BrokeVic t1_iw2u2w3 wrote
They don't really save you money to be honest. And they don't really help the environment. The money you supposedly save will end up going towards regular maintenance on the actual panels. And as far as the environment goes with all of the mining that goes into the making of them is crazy amount. First you have to mine mostly sand for the panels to be made. Plus other metal elements. Then you have to mine to make the batteries. So it is really not renewable energy. Plus when the Sun is gone and you have no power from your solar unit. You'll be drawing from the grid. So again not as great as they make them out to be.
[deleted] t1_iw3hd6d wrote
[deleted]
MarwyntheMasterful t1_iw52pby wrote
How much did you pay?
[deleted] t1_iw63fv5 wrote
[removed]
BrokeVic t1_iw3nafh wrote
Again I'm not disagreeing with everybody. I'm just saying they're not saving as much as they think they are and it's not as renewable as they think it is. And if you own your in system entirely how long has it been since you've had maintenance done? And how much does the maintenance cost? I'm not against it I'm thinking about getting it myself. I just know the things that I'm saying are fact that's all
[deleted] t1_iw3v131 wrote
[deleted]
fungussa t1_iw785h0 wrote
Do you realise that if we don't get off fossil fuels, the the planet will be increasingly inhospitable for humans?
BrokeVic t1_iwdacvp wrote
Oh yeah I realize that. Anyone in the world would be crazy not to. And I don't disagree with that at all. In my opinion hydrogen and which sounds bad nuclear power which is what stars are made of is what we need. We don't need something that is going to make it worse faster than the fossil fuels we use now. And that's what that is doing.
fungussa t1_iwds45k wrote
Nuclear is necessary but wholly insufficient, as nuclear:
-
has very long commissioning time
-
more expensive than renewables and the costs are divergent. Solar is halving in cost every 5 years.
-
proliferation risks
-
spent fuel containment
-
very poor horizontal scalability
-
it's carbon footprint is no better than wind and only fractionally better than solar
Shot-Job-8841 t1_iw3jcla wrote
It depends on your local installer and energy costs. There are people near me who have spent $3k on installation and purchase and saved $5k in electricity over 10 years. Your city is not everyone’s city. My area lets you sell excess power back, meaning you can actually make a hefty profit when you’re on vacation.
BrokeVic t1_iw3mw8s wrote
And you are correct I'll give you that. I'm not disagreeing with everything everyone said. I'm just saying that it's not saving people as much money as they think it is and it's not as renewable as they think it is That's all. I still like it
Surur t1_iw2zbzw wrote
Firstly, you don't need a battery to use solar, and the CO2 payback for solar panels is less than 2-3 years, and constantly falling as the grid in China becomes more renewable. They also last 25 years+, meaning they save 23 years of carbon emissions.
In addition, batteries only add a few years to the equation, and then you do have power when there is no sun.
Are you ill-informed or paid to spread nonsense on the internet?
BrokeVic t1_iw314q5 wrote
Yes you do need a battery. Because when there's no sun where will you get power? The solar panels charge up a battery unit. The battery unit is then connected to your fuse box. And then everything in your house runs off the battery powered by the solar panels.
Surur t1_iw31iwn wrote
I'm going to give you the benefit of doubt and just imagine you suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Firstly, you can use the power when its available in the day, such as to run your aircon, washing machine, fridge and ev charger.
Secondly the excess you can sell to the grid, and use normal grid electricity in the evening like everyone else.
Most solar installations do not have batteries.
BrokeVic t1_iw32pgh wrote
There's no reason to be rude about a conversation. And I don't need the benefit of the doubt from anybody. And you do not run off the grid at night. The problem is the solar panels do not produce enough power fast enough for the amount a normal size family household needs. So it charges the batteries firstly then it uses both battery power and solar power for larger size families. Depending on the size of the house and the amount of panels you own. You may have enough to run your entire house without a battery. But I guarantee you you still have a battery. You don't have to believe me. All I'm saying is I worked with solar for years and I'm telling you what I know is truth. And the gimmick of once the units paid off you can sell your power back to the electric company is idiotic. Because then you have to take care of your regular maintenance on your equipment. That's where that money will go trust me there is lots of maintenance that people do not see. And that's how they sell the units. Trust it or don't trust it I'm just putting it out there so people can do their homework and find out for themselves how solar panels and wind turbines really do work. Again I'm not going to reduce myself to calling people names or saying they have some kind of disease. But I do appreciate your benefit of the doubt.
Surur t1_iw339qu wrote
> But I guarantee you you still have a battery.
> Not every solar power system has a solar battery attached. In fact, only about 4% of residential solar installations had a battery backup.
Enough said. I will not address anything else, since you did not provide any sources.
BrokeVic t1_iw36527 wrote
Why don't you guys or women watch a certain documentary called"Planet Of The Humans" Directed by Jeff Gibbs. Then give me your opinion on alternative renewable energy sources like solar panels and wind turbines. It's actually a really good documentary too you might even enjoy it.
grundar t1_iw68p2t wrote
> Why don't you guys or women watch a certain documentary called"Planet Of The Humans"
Probably because it's full of bad information:
> "In their new YouTube documentary “Planet of the Humans,” director Jeff Gibbs and producer Michael Moore argue for splitting the two sides. Their misleading, outdated, and scientifically sophomoric dismissal of renewable energy is perhaps the most dangerous form of climate denial, eroding support for renewable energy as a critical climate solution."
The article goes into substantial and specific detail, but suffice it to say that the documentary you keep citing is not a good source of information about this topic, and I would strongly recommend you check what it's told you against other sources. If you're up for reading somewhat detailed articles, Carbon Brief is generally a reliable source which cites its sources well.
If you're not up for reading detailed information about the topic that's fine, but recognize that your knowledge of the topic will necessarily be rather limited, and -- if it's mostly from a widely-criticized movie -- will often be outright wrong.
Surur t1_iw5vg8o wrote
Obviously, I am not going to waste my time (1h39m), so a short written precis may be more appropriate.
BrokeVic t1_iw31a7t wrote
When the sun goes down The power you have left in the battery is what runs your house. Once that drains you have no power. Then you run off the grid. I have installed solar panel farms for years. They all have battery systems.
ShopObjective t1_iw3tpb4 wrote
Surur t1_iw3xi7w wrote
If you were to actually google China, "renewable"
> According to the NEA report, China's installed renewable generation capacity totaled 1,063 GW in 2021, accounting for 44.8% of the nation's total generation capacity. There is typically a difference in installed capacity and actual power generation due to the intermittency of renewables.
BrokeVic t1_iw31ium wrote
I don't disagree on the carbon emissions. But like I said it is not renewable energy. You have to mine stuff from the Earth to build them and the batteries to use them. That is a fact and when your power is out and your battery is dead you do run off the grid that's a fact. But I'm not saying that because I'm against them I'm just saying they need a better way to do it
BrokeVic t1_iw2u7uq wrote
I like to call them intermittent energy source. Both environmentally safe yet not environmentally safe lol.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments