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

131–140 of 842 posts

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

#131

Post by bryanlarsen »

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…

The same author has a really good blog article with the math showing that it's cheaper to build solar locally in places with poor insolation than it is to build high voltge DC lines to bring it in from sunnier places.

https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2020/12/27/the-future-of-...

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

#133

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

distrill wrote: post #31
fermentation wrote: post #5

In every game of Factorio I've played I didn't realize just how many solar panels I'd needed until I was hitting my power limits and in desperate need of more. The problem being that manufacturing these takes... power.

tbh i just skip solar panels. it's such a grind. by the time i can make them at scale, i need so many of them, and i hate placing them. even with pretty OP construction bots it's not worth the effort IMO. this might be mitigated if you tile something that can self expand, but even then you'll have to AFK or just have this going on for hours while you don't have access to the power you're trying to generated. i end up…

Solar power in Factorio pairs really well with spidertron. You can give it a bunch of bots, and an automated production line and it just builds itself. The only hard part is to make sure to always keep power growing rather than only expanding when you need more power.

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

#134

Post by philipkglass »

ghostpepper wrote: post #114
rektide wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-pan…

First Solar (the largest American solar manufacturer) has provided recycling for the panels they make since 2005:

https://www.firstsolar.com/modules/recycling

https://www.bnl.gov/pv/files/prs_agenda/2_krueger_ieee-prese...

https://www.firstsolar.com/-/media/First-Solar/Sustainabilit...

German company Flaxres recently completed a pilot scale trial for recycling silicon photovoltaic modules from any manufacturer:

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2022/07/22/industrial-process-fo...

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

#135

Post by atty »

standardUser wrote: post #93
jtolmar wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terraform Industries has a process for converting atmospheric CO2 and water into hydrocarbons (particularly "natural" gas), at the cost of a huge amount of electricity. Because solar panels keep getting cheaper and oil doesn't, they think they can out-compete the cost of oil in some markets (sunny with expensive oil) in the near future, and more places over time if solar power keeps getting cheaper. The author hopes…

Thank you, that is what I gathered, give or take. I guess I was just taken aback by the idea that instead of displacing natural gas we would use more energy to make natural gas. Seems like the ultra-gargantuan investments needed for this kind of transition would be better spent transitioning to a mostly-electric energy economy.

In the long term, complete displacement of hydrocarbons from the economy is probably the end goal. However, we are nowhere near being able to do that right now. Obviously for the billions of vehicles on the road and the current grid power generation we need not just solar/wind generation, but also massive amounts of grid storage (or massive increases in nuclear) and vehicle batteries. But in industry there are tons of chemical processes that also require hydrocarbons that we haven’t found suitable replacements for yet.

Because it’s not clear how fast we can get absolutely massive amounts of grid storage or nuclear deployed, finding ways to make effectively carbon-neutral natural gas/petroleum is a good step in the right direction, where we can continue to use some hydrocarbons without a net increase in greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere and oceans.

It’s also not clear if we will be able to replace all of our current petroleum reliant industrial processes with non-carbonized alternatives, and in those cases, this will be the absolute best case for us.

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

#136

Post by influxmoment »

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…

This kind of energy infrastructure is only build in China at the moment. High voltage DC, solar& battery manufacturing, solar installation, new nuclear plants

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

#137

Post by acyou »

In general, increasing the concentration of any product in a closed system requires net energy input across the system boundary. Larger increases in concentration need more energy input than smaller increases of concentration.

Concentrating atmospheric CO2 involves increasing the concentration from approx. 400 ppm, to a higher target concentration. That's 0.04%. There is no way around the energy input requirement within the basic, universally applicable and virtually undisputed laws of thermodynamics. You can make your process as efficient as possible, but there is a minimum energy requirement (theoretical limit) that you can calculate on a per unit basis for atmospheric CO2 capture that is very, very, very high.

For that reason, industry captures CO2 at point source (you start from a higher concentration). Unless you have zero access to point sources, point source capture will always be more "Environmentally Friendly" than atmospheric carbon capture.

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

#139

Post by kurthr »

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…

At current prices, it's already worth fully solar individually... just expensive up front. Batteries and transmission are so expensive it's worth just installing MOAR solar. Connecting to the grid would be $1k/year so (depending on rate of return) it takes ~20years to pay off, which is right around the warrantee period.

Where I am there are ~5 peak solar equivalent hours in mid summer and ~0.5 hour on a rainy winter day. If I need 10kWh/day, then I need to install ~20kW at $500/kW, with 30kWh of battery for I think the grid tie solar fees are so high because the power companies would rather be getting the money for installing solar and batteries.

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

#140

Post by manmal »

changoplatanero wrote: post #24
AdamTReineke wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is better. Terraform believes they can make methane from the air for cheaper than it can be extracted from the ground, leading to a preference for "carbon neutral" fuels. Part of their thesis though is the requirement for solar to keep getting cheaper and cheaper (as it has). Excess manufactured methane could also be injected underground, presumably.

What's a more efficient way to split water into hydrogen and oxygen: using electricity from a solar panel or using photosynthesis in a plant?

Another thing to consider: plants currently require a lot of natural gas or other fossil fuels to grow. Droughts and heat waves can disrupt production.
Post reply on HN