How Many Solar Panels Are Needed To Power Entire World

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Fatboy527

California already has power shortages so I'm sure millions of new electric cars will be no problem at all.

As a long time California resident, I keep seeing this false statement come up again and again. California does not have power shortages; we have plenty of power availability, and can get much more from our wind and solar resources if needed for electric cars. California has unacceptably frequent power outages because we have an antiquated and unsafe power distribution system. During the fire season, which now lasts from May through October, we have scheduled so-called Public Safety Power Shutoffs which means that PG&E just shuts off the power in high fire risk areas until the wind stops blowing so they don’t get sued for burning entire towns to the ground. In addition to that, they have set the circuit breakers to the most sensitive level possible such that a squirrel walking on a power line the wrong way can trip the breaker. The combination results in more than one power outage day per week during the peak fire season where I live in the Santa Cruz mountains.

The solution for this is to bury power lines in the high risk areas instead of running bare wires on wooden poles through the forest canopy. After resisting this obvious solution for years, PG&E has now claimed that they will start doing this.

I fully admit, I can be a dick sometimes. But in this case, I really want you, 1947boomer to read what the poster stated, and then read what you wrote. If you don't see anything wrong, please let me know so I can point it out. maybe it's me, but it looks a whole lot like you contradicted yourself with the facts.

a reply to: network dude

I think what I'm getting from that is a power outage =/= a power shortage.

The pole in front of my house can fall and I have a power outage but it is not due to a shortage of power in the network.

a reply to: waftist

just a few years back a mall i went to all the time spent a small fortune installing solar panels on the roof of their parking structure. said parking structure comprises about 1/3 (or more), of the mall's footprint (with that being about the only available roof space with the rest, and even a separate, smallish, building, being used for the air conditioning and other building systems). during construction, there were advertising signs all over the place about how such things would greatly help the environment, and how it was the cutting edge of technology, the best and most efficient panels available, etc. your typical "green messaging".

after it was completed, for a very short while they had signs saying how great it was, and more green messaging like the silly "it can light up x-thousands of light-bulbs and the like. but what caught my attention was some of the smaller print on some of those signs that spouted off about how great it was. it turns out that after all that expense, all it ended up saving was A WHOLE 5% OF THE NEEDED POWER OF THE MALL[/I]. in fact it was pretty much just enough to power the escalators, during the day. which s far as i'm concerned is pretty much right next to useless. no wonder those signs seemed to disappear so quickly, after all the hype before hand.

so just to power a mall, during daylight hours, [I]you would need to not only cover the entire roof with solar panels, but you would also need a property of just solar panes SIX TIMES THE SIZE OF THE MALL, on top of that. and since the it is dark about half the time the mall is open (one fun thing about being close to the equator is about 12 hours of light/ 12 hours of dark, all year), that would mean you would need to have fields of solar panels over TWELVE TIMES the footprint of the mall, just to provide enough power for it. that is one huge chunk of space, especially in a city (which is why it has a huge parking structure and not just huge parking lots like you find at most malls in North America), where space is at a premium. in short solar is a majorly expensive, inefficient, waste of space. i can just see cities being surrounded by fields of solar panels stretchering for miles around them, a far bigger area than the cities actually take up, just to power the city. at that point it would be like roads, with ongoing construction and repairs being constantly done, and never ending. you would probably start having to replace huge sections of solar panels, long before such a huge solar field is even completed being built.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

They have an unreliable power supply.
However it's worded the power wasn't available to use when it was needed and that's not likely to change anytime soon.

Throw in unreliable green power and it's going to get worse.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
They have an unreliable power supply.

What the other poster is reporting is an unreliable distribution system.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Bluntone22
They have an unreliable power supply.

What the other poster is reporting is an unreliable distribution system.

Wouldn't distribution be part of the supply chain?

Generation
Distribution
Consumption

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Wouldn't distribution be part of the supply chain?

Generation
Distribution
Consumption

You could have a surplus of production, say oil being refined on the gulf coast, and no pipeline to get it to the northeast. That isn't a supply issue, that's a distribution issue. Having enough capacity to meet energy demands and the correct distribution network are two different things.

a reply to: waftist

It all depends were you put them, put an array of giant solar panels into orbit to create a giant orbiting ring of power plants that would beam there power down to receiving stations on the earth using narrow beam microwave power transfer, then distribute it were it is needed.

We could in theory produce more than we ever have need for, even just doing it on the moon creating huge fields of solar arrays up there and transmitting it from the moon back to earth via narrow beam microwave energy transfer to receiving stations either in Orbit and on the planets surface.

It really is just a part of the way along the Kardashev Scale and not even a tiny part of the way.

We have the technology but we do not yet have the international cooperation or the will to do it.

And then some fruitcake would whinge about Rockets polluting the atmosphere as we tried to build it.


