> No. This is Los Angeles. And this happens every day, not in winter. We might not have tons of rain, but we do have clouds up there all the time. Here's April

> No. This is Los Angeles. And this happens every day, not in winter. We might not have tons of rain, but we do have clouds up there all the time. Here's April of this year: > https://i.imgur.com/8lYKImD.png https://i.imgur.com/8lYKImD.png Looks like a graph of 4-5kWh/day/kW in spring to me. Which is about DNI for the area. I'm sorry you had wildly unrealistic expectations for a home solar array. Did you get a system with bypass diodes? How is it positioned? Did you pick a chemistry with linear performance in low light? > My model predicted a range between 900 GW and 1.4 TW. I could not confirm the accuracy of this model until recently. So, good news, don't take my word for it, here's Elon Musk confirming my number: Then share your model, or at least the outrageous assumptions you used to get there. Also your argument from authority doesn't work when your authority constantly says any idiotic thing that would benefit his luxury car company. > So, yeah, the 1.2 TW estimate might be two low, by a factor of two, if not three. So 3.6TW of nuclear. Which requires 1/4 of all known and inferred uranium reserves for a single fuel load for a single country? This is your realism?