6 ms·

Well, 1 out of 22,300 TWh is a start! Menlo park didn't light the world in a day. https://www.statista.com/statistics/280704/world-power-consumption/ https://w

by sbf501 4y ago

Well, 1 out of 22,300 TWh is a start! Menlo park didn't light the world in a day. https://www.statista.com/statistics/280704/world-power-consumption/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/280704/world-power-consu... EDIT: Misread power as energy.

mjb 4y ago
You can't compare TW and TWh in that way (one is power, the other energy). With solar the way that TW translates to TWh is a little complicated, but it sure isn't 1:1 (probably closer to 1:2000).
- pooper 4y ago
  Just curious, did you get 2000 as in eight hours a day, five days a week? It just reminds me of the rough estimate of the number of hours worked in a year which I find funny to think about the sun going to work in an office for five days a week, eight hours a day. 8 * 5 * 50 = 2000 so the sun gets two weeks vacation a year :)
  - 10u152 4y ago
    Just on this, depending on location there are "rules of thumb" based on hours of sunlight, cloud cover etc. Where I live the rule of thumb is 4. So 1 KW of panels will make around 4kWh a day, averaged over the year or about 1460 a year.
  - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
    I think more accurately the sun puts in incredibly long hours, but isn't working at full productivity for a lot of it (maybe if it cut back to a normal 40 hour work week it would get more done).
jewel 4y ago
A single TW of solar would produce a TW for every hour that the sun is shining, so it could be 3,000 TWh for every TW installed. Obviously the exact value depends on the insolation.
- 8note 4y ago
  nit: watts are measured per second, not per hour
cnorthwood 4y ago
You're confusing TW with TWh. If running at full capacity that would be an additional 8760 TWh generated every year. Of course it won't be 100% utilised but it takes more of a chunk out of it then you suggest.
epistasis 4y ago
Solar has an average capacity factor of roughly 20%, meaning over the course of a year 1W generates an average of 0.2W. You are using a metric of TWh/year, so multiply 1 TW * .2 * 24 hour/day * 365 day/year and that 1TW of solar generates 1700TWh/year. Given an average lifespan of 25 years, a 1TW/year productive capacity supports 44,000TWh/year production. Given that solar will be so cheap, I expect us to be throwing away 20%-50% of solar electricity (curtailment, in current jargon). For example, production may be sized to produce enough at the seasonal minimum (winter in Northern countries), and summer time might have ridiculous abundance.
- RangerScience 4y ago
  Desalination will be the new pumped hydro. I kid but I don't. (I don't actually know much about desal - there's details, but is it power in = water out, plus a bunch of facility maintenance and operations?)
  - croddin 4y ago
    Yeah we need good things to do with cheap power that don't always have to run and aren't too capital intensive (Making them need to use more expensive power). I'm not sure what is best between Desalination, Aluminum smelting, Crypto mining, or what other good alternatives are.
    - brianwawok 4y ago
      You are putting crypto mining on the same level to humankind as making drinking water?
      - croddin 4y ago
        Desalination is higher priority overall then crypto mining. There are several factors which make something a good candidate to use excess solar power. Maybe it makes sense for desal to always be running? Crypto can more quickly be spun up or down to respond to the energy market. Crypto mining can be done anywhere with cheap power but desalination needs to be near salt water and where water is needed. We will probably need a mix of several industries to effectively use the cheap power.

by sbf501 4y ago

mjb 4y ago

You can't compare TW and TWh in that way (one is power, the other energy). With solar the way that TW translates to TWh is a little complicated, but it sure isn't 1:1 (probably closer to 1:2000).

pooper 4y ago
Just curious, did you get 2000 as in eight hours a day, five days a week? It just reminds me of the rough estimate of the number of hours worked in a year which I find funny to think about the sun going to work in an office for five days a week, eight hours a day. 8 * 5 * 50 = 2000 so the sun gets two weeks vacation a year :)
- 10u152 4y ago
  Just on this, depending on location there are "rules of thumb" based on hours of sunlight, cloud cover etc. Where I live the rule of thumb is 4. So 1 KW of panels will make around 4kWh a day, averaged over the year or about 1460 a year.
- TheCoelacanth 4y ago
  I think more accurately the sun puts in incredibly long hours, but isn't working at full productivity for a lot of it (maybe if it cut back to a normal 40 hour work week it would get more done).

jewel 4y ago

A single TW of solar would produce a TW for every hour that the sun is shining, so it could be 3,000 TWh for every TW installed. Obviously the exact value depends on the insolation.

8note 4y ago
nit: watts are measured per second, not per hour

cnorthwood 4y ago

You're confusing TW with TWh. If running at full capacity that would be an additional 8760 TWh generated every year. Of course it won't be 100% utilised but it takes more of a chunk out of it then you suggest.

epistasis 4y ago

Solar has an average capacity factor of roughly 20%, meaning over the course of a year 1W generates an average of 0.2W. You are using a metric of TWh/year, so multiply 1 TW * .2 * 24 hour/day * 365 day/year and that 1TW of solar generates 1700TWh/year. Given an average lifespan of 25 years, a 1TW/year productive capacity supports 44,000TWh/year production. Given that solar will be so cheap, I expect us to be throwing away 20%-50% of solar electricity (curtailment, in current jargon). For example, production may be sized to produce enough at the seasonal minimum (winter in Northern countries), and summer time might have ridiculous abundance.

RangerScience 4y ago
Desalination will be the new pumped hydro. I kid but I don't. (I don't actually know much about desal - there's details, but is it power in = water out, plus a bunch of facility maintenance and operations?)
- croddin 4y ago
  Yeah we need good things to do with cheap power that don't always have to run and aren't too capital intensive (Making them need to use more expensive power). I'm not sure what is best between Desalination, Aluminum smelting, Crypto mining, or what other good alternatives are.
  - brianwawok 4y ago
    You are putting crypto mining on the same level to humankind as making drinking water?
    - croddin 4y ago
      Desalination is higher priority overall then crypto mining. There are several factors which make something a good candidate to use excess solar power. Maybe it makes sense for desal to always be running? Crypto can more quickly be spun up or down to respond to the energy market. Crypto mining can be done anywhere with cheap power but desalination needs to be near salt water and where water is needed. We will probably need a mix of several industries to effectively use the cheap power.