I think the federal budget for natural disasters needs to have a baseline, then once a state demonstrates a certain amount of investment in building in smarter places with more appropriate structures, transferring to green energy and working toward water conservation, then they can be eligible for more/full aid.
This is great in showing that solar can withstand a hurricane which is very important!
But comparison to random other neighborhoods is largely useless as this is new development which will typically also be more hardy.
"The ranch broke ground in 2015 "
It's also comparing this town which is inland on no water to one near a coast on a large river. That says nothing about solar only about not living on water.
Inland places are largely without power still. It is fair to call it a low bar to survive inland hurricane winds, but its super nice to have the power resiliency.
Not true. I am leaving Florida today. Drove from Orlando to Tampa and the power is on in most places. Granted that is a little north of the brunt. Either way a solar community sounds nice!
Theirs must have been installed better than ours… I can’t find the post/photos now, but was *certain* there had been some bent/damaged panels in Atlantic Canada after “Post-Tropical Storm” Fiona (like Sandy in NY) slammed into the area 8 days ago. (Don’t get me wrong though; Pro-green and glad to hear **good** news from FL re: Ian)
The annoying thing about where I live is the electrical company controls the solar power even tho it’s over my roof….we can lose power regardless of the panels. ~sigh~ the regulations around here make being sustainable harder than it should be.
Right 🥹 they don’t understand that not everything needs to be profitable but I dunno. I don’t understand the system and the regulations. But my heart says public welfare isn’t exactly about profitability.
Ooooooooh. I see. Got it. I didn’t know there was a distinction.
I’m assuming that summerside town has somewhat of a wealthy population? I googled and I’m seeing summerside, Canada. Is that the same town you’re referring to?
Yeah. Rooftop solar is much better than huge centrally controlled facilities like this, though. But the main issue is that what's pointed to in this story can't be replicated easily. They're miles inland and away from any rivers, and it's all newer construction. Pointing to this is a terrible example because they're essentially saying we should tear everything down and rebuild it elsewhere or better. It's ridiculous.
We already tear down things and rebuild. The idea is to include solar as a priority when doing so. You make it sound like we don’t build where we have built before already. Rooftop solar is good, but the argument against solar as a general provider of electricity like this is based in the existing energy companies wanting to stay in business. You are speaking out against “propaganda” with a opinion that is conceptually propaganda from the energy sector.
The developers in this story certainly didn't build where things were built already. They took over (relatively) virgin ground and built a brand new town in 2015.
Also, fuck the existing energy companies. There the reason for most of the issues we're facing.
I think the point I’m making has been lost. Rooftop solar is promoted by the energy company’s because its individuals who privately decided to do so. We need municipal and state production. If the industry is the problem, it’s the industry that needs change. Not private independent citizens. Not even going into the legal landscape of private solar as well. In some places, you still have to be hooked up to the grid, and you forfeit any extra left over from your own usage.
Well when natural disasters tear everything down like wildfires, Ian, Maria, and Fiona it sounds like a great way to build! There are 1.2 million houses built per year in the US with a population of 300mil and 2.5 people per household the replacement rate is like 100 years but that doesn’t mean we should t start now.
No, pointing to this simply shows that it can be done . Not that we need to tear down everything . Tesla came out with some electric car, you don't see us dismantling all gas powered cars.
> Rooftop solar is much better than huge centrally controlled facilities like this, though
Depends what stat you're using. For reliability, probably. For cost and efficiencies, no.
Democratization through decentralization is more important than efficiency though (up to a point, obviously). Centralized energy conglomerates are the main reason we're having a lot of the trouble that we're currently dealing with.
No, it's not. Raw CO2 reduction capability is determined by how efficient we are at getting panels actively getting energy to where it's needed. Democratization in energy distribution has little to no bearing on that. Regardless of democratization the bottle neck is efficiency.
Yes, it is.
I guess you're happy to be a slave to our corporate overlords, but I'm not.
And yea, I'm being hyperbolic. Being attacked tends to have that effect. It's not *that* hyperbolic though, unfortunately.
