rab79 said:

---

PCC_80 said:

---

Still does not address the problems of rain, snow and clouds.

---

Hail, don't forget about those softball size pieces of ice falling from the sky.

---

That will just stop happening once we go solar power to stop global warming climate change.

rab79 said:

---

Artimus Gordon said:

---

Looks like a big solar farm going in just north of Rogers. Also looks like one is going in north of Cameron too. Just from what I can tell while watching 18 wheelers coming at me and a couple trying to run over me.

---

Olivia, Danevang, and Hungerford say hello.

---

The one at Olivia is for Formosa Plastics. You know, the most notorious polluter in the state? By destroying thousands of acres of brush, releasing hundreds of thousands of tons of sequestered carbon into the atmosphere, and replacing it with solar panels, suddenly they are now green. Never mind the benzene they just released, or the plastic nurdles floating in the bay and littering the shoreline.

Projects like this simply prove it's all a farce.

Anyway, it will all be overgrown with brush again soon.

The Chicken Ranch said:

---

rab79 said:

---

Artimus Gordon said:

---

Looks like a big solar farm going in just north of Rogers. Also looks like one is going in north of Cameron too. Just from what I can tell while watching 18 wheelers coming at me and a couple trying to run over me.

---

Olivia, Danevang, and Hungerford say hello.

---

The one at Olivia is for Formosa Plastics. You know, the most notorious polluter in the state? By destroying thousands of acres of brush, releasing hundreds of thousands of tons of sequestered carbon into the atmosphere, and replacing it with solar panels, suddenly they are now green. Never mind the benzene they just released, or the plastic nurdles floating in the bay and littering the shoreline.

Projects like this simply prove it's all a farce.

Anyway, it will all be overgrown with brush again soon.

---

Yeah, one of the solar farm neighbors said Formosa was using it for CO2 credits.

Is that reflection of hail damage?

DallasAg 94 said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

"Absolutely," Musk responded. "We need batteries, but yes."

---

---

This is probably him pimping his PowerWall by Tesla.

Solar is a failure.

I've said this repeatedly... if you were to buy enough PowerWalls from Tesla to store energy for your house to run on... and I gave you free electricity to charge them, you'll still never get positive economics.

TXU offered (may still) offered free Night & Weekends. You'd pay a premium to use TXU Electricity during the day, but at night and on weekends, it'd be free. The idea was to get people to run their W&D and other stuff off-peak.

Run the math to buy the Tesla PowerWall such that you could get free electricity to charge them during the night and you can't get the math to work.

So, even without the cost of the Solar... the battery storage alone is not viable.

---

More nuclear + solar as part of a national grid. A Texas alone grid is dumb. Eventually, fusion and ammonia will contribute as well.

zephyr88 said:

---

Is that reflection of hail damage?

---

Yes

https://cowboystatedaily.com/2023/06/27/baseball-sized-hail-smashing-into-panels-at-150-mph-destroys-scottsbluff-solar-farm/

ttu_85 said:

---

That area just west of Lubbock to west of Midland Odessa would be perfect. Nothing there but pump jacks. Let Texas power the nation.

---

Putting it there, could you imagine trying to repair those panels after a hail storm or tornado?

elon is right, solar is the future. installation cost has fallen dramatically in the last fifteen years compared to all other energy forms, hence the dramatic uptick in solar capacity construction over the last few years. this in turn creates heavy incentive for better battery technology to address its most glaring shortcomings.

Tx95Ag said:

---

And he's wrong. See math on page 2 of this old thread.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3311707/replies/62810546#62810546

---

I have a solar installation in a location that does not require air conditioning, so it is adequate. I have a PV-PRO App that monitors it. The average DAILY production is about 10 kwh for the 10 panel array, or about 1kwh per DAY per panel. I believe the calculation you referenced is based on the ANNUAL US consumption for 2021. So the array area required should be ABOUT 1.64 x 10^6 (1.5/1/365) sq mi = 6740 sq mi. So 100x100 miles square is in the park. Of course that is produced in the day, so storage is required. We are not anywhere close to the storage technology required. Energy storage will be the next Edison moment. Meanwhile, natural gas and nuclear are the way.

Edited to add, Elon is usually right. However; I am cautious about him because of his apparent view that humankind is or can be self sufficient, particularly with regard to preservation of the species. I would like to know what part he thinks God is or if He is.

MagnumLoad said:

---

Tx95Ag said:

---

And he's wrong. See math on page 2 of this old thread.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3311707/replies/62810546#62810546

---

I have a solar installation in a location that does not require air conditioning, so it is adequate. I have a PV-PRO App that monitors it. The average DAILY production is about 10 kwh for the 10 panel array, or about 1kwh per DAY per panel. I believe the calculation you referenced is based on the ANNUAL US consumption for 2021. So the array area required should be ABOUT 1.64 x 10^6 (1.5/1/365) sq mi = 6740 sq mi. So 100x100 miles square is in the park. Of course that is produced in the day, so storage is required. We are not anywhere close to the storage technology required. Energy storage will be the next Edison moment. Meanwhile, natural gas and nuclear are the way.

Edited to add, Elon is usually right. However; I am cautious about him because of his apparent view that humankind is or can be self sufficient, particularly with regard to preservation of the species. I would like to know what part he thinks God is or if He is.

---

It will also need an Edison moment for energy transmission.

It would have to be tied to the grid. The entire 100x100 miles would not have to be in the same location. BUT, storage is a steep climb. Right now the best application for solar is point of use generation. But if you have the grid option it is not economical. My location I referenced is off grid. I have 24, 6 volt batteries in three strings of 8 in series. The three strings are in parallel, for a 48 volt DC system; then inverted to 120/240 AC. Also a propane fueled generator backup. So if you have the grid, just the generator backup makes sense.

So, I went through the numbers again from base sources

4,000 terrawatt-hours consumption for 2022
Sun delivers about 1300 watts per sq meter to the earth with optimal atmospheric conditions
Solar irradiance in the US optimally is 5.5 hours per day annual in Arizona, down to about 2 hours in the NW and NE
Panel efficiency is roughly 20-25% at current mono layer tech after the first year of use.

Assuming 5 hours, at 22%, it requires 2959 sq mi.
In CenTex, the irradiance rating for my installation is 3.3 hours at 22%, this requires 4484 sq mi.
In the NW at 2 hours, it would require 7398 sq mi.

So for actual generation, turns out Elon is right in theory.

Sun w/m2 * efficiency * irradiance * 365 = m2 KWh generated per year
Consumption / m2 KWh generated = required square meters, convert to sq miles

Example: 1.3 * .22 * 5 * 365 = 521.95 KWh generated per year per square meter
With 4000 terrawatt-hours consumption / 521.95 KWh requires 7663569307.4 sq meters, which is 2959 sq mi


ETA- for reference, Rhode Island is 1034 sq miles land area, 1545 sq miles including water area

Could someone please remind me why we don't want nuclear power again?

Pumpkinhead said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

That area just west of Lubbock to west of Midland Odessa would be perfect. Nothing there but pump jacks. Let Texas power the nation.

---

As someone from a family with a notable amount of land in West Texas, some family members looked into a solar farming possibility and my impression as least currently is the business model is hard to make work.

---

Yep. Would have to build a grid.

OdessaAg said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

That area just west of Lubbock to west of Midland Odessa would be perfect. Nothing there but pump jacks. Let Texas power the nation.

---

Putting it there, could you imagine trying to repair those panels after a hail storm or tornado?

---

I grew up in Odessa. The hail threat is less than in the Panhandle and South Plains. Funny how so many people Look for excuses to fail vs reasons to succeed.

ttu_85 said:

---

OdessaAg said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

That area just west of Lubbock to west of Midland Odessa would be perfect. Nothing there but pump jacks. Let Texas power the nation.

---

Putting it there, could you imagine trying to repair those panels after a hail storm or tornado?

---

I grew up in Odessa. The hail threat is less than in the Panhandle and South Plains. Funny how so many people Look for excuses to fail vs reasons to succeed.

---

"Less of a threat" is not the same as "no threat" so there is a threat. And when that threat can take out your electrical power grid, it should be a consideration.

ANY concentration of strategic assets is a concern IMO...

Oil and gas. Oil and gas. Oil and gas doesn't kick the air's ( ).

I respect Elon as a businessman/thinker but I also think he's way off the deep end here and if this were in reality economically practical he'd…be doing it a la starship.

Owning a green energy monopoly in the US would be worth…Musk money but guess what, he's just blathering about it.

MagnumLoad said:

---

Tx95Ag said:

---

And he's wrong. See math on page 2 of this old thread.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3311707/replies/62810546#62810546

---

I have a solar installation in a location that does not require air conditioning, so it is adequate. I have a PV-PRO App that monitors it. The average DAILY production is about 10 kwh for the 10 panel array, or about 1kwh per DAY per panel. I believe the calculation you referenced is based on the ANNUAL US consumption for 2021. So the array area required should be ABOUT 1.64 x 10^6 (1.5/1/365) sq mi = 6740 sq mi. So 100x100 miles square is in the park. Of course that is produced in the day, so storage is required. We are not anywhere close to the storage technology required. Energy storage will be the next Edison moment. Meanwhile, natural gas and nuclear are the way.

Edited to add, Elon is usually right. However; I am cautious about him because of his apparent view that humankind is or can be self sufficient, particularly with regard to preservation of the species. I would like to know what part he thinks God is or if He is.

---

This post took an odd turn.

Oil comes from the earth. Oil comes from the earth.
Lookin' like a fool an economy with a dearth.

nortex97 said:

---

I respect Elon as a businessman/thinker but I also think he's way off the deep end here and if this were in reality economically practical he'd…be doing it a la starship.

Owning a green energy monopoly in the US would be worth…Musk money but guess what, he's just blathering about it.

---

They're involved in the battery side of energy generation, because it's the far less mature aspect. The factory producing these batteries was built out in under a year and has a 10,000 unit capacity.

Think their long term play is to focus on residential installations from a generation standpoint where they can dramatically reduce the cost of installation through automation by 3D imaging/modeling solar production and installing with robots. Cut the installation costs by 75% and you're basically pricing in anyone with reasonable sun exposure.

NEWS: A record 339 Tesla Megapacks worth over $550M spotted at the Lathrop Megafactory today.

Video: https://t.co/iI4BULOiHC pic.twitter.com/l59wUywvVm

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) December 28, 2023

Nothing wrong with oil
It is from the soil
Renewable resource
Captured in a force

Plastics won't be cheap
For solar power seek
As we pump less
Costs more stress

On economy
For both you and me
We have plenty
Why Don't you see

A Blind Marxist
Says it's best
Jobs are lost
At what cost
Tell your boss
On the screen
To go ahead
A Death of death
Make your bed
Bait and switch
China don't care
We'll be theirs

Stand to fight
This is right
Don't give in
It is a sin

Just being silly and trying to free flow.

When the rubber meets the road
A story rarely told
Comes from the ground
Plastics too surround
We are not too old
You don't make a sound
Do what you are told
Great escape abound
Stating what is sound
Don't you sell your soul
The Marxists are cold
Only see the belly
Cannot see the soul
Don't have a spine
They're made of jelly
smash their design
Don't Act like it's fine
All things go
For those without a soul

PCC_80 said:

---

Still does not address the problems of rain, snow and clouds.

---

And the problems with transmission of the power with an inconsistent flow of energy from solar. Maybe an EE could get in more detail.

kb2001 said:

---

So, I went through the numbers again from base sources

4,000 terrawatt-hours consumption for 2022
Sun delivers about 1300 watts per sq meter to the earth with optimal atmospheric conditions
Solar irradiance in the US optimally is 5.5 hours per day annual in Arizona, down to about 2 hours in the NW and NE
Panel efficiency is roughly 20-25% at current mono layer tech after the first year of use.

Assuming 5 hours, at 22%, it requires 2959 sq mi.
In CenTex, the irradiance rating for my installation is 3.3 hours at 22%, this requires 4484 sq mi.
In the NW at 2 hours, it would require 7398 sq mi.

So for actual generation, turns out Elon is right in theory.

Sun w/m2 * efficiency * irradiance * 365 = m2 KWh generated per year
Consumption / m2 KWh generated = required square meters, convert to sq miles

Example: 1.3 * .22 * 5 * 365 = 521.95 KWh generated per year per square meter
With 4000 terrawatt-hours consumption / 521.95 KWh requires 7663569307.4 sq meters, which is 2959 sq mi


ETA- for reference, Rhode Island is 1034 sq miles land area, 1545 sq miles including water area

---

In theory, theory and practice are the same.

In practice, they're not.

agent-maroon said:

---

Could someone please remind me why we don't want nuclear power again?

---

The right people aren't invested in it.

Poor can't afford Kwh solar generation.

agent-maroon said:

---

Could someone please remind me why we don't want nuclear power again?

---

The Union of Concerned Scientists.

They formed out of MIT and were very anti-nuclear. Started being against weapons and just bled into nuclear power.

They lent their "credibility" to everyone that fought against it.

You know the drill - "trust the science" and they said they were the arbiters of the science.

They've finally backed off of it and are somewhat reluctantly backing it.

I think they realize that if they REALLY want to be seen as credible now that we need to do away with fossil fuels then denying the promise of nuclear power makes them look stupid.

What's the bigger eye-sore, fields covered with wind turbines or solar panels?

If we do away with fossil fuels, then what will happen to the cost of production of plastics, rubber, make up, paint, asphalt cement mix, nylon, polyester, rayon, glue, windshields, vaseline, medical equipment, capsules, toys, fiberglass bodies of vehicles, cups for the food industry, and every kind of packaging, lubricants, paraffin wax, lpg, aviation fuel (electric planes and tanks and helicopters?) , ink, aspirin, food, furnishings, dentures, medicines, tar, tires, your blasted cell phone and laptop that you are using, etc. just to name a few.

You want to rely on China even more?

BTKAG97 said:

---

What's the bigger eye-sore, fields covered with wind turbines or solar panels?

---

• From far away, the wind turbines. Up close, it's solar panels.

Also, the cost of all of these would increase like carpet, laminate flooring, even "wood" flooring, mica, your "wooden" front door which was made from using adhesives, all of your inside doors, roofing shingles, your office desk, classroom desks, most chairs, ceiling tiles, fiberglass insulation, fiberglass wind turbine propellers, and the solar panels we are discussing.

All of which will increase the cost of labor and the cost of building materials.

AggieVictor10 said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

A US with nuclear as the fallback option and solar/windmill farms would be ideal.

---

---

What would be ideal is the sources delivered by the free market, without the current excessive red tape and subsidies. So a mix of nuclear and hydrocarbons. Enough of this central planning BS.

hph6203 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

I respect Elon as a businessman/thinker but I also think he's way off the deep end here and if this were in reality economically practical he'd…be doing it a la starship.

Owning a green energy monopoly in the US would be worth…Musk money but guess what, he's just blathering about it.

---

They're involved in the battery side of energy generation, because it's the far less mature aspect. The factory producing these batteries was built out in under a year and has a 10,000 unit capacity.

Think their long term play is to focus on residential installations from a generation standpoint where they can dramatically reduce the cost of installation through automation by 3D imaging/modeling solar production and installing with robots. Cut the installation costs by 75% and you're basically pricing in anyone with reasonable sun exposure.

NEWS: A record 339 Tesla Megapacks worth over $550M spotted at the Lathrop Megafactory today.

