Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Again... incrementally there is no change in waste heat from replacing fossil fuels with solar. Electricity usage and what waste heat there is stays the same regardless of the generating source. But solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the planet is different depending upon the generating source.And more heat being radiated by light bulbs, microwaves, toasters, TVs, coffee makers.
Anything that used the electricity.
You have to do all the math, not just half of it. That's what liberals do.
Solar panels induce a cooling effect because photons which would have otherwise struck the surface of the planet were converted into electricity. That's my claim.
Again... incrementally there is no change in waste heat from replacing fossil fuels with solar. Electricity usage and what waste heat there is stays the same regardless of the generating source. But solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the planet is different depending upon the generating source.Right. Because when you ignore 100 watts of waste heat, 100 watts of solar electricity is very cooling.
Not to mention the extra watts absorbed by the lower albedo panel that you ignored.
And yet cooler temperatures were measured above six solar farms.
The decreased albedo led to photons being converted into electricity not more heat being radiated by PV cells.
Again... incrementally there is no change in waste heat from replacing fossil fuels with solar. Electricity usage and what waste heat there is stays the same regardless of the generating source. But solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the planet is different depending upon the generating source.Did the extra absorbed heat go anywhere?
I showed you the math before and you ignored it.
How efficient are these cooling panels you love so much?
Again... incrementally there is no change in waste heat from replacing fossil fuels with solar.
There's not much mass to solar panels. Their ability to absorb solar radiation is limited by their mass. And when they give it back they cool down quickly because there's not much mass.Not all of the decrease is converted.
I never said adiabatic processes cause solar panels to cool the planet.
You are the one who went down the rabbit hole of waste heat because you couldn't argue cooler temperatures weren't measured above six solar farms because they were.Again, making that your claim would sound less stupid.
It's still stupid, when taking albedo into account, but not as obviously wrong as your FLoT error.
You tell me.View attachment 694391
If I didn't "ignore adiabatic processes", how would your claim be strengthened?
Again... incrementally there is no change in waste heat from replacing fossil fuels with solar. Electricity usage and what waste heat there is stays the same regardless of the generating source. But solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the planet is different depending upon the generating source.
Again... incrementally there is no change in waste heat from replacing fossil fuels with solar. Electricity usage and what waste heat there is stays the same regardless of the generating source. But solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the planet is different depending upon the generating source.How much waste heat is there from 100 watts of solar electricity?
That would depend upon how much solar radiation gets converted into electricity.
Or convert photons - which would have otherwise cause the surface of the planet to warm - into electricity.Obviously. Other sources don't drop albedo from 0.3 to 0.05
Again... that would depend upon how much solar radiation gets converted into electricity.That changes the magnitude, but not the fact. So local or planet wide?
The decreased albedo led to photons being converted into electricity not more heat being radiated by PV cells.
The decreased albedo led to photons being converted into electricity not more heat being radiated by PV cells.
Cooler daytime and nighttime temperatures above six solar farms say otherwise.Some is converted, but more is retained. At the panel and at point of use.
Again... incrementally there is no change in waste heat from replacing fossil fuels with solar. Electricity usage and what waste heat there is stays the same regardless of the generating source. But solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the planet is different depending upon the generating source.A lot more radiated by the users.
