The year in clean energy: Wind, solar and batteries grow despite economic challenges

latest finds

New fuels

oops

Carbon capture
 
But if solar panels are on the roofs of existing buildings/structures, it becomes a moot point because you are dual purposing and not requiring dedicated land.
PV arrays on roofs, or on covers over parking lots... a decent enough idea. Lots of real estate in existing heat islands. The fact that they are trashing farms and forests for this is evidence that the purpose is *not* "green" energy.
 

Are you under the impression that vast solar farms simply build themselves, with no human involvement?
Where did I imply anything of the type? I have just asked you to provide evidence to support your ascertains. Something you still seem unable/unwilling to do.
 
Where did I imply anything of the type?

By repeated childish whining.

I have just asked you to provide evidence to support your ascertains. Something you still seem unable/unwilling to do.
The evidence is visible in the video that was posted. Please review it before responding.
 
By repeated childish whining.
Chill out! Asking for evidence of claims of fact is not whining.
The evidence is visible in the video that was posted. Please review it before responding.
I did watch the video however, one video with no commentary and no evidence of where exactly it is filmed is hardly evidence. And by the way, Taihang mountain is hardly farming land. Yes it is forrest but again, I am failing to see how this constitutes "trashing" given there is still forestry visible in even that image.
 
I am failing to see how this constitutes "trashing" given there is still forestry visible in even that image.
If you unnecessarily fell and pave half a forest, pointing out the remaining half hardly qualifies as a "win" for forest preservation.

There is NO NEED for PV farms like this. As you yourself noted there are shit-tons of roofs that can be covered in PV arrays. This would be better on virtually every conceivable level... you'd put black PVAs atop black roofs, not bright dirt or plants; you'd reduce the transmission line lengths; you'd put the arrays within easy distance for repair and replacement. And you wouldn't be farking with nature. Additionally, a nuke plant would be vastly better still.

So there are not good reasons for such PV farms. There are only bad ones, such as graft and land-deal-scammery. Explanations get worse from there.
 
There is NO NEED for PV farms like this.
I am not arguing with you there. I return to my earlier comment though: "if solar panels are on the roofs of existing buildings/structures, it becomes a moot point because you are dual purposing and not requiring dedicated land" when it comes to the comparison with nuclear options which certainly do require dedicated land.
 
: "if solar panels are on the roofs of existing buildings/structures, it becomes a moot point because you are dual purposing and not requiring dedicated land" when it comes to the comparison with nuclear options which certainly do require dedicated land.

Nah. PVAs on roofs are great... but they don't work worth a damn at night, during dust storms, during overcast or after hail storms. You'll always need a powerful and reliable power source and nuclear is uniquely qualified for that. The space required for nuclear is trivial.

Consider the sheer power required to convert sewage, biowaste, the bodies of your defeated enemies into petroleum. And you'll *always* need petroleum, even if you pave the entire surface of the Moon with PVAs and microwave transmitters; petroleum is the basis for plastics and medicines and paint and lubricants and about half our modern infrastructure. Nuclear power plants could run full blast 24/7; at night it powers the places that can't be powered by PV; during the day, when PVs at least partially take over, the excess nuclear capability is fed into the thermal depolymerization facilities that convert slop into petroleum.
 
What you want is a little of everything.
Windfarms, Solar, nuclear and fossil fuel plants as a back-up at the very least.

Not only did Green Energy get frozen out a couple of years ago—even gas lines had problems.

Ironically space based solar rectennas would have been largely immune being inert metal clotheslines.

Oops
 
Last edited:
The plan is to put solar panels on the Moon and beam the power to Earth. A lot of solar panels.
 
Nah. PVAs on roofs are great... but they don't work worth a damn at night, during dust storms, during overcast or after hail storms.
Mine do. And as for the night question, that's why I also have batteries associated with.
 
