5 ms·
We are counting the specific efficiency of the solar panel now to malign solar? And <1200 kw/h per square fucking meter is negligible? The proof is in the pudd
by stefan_ 4y ago
We are counting the specific efficiency of the solar panel now to malign solar? And <1200 kw/h per square fucking meter is negligible?
The proof is in the pudding. Even with all the structural headwind, people can put solar on their roof and a battery in the basement and trivially source the majority of their own power. Who is going to give you the $15B+ it takes to build your nuclear power plant that needs to run 50+ years when that's what is possible today? That's why no one is building them anymore - it's not plausibly ever going to make money.
- wyager 4y ago> And <1200 kw/h per square fucking meter is negligible Why are you swearing - are you upset about this? It's 0kW/m^2 at night. > people can put solar on their roof and a battery in the basement and trivially source the majority of their own power The key here is "majority". The remaining 20% or whatever is disproportionately expensive, and people who are using solar while connected to the grid are externalizing the vast majority of the negative costs of using solar to other grid participants. If you need to generate 100% of your energy using solar, you need to significantly over-allocate and spend a huge amount on batteries. People who generate "most" of their power using solar would need to spend multiple times as much to go to 100% solar, so A) the approach doesn't scale and B) they're imposing a much higher marginal cost on the grid per joule consumed than a "normal" customer.