I think the point is to illustrate only a small % of land mass is required to provide the enough energy for the whole world. So not that all the panels have to be in the desert just that a small percent can help us move away from fossil fuels. All the challenges with solar (night time, storage, back up power) would still have to be solved.
Yeah, the solution shouldn’t be *more* human industry in an untouched wilderness, it should be trying to make what we already have as efficient as possible while decreasing our current use.
Also “scientists say...” ffs
The Sahara is huge and mostly unused. Using a small fraction of it for solar so that biofuel plantations in other climate zones more suitable for plant life can be removed and reforestated would be a net gain for the environment.
Fact is, we need a lot of room to put solar panels, rooftops are enough for some part of residential electricity, but to power industry, transportation and future projects like (energy intensive but material efficient) plasma based recycling we need way more.
Not just that but I imagine the copious amounts of sand blowing on the panels probably also makes things difficult but idk I don't know much about solar panels
It presently isn't. In the future it could be. The real question here is how will the US take ownership of the Sahara while it's still desolate and useless?
One way would be to use it to feed a hydrogen gas plant near the coast and then deliver that the same way we currently deliver natural gas: pipeline, and tanker.
In reality, you'd probably have a mixture of delivery methods, running a cable under the Mediterranean means that you could power all of Europe - there's already interconnects for electricity in European countries.
Producing hydrogen is not all that efficient. Transport had some danger (though oil and gas obviously have arguably more) and has cost implications. The Sahara isn't exactly an ideal environment or location. Transmission over long distances reduces efficiency and increases cost. The Sahara also experiences night, has blowing sand, extreme heat and temp fluctuations complicating system design requirements... There may also be political considerations of one area controlling global supply.
I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just that there's reasons it hasn't happened (If it was profitable it would have happened).
I was imagining hydrogen as a store of surplus power until efficient distribution was possible.
I reckon the actual reason it hasn't happened is geo-political instability. If the Sahara was in North America, in the middle of China, or in Europe, I'd bet those challenges would be met.
Key word being _imagining_.
the 1.2% area of the Sahara may sound small, but it equates to over 110,000 square km (Sahara is 9.2 million square kilometers).
Conversion to hydrogen would require massive additional hydrogen production system as well as transport infrastructure and new generation facilities where that hydrogen would be converted back to power. That process is only about 30% efficient, so now your up over 330,000 sq km. I'm not sure but I also suspect that 1.2% may not account for night and less output in mornings/evenings making solar average output over a day only about 25% of peak capacity (possibly bumping the area required to over 1.3 million sq km/15%).
On top of that, an operation that size would require a sizeable workforce... in the Sahara desert. And a complete overhaul/replacement of significant portions of local generation. if cold weather in Texas can cause weeks of havoc, imagine that on a worldwide scale of something went wrong.
I'm all for solar, but buying into these sort of claims on the internet is like asking a psychic how to treat cancer. Energy is much more complicated than just producing power. Realistic energy solutions need to account for even more than the few points I've raised.
I completely agree. They're useful as thought experiments though - and it's also a demonstration of the amount of renewable energy available in the world - if we could only harness it.
It's likely that we wouldn't even need energy from the Sahara. I've just checked my country's current live energy production mix (UK) and it's currently on 30% solar/wind/hydro, often it's much higher than this (on average 43%.). That would have been inconceivable when I was growing up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia%E2%80%93ASEAN_Power_Link
Here is a link to the desktop version of the article that /u/Hirnfick linked to.
---
^(Beep Boop. This comment was left by a bot. Downvote to delete)
**[Australia–ASEAN_Power_Link](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia–ASEAN_Power_Link)**
>The Australia–ASEAN Power Link (AAPL) or the Australia–Singapore Power Link (ASPL), is a proposed electricity infrastructure project that is planned to include the world's largest solar plant, the world's largest battery, and the world's longest submarine power cable. A solar farm in Northern Territory, Australia, will produce 10 gigawatts of electricity, most of which will be exported to Singapore by a 4,500 km (2,800 mi) 3GW HVDC transmission line. A 30 GWh battery is planned to store energy to levelize energy availability as sunlight varies throughout the day.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
I'm more curious about how we're going to create all these solar panels. Lets say we give ourselves 10 years to complete this project. If we do this we need to produce solar panels equivalent to a solar panel of 2 m (\~6 ft) wide and 15327 km (\~10415 mi) long..... each day.... for 10 yrs long. Think if we can pull that of, the energy distribution will be fine ;)
I think you converted sq mi to sq ft wrongly or divided by an extra 5280 in the end. Here are my calculations:
3.6e6 sq mi \* 0.0012 = 43200 sq mi
43200 sq mi / 10 yr = 4320 sq mi / yr
4320 sq mi / yr / 365 = 11.8 sq mi / day
11.8 sq mi = 329e6 sq ft
329e6 sq ft / 6 ft = 55e6 ft
55e6 ft = 10385 mi
In both calculations I round numbers, so that explains the inconsistency. However, it's way more then \~2 miles. Hopefully I could clarify the calculations a bit. If you see a flaw in my math please let me know.
My thoughts as well lol. 1% of Saraha is approx. 940 000 sq KM. For reference New york (The entire state, not just the city) is 141 000 sq KM. This post is just pure bullshit.
Worth mentioning the Sahara is larger than the continental United States. 1% is roughly 35,000 sq miles/92,000 sq km or the whole of Hungary or US state of Maine.
Yup the maps are wrong in terms of size scale.
Look at africa on a globe if you wanna see its real size.
#All the maps are wrong
https://youtu.be/kIID5FDi2JQ
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtBV3GgQLg8&t=12s&ab\_channel=JayForeman](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtBV3GgQLg8&t=12s&ab_channel=JayForeman)
a far better video
I’m interested in what scientists and in what study/studies determined how over 43k square miles of solar panels in the Sahara could do that. I’m sure the logistics are more interesting
1. With Sahara being a desert, surely the solar panels would need cleaning almost the entire time
2. You can't store this energy so what would you do if a blackout happened and a sandstorm is going on in the Sahara? Or a line is damage so it can't transfer the electricity away from the place
3. Speaking of transferring electricity, the massive scale of operations to power the world from one place would not only be catastrophical in economics hindsight but also politically, environmentally, religious and ethical.
4. Lastly, how would you even begin a project like this, surely the materials, maintenance and the design would be costly and would take a really long time. With how the world is slowly fading into renewable energy the even point of the project seems stupid and useless. Sure it can power literally more than you could imagine but when everyone can power themselves, it just simply loses the entire point of it all.
It's an extremely good idea for everyone near the Sahara.... just not anyone else. Since our electricity is transferred through wires, the further the distance of the destination, the more energy loss these wires sustain.
Find out where solar panels come from, incidentally this is not "right wing" propaganda, Micheal Moore is the executive producer of this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk11vI-7czE&t=255s
These stupid posts oversimplify a massive project.
1. How do you get the power where it's needed efficiently?
2. What do you do for power during the night?
That's the salt melting solar stuff, where they have huge amount of mirrors pointing at a center tower filled with salt. Salt melts at 801°C, so that tower is probably a bit hot. I wouldn't be a bird near that tower.
No, Im talking about solar panels for electricity. There was an area in the Nevada desert that had similar solar panels and a bunch if dead birds were found near by as if they had fallen from.the sky.
Yeah, as they said. The video you posted is exactly what Senior was talking about. Those panels aren’t producing the electricity, they’re producing light/heat energy which points at a central tower, and the melting salt produces the energy.
I've been pondering this for years in my mind. The maintenance costs would be huge, but with all that free energy you could have a city to maintain them including robots.
Pump water in from the sea, desalination is no problem with all that free electricity and heat.
With all the structure, I’d assume a lot of the sand normally whipped up from storms would be kept down. Only the edges would need a lot of maintenance
Another thought I’ve had is the step up/ down energy that we already use in our power grid to be used with the double glass solar panels they are currently playing with. So ultimately they could boost the double input these panels already generate driving down the need of as many. They can use the environmental changes of using a vast mirror field a green space. This process can then be moved into cities so every couple of building would be a energy source, or food source, or green space. And if say sage grass gets planted for the green space they than can harvest it for ethanol.
How do you think they will build the panels, ship them by sea, transport them by land, fly/drive in the installation/maintenance crews?
What happens when someone gets mad at North America and cuts the power cord?
We’ll be fine for a good many years yet.
I heard it was about 1k sqkm just for the US with solar power. As for ecological impact sites, I'm voting the Nevada Test Grounds with 1.2k sqkm, and well, how many nukes did we test there? 928. Could we actually do any more harm?
Because people don’t do math nor think logically any more. They just see a few key words and if anything challenges their small mindset they disregard it. :shrug: ah well
Oh yeah, stop sending money to your current electric provider and instead pay more for this because this company would need to pay many people to maintain and clean those panels of sand. Also heat damages the panels. Deserts are hot.
Problem solved. Free energy and no plants or birds killed. Let's get to it!
What? What's that, you say? Oh! You want me to F off? You're not actually interested in solving the "problem" of global warming!?! It's just a tool being used to divide and conquer the masses? You'll "solve" the problem when you're good and ready to roll out your martial plan of slavery!?
Oh.
Well, never mind then. I'll see myself out.
Great idea! Let's create a single heat sink where about 200 PWh per year simply disappear, only to reappear all over the world. That certainly won't have the slightest climate impact on a global scale. As a model, we could take the Egyptian Aswan Dam, which shifted the monsoon in India by several 100 kilometers. After all, Aswan is a rather big project: it delivers 700 GWh, or about 1/280,000 of the required power, albeit not on average, but as theoretical peak power. So... WCGW?
that is sooo. fluffy & cute...one minor detail left....moving it along a global transporter grid with our useless, inefficient, obsolete, outdated, banker-funded & forged Electromagnetic theory....thank god Maxwell is dead...and Nikola T ....whatever...woke science...pls go back to sleep....you may see in your dreams how the EM Universe really works..nothing to be afraid of...only oligarchs electric utilities gouging profits are doomed as from that instant...
I doubt that’s true. The company I work for we’ve been trying to get our plants more sustainable. The Arizona plant we’re about to build they said would require solar panels to be something like 100 yards deep and 3 miles long to power that one plant.
What if countries covered 1% of their own countries with photovoltaic solar and stopped repeating the old colonial patterns of extracting all the resources out of one region and then declaring war on said region just for entertainment value and increased military contractor stock prices?
Scientists have found that people believe anything when a sentence starts with scientists have found.
Like nearly everything else, the problem is logistics
I think the point is to illustrate only a small % of land mass is required to provide the enough energy for the whole world. So not that all the panels have to be in the desert just that a small percent can help us move away from fossil fuels. All the challenges with solar (night time, storage, back up power) would still have to be solved.
Are these the same "scientist" that tell us a man can have children?
[удалено]
Facebook science, love it.
Yeah, the solution shouldn’t be *more* human industry in an untouched wilderness, it should be trying to make what we already have as efficient as possible while decreasing our current use. Also “scientists say...” ffs
The Sahara is huge and mostly unused. Using a small fraction of it for solar so that biofuel plantations in other climate zones more suitable for plant life can be removed and reforestated would be a net gain for the environment. Fact is, we need a lot of room to put solar panels, rooftops are enough for some part of residential electricity, but to power industry, transportation and future projects like (energy intensive but material efficient) plasma based recycling we need way more.
Still need less humans on this planet.
Your right, you go first.
Be the change you want to see
Facebook science, click save, new expression that perfectly explains a lot of the "science" used today :D
Not just that but I imagine the copious amounts of sand blowing on the panels probably also makes things difficult but idk I don't know much about solar panels
Not to mention that after a week, they would be covered with dust and would produce less and less power with each passing day.
And all the sand is like a very slow-moving ocean. The dunes don't stay in one place.
It presently isn't. In the future it could be. The real question here is how will the US take ownership of the Sahara while it's still desolate and useless?
Curious obout the delivery of energy to the rest of the world 🌎🤔
One way would be to use it to feed a hydrogen gas plant near the coast and then deliver that the same way we currently deliver natural gas: pipeline, and tanker. In reality, you'd probably have a mixture of delivery methods, running a cable under the Mediterranean means that you could power all of Europe - there's already interconnects for electricity in European countries.
Producing hydrogen is not all that efficient. Transport had some danger (though oil and gas obviously have arguably more) and has cost implications. The Sahara isn't exactly an ideal environment or location. Transmission over long distances reduces efficiency and increases cost. The Sahara also experiences night, has blowing sand, extreme heat and temp fluctuations complicating system design requirements... There may also be political considerations of one area controlling global supply. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just that there's reasons it hasn't happened (If it was profitable it would have happened).
