Power the U.S. With Solar Panels!

[toobfreak]

It’s all semantics. When they say PV cells convert photons into electricity they mean primarily visible light even though they convert some of the infrared heat into electricity.

They're all photons so the statement is true.

So in the context of solar power I am using photons interchangeably for visible light. SMH at all the nitpicking going on.

45% of the incoming solar radiation comes from photons (light). I even have light in parenthesis.

No nitpicking going on. Just trying to get clear what we are saying here since I can only go by the strict scientific meaning of "photons" and "light;" after all, if light referred only to visible light, no one would say "visible light." Some animals and insects SEE those "invisible" frequencies!

So in other worlds, you're saying that 55% of the solar output is in the form of charged particles and not electromagnetic itself? I'm asking because I don't specifically know the value but it sounds reasonable if we overlook the fact that one is matter in the form of plasma while the other is massless, so two different units of measure must somehow be combined.

 

[ding]

They're all photons so the statement is true.



No nitpicking going on. Just trying to get clear what we are saying here since I can only go by the strict scientific meaning of "photons" and "light;" after all, if light referred only to visible light, no one would say "visible light." Some animals and insects SEE those "invisible" frequencies!

So in other worlds, you're saying that 55% of the solar output is in the form of charged particles and not electromagnetic itself? I'm asking because I don't specifically know the value but it sounds reasonable if we overlook the fact that one is matter in the form of plasma while the other is massless, so two different units of measure must somehow be combined.

The point of the post is that widespread use of solar will have an impact on the climate because capturing energy that would have warmed the planet and converting it into electricity instead directly impacts the earth’s energy budget.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Dude--- the photon is the force carrier for all wavelengths in the EM spectrum from radio to gamma! Please tell me, other than the solid charged particles outgassing in the solar wind, just what the hell the other 55% of the solar radiation is that is NOT electromagnetic?!

He's an idiot.

Have you seen the rest of his errors?

 

[ding]

He's an idiot.

Have you seen the rest of his errors?

You should probably mention that this all stems from me schooling you on fractional reserves and you’ve been chasing me around ever since.

 

[ding]

He's an idiot.

Textbook dunning effect.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You should probably mention that this all stems from me schooling you on fractional reserves and you’ve been chasing me around ever since.

You were wrong about fractional reserves too?

Based on your weak math skills, I'm not surprised.

 

[ding]

You were wrong about fractional reserves too?

Based on your weak math skills, I'm not surprised.

Said the guy who said solar radiation converted into electricity heats the surface of the planet and then couldn’t explain how using electricity to run an electric overhead crane heated the surface of the planet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Said the guy who said solar radiation converted into electricity heats the surface of the planet and then couldn’t explain how using electricity to run an electric overhead crane heated the surface of the planet.

Said the guy who won't admit 0.05 albedo panels heat the planet more than 0.40 albedo sand.

And that IR isn't photons.

Damn!!

 

[ding]

Said the guy who won't admit 0.05 albedo panels heat the planet more than 0.40 albedo sand.

And that IR isn't photons.

Damn!!

Powering the US with solar panels is a bad idea because converting solar radiation into electricity creates an incremental cooling effect at the solar farms.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Powering the US with solar panels is a bad idea because converting solar radiation into electricity creates an incremental cooling effect at the solar farms.

And "the spectrum is UV, visible and infrared"

I mean, shit, you prove your ignorance with almost every post.

 

[ding]

And "the spectrum is UV, visible and infrared"

I mean, shit, you prove your ignorance with almost every post.

A study was conducted at six solar farms comparing the infrared radiation before and after PV cells were installed.

 

[ding]

Toddsterpatriot

The study found that infrared radiation was less after PV panels were installed. The study found that the incremental cooling occurred during daytime hours when the PV cells were generating electricity. The study found that nighttime temperatures were similar. The study concluded that the cause of the incrementally cooler daytime temperatures was because solar radiation was being converted into electricity.

