Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We're going to need a lot of solar panels

caseyhandmer.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 842 posts

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#111

Post by kortilla »

adaml_623 wrote: post #90
ben_w wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A global grid was my favourite solution until recently. The problem is that it needs the combined cables to have cross section in the order of a few (3?) square meters (at 640 kV), and that in turn is in the order of 52 years of global copper production (we make more aluminium than copper but Al is a worse conductor). Using even higher voltages makes everything much easier, and the cables’ combined cross sections may…

The good news is that humanity has saved up a few trillion for emergencies. The bad news is that it's been saved up and hidden in tax havens. Pity

What a bad take. The US alone effectively created that much money out of thin air during the pandemic. All of the countries combined printed far more.

Doing the same for an energy project that might actually pay back (unlike the covid losses) is far less disruptive.

Finally, the amount of money hidden away in tax havens by the rich is nothing compared to this. Don’t drag down something as important as the climate crisis with some smooth brained class warfare.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#112

Post by tomxor »

walrus01 wrote: post #91
worik wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and an efficient way to transport power from a very sunny place to another location where the loads are The point of the article is to make synthetic hydrocarbons, so no, do not need HVDC so much.

My point was that maybe we should transport the electricity to where it needs to be used over high voltage long distance lines, rather than running an artificial hydrocarbon fuel generation process, storing it in tanks or pipelines, and then sending it to where it needs to be used, and feeding it into combustion engines.

The article also pointed out that even with future cost reduction from scale etc, some things just don't work well running off electricity, the energy density of hydrocarbons is very hard to beat unless you go nuclear... and for things like planes, baring any massive technological breakthroughs, it's probably gona have to be hydrocarbons for the foreseeable future... so synthesising those fuels by short circuiting the carbon cycle in a post "dig unreplenishable shit up from the ground" era, is pretty attractive.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#113

Post by tclancy »

walrus01 wrote: post #88
ben_w wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A global grid was my favourite solution until recently. The problem is that it needs the combined cables to have cross section in the order of a few (3?) square meters (at 640 kV), and that in turn is in the order of 52 years of global copper production (we make more aluminium than copper but Al is a worse conductor). Using even higher voltages makes everything much easier, and the cables’ combined cross sections may…

I don't know of any long distance HV AC or DC transmission lines that use copper. It's all aluminum already.

I’ve heard it’s all ball bearings but that may be outdated.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#114

Post by ghostpepper »

rektide wrote: post #75
oceanplexian wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand it’s an interesting engineering challenge, but I am always perplexed how covering hundreds of square km of an ecosystem with glass is “good for the environment”. It sounds like something future generations will shake their heads at while trying to dispose of all the toxic waste.

It'a really weird but there's a surprisingly growing base of farming amid a solar farm, where apparently many plants just cant stand the pure sun & benefit from some periodic shade during the day. I dont know how much I believe it but combined agriculture/solar use seems perhaps legit to be a thing. Also, solar panels dont seem that difficult to recycle. There's already a decent & growing reclaimation market. Giant s…

> Also, solar panels dont seem that difficult to recycle. There's already a decent & growing reclaimation market.

Curious if you're basing this on firsthand knowledge? I know nothing about solar panels but I've read some stories[0][1] lately about difficulties recycling them, particularly older ones that were deployed 10-20 years ago and are now reaching EOL.

[0] https://www.discovermagazine.com/environment/solar-panel-was... [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2022-01-17/are-some-solar-...

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#115

Post by bigcat12345678 »

thejarren wrote: post #63
walrus01 wrote: post #4

We're going to need a lot of solar panels and an efficient way to transport power from a very sunny place to another location where the loads are. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie The pacific DC intertie right now often ends up being used to transport power from hydroelectric dams in WA/OR to California. But there's nothing to say that something couldn't function the other way if there…

Just to add to this conversation a bit, did you know Singapore is running power wires to gather solar from Australia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia-Asia_Power_Link

"""

The AAPowerLink is being developed by the Singaporean firm Sun Cable and is projected to begin construction in mid-2023

"""

Being developed

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#116

Post by zizee »

leobg wrote: post #79

What would interest me: Can I do this locally, at the site of the consumer? Take the unused PV output of my house in summer to fill my house’s tank with natural gas for use in winter? Is that something that would be technically feasible today?

Why convert to gas for heating later when you can just store heat itself?*

There was an article/discussion here recently about heat batteries using sand to store heat for months, to use for heating in winter. This tech seems fairly simple to implement at scale.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2022-07-19/sand-battery-...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32006791

*This is a rhetorical question, I'm sure everyone can easily think of many benefits. But there is elegance in simplicity.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#117

Post by Pakdef »

walrus01 wrote: post #4

We're going to need a lot of solar panels and an efficient way to transport power from a very sunny place to another location where the loads are. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie The pacific DC intertie right now often ends up being used to transport power from hydroelectric dams in WA/OR to California. But there's nothing to say that something couldn't function the other way if there…

Are you saying that CA isn't very sunny?

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#118

Post by billiam »

kortilla wrote: post #111
adaml_623 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good news is that humanity has saved up a few trillion for emergencies. The bad news is that it's been saved up and hidden in tax havens. Pity

What a bad take. The US alone effectively created that much money out of thin air during the pandemic. All of the countries combined printed far more. Doing the same for an energy project that might actually pay back (unlike the covid losses) is far less disruptive. Finally, the amount of money hidden away in tax havens by the rich is nothing compared to this. Don’t drag down something as important as the climate cri…

People that charge class warfare just don't want anything to change. Wealth accumulated by the rich mostly by burning dinosaurs is just as fictitious as any QE from the Fed.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#119

Post by InvertedRhodium »

kortilla wrote: post #111
adaml_623 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good news is that humanity has saved up a few trillion for emergencies. The bad news is that it's been saved up and hidden in tax havens. Pity

What a bad take. The US alone effectively created that much money out of thin air during the pandemic. All of the countries combined printed far more. Doing the same for an energy project that might actually pay back (unlike the covid losses) is far less disruptive. Finally, the amount of money hidden away in tax havens by the rich is nothing compared to this. Don’t drag down something as important as the climate cri…

What a one sided take - there's no reason that both can't be real problems.

Re: We're going to need a lot of solar panels

#120

Post by billiam »

walrus01 wrote: post #10
toomuchtodo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HVDC or interconnects (losses are tolerable with enough renewables generation, considering existing curtailment), battery storage, and renewables generated ammonia for on demand combustion (chemical storage) will meet these needs. "Build, Baby, Build", with my apologies to Sarah Palin. Edit: with 1200GW of renewables capacity, the US has produced 20% of its energy from renewables this year, more than nuclear. Based o…

If the $ per Wh cost from PV is extremely low it's also possible to use electrical heating elements to store heat in tanks of something that melts and stays hot for long periods of time (for building heating purposes). Or to use cheap mid day electric power when the sun is up to generate gigantic blocks of ice that can then be used with cooling loops to air condition buildings.

A sand battery prototype in Finland is recently in the news. Has a lot of appealing features for local energy systems. https://interestingengineering.com/worlds-first-sand-battery
Post reply on HN