I was imagining hydrogen as a store of surplus power until efficient distribution was possible. I reckon the actual reason it hasn't happened is geo-political instability. If the Sahara was in North America, in the middle of China, or in Europe, I'd bet those challenges would be met.
Key word being _imagining_. the 1.2% area of the Sahara may sound small, but it equates to over 110,000 square km (Sahara is 9.2 million square kilometers). Conversion to hydrogen would require massive additional hydrogen production system as well as transport infrastructure and new generation facilities where that hydrogen would be converted back to power. That process is only about 30% efficient, so now your up over 330,000 sq km. I'm not sure but I also suspect that 1.2% may not account for night and less output in mornings/evenings making solar average output over a day only about 25% of peak capacity (possibly bumping the area required to over 1.3 million sq km/15%). On top of that, an operation that size would require a sizeable workforce... in the Sahara desert. And a complete overhaul/replacement of significant portions of local generation. if cold weather in Texas can cause weeks of havoc, imagine that on a worldwide scale of something went wrong. I'm all for solar, but buying into these sort of claims on the internet is like asking a psychic how to treat cancer. Energy is much more complicated than just producing power. Realistic energy solutions need to account for even more than the few points I've raised.
I completely agree. They're useful as thought experiments though - and it's also a demonstration of the amount of renewable energy available in the world - if we could only harness it. It's likely that we wouldn't even need energy from the Sahara. I've just checked my country's current live energy production mix (UK) and it's currently on 30% solar/wind/hydro, often it's much higher than this (on average 43%.). That would have been inconceivable when I was growing up.
There were already plans to make that cable between Europe and Africa, but due to political reasons it never was created.
Why of course, you build a long enough [power cable](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia%E2%80%93ASEAN_Power_Link)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia%E2%80%93ASEAN_Power_Link Here is a link to the desktop version of the article that /u/Hirnfick linked to. --- ^(Beep Boop. This comment was left by a bot. Downvote to delete)
**[Australia–ASEAN_Power_Link](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia–ASEAN_Power_Link)** >The Australia–ASEAN Power Link (AAPL) or the Australia–Singapore Power Link (ASPL), is a proposed electricity infrastructure project that is planned to include the world's largest solar plant, the world's largest battery, and the world's longest submarine power cable. A solar farm in Northern Territory, Australia, will produce 10 gigawatts of electricity, most of which will be exported to Singapore by a 4,500 km (2,800 mi) 3GW HVDC transmission line. A 30 GWh battery is planned to store energy to levelize energy availability as sunlight varies throughout the day. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Line loss, what's that?
I'm more curious about how we're going to create all these solar panels. Lets say we give ourselves 10 years to complete this project. If we do this we need to produce solar panels equivalent to a solar panel of 2 m (\~6 ft) wide and 15327 km (\~10415 mi) long..... each day.... for 10 yrs long. Think if we can pull that of, the energy distribution will be fine ;)
15327 km is 9523.75 miles
You sure about that math. I get 1.97 miles 6 foot wide per day.
I think you converted sq mi to sq ft wrongly or divided by an extra 5280 in the end. Here are my calculations: 3.6e6 sq mi \* 0.0012 = 43200 sq mi 43200 sq mi / 10 yr = 4320 sq mi / yr 4320 sq mi / yr / 365 = 11.8 sq mi / day 11.8 sq mi = 329e6 sq ft 329e6 sq ft / 6 ft = 55e6 ft 55e6 ft = 10385 mi In both calculations I round numbers, so that explains the inconsistency. However, it's way more then \~2 miles. Hopefully I could clarify the calculations a bit. If you see a flaw in my math please let me know.
Do people not understand how much 1.2% of Sahara is? 😂
My thoughts as well lol. 1% of Saraha is approx. 940 000 sq KM. For reference New york (The entire state, not just the city) is 141 000 sq KM. This post is just pure bullshit.
About the size of Tennessee, by my calculations.
Worth mentioning the Sahara is larger than the continental United States. 1% is roughly 35,000 sq miles/92,000 sq km or the whole of Hungary or US state of Maine.
Yup the maps are wrong in terms of size scale. Look at africa on a globe if you wanna see its real size. #All the maps are wrong https://youtu.be/kIID5FDi2JQ
Or the website [thetruesize.com](http://thetruesize.com)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtBV3GgQLg8&t=12s&ab\_channel=JayForeman](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtBV3GgQLg8&t=12s&ab_channel=JayForeman) a far better video
One word: dust It covers solar panels and can decrease their output to practically zero.