Video: https://t.co/iI4BULOiHC pic.twitter.com/l59wUywvVm

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) December 28, 2023

---

You may be right but this is a very tepid approach vs. how he approached the car company/spacex etc.

And I really don't think distributed solar on residential homes is ever going to work out at scale. They may be able to get to around 20 percent of the homes in Texas, or Arizona with subsidies/incentives etc., but most of the country it doesn't work in, and on the coasts/in corrosive environments prone to severe winds (hurricanes) I am not sure it really makes any sense either.

And for those curious, while he is definitely an AGW believer, who consequently supports idiocy like carbon capture, he is also very pro-nuclear power.

Quote:

---

"We need to get the parts per million level of CO2 in the atmosphere down to a lower level. We're going to have to pull it out of the air and store it somewhere. And I think storing it in some solid form is going to make sense. You know, in a form that you know after you store it, it doesn't gradually sort of evaporate and return to the atmosphere. It needs to be 'you've got to extract the CO2 and store it,'" Musk said.

To accomplish this, Musk noted that a lot of energy would need to be used. And when it comes to energy, he believes that using nuclear energy at least for now is an excellent way to power carbon capture projects. Musk noted that unless locations are at risk of natural disasters, using nuclear power is a pretty good energy solution.

"I'm actually pro-nuclear as well. I think nuclear has a bad rap. People shouldn't be shutting down nuclear power stations, in my view unless they're in a location that's prone to natural disasters. In which case, you know you can't just be like, "we're just waiting for the real but once in a century situation."

"Like the ***ushima situation. Well, you know there's a lot of tsunamis and stuff, so it's probably not great to have nuclear where there's natural disasters. But for example, in like France or Germany and many parts of theUS, there's really no meaningful risk of a natural disaster that could affect nuclear power plants. So we shouldn't shut them down in that case," Musk said.

Over time, Elon Musk noted that batteries and solar would probably be the solutions that will power the world. But for now, while the transition is still taking place, solutions such as nuclear power are not a bad alternative at all. It certainly beats the use of dirtier forms of energy like coal and fossil fuels.

---

Meh, one has to take the good with the bad, I guess.

This is the NUMBER ONE reason EV and the Batteries to support the EV and Solar Inversian Systems is the worst excuse for the Green New Deal idiots. There are tens of thousands of children working as slaves to supply the cobalt for the EV and Solar industry, and it may be years before they find a readily available viable substitute for cobalt. Lithium is also another problem. You geeks can crunch all the numbers you want, but it cannot and will not account for the abusive CHILD labor, sexual assault, birth defects, abject poverty, and CHILD workers buried alive in the artisanal cobalt mining in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.



GEN III, IV, and V nuclear reactors don't cause these horrific atrocities that are happing this very minute around the clock. And the new and next generation reactors can actually support the global grid for centuries and costs are far below this Solar Wind Scam that has no way of actually being close to as efficient, and long term viability. And you don't see this type of inhumane atrocities. While a bunch of deadbeats, who've never picked a bail of cotton, screaming for reparations for some great great grandparent that may hay or may not have been a slave and there are CHILDREN in SLAVERY right this minute and not one of those liberal idiots give a damn.











And they admit these are horrid condition and they DO EXIST



AND please don't insult anyone's intellegence with the whole BS about "Cobalt is no longer used in 50% of Tesla's batteries" Yeah and what about all the other metals? Lithium for instance? That's mined from opencast mines and the damage it does to the environment is terrible. It's also mined mostly in poor countries where labour is cheap, just like cobalt only far worse.
You can say what you want about EVs, but in the end they are even worse than ICE cars. Not to mention where all the copper is gonna come from to supply all these EVs with electricity. You do know that the global copper resources are close to exhaustion?
My god, when are you people going to wake up and discover that Green New Deal Movement are just one big money scam? I'm not saying protecting the environment is not important but Wind Mills are a scam and the impact of EV and Solar Storage/Inversion Batteries are far more of a negative impacton the enviroment and humanity that NUCLEAR will ever be.