Alternatives, Geothermal, dig deep enough anywhere and you can find temperatures that match those of almost any power station which you can use to heat up pressurised water and turn steam turbines with, argument it is expensive to drill - counter argument it become a lot cheaper if you drill a lot more and more money is spent into the process.

Nuclear, argument against it is dangerous and leaves waste that lasts millions or even billions of years, counter argument it is still cleaner than coal and it's always handy to have a third hand.

Hydroelectric, argument against there are not enough rivers and tapping all the wave power around coasts would change the ecological balance, counter argument it's clean and if properly implemented could actually be done with sensitivity to the environment.

Wind, argument against it kills birds and is damned ugly and hey who the hell eats that many beans, counter argument there are new bladeless wind turbines that while not as efficient do work, falls flat due to it being often too costly however so despite many nations having poured hundreds or millions or even billions into this it is actually a false economy and only viable when working in tandem with other power sources with wave, tidal and traditional hydroelectric power being the far superior technology's though it would work brilliantly in tandem with them as long is it is off shore, far away from being a bloody eyesore and implemented correctly - which it so far has not been in my opinion though on a small scale it remains great for small energy needs were alternatives are not easy to implement.

So best of all world's, build an army of remote controlled robotic workers to mine the moons regolith and not only for Helium 3 which is potentially an even better solution to our energy need's but to turn that material into Solar Panels, build facility's on the moon to convert it into a portable energy format such as microwaves and send it back to receiving stations in orbit were it can be distributed to ground based receiving stations, bob's your uncle the planet has TOO much energy and can fuel a new age of technological development.

Sadly not going to happen as we have morons in charge and people are dumb enough to vote those morons in every time.

a reply to: waftist

They will have to turn the earth into a glass ball, that out to do it, then when is time to harvest people will be eating glass for salads.

is unsustainable without creating a global crisis, you can not grow food with a carpet of glass covering the earth.

As a very firm advocate for solar, it just isnt that "green." Thats literally just propaganda.

We also need to consider how much heat is actually produced by things like solar cells. Urban areas change the surrounding environment dramatically, creating things like heat islands and even wind patterns.

Their strength comes in the autonomy it can provide for each household, with relative ease of access to said autonomy.

And with that said, I guess I just dont "get" this whole notion that everything has to be one or the other, all or nothing. Why bother even looking at what it takes to power the entire world with solar panels? Its an interesting endeavor, but should never be actively pursued in reality. Fossil fuels arent some devil to be eradicated, in my opinion.

There are a ton of technologies that are much better than solar in many ways, though some arent quite ready for primetime. I believe that solar itself will always have something of a place, but it isnt in these large centralized systems. To its credit, the video actually mentions this, but its merely in passing.

Lets build the systems and pieces of tech that enables us to easily integrate current and forthcoming energy sources in an easy and efficient way, and then you will be on to something.

Overall, I actually liked the video, but it misses so much that it veers very quickly into marketing. Even the so-called "experts" do this, so its not uncommon.

Beyond that, some of the big changes that can be made are everything from LED lighting to the design of large appliances. A lot of the daily stuff in a household doesnt actually use that much energy, like lighting and general electronics. However, throw something like a single hair dryer in there and you need a much more substantial system.

Whats kind of cool about a lot of the stuff, like LED lighting strips, is that they also provide a really fun platform for creativity and a lot of opportunity to do some very cool stuff when it comes to lighting. While most approaches to household lighting are pretty strictly functional, it can affect things like general mood. Even some 3" long strips in the right places can make for a room that feels completely different.

I'm sure California will whine and the administration will give them Nevada's, Oregon & Arizona's power. Gotta keep Hollywood & The Wine flowing.a reply to: Bluntone22

a reply to: loveguy

And least we forget the excess power (even though I believe your estimate of wattage used to be way off) ? Our current electric grid is in sore need of upgrades just to carry the current load.

The excess power has to go somewhere, power companies are not ready to store, pay for, nor deliver the excess power produced with an all solar grid. The enormous cost of solar conversion at the current price is just out of the question for the majority of residents much less even a medium to small business.

And while solar panels can have a life of around 20 years, their efficiency and production ability drop dramatically each year. Batteries have a shorter life span of around 15 years, and in some regions the dependence on solar would lead to disaster.

Hawaii is an example of solar power failure. Recently many who spent tens of thousands to convert to solar are now outlawed to using any solar power. Many residents are on very long waiting list to even install solar panels. The primary reason is the grid was incapable of the load and the energy companies could not afford to pay for the excess power and still deliver and maintain power to non solar customers.

What are the essential things we need energy for? Speeding up the economy and making everything fast? And then when everything is fast, we sit by the telly all evening with our spare time. That is the problem...