Rooftop PV doesn't roll itself out quickly and doesn't scale fast; it's easier (and significantly cheaper) to solar panel over a mountain than to convince a few million people to put solar on their tiny roofs. Solar land use is large but tolerable; the USA is ten million square kilometers, Algeria is two million square kilometers. At fifty percent land use, ten percent efficiency, twenty percent capacity factor, you're looking at ten electric terawatts per million square kilometers, which is quite adequate for a lot of things; you can double this with twenty percent efficient panels as per state-of-the-art. Floating solar has also been proposed, and the oceans are gargantuan. Millions and millions of square kilometers of the central pacific could in theory be used for solar power (the traditional 1970s depiction has them sharing with OTEC, fish farms, etc. and the idea also shows up in the Chtorr books); the Pacific alone is 165 million sqkm. The resource base for solar is huge, you can do all sorts of classic sci fi stuff with that kind of energy. One recalls the ideas about integrating solar with self replicating robot factories or suchlike.

Obviously the environmental impacts from putting up a million square kilometers of solar panel in Algeria and the Midwest and suchlike will be large, but this is quite obvious. Nuclear or space solar can be much lower impact in theory; rooftop and urban PV are likewise interesting, but I doubt you're getting ten terawatts from that. DOE tells me that rooftop solar is worth maybe a terawatt, and I don't think they included capacity factor; if capacity factor is twenty percent, that gives you 200GW (you'll want batteries), which isn't very much when you need to run everything on electricity in our glorious electrical future or whatever.

O'Neill noted in his ridiculously hilarious and fun book 2081 (a must-read! Very fun, not very good futurism prediction-wise IMO) that the classical limitation on minimum-impact activities is thermal pollution, which you will still get with nuclear (even if you do the sane thing and recycle the heat for domestic heating).

Screenshot 2024-07-24 222248.gif


It's taking forever to post this thing for some reason even though I've turned it into a tiny GIF file, I don't know why. Painting's by Robert McCall.


Solar requires batteries or will be subject to being taken offline (curtailment); too much solar overloads the grid, forcing everyone else to turn off expensive machinery which likes to be run continuously for best performance and economy (e.g. nuclear reactors), so you're better off turning off the solar instead.

Batteries are good for peak shaving, load balancing, etc, allowing solar penetration beyond the fifteen percent total energy possible without batteries; but you run into seasonal energy requirements outside the tropics. Chunks of North America and Europe especially will tend to run into issues with winter energy demands. HVDC and very large grids can offset this to a degree but you always want some longer term storage, probably chemical. There are also all sorts of other storage tricks to pull, like using buildings for thermal energy storage by over-cooling them in the day and letting them warm up slowly in the evenings.

===

On a side note, you can forget about marine current power; that one is meager, you can barely pull a few tens of gigawatts from something like the Gulf Stream. Good enough for IRL applications like supplementing some nighttime stuff I guess but nothing really adequate for robust economic growth or anything fancy.


OTEC is fun but the resource base for safe extraction is like ten terawatts (assuming you build in the central pacific and HVDC the power over) and the pipes get too long and get easily fouled up and the whole damn thing is inefficient as hell; ideally you'd use the deep cold water directly for air conditioning but those pipes would be even longer. On the plus side, fish farming is easier when you have like cubic hectare after cubic hectare of deep cold water to flush all the fish poop away.

 
Last edited:
China did one stupid installation and that disqualifies an entire energy system? But yeah we don't need anything fancy, stick the PV on roofs and parking lots and you save even more via shade. Win-win. Also solar and nuclear are not competing energy solutions but complimentary solutions. One provides base power one provides peak power.
 
China did one stupid installation and that disqualifies an entire energy system? But yeah we don't need anything fancy, stick the PV on roofs and parking lots and you save even more via shade. Win-win. Also solar and nuclear are not competing energy solutions but complimentary solutions. One provides base power one provides peak power.
That installation is a magnificent idea; flat land is needed for agriculture and urban development. Hills and slopes, on the other hand, are difficult to utilize, relatively uninhabited, and are from this perspective totally expendable. Terraced farms and hillside construction is doable but uneconomical, and agrivoltaics are still a work in progress. I'd worry a bit about landslides, but they seem to have kept enough plant cover to hold the slopes in, and some foliage can probably grow under the panels.

