4 ms·

You can put solar panels on rooftops. If you go to Europe, you'll see them on rooftops everywhere, even on barns.

by magduf 7y ago

wazoox 7y ago
These small solar arrays are connected to the grid and can't work without it. Furthermore, they actually tend to add too much load to the grid because it's not built to manage numerous random power sources dispatched across the network. And this is not the efficient thermal solar power the article mentions, either. They're between pretty inefficient and very inefficient (depending upon roof angle and orientation), heavily subsidized and in a period of dwindling resource availability, a piss-poor allocation of money compared to unsexy things such as proper building insulation and heat pumps everywhere. Anyone spending some time on analysing the numbers would be baffled by how poor the ROI is on renewable overall. They really can't stand on their own much.
- magduf 7y ago
  >These small solar arrays are connected to the grid and can't work without it. Huh? Everything is connected to the grid, whether it's producing or consuming electricity. What kind of argument is this? >Furthermore, they actually tend to add too much load to the grid because it's not built to manage numerous random power sources dispatched across the network. Apparently, it works just fine in Germany. >They're between pretty inefficient and very inefficient (depending upon roof angle and orientation), heavily subsidized and in a period of dwindling resource availability, a piss-poor allocation of money compared to unsexy things such as proper building insulation and heat pumps everywhere. Insulation and heat pumps don't generate electricity. Germany generates a huge portion of its total electricity with renewables, including solar, which is pretty remarkable considering it has a high latitude. >Anyone spending some time on analysing the numbers would be baffled by how poor the ROI is on renewable overall. They really can't stand on their own much. Do you work for the oil industry? Considering that Germany is one of the leading economies of the whole world, and especially the EU, and that they're quite successful with renewables, your statement sounds ridiculous.
  - wazoox 7y ago
    Germany is able to generate power using renewable and lower its emissions doing so only because they still have a huge base of coal power (about a third) to modulate down when wind blows or sun shines. I'm working in computers. I think we're on the verge of peak oil; that we absolutely must cease burning any fossil fuel as fast as possible starting 10 years ago, and that we're heading straight into civilisational collapse. I think it's time to get serious and stop pretending we can do everything and that we can avoid difficult choices and zero-sum games, and that we can reach pipe dreams such as "green growth" and all of this bullshit.
    - magduf 7y ago
      >Germany is able to generate power using renewable and lower its emissions doing so only because they still have a huge base of coal power (about a third) to modulate down when wind blows or sun shines. I totally agree that renewables aren't really feasible for providing all power: we'd need massive storage technology to do that, since the sun doesn't shine all the time and it isn't always windy. However, coal could easily be mostly replaced by nuclear for baseline generation. And if Germany doesn't want to do nuclear, I'm sure the French next door would be happy to sell it to them. >I think it's time to get serious and stop pretending we can do everything and that we can avoid difficult choices and zero-sum games, and that we can reach pipe dreams such as "green growth" and all of this bullshit. I agree about the dangers facing us. But I think it's wrong to bash green technologies like solar and wind: they are absolutely viable (in places, obviously wind power isn't feasible everywhere), and can contribute greatly to power needs. No, they aren't a silver bullet, and no, they really aren't able to supply ALL our power needs 24/7. Most other methods aren't either: nuclear for instance isn't really usable for total power generation because it can't spin up and down quickly to meet changing demand. But solar power is getting more efficient all the time, and there is a lot of work on storage technologies, so there is progress, but I also recognize we can't entirely rely on solar/wind for everything yet. Many places are generating large amounts of power with solar, which means there's that much power that doesn't need to be generated with fossil fuels. Personally, I'd like to see coal power phased out completely, as fast as possible, and nuclear brought back (with very modern, safe designs, not 50-year-old designs) to provide baseline power until we can find other ways of providing all the power we need without pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere.

You can put solar panels on rooftops. If you go to Europe, you'll see them on rooftops everywhere, even on barns.

by magduf 7y ago

You can put solar panels on rooftops. If you go to Europe, you'll see them on rooftops everywhere, even on barns.

These small solar arrays are connected to the grid and can't work without it. Furthermore, they actually tend to add too much load to the grid because it's not built to manage numerous random power sources dispatched across the network. And this is not the efficient thermal solar power the article mentions, either. They're between pretty inefficient and very inefficient (depending upon roof angle and orientation), heavily subsidized and in a period of dwindling resource availability, a piss-poor allocation of money compared to unsexy things such as proper building insulation and heat pumps everywhere. Anyone spending some time on analysing the numbers would be baffled by how poor the ROI is on renewable overall. They really can't stand on their own much.

magduf 7y ago
>These small solar arrays are connected to the grid and can't work without it. Huh? Everything is connected to the grid, whether it's producing or consuming electricity. What kind of argument is this? >Furthermore, they actually tend to add too much load to the grid because it's not built to manage numerous random power sources dispatched across the network. Apparently, it works just fine in Germany. >They're between pretty inefficient and very inefficient (depending upon roof angle and orientation), heavily subsidized and in a period of dwindling resource availability, a piss-poor allocation of money compared to unsexy things such as proper building insulation and heat pumps everywhere. Insulation and heat pumps don't generate electricity. Germany generates a huge portion of its total electricity with renewables, including solar, which is pretty remarkable considering it has a high latitude. >Anyone spending some time on analysing the numbers would be baffled by how poor the ROI is on renewable overall. They really can't stand on their own much. Do you work for the oil industry? Considering that Germany is one of the leading economies of the whole world, and especially the EU, and that they're quite successful with renewables, your statement sounds ridiculous.
- wazoox 7y ago
  Germany is able to generate power using renewable and lower its emissions doing so only because they still have a huge base of coal power (about a third) to modulate down when wind blows or sun shines. I'm working in computers. I think we're on the verge of peak oil; that we absolutely must cease burning any fossil fuel as fast as possible starting 10 years ago, and that we're heading straight into civilisational collapse. I think it's time to get serious and stop pretending we can do everything and that we can avoid difficult choices and zero-sum games, and that we can reach pipe dreams such as "green growth" and all of this bullshit.
  - magduf 7y ago
    >Germany is able to generate power using renewable and lower its emissions doing so only because they still have a huge base of coal power (about a third) to modulate down when wind blows or sun shines. I totally agree that renewables aren't really feasible for providing all power: we'd need massive storage technology to do that, since the sun doesn't shine all the time and it isn't always windy. However, coal could easily be mostly replaced by nuclear for baseline generation. And if Germany doesn't want to do nuclear, I'm sure the French next door would be happy to sell it to them. >I think it's time to get serious and stop pretending we can do everything and that we can avoid difficult choices and zero-sum games, and that we can reach pipe dreams such as "green growth" and all of this bullshit. I agree about the dangers facing us. But I think it's wrong to bash green technologies like solar and wind: they are absolutely viable (in places, obviously wind power isn't feasible everywhere), and can contribute greatly to power needs. No, they aren't a silver bullet, and no, they really aren't able to supply ALL our power needs 24/7. Most other methods aren't either: nuclear for instance isn't really usable for total power generation because it can't spin up and down quickly to meet changing demand. But solar power is getting more efficient all the time, and there is a lot of work on storage technologies, so there is progress, but I also recognize we can't entirely rely on solar/wind for everything yet. Many places are generating large amounts of power with solar, which means there's that much power that doesn't need to be generated with fossil fuels. Personally, I'd like to see coal power phased out completely, as fast as possible, and nuclear brought back (with very modern, safe designs, not 50-year-old designs) to provide baseline power until we can find other ways of providing all the power we need without pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere.