• aeronmelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m surprised that solar isn’t yet big enough to be broken out on its own.

    I’m also surprised that natural gas is outgrowing everything else.

    • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Natural gas is just Methane and is being pushed by big oil, since it needs all of the infrastructure they already have.

    • Forester@yiffit.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I’m surprised that solar isn’t yet big enough to be broken out on its own.

      and that’s the problem. It’s not even enough of our power generation to be its own separate entity on the graph, but these people expect it to just magically power the planet in the next 5 years.

    • Forester@yiffit.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I’m not knocking solar. It’s a great technology. It’s just not feasible to scale to the point that we would need to scale it to sufficiently power our societies . We only recently developed the technology to make burning methane more feasible. They used to just light it off and burn it at the wells when they would tap it.

      • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s just not feasible to scale to the point that we would need to scale it to sufficiently power our societies

        Anything to back that up?

        • Forester@yiffit.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          It’s a logistical problem basically most people don’t live at the equator and that’s the good spot for solar where it’s three times as effective. We could plaster a quarter of all the land with solar panels and then yeah you have enough. Except you still wouldn’t have a dependable energy inputs because sometimes the weather is shitty for a week. So you would still need the massive transition cables to pipe it in from somewhere else that the sun currently is shining. So basically you are going to need to cover massive amounts of land with solar panels. We would need to invest in massive transfer cables. I honestly think that would be a great idea to implement full coverage of solar panels in our cities and cover all things with them. However, do not think that’s a viable solution to meet our total energy needs. I do think solar is a viable way to help meet those goals. But it needs to be part of a team, not a solo. Lone Wolf . https://youtu.be/7OpM_zKGE4o?si=2_TW0JeYeA2htQm1

            • Forester@yiffit.netOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Fuck it! Here’s a hypothetical a magic genie. Just granted My wish and gave us enough solar to actually power everything we need. Now one six of every country on Earth is covered in solar panels. Here’s the catch though you need to Learn more about how electrical grids work then come back to me once you realized we would have to rebuild an even bigger worldwide connected grid to make solar and a battery powered society actually functional and that we currently have no way to make battery storage equitable and affordable enough to store the amount of energy we would need to store everyday to power our societies through the night.

              • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                You’re still doing it. Your run on paragraphs aren’t worth much, if you want me to take you seriously, please provide links to valid sources to back up your argument.

                • Forester@yiffit.netOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  Here comes the airplane say aaah

                  https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=36393#:~:text=The per-mile cost of,proposals and relevant regulatory filings

                  https://howtostoreelectricity.com/costs-of-1-mw-battery/#:~:text=Given the range of factors,on the factors mentioned above.

                  Solar gets cheaper everyday. Battery storage is not nearly equitable enough at this point in time. Small modular reactors are much more cost effective at the current price point than battery will be for the next 15 to 20 years.

                  • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    Here comes the airplane say aaah

                    No need to act like a bitch just because I asked you to do the bare minimum and provide sources.

                    Your first link is about HVDC lines, which already exist and work well, what is your point?

                    your second link is about battery storage. You’re just posting links without giving any context to how they support whatever argument you’re trying to make here.

                    Battery storage is not nearly equitable enough at this point in time.

                    What does this mean?

                    “findings suggest that the cost per kilowatt (KW) for utility-scale solar is less than $1,000, while the comparable cost per KW for nuclear power is between $6,500 and $12,250. At present estimates, the Vogtle nuclear plant will cost about $10,300 per KW, near the top of Lazard’s range. This means nuclear power is nearly 10 times more expensive to build than utility-scale solar on a cost per KW basis.”

                    https://www.energysage.com/about-clean-energy/nuclear-energy/solar-vs-nuclear/

                    Tell me again about what’s equitable.

                    Small modular reactors are much more cost effective at the current price point than battery will be for the next 15 to 20 years.

                    They literally don’t exist as a means of grid generation. You’re just writing pro-nuclear fanfic and expecting us to treat it as if it has any basis in reality. Are you getting paid to peddle this horseshit?

                    You should be.

          • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            We could use solar (or other renewables/nuclear) to power hydrogen fuel cells, then take the energy where it’s needed.

            • Forester@yiffit.netOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Hydrogen transport is also a mass of pain in the ass because hydrogen being the noblest of gases and only a single hydrogen molecule likes to seep out of every container we’ve ever made and there’s no way to permanently contain it.

              • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Hydrogen transport is also a mass of pain in the ass because hydrogen being the noblest of gases and only a single hydrogen molecule likes to seep out of every container we’ve ever made and there’s no way to permanently contain it.

                This statement you’ve made here is mostly accurate and informative. Hydrogen isn’t a noble gas, its brother Helium is. Hydrogen is highly reactive. However, your points about Hydrogen storage and transport are spot on. You’re not insulting nor condescending in this post. Nearly every other response you’ve made in this whole post is the opposite.

                You are clearly capable of civil and informative responses, but because you have so few you’ve lost the audience you want to inform/persuade a long time ago. Are you aware of that?

                • Forester@yiffit.netOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  This is /c/shitpost im not debating civilly as the arguments I get aren’t in good faith 9 times out of 10. I’m not here to be a school teacher. More of a doomsday preacher