antonthom
Not RappaportSolar is winning the energy race
The world’s cheapest power source is scaling at warp speed, pushing coal, gas and nuclear aside.
Pino Carafa@NotRappaport The argument against solar was always that the investment needed was prohibitively expensive compared to the cost of exploiting existing power sources. But over time the investment was made in dribs and drabs, and now it reached a tipping point. Good.
Nantucket Lit@NotRappaport A recent Technology Connections video really helped persuade me.
When oil or natural gas are extracted, they can be used exactly once.
When raw materials are extracted for solar panels and batteries, yes, there's an environmental cost, but the panels can be used for decades, and after that, the materials can be recycled.
dexternemrod
David PhdAnd the panels and batteries offset the carbon used in their manufacturing in the first weeks or months of use - and then go on to work for 25+ years
@nantucketlit @NotRappaport Pushing wind aside too. Wind requires huge custom structures, as do fossil fuels. Solar can go on any flat surface, and should.
We have solar covered parking at work and those are always taken first.
not a martian, honest
ĞÖKÜ👻👻™@NotRappaport infinite energy
@NotRappaport Well, you can't really believe to cover 1% of the earth's surface with solar panels, as cited in the article.
These are numbers just out of a naive computation that doesn't consider how real world is distributed: mountains, water ways, cities as a concentration of users, energy transportation, just to cite a few.
Even the cited percentages are pure biased play: in those numbers solar energy appears as the leading energy source everywhere. Why advocate a winner then?
These are numbers just out of a naive computation that doesn't consider how real world is distributed: mountains, water ways, cities as a concentration of users, energy transportation, just to cite a few.
Even the cited percentages are pure biased play: in those numbers solar energy appears as the leading energy source everywhere. Why advocate a winner then?
@NotRappaport The article talks about covering 1% of the earth in panels to meet our energy requirements
This student's calculations show it would just need to be 0.04%
Working out and discussion in the link http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2024/ph240/bailey2/
ARGVMI~1.PIFAs far as energy sources go, it's pretty tough to beat a giant fusion reactor that's already fully operational and will stay that way for the next several billion years.
Stephen Dioxide 
@NotRappaport This is great news! From what I'm hearing in the news, it's poor nations, especially in SE Asia, who need this most.