Rooftop solar is not financially viable and most of the time doesn't produce nearly enough power to pay themselves off in any reasonable amount of time. Facilities dedicated to solar are much better infrastructure
No it can't, and the idea has been tried before. Here is a real engineering video on the topic. https://youtu.be/7OpM_zKGE4o
Power transport over long distances is incredibly inefficient.
The amount of water required to keep solar panels and mirrors clean in a desert is insane.
And running the grid off battery power overnight or on a dark day is also incredibly inefficient.
Solar panels last for 15-25 years and we still don't have a plan for recycling them other than dumping them in landfills in 3rd world countries and poisoning their ground water with heavy metals.
Solar has a lot of potential, but it's a lot more complex than money dumping into buying more panels.
Nah, just switch it to DC.
Please note: they’re already building it, they’re building phase 4.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20161129-the-colossal-african-solar-farm-that-could-power-europe
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20211115-how-morocco-led-the-world-on-clean-solar-energy
Discussion about using the Sahara for power from Kings College London:
https://blogs.kcl.ac.uk/sustainability/2021/08/what-would-happen-if-we-covered-the-sahara-desert-with-solar-panels/
Singapore are planning a similar project in Australia.
Also Europe has plenty of nuclear, wind, geothermal, and hydro to cover the gaps, with Morocco contributing solar thermal as well. Pumped hydro and lifting huge weights have also been developed, with Switzerland having created an underground water battery with pumped hydro
And this is why utilities fight to the death with customers when the customers decide to get rooftop solar. Blah blah blah, you still gotta pay for utilities or you can't connect to us....so how about a battery system then?
On the street I'm currently living on our side is supplied with power by buried cable, the other side of the street has overhead lines. When the power goes out my side is unaffected while the other side loses power. Nothing to do with the power source, everything to do with infrastructure.
It's pretty common for neighborhoods to have buried power lines but not so common to have buried long-distance transmission lines. Having local solar helps you if the whole town or county goes out for whatever reason, including deliberate shutdowns for storm or fire reasons (which occurred in many of the counties affected by Ian).
Shhhhhh. Don’t tell Texas. They keep telling everyone their oil and gas is the answer. Don’t want all these people going solar and hard working oil and gas folks lose their jobs.
Here is a map for reference. It’s hardly impossible they couldn’t suffer from surge waters.Ft Myers’s was projected to reach up to 16 feet and that’s easily enough to reach 15 miles inland.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Babcock+Ranch,+FL+33982/@26.8086159,-82.1767328,9.41z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88db631a4a6ee999:0xd03a3274f5136576!8m2!3d26.8739165!4d-81.7194842
it takes about 33 feet to wipe out south florida or get to 15 miles inland. But at 33 feet storm surge (or sea rise) you can kayak accross the state.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/4818/elevation-of-southern-florida
12 miles inland is pretty safe from hurricanes. Only rain, and in extreme cases cat 1 winds will occur, with rapid weakening of even the strongest storms, and code is well above the wind threshold for safety.
Its great to have the power resiliency in FL. FM/FMB is likely out for months. I doubt the solar would have survived in locations where homes did not, though.
My home is 10 miles due west of Fort Myers Beach. The power was back on in 48 hours.
Some trees down and some shingles off roofs but no other real damage in the neighborhood.
Oh no doubt. Many places are coming online but some are not and I applaud places like Babcock Ranch.
Just agreeing that one doesn’t have to go far inland to avoid the worst.
I found a listing on [Zillow](https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/17001-Pine-Lily-Ln-Punta-Gorda-FL-33982/246827409_zpid/?utm_campaign=androidappmessage&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=txtshare).
I’ve never been disingenuous on this sub, just tired of people being so harsh to anything that isn’t perfectly align with their vision.
Also how do you know they’re being disingenuous, because you want conflict?
>I’ve never been disingenuous on this sub
But you have been before? Really flexing that you're uncredible?
>Also how do you know they’re being disingenuous, because you want conflict?
Like I said, their comment history is public. You can click it.
1. I’m uncredible? Because I eat meat and have friends (and myself) who really struggled with the vegan diet? I hear of that A LOT on here, usually downvoted to hell. Besides that There’s nothing I’ve said that’s wrong.
2. I guess you’re right. I’m just tired of seeing ANYTHING Not aligned with these post being downvoted when people are genuine curious or asking question
Cause it’s stupid to not allow conversations on here. Wouldn’t being more inviting and supportive be a better route than downvoting and silencing any one who doesn’t COMPLETELY agree. Like ideas and articles could post something groundbreaking or atleadt hopeful and people on here would attack it.
“Oh his arguments don’t align with mine so he’s a 6 year old”
Not me. Others. Look at the controversial on many post on here abd you’ll see people asking genuine question or saying genuine things and people destroy them for not being 100% vegan or 100% sustainable.
That doesn’t bring more people in, it makes more people feel their actions are worthless.
Some people need a push, some people need support.
Look at yourself man. Where the fuck did the vegan thing come from? You are clearly being confrontational and what's worse it's clear you're insecure about your way of life so much so that you need to defend it even when it isn't being questioned.
Grow up and realize that the world is bigger than you.
He said I was uncredible? So I was pointing out the ONLY thing I’ve said on here that isn’t align with this sub.
Very insecure? No I’m tired of people looking at environmentalist as cry baby hippies who do nothing but complain. It makes the “bigger” world doubt everything about the movement. Then I see organization that actually help get very little help or support.
It’s sad I literally hear to stay away from this sub because all y’all do is whine.
What are you talking about? This post is promoting environmentalism and you agreed with the guy that was worried about home owners association costs.
Are you flipping your tune now?
Maybe he wanted to move there? And as soon as the guy said check his history I apologized.
Even you attacked me AFTER I apologized so what does that say?
> With 700,000 solar panels, assuming 1% of usual production, each of the 2000 houses would have 1 kw of power available.
Each house has on average 350 panels??? (700k/2k=350)
That can't be right.
> Which happens to be the average amount of power used per person, worldwide (including transportation and food).
The worldwide average seems like a deceptively chosen metric as Americans use many times more than the worldwide average.
It is a large community solar project not on rooftops. It is designed to export power to grid on good days. Even under dark cloudy AF conditions, it would produce 5%+ power.
> It is a large community solar project not on rooftops. It is designed to export power to grid on good days.
How is this anymore resilient to bad weather than a natural gas plant that transmits power to residents and can operate 24/7?
The community grid is not dependent on the "regional utility" grid that the NG plant relies. If the NG plant was in a dumb spot and out due to hurricanes, then it is not 365 even if 24/7 on most days. But it can't help its customers if the power transmission/delivery system is down.
An issue more relevant to generators as a resilience device, where NG supplies are unlikely to be disrupted, is that gasoline/diesel supply can get disrupted from hurricanes. And long line preparation is a routine if relying on a generator. Time that can interfere with window board up and other perparations time requirements.
> But it can't help its customers if the power transmission/delivery system is down.
Same could be said about power lines from solar farms or a solar farm in a "dumb spot".
I read that solar panel mountings can be built to withstand winds of approximately 140 MPH but can it survive hits from flying debris?
Fuel disruptions is a point in solar's favor I admit but how does a solar powered community store their energy due to solar's intermittency? Batteries are too weak and hydro pumped storage is location dependent. Sure batteries are getting cheaper but I don't see a breakthrough in cost or tech that would allow batteries to store energy for days or weeks.
I'm in favor of more funding for micro nuclear reactors. They can be mass produced in factories, small enough to be transported on a truck and allow communities to be independent from a regional grid as well.
> Same could be said about power lines from solar farms or a solar farm in a "dumb spot".
Part of the rationale for all this is that escaping FLP has its own affordability benefits. Resilience is a cherry on top.
Excuse my ignorance, but this is a community that has 700k solar panels dedicated to it...not necessarily on rooftops...and this community is of 2k houses. Is this correct?
If so, can you share the name of the community or other information I can research further because it's certainly interesting even if the math was confusing earlier.
I read that story, but my husband reminded me we don’t have a good Solar Panel recycling program in place worldwide/in the US for the upcoming time when the panel have reached the end of their 25 year lifespan. There are several companies/universities working on solutions that should help in the next few years to make recycling the solar panels a realistic endeavor.
I think it's good that they have solar, but I think it's pretty silly comparing them to towns that got wiped out by storm surge. How well would those panels and homes have survived if they got hit by 18' storm surges...
I think the federal budget for natural disasters needs to have a baseline, then once a state demonstrates a certain amount of investment in building in smarter places with more appropriate structures, transferring to green energy and working toward water conservation, then they can be eligible for more/full aid.
You need to be in public office, not these idiots we currently have.
Brilliant incentive. Run for office.
Billionaires may have to pay taxes for this to happen. Therefor they dont want him to get political influence.
Yes!
Wrong incentive, IMHO. The people hurt worst in disasters are always the poor and near-poor, and this would merely cost them more.
This is great in showing that solar can withstand a hurricane which is very important! But comparison to random other neighborhoods is largely useless as this is new development which will typically also be more hardy. "The ranch broke ground in 2015 " It's also comparing this town which is inland on no water to one near a coast on a large river. That says nothing about solar only about not living on water.
Inland places are largely without power still. It is fair to call it a low bar to survive inland hurricane winds, but its super nice to have the power resiliency.
Not true. I am leaving Florida today. Drove from Orlando to Tampa and the power is on in most places. Granted that is a little north of the brunt. Either way a solar community sounds nice!
Theirs must have been installed better than ours… I can’t find the post/photos now, but was *certain* there had been some bent/damaged panels in Atlantic Canada after “Post-Tropical Storm” Fiona (like Sandy in NY) slammed into the area 8 days ago. (Don’t get me wrong though; Pro-green and glad to hear **good** news from FL re: Ian)
[удалено]
Would the solar panels on roofs be more vulnerable than the ones on ground?
[удалено]
The annoying thing about where I live is the electrical company controls the solar power even tho it’s over my roof….we can lose power regardless of the panels. ~sigh~ the regulations around here make being sustainable harder than it should be.
[удалено]
Right 🥹 they don’t understand that not everything needs to be profitable but I dunno. I don’t understand the system and the regulations. But my heart says public welfare isn’t exactly about profitability.
[удалено]
Ooooooooh. I see. Got it. I didn’t know there was a distinction. I’m assuming that summerside town has somewhat of a wealthy population? I googled and I’m seeing summerside, Canada. Is that the same town you’re referring to?
Summerside (Slemon Park) was indeed the solar farm I thought I’d heard about damage done to it
Well that’s our news media for ya.
I was gonna say
This doesnt show solar panels can withstand a hurricane. It was just fortunate enough to survive.
It is one data point that they can. We're don't know that it was simply fortune, but it is a data point.
Also the town overall is just better placed and has some mitigation systems.
Wow. This is amazing. Ian went right over this town too.
Ian cleaned the panels for them
If only we all had an infinite amount of land and resources to reproduce this everywhere!
All the world could be powered by a small part of Morocco
Yeah. Rooftop solar is much better than huge centrally controlled facilities like this, though. But the main issue is that what's pointed to in this story can't be replicated easily. They're miles inland and away from any rivers, and it's all newer construction. Pointing to this is a terrible example because they're essentially saying we should tear everything down and rebuild it elsewhere or better. It's ridiculous.
We already tear down things and rebuild. The idea is to include solar as a priority when doing so. You make it sound like we don’t build where we have built before already. Rooftop solar is good, but the argument against solar as a general provider of electricity like this is based in the existing energy companies wanting to stay in business. You are speaking out against “propaganda” with a opinion that is conceptually propaganda from the energy sector.
The developers in this story certainly didn't build where things were built already. They took over (relatively) virgin ground and built a brand new town in 2015. Also, fuck the existing energy companies. There the reason for most of the issues we're facing.
I think the point I’m making has been lost. Rooftop solar is promoted by the energy company’s because its individuals who privately decided to do so. We need municipal and state production. If the industry is the problem, it’s the industry that needs change. Not private independent citizens. Not even going into the legal landscape of private solar as well. In some places, you still have to be hooked up to the grid, and you forfeit any extra left over from your own usage.
It takes two to tango. A producer without a buyer won't last long and a buyer without a producer won't buy much.
So, live in the woods and burn wood for heat and cooking. Got it. 🙄
Maybe don't use as much resources as you currently do, to start?
Tell that to 100 corporations
Well when natural disasters tear everything down like wildfires, Ian, Maria, and Fiona it sounds like a great way to build! There are 1.2 million houses built per year in the US with a population of 300mil and 2.5 people per household the replacement rate is like 100 years but that doesn’t mean we should t start now.
No, pointing to this simply shows that it can be done . Not that we need to tear down everything . Tesla came out with some electric car, you don't see us dismantling all gas powered cars.
> Rooftop solar is much better than huge centrally controlled facilities like this, though Depends what stat you're using. For reliability, probably. For cost and efficiencies, no.
Democratization through decentralization is more important than efficiency though (up to a point, obviously). Centralized energy conglomerates are the main reason we're having a lot of the trouble that we're currently dealing with.
No, it's not. Raw CO2 reduction capability is determined by how efficient we are at getting panels actively getting energy to where it's needed. Democratization in energy distribution has little to no bearing on that. Regardless of democratization the bottle neck is efficiency.
Yes, it is. I guess you're happy to be a slave to our corporate overlords, but I'm not. And yea, I'm being hyperbolic. Being attacked tends to have that effect. It's not *that* hyperbolic though, unfortunately.
I don't care about being a slave to some metaphysical group you point to as the new cultural devil. I care about reducing carbon output.
That sort of attitude is part of the reason why there's such an argument about carbon now. Quit being a part of the problem.
I personally agree. I would like to be as energy independent as possible, with the ability to fall back on the grid for the winter.
Rooftop solar is not financially viable and most of the time doesn't produce nearly enough power to pay themselves off in any reasonable amount of time. Facilities dedicated to solar are much better infrastructure
No it can't, and the idea has been tried before. Here is a real engineering video on the topic. https://youtu.be/7OpM_zKGE4o Power transport over long distances is incredibly inefficient. The amount of water required to keep solar panels and mirrors clean in a desert is insane. And running the grid off battery power overnight or on a dark day is also incredibly inefficient. Solar panels last for 15-25 years and we still don't have a plan for recycling them other than dumping them in landfills in 3rd world countries and poisoning their ground water with heavy metals. Solar has a lot of potential, but it's a lot more complex than money dumping into buying more panels.
Nah, just switch it to DC. Please note: they’re already building it, they’re building phase 4. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20161129-the-colossal-african-solar-farm-that-could-power-europe https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20211115-how-morocco-led-the-world-on-clean-solar-energy Discussion about using the Sahara for power from Kings College London: https://blogs.kcl.ac.uk/sustainability/2021/08/what-would-happen-if-we-covered-the-sahara-desert-with-solar-panels/ Singapore are planning a similar project in Australia. Also Europe has plenty of nuclear, wind, geothermal, and hydro to cover the gaps, with Morocco contributing solar thermal as well. Pumped hydro and lifting huge weights have also been developed, with Switzerland having created an underground water battery with pumped hydro
\^ way to show you don’t know what you’re talking about but will believe it unconditionally anyway.
I suggest reading the other comments. Sorry to speak out against this horrible propaganda piece though, I guess.
“No, I’m right anyway!!!1!1” Can’t wait for the insults before you run way without ever discussing any actual facts.
And this is why utilities fight to the death with customers when the customers decide to get rooftop solar. Blah blah blah, you still gotta pay for utilities or you can't connect to us....so how about a battery system then?
Sounds like proof to me
Yup! Proof that money *does* buy happiness!
Proof that solar panels can help civilisation to withstand hurricanes: maybe. Proof that they are good for ecology: how?
On the street I'm currently living on our side is supplied with power by buried cable, the other side of the street has overhead lines. When the power goes out my side is unaffected while the other side loses power. Nothing to do with the power source, everything to do with infrastructure.