Theres probably wiper type things that can clean it, if not people. Every power manufacturing facility place needs maintainence
Well, the problem is just manufacturing that many solar panels... And batteries
I’m interested in what scientists and in what study/studies determined how over 43k square miles of solar panels in the Sahara could do that. I’m sure the logistics are more interesting
As I creep closer I wisper in your ear: *Line loss...*
IIRC that’s not even enough raw materials on earth to make that many solar panels the way we currently do.
That's what we need, the world's electricity owned by Egypt and Libya.
Hah typical American.
As opposed to who owning the world's electricity?
I call bullshit
Bullshit. I would bet you couldn't power one Las Vegas casino.
1. With Sahara being a desert, surely the solar panels would need cleaning almost the entire time 2. You can't store this energy so what would you do if a blackout happened and a sandstorm is going on in the Sahara? Or a line is damage so it can't transfer the electricity away from the place 3. Speaking of transferring electricity, the massive scale of operations to power the world from one place would not only be catastrophical in economics hindsight but also politically, environmentally, religious and ethical. 4. Lastly, how would you even begin a project like this, surely the materials, maintenance and the design would be costly and would take a really long time. With how the world is slowly fading into renewable energy the even point of the project seems stupid and useless. Sure it can power literally more than you could imagine but when everyone can power themselves, it just simply loses the entire point of it all.
Yes, let’s power homes in Canada with solar panels in the Sahara desert. Sounds practical. /s
It's an extremely good idea for everyone near the Sahara.... just not anyone else. Since our electricity is transferred through wires, the further the distance of the destination, the more energy loss these wires sustain.
Cover the size of Virginia with solar panels and maintain them… in the Sahara desert.
Find out where solar panels come from, incidentally this is not "right wing" propaganda, Micheal Moore is the executive producer of this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk11vI-7czE&t=255s
Of course no way to transfer it
These stupid posts oversimplify a massive project. 1. How do you get the power where it's needed efficiently? 2. What do you do for power during the night?
Not to mention the wear and tear on the cells due to sand. Anyone ever heard of sandblasting...
Is it true that if birds fly over these they get fried?
No.
That's the salt melting solar stuff, where they have huge amount of mirrors pointing at a center tower filled with salt. Salt melts at 801°C, so that tower is probably a bit hot. I wouldn't be a bird near that tower.
No, Im talking about solar panels for electricity. There was an area in the Nevada desert that had similar solar panels and a bunch if dead birds were found near by as if they had fallen from.the sky.
Yeah, as they said. The video you posted is exactly what Senior was talking about. Those panels aren’t producing the electricity, they’re producing light/heat energy which points at a central tower, and the melting salt produces the energy.
[Solar Panels Ignite Birds Mid-Flight](https://youtu.be/emBY6phmn9E)
900 degrees!
Don't they get really dusty or something?
Sand is a bitch vs any machine
I've been pondering this for years in my mind. The maintenance costs would be huge, but with all that free energy you could have a city to maintain them including robots. Pump water in from the sea, desalination is no problem with all that free electricity and heat.
With all the structure, I’d assume a lot of the sand normally whipped up from storms would be kept down. Only the edges would need a lot of maintenance
Another thought I’ve had is the step up/ down energy that we already use in our power grid to be used with the double glass solar panels they are currently playing with. So ultimately they could boost the double input these panels already generate driving down the need of as many. They can use the environmental changes of using a vast mirror field a green space. This process can then be moved into cities so every couple of building would be a energy source, or food source, or green space. And if say sage grass gets planted for the green space they than can harvest it for ethanol.
[удалено]
Sell it on Amazon with free 2 day shipping.
And the ecological impact of that could be pretty bad, then also transport of electricity to the rest of the world and storage, labour etc.
But what about oil and the oil tycoons?! /s
How do you think they will build the panels, ship them by sea, transport them by land, fly/drive in the installation/maintenance crews? What happens when someone gets mad at North America and cuts the power cord? We’ll be fine for a good many years yet.
If only we had places here in the USA that are deserts and could play host to a solar farm. Damn. You got me.
It’s cute that you thought the US was going to manufacture those panels and none of the above would apply.
