3 ms·
That sounds like a kneejerk response. Got a source for it? It's not like we didn't know about it all the time, yet the large solar systems were built.
by viraptor 3y ago
That sounds like a kneejerk response. Got a source for it? It's not like we didn't know about it all the time, yet the large solar systems were built.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> sounds like a kneejerk response. Got a source for it If you have 120% solar capacity in the summer so you have 100% in the winter, that’s obviously going to be more expensive than just building 100%. This is basic utilisation. Also, diminishing returns: the most-productive spots for solar will be built out first.
- viraptor 3y agoThat wasn't your claim. You said it stops being cheap - does it? Compared to alternatives?
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> You said it stops being cheap - does it? Compared to alternatives? “As cheap.” Solar will keep getting cheaper until saturation, then overshoot while it gets a bit more expensive. The equilibrium will shift from time to time as technology advances. But there are fundamental limits, and power demand is only going to grow.
- wolfram74 3y agoAs the seasonality of power becomes more and more pronounced, it'll make more and more sense to make seasonal loads. Cheap to build but electrically expensive to operate manufacturing processes that take advantage of borderline free power in the summer months that don't have much capex to amortize in the winters.
- pfdietz 3y agoOr, it makes sense for industry to move to those darker skinned places without seasonality. PV, the anti-colonial energy source. Poetic justice for Europe, don't you think?
- Wytwwww 3y agoDepends on the latitude and weather patterns. For instance you might need 25 (or much more) higher capacity to generate as much power in December as you would in May in most of Northern Europe (that should be pretty obvious though).