Letters to the Editor
-
Entire states?
Gulliver quotes from the journal Science:
" 'The reason is simple. Solar energy is dilute. Once it’s collected the various applications become possible. But to collect it in the amounts required to make a real difference is a huge difficulty. There is no short cut, no technology can be invented to surmount it: massive areas of the earth’s surface must be devoted to it. Solar energy has been well understood for over a century; the amount of solar energy falling on the planet is known, fixed and unchanging. The areas required for collectors, if solar was to make a significant contribution on the scale of present energy needs, are, in turn, on the scale of entire states.' "
OK, maybe that last sentence applies if we were to obtain ALL our electric power from solar. But I don't think anyone is seriously advocating that. The question is whether vastly increased solar power generation, on both local panels-on-the-roof and larger thermal solar scales, is something that should be pursued, and pursued to the maximum extent possible. The answer to that is clearly yes.
To state that "to collect [solar energy] in the amounts required to make a real difference is a huge difficulty" is sheer nonsense. I know someone who installed solar panels on the roof of his new house, and his electric bill is close to $0. A comparable 3000 square foot house in Silicon Valley running the a/c as much as he does would incur electric bills of hundreds of dollars per month. Now, according to the Science writer's logic, if everyone in Silicon Valley had solar collectors on their roofs, this still wouldn't make a "real difference". As I said, that is utter nonsense.
All this talk about covering entire states with solar panels misses the point entirely. We can do a lot more to spread solar collectors so that they are nearly universal instead of nearly universally absent. And that WILL make a real difference.