October 5, 20223 yr Just now, Tnt4philly said: We have to rewrite the laws of physics to increase efficiency? At a certain point, you can only get sooooooo sufficient. 100% efficiency - All sunlight hitting a defined area is turned into usable electricity - does not equate to the same miniaturization that we've seen in electronics, for example. There is a limit.
October 5, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said: If you're implying that pv solar cell efficiency gains are at odds with the laws of physics, I'm not sure you understand what the laws of physics actually are... https://sites.lafayette.edu/egrs352-sp14-pv/technology/history-of-pv-technology/ I was referring to the notion that you can shrink a football field size of solar panels into a tiny 10' x 10' array - Not specifically stated, but highly implied.
October 5, 20223 yr Just now, CountBlah said: I was referring to the notion that you can shrink a football field size of solar panels into a tiny 10' x 10' array - Not specifically stated, but highly implied. Well no, the tech is improving but still has its own limitations of course. I'm not one to overstate how useful pv solar is at scale, but sometimes it's likewise annoying to see people get so carried away in all their green-tech bashing that they misinterpret things and fall hard on their face like Kz did in this thread. Nobody is trying to necessarily say that what this town did is scalable, cost effective, or applicable for the rest of the country, but we can also give credit where credit is due without needing to write-off a technology based on pre-conceived notions.
October 5, 20223 yr 8 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: If you're implying that pv solar cell efficiency gains are at odds with the laws of physics, I'm not sure you understand what the laws of physics actually are... https://sites.lafayette.edu/egrs352-sp14-pv/technology/history-of-pv-technology/ In addition to that, there are prototypes that capture the excess heat, aka wasted energy, and covert that to electricity as well. Just a lab experiment right now but would in theory allow the panels to produce power past sundown.
October 5, 20223 yr 5 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Well no, the tech is improving but still has its own limitations of course. I'm not one to overstate how useful pv solar is at scale, but sometimes it's likewise annoying to see people get so carried away in all their green-tech bashing that they misinterpret things and fall hard on their face like Kz did in this thread. Nobody is trying to necessarily say that what this town did is scalable, cost effective, or applicable for the rest of the country, but we can also give credit where credit is due without needing to write-off a technology based on pre-conceived notions. No write off here, just trying to tamp down the cure-all/pie-in-the-sky notion that solar can do things that it cannot. It's part of the solution, but not THE solution alone. No technological magic is going to capture more solar power than is actually imparted by the sun, over a given area.
October 5, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, paco said: In addition to that, there are prototypes that capture the excess heat, aka wasted energy, and covert that to electricity as well. Just a lab experiment right now but would in theory allow the panels to produce power past sundown. Any gains there I'd expect to be marginal. Maybe an extra 5-10% boost or so, but if we want to reduce losses at scale, a thermal solar plant with heliostats is the way to do it. A bit similar to a nuclear reactor, it has a larger up-front investment cost but far more efficient over time (though the hippies will cry about the birds getting BBQ'd.)
October 5, 20223 yr 5 minutes ago, CountBlah said: No write off here, just trying to tamp down the cure-all/pie-in-the-sky notion that solar can do things that it cannot. It's part of the solution, but not THE solution alone. No technological magic is going to capture more solar power than is actually imparted by the sun, over a given area. The amount of energy imparted by the sun is massive. Insanely massive. The problem is our current methods of capturing it have disadvantages and inefficiencies. And to be clear, there are better ways to do this (e.g. next-gen nuclear reactors), but people and politicians are stupid, so instead we have to live with half-measures like these large-scale pv panel farms.
October 5, 20223 yr 10 minutes ago, CountBlah said: I was referring to the notion that you can shrink a football field size of solar panels into a tiny 10' x 10' array - Not specifically stated, but highly implied. Unless the efficiency of solar panels is currently at 100%, they will continue to be more efficient. As efficiency increase the amount of power that a football sized field of panels can produce will increase.
October 5, 20223 yr 18 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said: LOLOL no you weren't, because what you "quoted" isn't what the article states. What the article ACTUALLY states is, "Babcock Ranch calls itself "America’s first solar-powered town.” Its nearby solar array — made up of 700,000 individual panels — generates more electricity than the 2,000-home neighborhood uses, in a state where most electricity is generated by burning natural gas, a planet-warming fossil fuel." holy sh-t you really are disingenuous. You deleted the words "more" and "than" from your "quoted" post and replaced it with "..." to make it seem like the article was saying that the 700,000 panels are what's needed to generate the electricity used by the 2,000 homes. ffs.....You literally went out of your way to create your own made up false narrative. Damn, I was super subtle using the ellipses, too. Would have gotten away with it, too, if not for sherlock over here.
October 5, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, Kz! said: Damn, I was super subtle using the ellipses, too. Would have gotten away with it, too, if not for sherlock over here. "Hah, I tricked you all into thinking I'm retarded. Joke's on you, I was only initially retarded!"
