5 ms·

That is quite remarkable (if true), given that total world electricity consumption is around 3 TW on average. (ETA: one commenter adds that solar has an "avera

by FabHK 4y ago

That is quite remarkable (if true), given that total world electricity consumption is around 3 TW on average. (ETA: one commenter adds that solar has an "average capacity factor" of around 20%, so that 1 TW deployed will provide about 0.2 TW on average. Still, very impressive.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_energy_consumption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_energy_consumption

anonu 4y ago
Elon musk made a point in a recent talk, the entire demand of the USA could be satisfied with a 100x100 square miles of solar panels. Thinking in those terms, you realize it's quite achievable. Edit - 100x100
- ncmncm 4y ago
  There is a video debunking that: 10,000 square miles, to start with. But really, a fair bit more than that. Or would be, except we have wind and hydro. And even nukes and geothermal. It will honestly take one hell of a lot of panels, any way you count them. But that just hammers home how much we are still spending every day on coal, oil, and gas. We will spend less when most of our power comes from the panels, even with the capital cost of the panels figured in.
- guerrilla 4y ago
  Elon Musk lies a lot, not sure why you didn't validate that before parroting it because it's definitely false.
- 8bitsrule 4y ago
  Not sure (it's been a long time) but I think that a figure like that (a square 200 miles on a side) arose long ago based on a constant insolation (so, spread around the world, not one location) and 100% capture(??). (For world electricity use only, based on usage at that time.)
- quickthrower2 4y ago
  Even if 100 by 100 is correct and it isn’t more that is an insane engineering project, and a lot of land. More than Lebanon, for example.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    Alternatively, covering less than half the car parks in the US with solar roofs. "A 2011 study by the University of California, estimated there are upwards of 800m parking spaces in the US, covering about 25,000 square miles of land." https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/sep/27/cities-eliminating-car-parks-parking https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/sep/27/cities-elimin...
foolfoolz 4y ago
i’ve been reading on this lately and it’s incredibly hard to find up to date numbers on solar capacity, deployed or projected, in terms that make sense. some places report draw rates. some GHw. some daily numbers some yearly. politicians like to report places are 100% running off renewables when that means current draw rate matches solar productivity rate. yet solar production is always a small fraction of overall usage. it’s all very confusing
DeRock 4y ago
Also keep in mind that this will coincide massive electrification of historically non-electric energy consumption (eg. transportation and heating).
xedrac 4y ago
You'll be even more impressed after trying to match this in Factorio...

by FabHK 4y ago

anonu 4y ago

Elon musk made a point in a recent talk, the entire demand of the USA could be satisfied with a 100x100 square miles of solar panels. Thinking in those terms, you realize it's quite achievable. Edit - 100x100

ncmncm 4y ago
There is a video debunking that: 10,000 square miles, to start with. But really, a fair bit more than that. Or would be, except we have wind and hydro. And even nukes and geothermal. It will honestly take one hell of a lot of panels, any way you count them. But that just hammers home how much we are still spending every day on coal, oil, and gas. We will spend less when most of our power comes from the panels, even with the capital cost of the panels figured in.
guerrilla 4y ago
Elon Musk lies a lot, not sure why you didn't validate that before parroting it because it's definitely false.
8bitsrule 4y ago
Not sure (it's been a long time) but I think that a figure like that (a square 200 miles on a side) arose long ago based on a constant insolation (so, spread around the world, not one location) and 100% capture(??). (For world electricity use only, based on usage at that time.)
quickthrower2 4y ago
Even if 100 by 100 is correct and it isn’t more that is an insane engineering project, and a lot of land. More than Lebanon, for example.
- pjc50 4y ago
  Alternatively, covering less than half the car parks in the US with solar roofs. "A 2011 study by the University of California, estimated there are upwards of 800m parking spaces in the US, covering about 25,000 square miles of land." https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/sep/27/cities-eliminating-car-parks-parking https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/sep/27/cities-elimin...

foolfoolz 4y ago

i’ve been reading on this lately and it’s incredibly hard to find up to date numbers on solar capacity, deployed or projected, in terms that make sense. some places report draw rates. some GHw. some daily numbers some yearly. politicians like to report places are 100% running off renewables when that means current draw rate matches solar productivity rate. yet solar production is always a small fraction of overall usage. it’s all very confusing

DeRock 4y ago

Also keep in mind that this will coincide massive electrification of historically non-electric energy consumption (eg. transportation and heating).

xedrac 4y ago

You'll be even more impressed after trying to match this in Factorio...