Solar Power

Covering about 1.2% of the Sahara Desert in solar panels would be enough to replace all other energy sources (coal+oil+hydroelectric+nuclear+renewable) and power the entire world. Such a project would cost a few trillion dollars. That's around 10% of the world's GDP in one year. More has been spent on bailouts by the US alone. Now, depending the entirety of the world's energy on a desert in Africa is obviously a retarded idea but the point still remains. Running the world on solar power is a completely feasible idea, so why aren't you supporting it?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=tDv-DHjbxTc
ted.com/talks/kirk_sorensen_thorium_an_alternative_nuclear_fuel
aliexpress.com/item/DE-stock-no-tax-1piece-25-w-18V-poly-solar-panel-for-charging-12V-battery-Free/32800228672.html?spm=2114.search0104.3.25.xXUqMi&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_3_10152_10065_10151_10130_10068_10344_10345_10547_10342_10546_10343_10340_10341_10548_10545_10541_10307_10060_10155_10154_10056_10055_10539_10538_10537_10536_10059_10534_10533_100031_10103_10102_5590020_5640020_10142_10107_10324_10325_10084_10083_5370020_10178_5630020_10312_10313_10314_10073,searchweb201603_14,ppcSwitch_7&btsid=1d3124ff-f1a8-4d54-8d54-f7de225d12dd&algo_expid=1b8e387d-e619-46f4-a738-d9da56400782-6&algo_pvid=1b8e387d-e619-46f4-a738-d9da56400782
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

you need to secure them. There are lots of Berber tribes in the Sahara who would loot and destroy it.
They see Sahara as their homeland.

They're probably not that fantastic here with 0-7 hours of sunlight during winter. You need alternative sources of energy.

>enough to replace all other energy sources
Sounds like bullshit

>suddenly buying so many solar panels would not induce any kind of price spike for the materials involved

All fields

Except getting electricity to every corner of the world would be a nightmare. Protecting every power station and line that say brings power to the US since those would be targets of every terrorist group and countries like North Korea. One substation in Algeria goes down and the America's goes black.

You can't use solar for baseline power, you dolt.
Nuclear is where it's at.

Currently Solar supplements traditional power plants. If you want to go full solar then you would need to be able to store energy for the time when the sun isnt shining. Basically, you would need massive, toxic, exspensive battery farms or require every home on the planet to have a fuckton of batteries in it.

>"That's around 10% of the world's GDP in one year"

Plus the protection and replacement cost of the panels since niggers are inherently criminal and have no sense of the greater good they are like animals in that sense.

>Covering about 1.2% of the Sahara Desert in solar panels would be enough to replace all other energy sources (coal+oil+hydroelectric+nuclear+renewable) and power the entire world
Gee, it's too fucking bad that the entire world isnt located in the shit-reeking sahara desert.

Nuclear is cleaner

Solar energy will always be a supplemental energy.
It varies too much, and will never yield as much energy due to being a passive energy source.
So growth will have to be exponentially more with every family.

It's a great idea to put them in deserts regardless. Might as well it will bring the cost of energy down in certain areas and i'm fine with that.

Transferring that power even as "close" as to other parts of Africa would already be very inefficient. And you want to transfer it all the way to the other side of the planet? Not happening with current technology.

>Covering about 1.2% of the Sahara Desert in solar panels would be enough to replace all other energy sources (coal+oil+hydroelectric+nuclear+renewable) and power the entire world. Such a project would cost a few trillion dollars.

Source? I call bs. Germany has already investe 300 billion euros in solar and only 2 percent of our energy comes from solar.

...

>Trump builds wall
>Trump puts solar panels on wall
>The wall becomes the norm for protecting borders and providing all the energy requirements for a nation
>Trump saves the world (again)
Just you wait.

youtube.com/watch?v=tDv-DHjbxTc

Much more efficient to build solar arrays in space. No clouds or atmosphere getting in the way.

>Chernobyl
>Three Mile Island
>Fukushima

>(((solar panels)))
lol
salt heaters is where it's at.
Simple and easy

all preventable.

>Guys this would totally work
>Now here's why it wouldn't work
Thanks for saving us the time kiddo

Even if you include all the accidents, which are rare, nuclear still is by far the safest form of electricity production.

Solar power isn't feasible at mass scale. We have no competent energy storage. Current solar PVs are still limited to around 22%~ efficiency, degrade over time, and are bad for the environment. Certain locations only have 3 hours of peak sunlight per day, and that makes it incredibly hard for solar to pay off. Solar thermal is even more limited in areas it can be deployed, and every variety of it has insane environmental impact.

