2 ms·

Wrong, it actually DOES include capacity factor, "generation." Solar is around 5% of generation (i.e. kWhs of energy produced in a given year) if you include be

Wrong, it actually DOES include capacity factor, "generation." Solar is around 5% of generation (i.e. kWhs of energy produced in a given year) if you include behind-the-meter[0]. Wind is at 10% [1]. Solar is growing at about 25% year on year, and the "Inflation Reduction Act" should help sustain this. So after around 3 years, solar will be about 10%. Wind is growing slower, but 15% of electricity from wind in 3 years is feasible. Did you actually check first? [0] https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=table_1_01 https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph... [1] https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=table_1_01_a https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph...

perrygeo 3y ago
The article and OP were talking about available generating capacity as measured in Watts not Watt-hours. The capacity factor is absolutely necessary if you want to extrapolate that over time. Please double check the reported solar capacity (the article) vs the reported power generation (your links). The report shows 84GW of current solar capacity which, multiplied by the hours in a year gets you 735,840 GWhr if running at peak all year. Your links shows a total of 204,110 GWhrs solar generated in the year of 2022. So the very information you shared confirms a solar capacity factor of roughly 28%. The sun doesn't always shine and solar panels don't always run at peak. This is common sense, but the article makes no reference to it.