Solar Punk is actually real??
>>810779I wonder how pollution all those solar panels cause. How often do you need change them?
>>810788Replacing itself isn't that much of a problem if you can recycle the old pannels, that's of course not the same story if you just dump them in the wild every odd days.
Solar panels have become so cheap and efficient, even standing upright that we are going to start seeing them being integrated into facades as an integrated part of the buildings structure because they actually end up being cheaper than the facade material itself.
>>810789Even if you put all solar panels into a landfill overall all net pollution but be several magnitudes smaller than that of the entire fossil fuel industry.
>>810788Solar tech improves year on year.
Greenwashing is a real problem, but solar really isn't a bad thing.
>Based
PV Solar panels, battery storage systems, Post-Lithium battery tech, BEVs, wind parks, hydroelectric dams, heat pumps
>cringe af
gas a a transition tech, the hydrogen economy, fuel cells and electrolyzers, carbon capture, 'Green fuels/future fuels', ammonium as energy storage, concentrated solar power arrays, biofuel
>>810803Some of that stuff is not so cringe for a few applications like shipping, planes and so on while waiting for better storage tech. Carbon capture will make sense when we have an abundance of renewable energy.
The cringiest thing today might just be nuclear fission which is mind blowingly expensive, it's a couple percents of electricity generation but people won't fucking shut up about this shit ass old tech
>>810803>the hydrogen economyHow exactly are ships and other heavy machinery supposed run without it? Just put a nuclear reactor in every container ship?
>>810818Heavy and mining machinery already is currently being electrified as we speak. CATl+Chinese heavy machinery manufacturers and Western industry giants like Liebherr already have major battery electric projects. Battery already killed hydrogen trucks, they are killing hydrogen off-high way and they might kill shipping as well actually.
>>810810>Some of that stuff is not so cringe for a few applications like shipping, planes and so on while waiting for better storage tech. Carbon capture will make sense when we have an abundance of renewable energy.Nope, none of that shit makes any sense at scale. The amount of public subsidies from Western govs and R&D effort put into these niche technologies purely serve as a red hering to prolong the fossil fuel indutry as well as combustion tech and to divert funds and attention for the actual good shit green energy solutions and line the pockets of grifters.
I have worked in Energy Tech R&D. I have looked behind the curtain. All that shit is total crap.
>>810810>Carbon captureWe already have that, its called trees.
>>810836Also, no you can't source you power from African deserts. The transmission system will be super complex, inefficient and expensive. Sourcing from hundreds of kilometers away doesn't always work because of frequency and impedance problems let alone thousands or tens of thousands kilometers. Also you should always keep an eye for other factors like geopolitical instability, earthquakes, storms, etc. Outsourcing gas and oil is something, power is something else.
>>810836Nobody is saying 100% of power should be from solar alone. What about tidal, wind, geothermal, etc.
>>810840That's fine, but again, transition should be carefully planned. Every nation needs its own hand crafted solutions.
>>810837Sure the system would be complicated, but there is already an underseas power cable between Norway and the UK which is 730km long and only cost 2 billion euros (obviously not a small amount of money but hardly financially ruinous either for such a big project), and has a capacity of 1400MW which is equal to the production of dozens of average coal power plants.
There's no reason why the Sahara and Spain can't be connected. Not saying that is the best option but it is doable.
>>810841Careful planning, sure, but too often that is just used as an excuse for obstructionism. People will point out of renewables are logistically difficult, but so are fossil fuels, we already spend trillions of dollars worldwide on moving power and fossil fuels from one place to another.
>this is what ecofascists actually believe
hotel lobby ass building
>built with the planet in mind
<car in the background
yeah I'm not buying it
>>810836Why not just get electricity from the rest of the nation where it is not raining?
>>810840>accepting the fud at face valuenotice he didn't post any number or source. I can tell you that batteries are enough for when there isn't sunlight and you should uncritically accept it since you did the same with the other poster
>>810779solarpunk is radlib cope. they're liberals so they are willing to admit that solar panels are good, but then they notice that this puts them in an uncomfortable position because pv is an economy of scale, which means that,
>central planning (China) is king<the westoid alternative will have to be a monopoly>this monopoly will be fascist and predatory, like teslaif you read the solarpunk people, they hate central planning and vertical integration the most, which is, funnily enough, the thing that has made solar panels cheap. at a surface level, they want an extremely inefficient artisan economy where they can live in a nudist amusement park and their job is making ceramics. at a deeper level, if you read between the lines, they want war on the third world, and once that's done, radical depopulation at home
so yes, the most real thing about solarpunk that you're ever going to see is either a performative gesture in some european country, like your video, or a manson family -style massacre at some solar-powered compound in the usa. the zizians were solarpunk, it's weird how no one ever talks about that
>>810901I find a lot of solar punk/steampunk shit is mainly just idle bohemian-hipster folk who don’t have any genuine technical skills at all. And they’re not all well read on ecology either
>>810779Why is there so much animosity towards solar panel as daily tech?