Until we have 40% efficient multi junction panels in mass production solar is still going to be a niche at best.


Reflector arrays are absurdly inefficient, can fuck up local weather, and they heat the air so much that any birds flying near get baked and killed.
They're terrible concepts. Even deserts are home to life. Building something that destroys habitats in the name of being environmentally friendly is so blindingly retarded only a leftist could approve.

Then go with solar updraft.

I don't care much for solar though.
it's either nuclear or thorium

>Do ya faggots realise that electricy needs a huge infrastructure to get from part A to B and shitloads is lost when covering loads of distances, its easy to akbar around with numbers, maintanance and feasibility gonna cost more then you can imagine and its gonna be hard to maintain

Future is Thorium, learn about it

ted.com/talks/kirk_sorensen_thorium_an_alternative_nuclear_fuel

Still carrier the higher risk of a meltdown. Plus all the radiation isnt good

yeah but then the price of oil will crash if we do that

Small home thorium reactors when???
I dream of a day when every house is off the grid.

Maintenance? pay a company.

>Still carrier the higher risk of a meltdown.
There are 448 nuclear reactors on this planet that safely supply us with clean, emission-less electricity every day.
Talking about meltdowns as if they are somehow a show stopper with nuclear is like saying plane crashes make airplanes a fundementally unsafe technology.

>Plus all the radiation isnt good
Nuclear plants only emit tiny amounts of radiation during normal operation.
Even coal plants release more because the coal they burn often contain radioactive elements like uranium and thorium.

>Future is Thorium, learn about it

No it isn't.
Thorium is the solution to a problem we never had.
It's also mindlessly expensive by it's very nature. It will never be able to compete with light water reactors.

There's massive geopolitical implications for such a project.

Indium supply for the photovoltaic cells would be virtually drained. Who will we be buying the supplies from? Does the international community want to blatantly fund a communist regime such as China? What about the maintenance of such a complex?

How would one prevent a quasi-monopoly like we have with OPEC? What are the climactic effects of basically putting down a mirror for 42,000 square miles of desert?

Imagine some of the ramifications of having power coming from one location. It would be the highest valued target for terrorist organizations, and placing it in an Islamic state in a region prone to war and poverty makes the scenario very conducive.

And most importantly, why should struggle be removed from life? If you give everyone equal capacity to prosper, by definition, you are creating a dysgenic environment that will erode innate human progress.

Do you realise how big 1.2% of the Sahara Desert is?
>do you even...

Better start digging..

How feasible is distributed solar and wind (small installations in homes and businesses) that supplement centralized power plants? The more distributed systems, the less work the centralized systems have to do.

>>Fukushima
The people who built it didn't do what the scientists asked for. They did it to reduce the costs.

Yeah and would cost trillions of dollars idiot

Except solar panels produce waste far more harmful and destructive than nuclear waste you dingus and it's just as impossible to get rid of it

meltdowns don't happen if you don't let them

All of those preventable
Also like I said the waste solar panels produce is much more potent and destructive than nuclear waste

But our best source of Thorium is one of Jupiter's moons :/

Leave nuclear power to us alright?

There has never been a solar panel yet invented that has generated more energy than it took to create the solar panel.

OK, so who gets to be in charge of the sahara desert when this happens? Who gets to be in charge of the electrical supply for the entire planet?

>Covering about 1.2% of the Sahara Desert in solar panels would be enough to replace all other energy sources
what about resistance mate?

Then how do you expect to transfer that energy everywhere else, dipshit? Power transfer is a much more difficult problem than power generation.

Yeah, the problem comes from allowing ((((multinational corporations))) to build reactors and expect them not to cut corners.

lives by giant glowing nuclear fireball

>radiation isnt good

sage

Solar is great as a supplemental energy source, but there are maintenance costs and storage & inversion of collected energy is a huge factor. You don't just put up solar panel and wire them right into the AC energy grid. Not to mention the byproducts of producing these panels is extremely caustic at the current time. It would be less of an environmental impact to go with a nuclear breeder reactor.

Anyone who claims we can power the world with solar is clearly a retard who understands absolutely nothing about physics or economics.
sage

Do you understand that the power grid is only about 35% efficient? Transmission lines are not 100% efficient, especially as distances increase. Do they actually teach kids anything anymore?

>Covering about 1.2% of the Sahara Desert in solar panels would be enough to replace all other energy sources (coal+oil+hydroelectric+nuclear+renewable) and power the entire world.
false
try 40%

you also cannot transmit power that far

>Such a project would cost a few trillion dollars. That's around 10% of the world's GDP in one year.
more like 60 trillion

>Running the world on solar power is a completely feasible idea, so why aren't you supporting it?
because it's not feasible and there are better options

'by far' is a bit of an exaggeration, no? Also, just dividing the total energy output by the number of associated deaths is simplifying the matter a bit.

