That’s not why it is done, it’s because this is reporting in capacity and that is the physical capacity being installed. That phrasing makes it sound nefarious,

That’s not why it is done, it’s because this is reporting in capacity and that is the physical capacity being installed. That phrasing makes it sound nefarious, then you end with a fairly low solar range (which varies substantially and exceeds that in sunnier parts of the US). Bit of an odd take. You could say the same, or lower, of capacity factors on peaking oil or gas plants in some areas that run for only a couple percent of the year. Nameplate and utilization are just different things. Maybe worth noting that despite lower capacity factors and despite it being mid-winter, Texas (ERCOT) keeps setting solar output records because they’re installing so much nameplate[1]. It’s not like it does nothing. [1] https://www.gridstatus.io/records/ercot?record=Maximum%20Solar https://www.gridstatus.io/records/ercot?record=Maximum%20Sol...