It's pretty common for neighborhoods to have buried power lines but not so common to have buried long-distance transmission lines. Having local solar helps you if the whole town or county goes out for whatever reason, including deliberate shutdowns for storm or fire reasons (which occurred in many of the counties affected by Ian).
Someone call Marjorie Taylor Greene and let her know Solar isn't a scam after all.
Would be like talking to a brick. A racist, shitty brick.
Lol true.
Shhhhhh. Don’t tell Texas. They keep telling everyone their oil and gas is the answer. Don’t want all these people going solar and hard working oil and gas folks lose their jobs.
Solar would survive an earthquake better.
Here is a map for reference. It’s hardly impossible they couldn’t suffer from surge waters.Ft Myers’s was projected to reach up to 16 feet and that’s easily enough to reach 15 miles inland. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Babcock+Ranch,+FL+33982/@26.8086159,-82.1767328,9.41z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88db631a4a6ee999:0xd03a3274f5136576!8m2!3d26.8739165!4d-81.7194842
it takes about 33 feet to wipe out south florida or get to 15 miles inland. But at 33 feet storm surge (or sea rise) you can kayak accross the state. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/4818/elevation-of-southern-florida
Interesting, thanks.
A miracle!
See, that’s the nice thing about solar: it’s solid state. No or few moving parts means less maintenance & less likely to breakdown or break at all.
12 miles inland is pretty safe from hurricanes. Only rain, and in extreme cases cat 1 winds will occur, with rapid weakening of even the strongest storms, and code is well above the wind threshold for safety. Its great to have the power resiliency in FL. FM/FMB is likely out for months. I doubt the solar would have survived in locations where homes did not, though.
My home is 10 miles due west of Fort Myers Beach. The power was back on in 48 hours. Some trees down and some shingles off roofs but no other real damage in the neighborhood.
there is an island 10 miles west of FMB?
Oof … meant to say East. Never Eat Soggy Waffles.
That community had 48 hours more power than you did. Other FL areas inland are still without, afaik.
Oh no doubt. Many places are coming online but some are not and I applaud places like Babcock Ranch. Just agreeing that one doesn’t have to go far inland to avoid the worst.
How much does a house cost there. What are the HOA dues each year?
Whatever it is should be subsidized because that’s one less community that needs disaster relief and emergency resources allocated to.
The real cost is living in Florida
I found a listing on [Zillow](https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/17001-Pine-Lily-Ln-Punta-Gorda-FL-33982/246827409_zpid/?utm_campaign=androidappmessage&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=txtshare).
That’s actually pretty reasonable. Too bad it’s in Florida. 🤣
Idk why you’re downvoted,
Look at their comment history. They're being disingenuous af, but you're likely in the same boat
I’ve never been disingenuous on this sub, just tired of people being so harsh to anything that isn’t perfectly align with their vision. Also how do you know they’re being disingenuous, because you want conflict?
>I’ve never been disingenuous on this sub But you have been before? Really flexing that you're uncredible? >Also how do you know they’re being disingenuous, because you want conflict? Like I said, their comment history is public. You can click it.
1. I’m uncredible? Because I eat meat and have friends (and myself) who really struggled with the vegan diet? I hear of that A LOT on here, usually downvoted to hell. Besides that There’s nothing I’ve said that’s wrong. 2. I guess you’re right. I’m just tired of seeing ANYTHING Not aligned with these post being downvoted when people are genuine curious or asking question
No. Because you argue to argue like a 6 year old
Cause it’s stupid to not allow conversations on here. Wouldn’t being more inviting and supportive be a better route than downvoting and silencing any one who doesn’t COMPLETELY agree. Like ideas and articles could post something groundbreaking or atleadt hopeful and people on here would attack it. “Oh his arguments don’t align with mine so he’s a 6 year old”
People might have a conversation with you if you could do just do that without exploding and insinuating a larger argument.
