this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
703 points (94.4% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

9719 readers
549 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/8471507

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I don't see the problem. Buy the underpriced Chinese Solar. If they raise prices, build a factory. It's only a few years of overpriced panels, then prices go back down. If they are dumping panels, it's the Chinese who are handing free money to US consumers.

After the US is 100% solar we can worry about domestic manufacturing for maintaining infrastructure.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

except the U.S. needs solar panels for military industrial complex reasons too, and they don't want to rely on a notoriously hostile power to build the groundwork of that structure. a big part of selling the U.S. on solar is the promise of energy independence, you don't get independence if your entire foundation is built on another country's tech.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The US exports oil and gas so we are already energy independent. If China sold Gold to US consumers at $1000 an ounce, should the US step in and stop China from giving Americans cheap gold?

Yes I understand the need for domestic production. Factories take a few years to ramp up. Domestic production can be started after everyone has solar panels and old panels need replacement.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 7 months ago

The USA keeps several wartime industries afloat with subsidies in case of war. The big one is steel, but there are others as well.

There has been a recent rethink of what industries are needed during war and solar capacity is part of that.

[–] hark@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

If it was that important then the US should've invested in local manufacturing.

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Solar panels degrade over time, I don't know what the numbers are but they used to be dysmal, like 30% reduction in generation capacity over 5 years. Whatever the actual numbers are, we will constantly be replacing panels. I am sure we can figure out refurbishing too at some point.

[–] Juvyn00b@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah they're definitely better now, I'm reading anywhere between 1% per year or 12.5% at year 25. There are other things that can pop up though, micro cracks causing localized overheating of the panel - to backing failures and other physical issues. I'm interested in standing some up at some point but the capital eludes me at the moment.

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm am certainly wrong, that figure was something my dad told me as a kid, we were on solar back then.

[–] Juvyn00b@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No worries at all. Like you said though, with advancements people will likely do upgrades over time anyways. I don't have numbers off the top of my head, but even just the per panel efficiencies have grown fantastically since your last experience.

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Yeah I was totally wrong, that is great though!

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

but they used to be dysmal, like 30% reduction in generation capacity over 5 years.

??? Monocrystalline silicon losses less than .4% a year. That means after 50 years it's still producing 82% of when it was new. It takes 90 years to get a 30% reduction rate.

https://www.engineering.com/story/what-is-the-lifespan-of-a-solar-panel

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Do you know the type of pv panel that was used 20+ years ago? I lived in an off grid house and my dad mentioned that at one point.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Monocrystalline silicon was used 20 years ago. It's the oldest solar technology.

According to the source data in a link in the page I linked thin film CIGS rollable solar sheets was the least durable. Panels installed before 2000 had a degradation of 3.5% a year. That's 10 years to lose 30%. But CIGS solar systems installed after the year 2000 show only .02% degradation a year. The document talks about manufacturing defects that were corrected.

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/51664.pdf

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Ok, I'm just flat wrong! Til!

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but your point is that solar panels degrade 30% after 5 years, and then you reframe the context for 20 years ago?

Go astrosurf somewhere else.

Any grid has a maintenance cost and degradation. Solar panels isn't any different.

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

The fuck are you talking about. I was wrong. Get over it.