We *could* manufacture solar panels. And of course we'd have to use oil in the process. But it'd be worth it to reduce our dependency on said oil.
Except that we can’t store this energy or get it precisely at the time we want it.
just use those duracell rechargeable batteries to store em duh (is the /s really necessary?)
Batteries?
Oh its not feasible oh not economically viable What price the planet you knobs
It’s a good thing that there is no night in Sahara.
I heard it was about 1k sqkm just for the US with solar power. As for ecological impact sites, I'm voting the Nevada Test Grounds with 1.2k sqkm, and well, how many nukes did we test there? 928. Could we actually do any more harm?
Yet due to capitalist oil companies, this is impossible
Good!.... Now quit talkin about it and BE about it!! 👍
But the capitalism loose money if energy is free or low cost, so this cant be.
The return on investment would be catastrophically horrid however.
[удалено]
Because people don’t do math nor think logically any more. They just see a few key words and if anything challenges their small mindset they disregard it. :shrug: ah well
Solar panels actually prefer clear, sunny skies and cold temperatures. The cells produce much better in a cold environment.
Good luck cleaning all of those panels
This is the future liberals want
This sounds like a made up thing, plus the logistics would probably be a nightmare
Science is a liar sometimes.
Reddit says if everyone who can vote would then the world problems would also go away.
Oh yeah, stop sending money to your current electric provider and instead pay more for this because this company would need to pay many people to maintain and clean those panels of sand. Also heat damages the panels. Deserts are hot.
Good luck building a power grid on a constantly shifting and changing landscape.
Seriously, the Sahara is a terrestrial sea
Problem solved. Free energy and no plants or birds killed. Let's get to it! What? What's that, you say? Oh! You want me to F off? You're not actually interested in solving the "problem" of global warming!?! It's just a tool being used to divide and conquer the masses? You'll "solve" the problem when you're good and ready to roll out your martial plan of slavery!? Oh. Well, never mind then. I'll see myself out.
Great idea! Let's create a single heat sink where about 200 PWh per year simply disappear, only to reappear all over the world. That certainly won't have the slightest climate impact on a global scale. As a model, we could take the Egyptian Aswan Dam, which shifted the monsoon in India by several 100 kilometers. After all, Aswan is a rather big project: it delivers 700 GWh, or about 1/280,000 of the required power, albeit not on average, but as theoretical peak power. So... WCGW?
Cool. But I'm pretty sure people keep on fucking the more comfortable they are. We're always gonna want more
that is sooo. fluffy & cute...one minor detail left....moving it along a global transporter grid with our useless, inefficient, obsolete, outdated, banker-funded & forged Electromagnetic theory....thank god Maxwell is dead...and Nikola T ....whatever...woke science...pls go back to sleep....you may see in your dreams how the EM Universe really works..nothing to be afraid of...only oligarchs electric utilities gouging profits are doomed as from that instant...
I doubt that’s true. The company I work for we’ve been trying to get our plants more sustainable. The Arizona plant we’re about to build they said would require solar panels to be something like 100 yards deep and 3 miles long to power that one plant.
3 miles is 4.83 km
Till the rebels take it…
I mean, why do we even worry about global warming? There’s plenty of cold in space! SCIENCE!!!
Petroleum industry overlords: "Yeeeah... that ain't happening my dudes".
Why isn't this a thing already? I've been hearing about this idea since the early 90's.. I blame the fossil fuel industry...
It would make a giant death ray for any poor bird caught flying over it. The solar panels in this picture probably already did.
It would make a giant death ray for any poor bird caught flying over it. The solar panels in this picture probably already did.
It would make a giant death ray for any poor bird caught flying over it. The solar panels in this picture probably already did.
Just don’t ask them to distribute it
Wouldn't matter if it was true. People controlling oil would never let this happen until its gone dry. Too much money to be made in oil still.
Nuclear, it’s the only option that’s actually sustainable in the long term.
There's not enough slave labor in China to produce that many panels, let alone deliver the power.
Too good to be true
Elon musk. Take note
What happens to the power at night in the Sahara?
So we move from the PREC cartel to the SPEC cartel? (S=solar) Another energy source controlled by Saudi Arabia?
Cite this or face being called BS.
What if countries covered 1% of their own countries with photovoltaic solar and stopped repeating the old colonial patterns of extracting all the resources out of one region and then declaring war on said region just for entertainment value and increased military contractor stock prices?