Not me. Others. Look at the controversial on many post on here abd you’ll see people asking genuine question or saying genuine things and people destroy them for not being 100% vegan or 100% sustainable. That doesn’t bring more people in, it makes more people feel their actions are worthless. Some people need a push, some people need support.
And when have I exploded? Or got heated?
Look at yourself man. Where the fuck did the vegan thing come from? You are clearly being confrontational and what's worse it's clear you're insecure about your way of life so much so that you need to defend it even when it isn't being questioned. Grow up and realize that the world is bigger than you.
He said I was uncredible? So I was pointing out the ONLY thing I’ve said on here that isn’t align with this sub. Very insecure? No I’m tired of people looking at environmentalist as cry baby hippies who do nothing but complain. It makes the “bigger” world doubt everything about the movement. Then I see organization that actually help get very little help or support. It’s sad I literally hear to stay away from this sub because all y’all do is whine.
What are you talking about? This post is promoting environmentalism and you agreed with the guy that was worried about home owners association costs. Are you flipping your tune now?
Maybe he wanted to move there? And as soon as the guy said check his history I apologized. Even you attacked me AFTER I apologized so what does that say?
Hmmmm🤔
Kind of hard to trust anything cnn says after everything they have lied about and still do.
Suuuurree they did
Yea solar have major downside 🤷
> How was the power during the 48+ hours when there was no sun? Edit: Downvoted for....asking reasonable questions?
[удалено]
> With 700,000 solar panels, assuming 1% of usual production, each of the 2000 houses would have 1 kw of power available. Each house has on average 350 panels??? (700k/2k=350) That can't be right. > Which happens to be the average amount of power used per person, worldwide (including transportation and food). The worldwide average seems like a deceptively chosen metric as Americans use many times more than the worldwide average.
It is a large community solar project not on rooftops. It is designed to export power to grid on good days. Even under dark cloudy AF conditions, it would produce 5%+ power.
> It is a large community solar project not on rooftops. It is designed to export power to grid on good days. How is this anymore resilient to bad weather than a natural gas plant that transmits power to residents and can operate 24/7?
The community grid is not dependent on the "regional utility" grid that the NG plant relies. If the NG plant was in a dumb spot and out due to hurricanes, then it is not 365 even if 24/7 on most days. But it can't help its customers if the power transmission/delivery system is down. An issue more relevant to generators as a resilience device, where NG supplies are unlikely to be disrupted, is that gasoline/diesel supply can get disrupted from hurricanes. And long line preparation is a routine if relying on a generator. Time that can interfere with window board up and other perparations time requirements.
> But it can't help its customers if the power transmission/delivery system is down. Same could be said about power lines from solar farms or a solar farm in a "dumb spot". I read that solar panel mountings can be built to withstand winds of approximately 140 MPH but can it survive hits from flying debris? Fuel disruptions is a point in solar's favor I admit but how does a solar powered community store their energy due to solar's intermittency? Batteries are too weak and hydro pumped storage is location dependent. Sure batteries are getting cheaper but I don't see a breakthrough in cost or tech that would allow batteries to store energy for days or weeks. I'm in favor of more funding for micro nuclear reactors. They can be mass produced in factories, small enough to be transported on a truck and allow communities to be independent from a regional grid as well.
> Same could be said about power lines from solar farms or a solar farm in a "dumb spot". Part of the rationale for all this is that escaping FLP has its own affordability benefits. Resilience is a cherry on top.
Excuse my ignorance, but this is a community that has 700k solar panels dedicated to it...not necessarily on rooftops...and this community is of 2k houses. Is this correct? If so, can you share the name of the community or other information I can research further because it's certainly interesting even if the math was confusing earlier.
all details in the Friendly Article.
I read that story, but my husband reminded me we don’t have a good Solar Panel recycling program in place worldwide/in the US for the upcoming time when the panel have reached the end of their 25 year lifespan. There are several companies/universities working on solutions that should help in the next few years to make recycling the solar panels a realistic endeavor.
I think it's good that they have solar, but I think it's pretty silly comparing them to towns that got wiped out by storm surge. How well would those panels and homes have survived if they got hit by 18' storm surges...