Technically moonlight and light pollution at night means that there's a lot of light for solar panels to absorb even at night. Can't solar panels absorb moonlight and lights from new york skyscrapers etc?Moonlight is reflected solar light.
>>16778941>Mehdi HasanThis man is an evil piece of shit.You should probably not care about his hot takes.
>>16778941Nope, solar and wind are both scams.>muh batterypeople need power both during the day and night.Truth is solar, wind etc etc are all extremely low density sources of energy, basically you pay more for less amount of energy.Nuclear is only viable "alternative" source of energy, and even then petroleum can't be "le abolished" as these 65IW illiterate and in pic rel case, inbred libcucks think, because petroleum is blood of modern civilisation, agriculture wouldn't be possible without it, all modern medicines, fertilisers, various sorts of appliances, textiles etc all need petroleum, petroleum is needed in manufacturing of solar cells and wind turbines, all the heavy machinery in this world requires petroleum based lubricants.
>>16778945He is just another inbred muzzchud retard
>>16778941>Can solar panels generate electricity through moonlight?Not in any useful capacity. Light intensity is already the major limiting factor with solar, and the reflected light from the moon is orders of magnitude less intense. While a full moon might look bright enough to see to you, it's because your eyes perceive light in a logarithmic fashion so huge changes in intensity result in smaller changes in how you see. There's simply not enough energy being reflected by the moon. Similarly, while it might look like there's a lot of light pollution it only seems that way because you're comparing it to very dim stars. You'd have more electricity just by shutting off unnecessary lights at night.Politics aside, >>16778948 is correct that nuclear power (including fission technologies that were never fully developed) is the only real solution for long-term sustainable energy production.
>>16778945So he's evil for debating Israelis who tell him that they're gonna kill him in every debate on piers morgan.
>>16778949You're not actually racist, you just hate him because he calls out Israel every day.If he was loving israel you'd say he's based.
>>16778975>Not in any useful capacityBut they do generate something and they do recycle light pollution to a very low extent then?As solar panel technology improves by increasing sensitivity what will happen.
>>16778948>Truth is solar, wind etc etc are all extremely low density sources of energy, basically you pay more for less amount of energy.Not if you measure in dollars per kwh, also land any power plant has to use is already baked into the price of it's electricity.
>>16778948>petroleum is blood of modern civilisation, agriculture wouldn't be possible without it, all modern medicines, fertilisers, various sorts of appliances, textiles etc all need petroleum, petroleum is needed in manufacturing of solar cells and wind turbines, all the heavy machinery in this world requires petroleum based lubricants.If we stop using petroleum for energy production we will have a lot more petroleum for all those things AND will reduce atmospheric pollution.
>>16778941This is equivalent to asking if you can focus moonlight enough to start a campfire.
>>16778975Is there any way to get the solar panels higher upMaybe in space they can charge batteriesAnd then have some kind of a system to get itEven powering lasers and all that would that work?Probably not. Not good enoughAnd too much loss and upkeepI had a loose shit ideaMake little solar panels on wheels with basicNavigation and put a plant on them like cannabis(9 essential amino acids//nutrients/medicine/oil/material)Put them in the desert and let them ride around collecting energyAnd maybe producing water
Solar energy on Mars is about as strong as moon light. Rovers get by just fine. Until winter that is…
>>16778983No, he's just an evil piece of shit because he's an evil piece of shit, I couldn't care less about what ever he has to do with israel.
>>16778985>>16779619I'd be surprised if the moonlight or ambient light pollution light would produce enough voltage in panel to overcome internal resistance to even be measured. In terms of numbers, mid day sunshine under clear skies (which is how solar panels are rated) comes in at over 100,000 lux. The light of the full moon on a clear night is less than 0.1 lux. That's a million-fold difference. If you had a big ass solar installation with a nominal output of 5MW, it would only produce 5W in full moonlight, barely enough power to charge a single cell phone even if there was no parasitic loss to resistance in wiring, inverters, etc. The intensity of light pollution will vary, but I've never seen light pollution approach full moon light levels. It just wouldn't work. And even if you put panels in space, you might as well aim them at the sun for the much higher intensity.>>16780294That's not true at all, light intensity from the sun on Mars is still something like 40,000 lux. Even Pluto gets more intense light from the sun than Earth does from the moon.
Lunar irradiance during the night is roughly 1/400,000 that of solar irradiance during the day. So with the same panels you will be collecting 1/400,000th the amount of power. That's less than a rounding error compared normal variations from cloud cover.>>16778985Current residential solar panels are about 20% efficient. So if you somehow made perfect panels you would be able to collect about about 5x as much energy. 5 times the trivial amount of energy current panels can collect from moonlight is still trivial. >>16780294Incorrect. Solar irradiance on Mars is about 40% of what it is on the Earth.
>>16779619There have been proposals to put solar panels in orbit (mind you you would point them at the sun, not the moon) and use microwaves to beam the power back to Earth. From a technical stand point said system should work just fine, but the costs of launching those panels currently easily over weighs the benefits from not having atmospheric losses. And putting solar panels on roaming devices, while possible (that's what the Mars rovers are), would just be silly for energy production. Putting stationary solar panels on roof tops or empty desert land makes more sense. If you want them to make water you then use those to power a desalination plant, which has to be by the ocean.
>>16780417But solar panels would cover a lot of space in space
>>16781777No planning regulations (so far).
>>16780390Lux is some bastardized corrected for human eye perception by wavelength bullshit. Your numbers are vaguely correct for human eyes but for panels turning light into watts, panels typically produce about 0.1 to 0.2 percent of daytime power in moonlight. Maybe the stars or cloud reflections contribute. Anyway yeah you can get fucked up if you touch solar panel wiring at night. You still need to lock out tag out panels not just wait for sunset. Trust me you will get fucked up if you try crimping connectors at night thinking you won't get shocked. It's not a lot of power I suppose if you'd get vaporized during the day for the same panels....
>>16778948I generate 28kwh a day, typically use about 5, and get paid 60% of retail for what I don't use. Why is this a scam?
>>16785660Sounds like it works good for you but it relies on others not using solar so your excess can be provided to them through the grid and then you can pull non-solar power from the grid at night. If everyone goes solar, your system no longer works for you nor their systems for them.
>>16778941there are bacteria who photosynthesize solely using the glow from deep sea hydrothermal ventshttps://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0503674102
