Our research includes linear regression, principal component regression, and spatial error models to provide empirical evidence for the relationship between the adoption rates and socio-economic, geographical, and technical factors while identifying characteristics of adopter groups. The results suggest that the relative advantage factors – electricity prices and solar irradiation – play the most significant role across all regions and market segmentations. Statewide policy indicators are the second most significant factor, followed by socio-economic variables on employment status, remote working, car ownership, and property value. Our results indicate that homeowners do not only differ in their circumstances but also in their motivations.

Those all seems like very workable options.

The theoretical explanation:

When RPVSPs are installed on roofs, they absorb a significant amount of solar energy, converting some of it into electricity but also generating heat in the process. This heat is released into the surrounding air, leading to an increase in air temperature around the panels. Moreover, the elevated installation of RPVSP creates two hot surfaces: the top surface of the panels and the underside surface. As air flows over these RPVSPs, it picks up heat more efficiently than it would from typical building or ground surfaces. Observational studies in the literature have shown that areas with RPVSP arrays can experience higher daytime air temperatures compared with reference sites without RPVSP.

In essence, the heat that would be absorbed by the building (requiring more energy for cooling the interior) is instead absorbed by the panels and conducted to the surrounding air which creates a convective heat exchange cycle on a city wide scale. It would be interesting if this were compared to awnings (and pegodas) that have been in use for centuries for passive cooling of space in and around buildings.

Further, It seems like this would call for the use of phase changing material to absorb the heat from the back of the solar panels which would reduce this intensification of the urban heat island effect as the heat energy would be use in the phase change process during the day and slowly released in the reverse phase change at night without conducting more heat into the building.

None of this seems to have any real consequence on the global warming effects of greenhouse gasses (primarily natural gas [methane] and Carbon Dioxide). But it is a more accute concern that is more likely to be addressed through local ordinances, laws, and regulations.

I’m not surprised by any of it. I live in a pocket of New Jersey that has a group fighting against offshore wind farms funded mostly by Real Estate agents and existing energy interests claiming that adding supply from a new source of power is going to increase the market rate of electric power. It’s exhausting to listen to and read about their bullshiting.

I want to thank you for your reply. Hearing about someone like you and your attempt to improve your community and the world I the ways you can is so uplifting!

People are social (even the introverts) and the return on in person, deep social interaction is another reason it’s important to fight the allure of convenience of online media being ones primary and most influencial social interaction. I love that you’re doing it!

“The solar power producers during the day, and fossil legacy plants in the night.”

Thus is precisely the bottle neck I was referring to.

Batteries are the bottleneck now that solar PV equipment is so cheap. I’m excited to see how ot plays out.

Rather than take a defeatist veiw from this line if thinking, it will do well for your mental health to first spend more time, energy and thoughts on things you can control. Not just things related to environmentalism, but broadly reduce energy, engagement and focus from the things you don’t have significant control over and direct them to those things you do have control. It’s good to get a broad picture and observe the world around you outside of your control in small doses, but it’s easy to over indulge in an unfocused survey of problems in the world, especially on social media. (I include Lemmy communities in the social media category).

Furthermore, when you do engage with these problems, do so with more narrow focus and in more depth with an eye towards understanding the level of impact the problem has and what organizations or policy positions you can support to amplify your limited influence over the issues that causee the problem. In this way you can mitigate the feelings of helplessness and sense of there being many existential and imminent problems you need to contend with but cannot remedy. You can turn seemingly untouchable solutions into real possibilities without overwhelming your emotional capacity by working with others.

I am not happy now.

By chance, sure.

How is it not? Energy storage for use later in a different location from where it was collected seems like the purpose of a battery to me.

Terraform is making the claim right now. By eliminating inverters and loss from long distance transmission lines there are opportunities to make solar installation that’s not near existing infrastructure to be economically more viable.

Aircraft and shipping would be two very important circumstances.

Because the battery tech you’re thinking about isn’t the most efficient in all cases. Using hydrocarbons as a battery can be more efficient depending on circumstances.

This seems to validate Terraform’s approach of synthesizing hydrocarbons from PV power sources where there’s more distance between the production of PV power and it’s use. I hope they can figure out methenol synthesis instead of methane for this purpose.

Unfortunately, part of capitalism is the entrenched interests that interfere with anything that doesn’t directly benefit themselves. So large solar installations like this are a big win over that resistance to new sources of power.

That’s an interesting observation, it’d be interesting to see what could be the reason why that pattern might hold in a proper survey. But it could just be chance that it was that way at that particular facility.

Keep talking with your psychiatrist.

They’re like a gas tank, right?

Tidal turbines are designed to be noisy enough to deter marine life but not so noisy that there are detrimental health and ecological effects. Not sure how successful this strategy is, but the scale of deployments is still small and more study and monitoring should be done before the scale makes big impacts from even small effects.

Here’s a blog post from an engineering firm that works on these issues:
https://eandt.theiet.org/2024/03/21/designing-tidal-turbines-are-safe-marine-life