Actually you don't need energy for most things, here are some examples:
- cooling & heating : Our houses have for centuries been built wrong, that's why we need a lot of heating and cooling. Traditionally houses in hot climes were built with central water reservoirs, the evaporation kept the inner yard and house cool. They were also painted white. You can look it up. In cold climes, they were built underground. You have about +5 degrees Celsius ( 41 degrees F ) in an average cave or pit dwelling with just human body heat even if it is freezing outside. But hey, we want windows, nice view etc.

Now we also suck the hot air out from the top of the room and create new hot air from radiators that rises up or push it in close to the ceiling. What a waste of energy! Air is coolest at floor level, it should be sucked out there, additional benefit, dust goes out as well when you suck air out at floor level. Now we circulate dust in rooms... Meaning, our air circulation systems installed in houses are designed against the physics of hot air. In both hot and cold climes air should be run through a long tube installed in the ground, in winter it heats to +5C even if it is freezing outside, in summer you get cool air at +5C.

- food preservation: vinegar, salting, drying, a freezer or fridge is not needed for most foods. In places where it freezes over, ice was stored in sawdust over the summer and taken out when needed for 'fridges'. Sorry, did I forget the modern comfort and ease requirement? Cellars are also relatively cool in summer, they also are housed underground...

- entertainment: we are lazy to do the things we need to do for our living the 'slow way', so we need energy, then we use more energy to satisfy our boredom with the free time on our hands.

- transport: we have managed it so that our workplaces don't exist in the vicinity where we live and because we are bored with our free time we need a lot of stuff besides necessities that needs to be brought to us, including food that we don't produce in the vicinity. Look at a traditional village, farms around, most services and jobs in town...

Sum it up : we are lazy as a species and want everything now. That needs energy to realize...

Just as a side note: doesn't matter how much we struggle, we are always here and now, which most people don't realize and no matter how 'fast' we get things, we still have 24 hrs / per day

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: waftist

I think the government elites figured out years ago that it will be impossible to convert the world to green energy.
That leaves only one viable option.
Reduce energy consumption.
What's the easiest way to do that?
Destroy the world economy and send everyone into poverty.

That is also why they are reducing energy consumption by fees , taxes or monetary means so it allows those with money to afford to continue to have their 5 houses,2 yachts, private jets,etc.

A fee or monetary penalties only effects the peeons.

I remember coming across an article about the California water shortages and how many in hollywood still had beautifully maintained lawns . They just paid the thousands in fee which was the equivalent of a 50 dollar fee for the rest of normies.

So while everyone else had dead grass or had to redo their lawns , the same people pushing for sustainability had perfect lawns because the fees didn't impact them.

I'm still waiting for large orbital platforms to beam microwave lasers to selected receiving stations located in the world's deserts and ocean platforms areas. Nice, clean, high-efficiency power and plenty of it.

a reply to: waftist

Depends on the size of the Panels i suppose.

But our Sun releases more energy in a minute than we could use in a 1000 years at our current level of material science, technology, and ability to harness and/or produce energy.

My partner and I just invested in solar. Not because we want to go 'green' but because our supply isn't reliable. We have frequent outages. We have a 1800 square foot house. Our roof is perfect since we have a large area facing South with no shade.

It's not cheap but some of that will be offset by reducing our electric bill to almost zero. We will overproduce during the day and bank the extra with our electric company. What we bank during the day will then be available to use at night. Should work out to be a zero sum game if the calculations are correct.

A big part of the cost is the battery bank we bought for those frequent outages. But we invested in that because our design will allow us to run everything including A/C even if we have a power outage.

Like I said, we didn't do this in order to be 'green'. We decided to invest because of frequent outages and our electric company allows us to bank any overproduction. Also even if the cost of electricity goes up it won't affect us because our payments for the system are fixed and we got a loan for 1.49%.

a reply to: Bluntone22
Off grid in an rv with 2 deep cycle batteries (4,000w inverter) and 200 watts rated panels would run my ac for a solid four hours, in order to still run the fridge and microwave each day...
it was fun for a couple of years...

beyondknowledge

👍
I gave a ballpark figure of a personal experience, can only speak for myself.

a reply to: Superecho2021
Can't disagree with ya there.

Our priorities are fudged because we're always compromising better judgement for profit...that real quick short fix-

People that spend their vacation working are not on vacation.

We spend more energy on desire than gratitude, most can't escape it. Which creates more adversity by default....

a reply to: loveguy

You are correct but it’s not going to change. And our consumption is only going to get worse. Devices that use to actually turn off when you turned them off now are connected 24-7 to the internet to satisfy needs and desires. The IOT or internet of things is becoming off the chain, everything from cameras in our refrigerators to BBQ grills wired and ready to report when the coals are hot.

As more automation and robotics kick in, leisure time will increase as will leisure items. All will increase the demands on the grid which can barely handle delivery now much less absorb the storage and delivery of the extra juice from solar. Obviously I am no expert but until we invest in upgrades to what is already an archaic system we can’t move much further towards “free” energy from solar.