Still, coal needs to go.

>10% of world GDP
I don't think you understand how fucking massive that is. That's about 7.7 trillion dollars. Not only that, but the project would be "real wealth", i.e., put the money on the fucking table. Like 10% of all things produced by humans would be devoted to this project. 1 out of every 10 fucking grains of rice on planet earth.

>More money has been spent on bail outs
No. It hasn't. You're looking at about 700-800 billion, and those were mostly loans.

Now let's get to the fun parts

>Is this even feasible?
And that's probably the biggest problem. I assume you're a fucking dumbass and just googled vaguely the price solar panels cost and how much energy they produce per square whatever. What you're forgeting is

>The infrastructure to support the manufacture of solar panels
>The infrastructure to support the transportation of these panels
>The infrastructure to support the maintenance of these panels
>The infrastructure to actually link power grids to these panels

Let's not even touch the politics, land, or rights regarding this.

Then of course
>Is it a good use of money?
The answer is... no. With our current technology, we can produce solar energy at about 12 cents per kilowatt hour. We can produce the same amount of energy for coal at 3 cents or nuclear at 2 cents. Assuming we include the manufacture related to everything.

Your project would be even less efficient due to the massive undertaking involved in it.

So, what you're asking is
>Why don't you want to give me 1/10 of what you make in a year to provide energy to you at the very least 4x the cost?

>All fields
Solar panels in all fields

Sounds like this retard doesn't realize how big a 1.2% of the Sahara desert is.
>Latvian education

>dividing the total energy output by the number of associated deaths is simplifying the matter a bit.
That's actually the best way you could represent it.

This would be done easily in one year if the world was only populated by smart whites (and maybe asians).
Sadly, jews, arabs and niggers are a large majority on this planet, especially around the Sahara

Does this include accidents in resource gathering?

Who cares about some feral niggers. Employ private security

> Americas go black

Bit late for that pal

The West and Chinks if they play ball

Upkeep and maintenance would be outrageous. Solar panels don't last long due to the fact that they're in the sun all day and are constantly breaking down. It's not feasible.

Sahara desert = 9,200,000 km^2
=9,200,000,000,000 m^2
*.012
=110,400,000,000 m^2 of solar panels

520mmx365mm solar panel = 44$
5.2 panels per meter squared
= 228$ per meter squared
= 25 trillion dollars in solar panels

Minus labor
Minus upkeep
Minus transformers and everything else

Probably cost 100 trillion dollars

aliexpress.com/item/DE-stock-no-tax-1piece-25-w-18V-poly-solar-panel-for-charging-12V-battery-Free/32800228672.html?spm=2114.search0104.3.25.xXUqMi&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_3_10152_10065_10151_10130_10068_10344_10345_10547_10342_10546_10343_10340_10341_10548_10545_10541_10307_10060_10155_10154_10056_10055_10539_10538_10537_10536_10059_10534_10533_100031_10103_10102_5590020_5640020_10142_10107_10324_10325_10084_10083_5370020_10178_5630020_10312_10313_10314_10073,searchweb201603_14,ppcSwitch_7&btsid=1d3124ff-f1a8-4d54-8d54-f7de225d12dd&algo_expid=1b8e387d-e619-46f4-a738-d9da56400782-6&algo_pvid=1b8e387d-e619-46f4-a738-d9da56400782

????????
This retard actually thinks it's feasible to power the world using solar panels in the Sahara desert.
He just used the Sahara desert to demonstrate what can be achieved and how much needed to achieve it.
If we were to implement the plan of yours then what?
how will we deliver energy around the world?
using copper wires that weigh billions of tons.
are we gonna make them float somehow or dig trenches under the oceans?

Every house in the future might have a small battery and a few panels on roof maybe many. and efficient appliances.

yeah, its cool and shit, but in how much time it will pay off and how to deal with unless this is a big scam

You forgot transmission, mounting, batteries. Your price is also wrong in other ways. The cost of the panels is actually small but you have them as the ENTIRE cost of the project.

You're much better off taking a similar project in those conditions and multiplying by the relative size.

You're right. it is not feasible but your reasoning is wrong.
solar panels come with 30 years warranty.
Which means only god knows how long those fuckers will last.

Solar panels are junk. We need breakthroughs in nuclear power.

I implicitly said minus labor, upkeep, transformers, infrastructure.

Reread my post.

25 trillion in solar panels
100 trillion total cost