 

[ding]

Toddsterpatriot

A second study was performed to model the potential climate impact of solar farms. Their model predicted a regional cooling effect should occur at solar farms. The authors of this study also concluded that any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation which cannot heat the surface of the planet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Toddsterpatriot

A second study was performed to model the potential climate impact of solar farms. Their model predicted a regional cooling effect should occur at solar farms. The authors of this study also concluded that any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation which cannot heat the surface of the planet.

Their model predicted a regional cooling effect should occur at solar farms.

 

[ding]

Their model predicted a regional cooling effect should occur at solar farms.

Powering the US with solar power is a bad idea. The planet is less than 2C away from extensive continental glaciation in the northern hemisphere. The earth’s energy balance is only 0.7 W/m^2 away from net cooling.

 

[toobfreak]

The point of the post is that widespread use of solar will have an impact on the climate because capturing energy that would have warmed the planet and converting it into electricity instead directly impacts the earth’s energy budget.

Do you have any sort of DATA to support that? Because sunlight striking a solar panel does convert some of the inherent electric energy of the light into causing a photoelectric effect is the semiconductor, the rest is absorbed and re-released as heat, so some of the original energy was changed in form to electricity while the rest was changed to heat and since a solar panel is darker than most other things, probably less of it was reflected back out into the sky, the net effect being that about the same amount of energy was trapped, stored or converted---- it is debatable how much loss or change to the climate there really is, multiplied by the fact that the solar panels on the roof contribute to a slightly cooler roof now by blocking/absorbing much of the Sun thus likely somewhat lowering the home's cooling needs reducing power consumption saving coal, NG or whatever generates the electricity elsewhere benefiting the climate, times the fact that if all solar panels were put together in this country, my best guess from the available data on the web is that they would constitute an area of about 45 square miles (an average home has about 300 sq./ft of panels and there are an estimated 4 million solar homes).

So, if we assume the USA comprises about 1/12 the total area by all inhabited land mass and probably around HALF of all solar panels in the world, are you really expecting a climate effect from an area of the Earth of maybe 100 sq./mi covered in solar panels, of which, probably most of the energy in the original sunlight is still returned to the environment directly or indirectly anyway? Remember, even much of that lost to the generation of electricity comes back to the climate indirectly in the work done by however that electricity is used.

You see, the Earth is largely a closed system with an exchange between the Sun and space in a FB equilibrium--- if slightly less solar energy is inputted directly to the climate thru the use of PV panels slightly cooling the Earth, this also slightly reduces the outward pressure of the Earth then in resisting further incoming solar energy! So, there is likely a slight net increase of solar input!

Do you really think that could result in a measurable cooling of the climate, and if it did reduce it by 1/100th of a degree, might that not be a good thing?

 

[toobfreak]

He's an idiot. Have you seen the rest of his errors?

Well, I'm not prepared to say Ding is an idiot. Maybe just a difference of opinion? I mean error wise, even Einstein got some physics and math wrong. Albert was not an idiot.

 

[ding]

Do you have any sort of DATA to support that?

A study was conducted at six solar farms comparing the infrared radiation before and after PV cells were installed. The study found that infrared radiation was less after PV panels were installed. The study found that the incremental cooling occurred during daytime hours when the PV cells were generating electricity. The study found that nighttime temperatures were similar. The study concluded that the cause of the incrementally cooler daytime temperatures was because solar radiation was being converted into electricity.

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

A different study modeled the potential climate impact of solar farms. Their model predicted a regional cooling effect should occur at solar farms. The authors of this study also concluded that any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation which cannot heat the surface of the planet.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283975603_Impact_of_solar_panels_on_global_climate

 

[ding]

are you really expecting a climate effect from an area of the Earth of maybe 100 sq./mi covered in solar panels

What I am saying is that there will be an incremental cooling effect from converting solar radiation into electricity which would have otherwise produced heat and warmed the surface of the planet. And that the magnitude of the impact will be directly proportional to the amount of solar installed.

I calculate that it will take PV cells being installed on 1% of the landmass of the planet to take the planet from net warming (0.6 W/m^2) to net cooling (-0.1 W/m^2).

 

[ding]

the original sunlight is still returned to the environment directly or indirectly anyway

But it’s not. Certainly not in the way solar radiation does at least.

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 which strikes the surface of the planet. Waste heat from electricity usage 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.