Global Solar Power Investment Will Top $1B per Day This Year

Post by kbar13 » Wed, Jun 07, 2023, 6:54 PM UTC

CyberDildonics wrote: post #36

grej wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think solar makes sense in all of the places that otherwise are unused. Roofs and the shades of car parks, for example. But I am not a fan of giant fields of solar panels. Or worse, taking arable land and covering it with solar panels. Nuclear (smallest geographic footprint and smallest overall environmental impact) + solar & wind is the way forward.

But I am not a fan of giant fields of solar panels. Or worse, taking arable land and covering it with solar panels. Why are there any negatives here? A field of solar panels is far more valuable than a field growing corn to feed to cows. Nuclear (smallest geographic footprint This doesn't matter, there is no shortage of land. People living in high rises in the center of big cities think there is, but once someone loo…

Post by onlyrealcuzzo » Wed, Jun 07, 2023, 6:57 PM UTC

jackmott42 wrote: post #34

standardUser wrote: post #7

I get a little frustrated that all of the people who crapped all over solar power can now simply sit there quietly as it becomes a major component of electricity generation and pay no price for spreading anti-solar propaganda at such a historically critical juncture. I always found it particularly grotesque coming from the HN crowd, where an audience of mostly engineers and entrepreneurs seemed to have no problem fin…

I have at times tried to explain realistic visions of what it takes for renewables to become, say, 75% of the grid and people have taken it as crapping on solar, because I describe how it will require trillion dollar scale storage solutions. But fossil fuels also require trillion dollar scale extraction solutions, so I don't see it as crapping on solar, it won't be easy but we will do it, I hope!

Post by thx-2718 » Wed, Jun 07, 2023, 7:00 PM UTC

standardUser wrote: post #7

I get a little frustrated that all of the people who crapped all over solar power can now simply sit there quietly as it becomes a major component of electricity generation and pay no price for spreading anti-solar propaganda at such a historically critical juncture. I always found it particularly grotesque coming from the HN crowd, where an audience of mostly engineers and entrepreneurs seemed to have no problem fin…

Post by ZeroGravitas » Wed, Jun 07, 2023, 7:02 PM UTC

not_a_shill wrote: post #37

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a paragraph about 2/3rds down that rolls out all the usual BS, and links to an article, by the same author, suggesting we need to slow down renewable rollout as it is "destabilising the grid".

Can you please respond to this? I just want to make sure misinformation isn't being spread. >Just curious because this question is always posed when HN disagrees with something. Are the recent climate events actually statistically significant?

Post by gregschlom » Wed, Jun 07, 2023, 7:03 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #29

timerol wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't characterize that as a bait-and-switch, but as adjusting to economic reality. When solar is <1% of penetration, a solar kWh is basically just as valuable as any other kWh. When solar gets over 10% of penetration, a solar kWh is worth much less than any other kWh - when the sun is shining, energy is plentiful. By the time you get to ~25% solar penetration, energy is almost free on a sunny day at noon, and m…

Nonsense, until 100% of daytime generation is solar/wind every KW added still offsets generation from other sources. This myth is mostly perpetrated by the suppliers of power based on more expensive and more polluting sources who see the value of their investments slashed.