3 ms·

> Annual PV capacity production of around 400 GW in 2023 How does that make sense. 400GW Peak? Average? Or are they talking GWh If the IEA can't use the righ

> Annual PV capacity production of around 400 GW in 2023 How does that make sense. 400GW Peak? Average? Or are they talking GWh If the IEA can't use the right units in its reports, what hope is there.

fsh 4y ago
The IEA is using the correct unit. They are talking about "annual solar PV capacity additions" which is measured in Watts.
- badpun 4y ago
  It's correct but not very useful, as it doesn't inform about the real energy output (and who cares about the nominal/theoretical output). PV in a desert in US Southwest produces vastly more energy than say PV in Germany.
  - cinntaile 4y ago
    It's not supposed to measure real energy output, it's about predicting the capacity increase. What the actual energy output will be is a lot harder to predict and there is a lot more uncertainty regarding those numbers. Regular power plants are denominated in the exact same way, even though the actual energy output will be lower.
  - fsh 4y ago
    The difference is around a factor of two between the US Southwest deserts and the German north sea coast [1]. So tracking installed peak capacity is not an ideal metric, but it is very simple and gets the order of magnitude right. [1] https://globalsolaratlas.info https://globalsolaratlas.info
  - Retric 4y ago
    Real energy output is just one of many possible ways of measuring PV, but it’s even less predictable than number of panels. Fixed installations produce less power per year than 1 or 2 axis tracking etc. Different locations mean different amounts of transmission losses etc. But even the best model is going to get blindsided by politics. Europe would have been well severed by massively investing over the summer in PV to reduce it’s dependence on Russian natural gas. They didn’t do so but I was very much expecting a push for the fastest to install alternative to natural gas turbines which is PV.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
sgerenser 4y ago
Nameplate capacity. E.g. if panels are all 400W panels, it’s 1 billion panels.

fsh 4y ago

The IEA is using the correct unit. They are talking about "annual solar PV capacity additions" which is measured in Watts.

badpun 4y ago
It's correct but not very useful, as it doesn't inform about the real energy output (and who cares about the nominal/theoretical output). PV in a desert in US Southwest produces vastly more energy than say PV in Germany.
- cinntaile 4y ago
  It's not supposed to measure real energy output, it's about predicting the capacity increase. What the actual energy output will be is a lot harder to predict and there is a lot more uncertainty regarding those numbers. Regular power plants are denominated in the exact same way, even though the actual energy output will be lower.
- fsh 4y ago
  The difference is around a factor of two between the US Southwest deserts and the German north sea coast [1]. So tracking installed peak capacity is not an ideal metric, but it is very simple and gets the order of magnitude right. [1] https://globalsolaratlas.info https://globalsolaratlas.info
- Retric 4y ago
  Real energy output is just one of many possible ways of measuring PV, but it’s even less predictable than number of panels. Fixed installations produce less power per year than 1 or 2 axis tracking etc. Different locations mean different amounts of transmission losses etc. But even the best model is going to get blindsided by politics. Europe would have been well severed by massively investing over the summer in PV to reduce it’s dependence on Russian natural gas. They didn’t do so but I was very much expecting a push for the fastest to install alternative to natural gas turbines which is PV.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

sgerenser 4y ago

Nameplate capacity. E.g. if panels are all 400W panels, it’s 1 billion panels.