4 ms·

Solar panels are almost exclusively made in China now using coal. The carbon economics of EVs were and still are based on older EU solar production that relied

Solar panels are almost exclusively made in China now using coal. The carbon economics of EVs were and still are based on older EU solar production that relied on natural gas for energy. Nobody has done the recalc. There's hardly a net benefit now.

Tade0 3y ago
Solar panels were throughly scrutinised for years: https://solarscorecard.org/past-scorecards https://solarscorecard.org/past-scorecards
- swader999 3y ago
  Those scorecards prove my point. One, they don't actually rate or calculate the net coal used to make the panels. Two, the dirty producers market share isn't at all described.
  - _kulang 3y ago
    Cars use an absurd amount of energy so I would think regardless of “dirty production” that you are largely incorrect
flir 3y ago
> Solar panels are almost exclusively made in China now using coal. Ok. How do you know?
- swader999 3y ago
  https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-panels-are-more-carbon-intensive-than-experts-will-admit https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-pa...
  - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
    This is Micheal Shellenberg's fossil fuel boosting org. I know they and he put a small amount of effort into pretending to be "environmentalists" but it's pretty far from convincing unless you want to believe for some reason.
    - flir 3y ago
      If you're trying to assess the data quality based on the source, rather than the data itself (no shame, I'm doing the same - I don't have time to debunk every half-truth out there), you probably need to go one deeper to the report's author - Enrico Mariutti. I can't find out much about him.
      - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
        > However, in light of the acceleration of European climate policy, which threatens to condemn Italy to irreversible decline, I feel it is my duty to enable the media to cover this discovery. Yeah, he sounds like a legit researcher, rather than someone with a blog and a message the fossil fuel lobby finds useful.
        flir 3y ago
        I found something in the end. There's an interesting list of publications on his linkedin page. Pick a title at random and translate it.
zamadatix 3y ago
Could you share the numbers you used for that conclusion? It feels like a solar panel will produce ridiculously more power than is required to make it so it seems hard to believe small scale gas combustion engines are more carbon efficient regardless if that initial energy is from a coal or gas power plant. I'm not sure what a reasonable range of numbers for the energy needed for panel production is though so I'm curious what you used.
- swader999 3y ago
  The truth of it is that there aren't numbers, China won't give them. The ones used in the analysis and policy are pure fantasy in 2023 reality. https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-panels-are-more-carbon-intensive-than-experts-will-admit https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-pa...
  - zamadatix 3y ago
    Nobody but China has a clue how much power it takes to produce a solar panel and nobody has done a recalc but you know it's hardly a net benefit and also here's a link with some numbers? Well which is it, you didn't use a number or you're claiming the numbers in that link? I'm also not sure I follow what you're saying about Europe's power anyways. Natural gas was never a leader for production, coal used to be 3x the production, it's only in the last 5 years that flipped. I'm trying to understand what numbers you're basing your claims on because they don't make any sense but you state them very authoritatively.
AtlasBarfed 3y ago
Let's take your assertion at face value, assume you are correct. You're saying, WORST CASE, likely with cooked numbers in your favor, that the net benefit of CURRENT manufacturing is equivalent? Okay, let's ask the next question: With the LCOE of coal being fundamentally noncompetitive with wind and solar, what do you think the future of coal-based production is? Right, coal is being actively phased out wherever possible for wind/solar that is simply plummeting in cost, and likely has a decade of cost drops. And if they are using a grid, what is the switching cost by the factories to use wind/solar? Oh right, probably nothing, since they just pull from ... the grid. So let's say natural gas turbine took over a lot of coal? Well, the carbon emissions of natural gas turbine are better than coal in the short run, but solar/wind are now beating natural gas turbine, and natural gas turbine is the absolute last gasp of carbon-based energy production trying to take on wind/solar. So, even if we accept your proposition that it "doesn't matter", and likely those numbers are already years old and alternative energy adoption is drastically ahead of the IEA's projections in the last decade or so, the fact of the matter is that the ball is rolling in the right direction, and anyone with half a policy brain realizes that. And again, the coal/natural gas/ICE technologies are played out. They have maximized their efficiencies, and wind/solar/EV is already better than in in most meaningful ways, and the technology for wind/solar/EV in terms of economies of scale, design refinement, fundamental technology like perovskites compound cells in solar and sodium ion/LFP/LMFP/sulfur techs have likely 10-20 years of runway left.

