• @ForesterOP
    link
    fedilink
    -5
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m not knocking solar. It’s a great technology. It’s just not feasible to scale to the point that we would need to scale it to sufficiently power our societies . We only recently developed the technology to make burning methane more feasible. They used to just light it off and burn it at the wells when they would tap it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      152 months ago

      It’s just not feasible to scale to the point that we would need to scale it to sufficiently power our societies

      Anything to back that up?

      • @ForesterOP
        link
        fedilink
        -2
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It’s a logistical problem basically most people don’t live at the equator and that’s the good spot for solar where it’s three times as effective. We could plaster a quarter of all the land with solar panels and then yeah you have enough. Except you still wouldn’t have a dependable energy inputs because sometimes the weather is shitty for a week. So you would still need the massive transition cables to pipe it in from somewhere else that the sun currently is shining. So basically you are going to need to cover massive amounts of land with solar panels. We would need to invest in massive transfer cables. I honestly think that would be a great idea to implement full coverage of solar panels in our cities and cover all things with them. However, do not think that’s a viable solution to meet our total energy needs. I do think solar is a viable way to help meet those goals. But it needs to be part of a team, not a solo. Lone Wolf . https://youtu.be/7OpM_zKGE4o?si=2_TW0JeYeA2htQm1

          • @ForesterOP
            link
            fedilink
            -4
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Fuck it! Here’s a hypothetical a magic genie. Just granted My wish and gave us enough solar to actually power everything we need. Now one six of every country on Earth is covered in solar panels. Here’s the catch though you need to Learn more about how electrical grids work then come back to me once you realized we would have to rebuild an even bigger worldwide connected grid to make solar and a battery powered society actually functional and that we currently have no way to make battery storage equitable and affordable enough to store the amount of energy we would need to store everyday to power our societies through the night.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              52 months ago

              You’re still doing it. Your run on paragraphs aren’t worth much, if you want me to take you seriously, please provide links to valid sources to back up your argument.

              • @ForesterOP
                link
                fedilink
                -2
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Here comes the airplane say aaah

                https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=36393#:~:text=The per-mile cost of,proposals and relevant regulatory filings

                https://howtostoreelectricity.com/costs-of-1-mw-battery/#:~:text=Given the range of factors,on the factors mentioned above.

                Solar gets cheaper everyday. Battery storage is not nearly equitable enough at this point in time. Small modular reactors are much more cost effective at the current price point than battery will be for the next 15 to 20 years.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  12 months ago

                  Here comes the airplane say aaah

                  No need to act like a bitch just because I asked you to do the bare minimum and provide sources.

                  Your first link is about HVDC lines, which already exist and work well, what is your point?

                  your second link is about battery storage. You’re just posting links without giving any context to how they support whatever argument you’re trying to make here.

                  Battery storage is not nearly equitable enough at this point in time.

                  What does this mean?

                  “findings suggest that the cost per kilowatt (KW) for utility-scale solar is less than $1,000, while the comparable cost per KW for nuclear power is between $6,500 and $12,250. At present estimates, the Vogtle nuclear plant will cost about $10,300 per KW, near the top of Lazard’s range. This means nuclear power is nearly 10 times more expensive to build than utility-scale solar on a cost per KW basis.”

                  https://www.energysage.com/about-clean-energy/nuclear-energy/solar-vs-nuclear/

                  Tell me again about what’s equitable.

                  Small modular reactors are much more cost effective at the current price point than battery will be for the next 15 to 20 years.

                  They literally don’t exist as a means of grid generation. You’re just writing pro-nuclear fanfic and expecting us to treat it as if it has any basis in reality. Are you getting paid to peddle this horseshit?

                  You should be.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          22 months ago

          We could use solar (or other renewables/nuclear) to power hydrogen fuel cells, then take the energy where it’s needed.

          • @ForesterOP
            link
            fedilink
            32 months ago

            Hydrogen transport is also a mass of pain in the ass because hydrogen being the noblest of gases and only a single hydrogen molecule likes to seep out of every container we’ve ever made and there’s no way to permanently contain it.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  02 months ago

                  Seems like a big assumption. It could be generated in a remote area by a nuclear reactor or a renewable source.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    12 months ago

                    It won’t be. You’d be expecting to eat like 30% losses if you were to generate hydrogen from electrolysis, then that’s combined with 40 to 60% efficiency in fuel cells, then that’s combined with a pretty low energy density, even if it has a relatively high specific energy. You’re also dealing with hydrogen tending to make everything it touches pretty brittle, since it’s reactive, and liking to leak out because it has such a small particle size, in combination with your tanks all having to be like multiple times the size of a propane tank to offset the losses. Either way, the sheer tank size tends to offset the gains in practice, and piping that shit would fucking blow, maybe literally.

            • partial_accumen
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Hydrogen transport is also a mass of pain in the ass because hydrogen being the noblest of gases and only a single hydrogen molecule likes to seep out of every container we’ve ever made and there’s no way to permanently contain it.

              This statement you’ve made here is mostly accurate and informative. Hydrogen isn’t a noble gas, its brother Helium is. Hydrogen is highly reactive. However, your points about Hydrogen storage and transport are spot on. You’re not insulting nor condescending in this post. Nearly every other response you’ve made in this whole post is the opposite.

              You are clearly capable of civil and informative responses, but because you have so few you’ve lost the audience you want to inform/persuade a long time ago. Are you aware of that?

              • @ForesterOP
                link
                fedilink
                -22 months ago

                This is /c/shitpost im not debating civilly as the arguments I get aren’t in good faith 9 times out of 10. I’m not here to be a school teacher. More of a doomsday preacher