solar energy means a warmer planet.

Less infrared heat measured at six solar farms after PV cells were installed says otherwise.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The widespread use of solar power is a bad idea in the middle of an ice age because converting photons into electricity reduces the effective solar radiation the earth receives. It’s based upon satellite measurements which measured less infrared radiation being emitted at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total and that only the friction created from doing that work created heat. Furthermore what heat that is created from electricity usage doesn’t heat the surface of the planet. It heats the surrounding air. And what heat that is close to the surface doesn’t heat the surface like photons do. It radiates in all directions. So a good portion of that heat does not heat the surface of the planet.

And lastly even if waste heat from electricity usage heated the surface in exactly the same way as photons do that there would still be an incremental cooling effect because the waste heat is the same in both cases. Replacing fossil fuels with solar does not increase the amount of waste heat generated. But the generation of electricity effectively reduces the incoming solar radiation by converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise produced heat.

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

If the waste heat from electricity heats the air, how does that help your claim that the planet
is cooler?

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total

How large a portion? Link?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Incorrect.

Of the sunlight that reaches Earth's surface, 54% is already heat (infrared), 45% is visible light, and about 1% at shorter wavelengths (ultraviolet).

Thermal Energy from Light

Modern society is built on the consumption of fossil fuels, mostly petroleum (oil), natural gas, and coal. The decaying of plants and animals that lived millions of years ago created these fossil fuels. As the ...

serc.carleton.edu

Of the sunlight that reaches Earth's surface, 54% is already heat (infrared), 45% is visible light, and about 1% at shorter wavelengths (ultraviolet).

54% + 45% + 1% = 100% photons.

DURR

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Todd practices the time honored cultural Marxist practice of critical theory.

He doesn’t have beliefs he only can criticize what he doesn’t believe.

He can’t actually state what something is in a sequential logical fashion. He can only state what he believes it isn’t.

Show me on this doll where the Marxist touched you.

 

[ding]

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

If the waste heat from electricity heats the air, how does that help your claim that the planet
is cooler?

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total

How large a portion? Link?

The widespread use of solar power is a bad idea in the middle of an ice age because converting photons into electricity reduces the effective solar radiation the earth receives. It’s based upon satellite measurements which measured less infrared radiation being emitted at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total and that only the friction created from doing that work created heat. Furthermore what heat that is created from electricity usage doesn’t heat the surface of the planet. It heats the surrounding air. And what heat that is close to the surface doesn’t heat the surface like photons do. It radiates in all directions. So a good portion of that heat does not heat the surface of the planet.

And lastly even if waste heat from electricity usage heated the surface in exactly the same way as photons do that there would still be an incremental cooling effect because the waste heat is the same in both cases. Replacing fossil fuels with solar does not increase the amount of waste heat generated. But the generation of electricity effectively reduces the incoming solar radiation by converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise produced heat.

 

[ding]

Of the sunlight that reaches Earth's surface, 54% is already heat (infrared), 45% is visible light, and about 1% at shorter wavelengths (ultraviolet).

54% + 45% + 1% = 100% photons.

DURR

The widespread use of solar power is a bad idea in the middle of an ice age because converting photons into electricity reduces the effective solar radiation the earth receives. It’s based upon satellite measurements which measured less infrared radiation being emitted at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total and that only the friction created from doing that work created heat. Furthermore what heat that is created from electricity usage doesn’t heat the surface of the planet. It heats the surrounding air. And what heat that is close to the surface doesn’t heat the surface like photons do. It radiates in all directions. So a good portion of that heat does not heat the surface of the planet.

And lastly even if waste heat from electricity usage heated the surface in exactly the same way as photons do that there would still be an incremental cooling effect because the waste heat is the same in both cases. Replacing fossil fuels with solar does not increase the amount of waste heat generated. But the generation of electricity effectively reduces the incoming solar radiation by converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise produced heat.

 

[ding]

Of the sunlight that reaches Earth's surface, 54% is already heat (infrared), 45% is visible light, and about 1% at shorter wavelengths (ultraviolet).

54% + 45% + 1% = 100% photons.

DURR

The widespread use of solar power is a bad idea in the middle of an ice age because converting photons into electricity reduces the effective solar radiation the earth receives. It’s based upon satellite measurements which measured less infrared radiation being emitted at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total and that only the friction created from doing that work created heat. Furthermore what heat that is created from electricity usage doesn’t heat the surface of the planet. It heats the surrounding air. And what heat that is close to the surface doesn’t heat the surface like photons do. It radiates in all directions. So a good portion of that heat does not heat the surface of the planet.

And lastly even if waste heat from electricity usage heated the surface in exactly the same way as photons do that there would still be an incremental cooling effect because the waste heat is the same in both cases. Replacing fossil fuels with solar does not increase the amount of waste heat generated. But the generation of electricity effectively reduces the incoming solar radiation by converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise produced heat.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Less infrared heat measured at six solar farms after PV cells were installed says otherwise.

Moving electricity to the city or warming the air near the panels doesn't reduce the amount of energy retained.

 

[ding]

View attachment 729129

Show me on this doll where the Marxist touched you.

The widespread use of solar power is a bad idea in the middle of an ice age because converting photons into electricity reduces the effective solar radiation the earth receives. It’s based upon satellite measurements which measured less infrared radiation being emitted at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total and that only the friction created from doing that work created heat. Furthermore what heat that is created from electricity usage doesn’t heat the surface of the planet. It heats the surrounding air. And what heat that is close to the surface doesn’t heat the surface like photons do. It radiates in all directions. So a good portion of that heat does not heat the surface of the planet.

And lastly even if waste heat from electricity usage heated the surface in exactly the same way as photons do that there would still be an incremental cooling effect because the waste heat is the same in both cases. Replacing fossil fuels with solar does not increase the amount of waste heat generated. But the generation of electricity effectively reduces the incoming solar radiation by converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise produced heat.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When ding starts repeating himself, you know he's been defeated.

 

[ding]

Moving electricity to the city or warming the air near the panels doesn't reduce the amount of energy retained.

The widespread use of solar power is a bad idea in the middle of an ice age because converting photons into electricity reduces the effective solar radiation the earth receives. It’s based upon satellite measurements which measured less infrared radiation being emitted at six solar farms after PV cells were installed.

You have argued that when the electricity is used it heats the surface of the planet just like solar radiation striking the planet does which is stupid.

A large portion of electricity usage is used to perform work and the amount of energy used to perform that work must be subtracted from the total and that only the friction created from doing that work created heat. Furthermore what heat that is created from electricity usage doesn’t heat the surface of the planet. It heats the surrounding air. And what heat that is close to the surface doesn’t heat the surface like photons do. It radiates in all directions. So a good portion of that heat does not heat the surface of the planet.

And lastly even if waste heat from electricity usage heated the surface in exactly the same way as photons do that there would still be an incremental cooling effect because the waste heat is the same in both cases. Replacing fossil fuels with solar does not increase the amount of waste heat generated. But the generation of electricity effectively reduces the incoming solar radiation by converting photons into electricity that would have otherwise produced heat.