In land-scarce regions, hillsides and reservoirs are the way forward for solar installations. That, and/or transcontinental HVDC (state of the art is over 3,000km).

Seriously, one of the great reservations I had about SPS when I was a kid was the sheer size of those rectennnas - where on Earth do you get a piece of flat land ten kilometers across with minimal inhabitants? I know you can still farm under the mesh, but you gotta convince farmer bob that it's okay, and talk to the local town or whatever ya know. If you plopped one of those in Jiangsu province or whatever, you'd need to negotiate with maybe tens of thousands of angry farmers and maybe three or five villages. Offshore rectennas (the SPS report was that those would be good for Japan, and I was like, yeah no shit), higher frequencies/higher power densities with smaller rectennas, and those mixed-use greenhouse rectennas always made far more sense to my Asia-Pacific sensibilities. The old SPS reports were not so clever as to propose hillside rectennas, so kudos to the people who remembered that, yes, you can install solar on unused hills. And by extension, you can install SPS on unused hills too.

1721975466312.png 1721975605665.png
 
Last edited:
Solar In the news

Energy

Chemistry
 
Solar this week

The biggie
 
Last edited:
Green energy today

An Irwin Allen production? Vertical farming please.

The grid

The lineman's trade
 
Last edited:
green energy research

Not smart:

You need to keep old plants as backups
Use dead malls as data storage
 
Last edited:
solar.jpg

Global power-net one day, I guess.
 
I hope this helps

Solar power

other news

EV cars

CO2 recovery

Water safety


Hydrogen storage
 
Last edited:
Solar news

 
The problem of beaming energy from orbit to ground is still not solved satisfactory( That's why I consider space-based mirror arrays, illuminating land-based PV fields, to be optimal immediate solution. You could increase luminosity over solar panels several times, using only simple light beams.
The idea is good but they can also be used as weapons or to burn crops.
 
Ugly too.
In the Sahara it’s be nice shade
The Sahara is in the same region of the world as oil and is susceptible to energy blackmail such as that of 1973. In addition, the cable connection to Europe is susceptible to terrorism.

In southern Spain and in Sicily there are thousands of square kilometers available for solar panels... paying a pizzo.;)
 

I was generally hyper skeptical about space mirrors, but Kraftt Ehricke can make anything sound cool. The whole paper is pay walled unfortunately but you might be able to find it on... Other sources, preprint sites, etc.

Space Light by Kraftt Ehricke (the man himself!!!) is always a fun read. The traditional approach to space mirror constellations is just to proliferate like mad - both your mirrors, and ground receivers. If you have ten thousand mirrors, each ten hectares, a hundred flashing by every ten minutes ain't as bad, with even, diffuse lighting even.

And if you have a bunch of sites on the ground, at all latitudes, that need light for say one or two hours after sundown to correspond to peak energy needs, then a sun synchronous terminator hugging orbit for your constellation ain't bad. Obviously it ain't going to do it all, absentee ratio blah blah blah, and is nowhere as good as traditional SPS but not uninteresting.

One or two mirrors are pretty sucky, you want at least a few square kilometers worth in GEO if you want to do basic things like nighttime illumination (unless you just want to enhance night vision devices over the Ho Chi Minh Trail as was proposed for Vietnam).

Solving the difficult control problems and all the other problems with the idea of course are in usual Kraft Ehricke style left as exercises for the reader, but boy that guy thinks big!

Paper should be right up your alley, Scott. They have diagrams of an STS deployed beam machine based reflector.
The idea of the large parabolic mirror is outdated, the same result can be obtained with hundreds of small independent mirrors (one meter in diameter and equipped with thrusters) capable of adopting any formation in space thanks to laser rangefinders and AI. They are cheap, easy to launch and replace, and their adaptability is limitless. Imagine what telescope could be built in orbit with this technology.
 
Energy news this week

Solar fuel
 
 
Hydrogen storage

Solar breakthroughs
 
New this week

 
solar power news


CO2 harvest

wind

Nuke

Oil


Gold


More

Good news?
 
Last edited:
Hydrovoltaics

Wind


Green
 
Last edited:

LFP Cell level prices hit $54/kwh
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom