• @hitwright
    link
    English
    91 year ago

    KWH per dollar during whole lifetime, solar wins, even when oil is subsidized (for national security reasons)

    There are problems with solar that it is not a steady supply of energy, yet I would argue that it is better that way. People should sleep during the night, not work.

    • crentist
      link
      English
      31 year ago

      I agree on the sleep during nighttime part but we in Sweden also get very few hours of daylight during the dead of winter meaning energy production is very low and if the panels are covered in snow it’s nil.

      I’m all for solar but it has limitations.

    • @PixxlMan
      link
      English
      31 year ago

      That’s a bizzare and frankly nonsensical argument. First of all, power is not just necessary when working (leisure, ac, etc use power too), secondly there are tons of jobs which have to be done at night. They’re not done at night “just because”. I’m sure many of those would like to “not work” at night, but then the world wouldn’t work… Then there’s also the problem that not everywhere has sufficient sunlight during winter. It’d be impossible to power Sweden throughout winter using only solar power for instance. Solar is great, but the solution to achieve greater adoption isn’t just to ignore the downsides with it, but rather to accomdate them.

      • @hitwright
        link
        English
        21 year ago

        The problem is that most power during the night isn’t used for critical services like healthcare, but rather manufacturing. So resting during the night argument is more directed towards that. For former there is sufficient battery capacity.

        Solar advanced quite a lot, that I could argue, that Sweden can adopt solar panels. I agree it wouldn’t be as efficient like near the equator, but still usable. Not to mention that wind power is always an option. Sweden is also connected to European grid, so they are not required to manufacture solar themselves.

        Main idea is that accomodation is necessary, due to limited and unachievable battery capacity compared to what we use today. Using batteries for cars is nonsensical imho

    • The Snark Urge
      link
      English
      21 year ago

      It’s largely a problem of energy storage, which is going to be solved one way or another. Never bet against technology.

      I’d love to hear that solar panels get easier to recycle… The e waste issue bugs me.

      • @hitwright
        link
        English
        31 year ago

        To be fair, one of the main uses for energy is heating/cooling our home. The house can act as a thermal battery, and many people already do so with heavy thermal insulation. (Heat up during the day and stay warm through the night, or vice-verse) Another part is transportation. Batteries can not progress infinitely, the best you can get is gasoline level, and then it is basically gasoline. I’m actually surprised that LiPo batteries are used in cars at all, due to how dangerous they are. There should be a transition away from cars to trains+bikes combination. Sadly people are too car-centric to make the shift.

        • The Snark Urge
          link
          English
          41 year ago

          I’m actually more onboard than you suppose, I moved my entire family abroad to a more walkable town with train links over a year ago and ditched the car for a bike. I lost 30 lbs more or less by accident before starting to work out for real. I’ve never been this healthy in my life, and the rare occasion I need a car, a local taxi service can get me to an int’l airport for less than the cost of a tank of gas, or around town for £5 flat. Boom, fuck a car.