> When they're not grid backed, which is what we're discussing here Are we? Or is it just your deliberate narrowing of the topic for convenience? > After that

> When they're not grid backed, which is what we're discussing here Are we? Or is it just your deliberate narrowing of the topic for convenience? > After that, someone inevitably insists that we can just cover the planet in transmission wires. Ah, yes, "Someone" a.k.a. Straw Man. > solar plants don't work. Ivanpah has wanted to shut down Ivanpah is solar thermal. The main thing making it less competitive is cost reduction in medium- and large-scale PV installations, and [citation needed] for them wanting to shut down. > Another thing nobody seems to understand is flywheel smoothing Another thing nobody cares about in this context because it's not essential. Most large solar projects are turning to molten salt (not batteries BTW) for storage. In such a system, there's no need for flywheel smoothing. > You remember how the one at Level3 cut a notch through the highway No. Do you remember the thousands of oil spills, fires, and other adverse events associated with fossil fuels, or the nuclear-power-plant disasters? No technology is perfectly safe. It's not sufficient to cherry-pick an example or two. To have any kind of point here, you'd have to show that overall solar is less safe than alternatives. > driven by an amateur who's googling shit. Totally uncalled for, against the guidelines, and also more descriptive of the people pimping nuclear. That's the very epitome of "works great on paper" google-research, ignoring still-unsolved problems with older designs and hand-waving over anticipated problems with as-yet-untried ones. > Just look at the real world evidence. Please take your own advice.