Tade0 3y ago

Solar panels were throughly scrutinised for years: https://solarscorecard.org/past-scorecards https://solarscorecard.org/past-scorecards

swader999 3y ago
Those scorecards prove my point. One, they don't actually rate or calculate the net coal used to make the panels. Two, the dirty producers market share isn't at all described.
- _kulang 3y ago
  Cars use an absurd amount of energy so I would think regardless of “dirty production” that you are largely incorrect

flir 3y ago

> Solar panels are almost exclusively made in China now using coal. Ok. How do you know?

swader999 3y ago
https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-panels-are-more-carbon-intensive-than-experts-will-admit https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-pa...
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  This is Micheal Shellenberg's fossil fuel boosting org. I know they and he put a small amount of effort into pretending to be "environmentalists" but it's pretty far from convincing unless you want to believe for some reason.
  - flir 3y ago
    If you're trying to assess the data quality based on the source, rather than the data itself (no shame, I'm doing the same - I don't have time to debunk every half-truth out there), you probably need to go one deeper to the report's author - Enrico Mariutti. I can't find out much about him.
    - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
      > However, in light of the acceleration of European climate policy, which threatens to condemn Italy to irreversible decline, I feel it is my duty to enable the media to cover this discovery. Yeah, he sounds like a legit researcher, rather than someone with a blog and a message the fossil fuel lobby finds useful.
      - flir 3y ago
        I found something in the end. There's an interesting list of publications on his linkedin page. Pick a title at random and translate it.

zamadatix 3y ago

Could you share the numbers you used for that conclusion? It feels like a solar panel will produce ridiculously more power than is required to make it so it seems hard to believe small scale gas combustion engines are more carbon efficient regardless if that initial energy is from a coal or gas power plant. I'm not sure what a reasonable range of numbers for the energy needed for panel production is though so I'm curious what you used.

swader999 3y ago
The truth of it is that there aren't numbers, China won't give them. The ones used in the analysis and policy are pure fantasy in 2023 reality. https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-panels-are-more-carbon-intensive-than-experts-will-admit https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-pa...
- zamadatix 3y ago
  Nobody but China has a clue how much power it takes to produce a solar panel and nobody has done a recalc but you know it's hardly a net benefit and also here's a link with some numbers? Well which is it, you didn't use a number or you're claiming the numbers in that link? I'm also not sure I follow what you're saying about Europe's power anyways. Natural gas was never a leader for production, coal used to be 3x the production, it's only in the last 5 years that flipped. I'm trying to understand what numbers you're basing your claims on because they don't make any sense but you state them very authoritatively.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago

Let's take your assertion at face value, assume you are correct. You're saying, WORST CASE, likely with cooked numbers in your favor, that the net benefit of CURRENT manufacturing is equivalent? Okay, let's ask the next question: With the LCOE of coal being fundamentally noncompetitive with wind and solar, what do you think the future of coal-based production is? Right, coal is being actively phased out wherever possible for wind/solar that is simply plummeting in cost, and likely has a decade of cost drops. And if they are using a grid, what is the switching cost by the factories to use wind/solar? Oh right, probably nothing, since they just pull from ... the grid. So let's say natural gas turbine took over a lot of coal? Well, the carbon emissions of natural gas turbine are better than coal in the short run, but solar/wind are now beating natural gas turbine, and natural gas turbine is the absolute last gasp of carbon-based energy production trying to take on wind/solar. So, even if we accept your proposition that it "doesn't matter", and likely those numbers are already years old and alternative energy adoption is drastically ahead of the IEA's projections in the last decade or so, the fact of the matter is that the ball is rolling in the right direction, and anyone with half a policy brain realizes that. And again, the coal/natural gas/ICE technologies are played out. They have maximized their efficiencies, and wind/solar/EV is already better than in in most meaningful ways, and the technology for wind/solar/EV in terms of economies of scale, design refinement, fundamental technology like perovskites compound cells in solar and sodium ion/LFP/LMFP/sulfur techs have likely 10-20 years of runway left.