We have spacecraft that use solar panels for powering
>>810788My aunt and uncle have an off grid house with solar power and they've replaced their panels once in 20 years. The previous owner had the old panels for like 20 years himself so it was more like once in 40 years.
>>810897Ok uygha go ahead and post the battery that caan feed a mid sized city for 4 hours
>>810916This is straight up lying. Were those engineering calculator panels?
>>810889>US defaultismEven them suddenly trying to feed a city as big as NY may cause another grid collapse.
>>810836>Let me explain the hidden problem from the perspective of someone who has actually studied EE. During weather events, for example a rainstorm, the net energy produced by solar panels will drop to 0. The building then starts pulling power form the main network. For a few hundred or even thousand building, this is not a concern. But what if 90% of buildings in a city suddenly fallback to the grid in a matter of 20 minutes? The grid won't be able to supply such demand and will simply shed loads. In a nationwide scenario, this will be catastrophic.this assumes we would use purely solar and not simply mix fossil fuels, nuclear, solar, and wind as we already do, but in more solar-favorable proportions than we currently do. In fact, Jevons showed that using a resource more efficiently results in that resource getting used more in the long run, since the savings get diverted to new uses. We would actually use even more fossil fuels in a highly solar and wind powered world until we hit peak oil, peak coal, peak gas.
>>810843>There's no reason why the Sahara and Spain can't be connected. Not saying that is the best option but it is doable.Such a trasn continent line would have to carry immense power to be economically sustainable. At the same time it must meet N-1 contingency. So it can't be too big to fail the system. But at the same time it won't be economically sustainable. You can't have both.
>>810958Yeah I know it's ideal to have them altogether. Then again dynamic sources like solar and wind may cause problems due to duh, their inherent nature. Again it's complex.
>>810962I don't think anyone is denying complexity and if they are they are stupid. We couldn't even manufacture solar panels in the first place had we not gone through a period of fossil fuel reliance. It's in the supply chains and the manufacturing methods. The only alternative is, idk, all life on earth convergently evolving photosynthetic mechanisms over the course of billions of years or something lol
>>810950bro they've had solar panels for years. jimmy carter put them on the white house.
>>810958>We would actually use even more fossil fuels in a highly solar and wind powered world until we hit peak oil, peak coal, peak gas.why lol? if renewables become cheaper than FF why would use of them increase.
>>810961I literally just told you that there's already a cable between Norway and UK
>>810912unrepentant tankies can't deal with anything that's not concrete 'blue collar' wank
>>810962>>810964>it's complexin the sense of setting up any global logistics system is yeah, but it's not that complex what we need to do, move to renewables now, we have the technology and the resources to do it, we just don't have rational political/economic systems
it feels like you're just trying to muddy the waters for no reason.
>>810972>but it's not that complex what we need to do, move to renewables nownobody is denying that. you have an economy that is primed to do the opposite of what we need to do because we have a for-profit mode of production.
>>810973I mean yeah obviously, that's another reason why we need to abolish capitalism
>the self proclaimed engineer hasn't posted a single number or paper yet
why do you retards always fall for he most obvious fud and bait
>>810779I just want O'Neill cylinder and socialist arcology punk.
>>810810Nah fission is awesome and it is great for national autarky and development of nuclear deterrents.
>>810836Awesome, let's do the big battery since we need to do Asteroid mining anyway to develop exoplanetary industry.
>>810971>unrepentant tankies can't deal with anything that's not concrete 'blue collar' wankWhat’s up with this whining about “tankies”? If anything N it sounds like they’d be all for solar panel energy
No you don't need to fucking mine asteroids to make battery storage systems at scale. The next industry standard is literally based on sodium, one of the most abundant elements on earth.
What you might need fucking asteroids for is actually hydrogen tech because most of that shit is extremely dependent on platinum group metal catalyst which we still haven't found a solution for. This is just one out of the 100 problems with hydrogen no one has been able to solve in the last 100 years.
Why do EEs or those that claim to be just make shit up about battery tech and electrochemistry when this stuff isn't even part of their domain or curriculum.
The global energy supply literally has to entertain a huge parallel infrastructure system, next to the electrical one, in forms of endless pipeless, port terminals, fuel tanks etc just to accommodate fossil energy.
Everyone claiming to you that upgrading electricity grids that already exist mind you to better accommodate renewable energy solutions wouldn't be cheaper than all the stuff we have to entertain to keep sucking on the fossil man tit is lying to you.
Unique IPs: 16