October 5, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Any gains there I'd expect to be marginal. Maybe an extra 5-10% boost or so, but if we want to reduce losses at scale, a thermal solar plant with heliostats is the way to do it. A bit similar to a nuclear reactor, it has a larger up-front investment cost but far more efficient over time (though the hippies will cry about the birds getting BBQ'd.) The largest one of these, the one that all the stock photos come from, went belly up because of the maintenance costs - https://www.reutersevents.com/renewables/solar/crescent-dunes-owner-files-bankruptcy-cyprus-starts-build-first-csp-plant Much like communism, it's great in theory, but in it's execution, not so much.
October 5, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, Tnt4philly said: Unless the efficiency of solar panels is currently at 100%, they will continue to be more efficient. As efficiency increase the amount of power that a football sized field of panels can produce will increase. ... Up to a physical limit. Add that, and we are in 100% agreement.
October 5, 20223 yr 8 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Any gains there I'd expect to be marginal. Maybe an extra 5-10% boost or so, but if we want to reduce losses at scale, a thermal solar plant with heliostats is the way to do it. A bit similar to a nuclear reactor, it has a larger up-front investment cost but far more efficient over time (though the hippies will cry about the birds getting BBQ'd.) Agreed. But with solar, 5-10% gains are huge given how long it takes to gain that amount from traditional innovation.
October 5, 20223 yr 5 minutes ago, Tnt4philly said: Unless the efficiency of solar panels is currently at 100%, they will continue to be more efficient. As efficiency increase the amount of power that a football sized field of panels can produce will increase. Anything above 20% efficiency is considered good right now. You pay a premium for the panels that inch closer to 25%, but most folks opt to just get the cheaper 20-22% ones and add a panel.
October 5, 20223 yr 10 minutes ago, CountBlah said: The largest one of these, the one that all the stock photos come from, went belly up because of the maintenance costs - https://www.reutersevents.com/renewables/solar/crescent-dunes-owner-files-bankruptcy-cyprus-starts-build-first-csp-plant Much like communism, it's great in theory, but in it's execution, not so much. Uh no, Ivanpa is still operational in CA, there's also a big one in Spain, and one elsewhere in Europe too I think. They're fine in execution but need to be well designed just like any power plant, but using this case (sounds like a leak in the salt storage tanks) as representative of issues of the tech in general is a bit myopic. The same reasoning that resulted in shuttered nuclear power plants because of what happened at Three Mile Island. Or saying wind turbines are worthless after some were frozen in Texas during their cold snap. Avoiding failure modes applies to all technologies, but some companies/countries do this better than others. 8 minutes ago, paco said: Agreed. But with solar, 5-10% gains are huge given how long it takes to gain that amount from traditional innovation. 5-10% of their current efficiencies, not in total output.
October 5, 20223 yr 13 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: "Hah, I tricked you all into thinking I'm retarded. Joke's on you, I was only initially retarded!" Haha, tiny loser overcompensating again.
October 5, 20223 yr 18 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said: LOLOL no you weren't, because what you "quoted" isn't what the article states. What the article ACTUALLY states is, "Babcock Ranch calls itself "America’s first solar-powered town.” Its nearby solar array — made up of 700,000 individual panels — generates more electricity than the 2,000-home neighborhood uses, in a state where most electricity is generated by burning natural gas, a planet-warming fossil fuel." holy sh-t you really are disingenuous. You deleted the words "more" and "than" from your "quoted" post and replaced it with "..." to make it seem like the article was saying that the 700,000 panels are what's needed to generate the electricity used by the 2,000 homes. ffs.....You literally went out of your way to create your own made up false narrative. what a dipsheet!
October 5, 20223 yr 5 minutes ago, Kz! said: Haha, tiny loser overcompensating again. Lololololololololololololol
October 5, 20223 yr 6 minutes ago, Kz! said: Haha, tiny loser overcompensating again. "Please make fun of me, guys. Please! The sounds of laughter is better than the silence I hear all day every day!"
October 5, 20223 yr Just now, we_gotta_believe said: "Please make fun of me, guys. Please! The sounds of laughter is better than the silence I hear all day every day!" "Honey, you'll never believe it! I called a conservative retarded on the internet again! Aren't you proud of me?"
October 5, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, Boogyman said: Lololololololololololololol lmao unemployed loser who spends his entire day on the EMB thinks something's funny.
October 5, 20223 yr Just now, Kz! said: lmao unemployed loser who spends his entire day on the EMB thinks something's funny. I have more than you will ever have lol. Including testosterone.
October 5, 20223 yr 12 minutes ago, CountBlah said: ... Up to a physical limit. Add that, and we are in 100% agreement. Do you know that physical limit? Are we even close to being 100% efficient? Should we stop trying to improve the technology? What exactly is the issue here?
October 5, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: "Please make fun of me, guys. Please! The sounds of laughter is better than the silence I hear all day every day!"
October 5, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, Boogyman said: I have more than you will ever have lol. Including testosterone. Uh oh, triggered into posting his wife's bank account info after only one post? lmao
Create an account or sign in to comment