For those keeping count, solar panels now don't work when it's: 1. Dark 2. Cloudy 3. Too dusty 4. Not subsidized by government And... 5. Too sunny!
“Solar likes sunshine, but it doesn’t like being hot,” Alastair Buckley, a professor of organic electronics at the University of Sheffield,
There’s such a thing as too much sun for solar panels
And Europe’s solar industry is starting to buckle.
fortune.com
“Solar likes sunshine, but it doesn’t like being hot,” Alastair Buckley, a professor of organic electronics at the University of Sheffield,
progress in libtardian land
Over the weekend, Germany broke the country’s record for solar power output, with even higher levels of electricity generation expected this week as the heat wave rages.
Over the weekend, Germany broke the country’s record for solar power output, with even higher levels of electricity generation expected this week as the heat wave rages.
Speaking of solar panels.
California now has a problem w/ dead solar panels piling up in landfills contaminating groundwater.
https://www.latimes.com/business/st...rnia-rooftop-solar-pv-panels-recycling-danger
Many are already winding up in landfills, where in some cases, they could potentially contaminate groundwater with toxic heavy metals such as lead, selenium and cadmium.
Sam Vanderhoof, a solar industry expert and chief executive of Recycle PV Solar, says that only 1 in 10 panels are actually recycled, according to estimates drawn from International Renewable Energy Agency data on decommissioned panels and from industry leaders.
The looming challenge over how to handle truckloads of waste, some of it contaminated, illustrates how cutting-edge environmental policy can create unforeseen problems down the road.
“The industry is supposed to be green,” Vanderhoof said. “But in reality, it’s all about the money.”
California now has a problem w/ dead solar panels piling up in landfills contaminating groundwater.
https://www.latimes.com/business/st...rnia-rooftop-solar-pv-panels-recycling-danger
Many are already winding up in landfills, where in some cases, they could potentially contaminate groundwater with toxic heavy metals such as lead, selenium and cadmium.
Sam Vanderhoof, a solar industry expert and chief executive of Recycle PV Solar, says that only 1 in 10 panels are actually recycled, according to estimates drawn from International Renewable Energy Agency data on decommissioned panels and from industry leaders.
The looming challenge over how to handle truckloads of waste, some of it contaminated, illustrates how cutting-edge environmental policy can create unforeseen problems down the road.
“The industry is supposed to be green,” Vanderhoof said. “But in reality, it’s all about the money.”
There Is No Climate Crisis: History Shows Us That The Earth Has Seen Far Worse
BY TYLER DURDENWEDNESDAY, AUG 17, 2022 - 09:00 PM
Climate science has been so suffocated by ideological zealotry it's becoming difficult just to find normal objective analysis these days. Any piece of data that contradicts the man-made climate change narrative is surrounding by a spin machine that either dismisses the information or obscures it in a deluge of global warming propaganda, inoculating the reader well before they get a chance to digest the news that maybe climate change is not all it's cracked up to be.
Whenever high temperatures are reported in the US or Europe the news is hyperinflated into wild theories of climate Apocalypse by the media, but weather history suggests that the panic is fabricated rather than justified. In fact, any hot weather event you can pick out in recent years is likely overshadowed by a much worse event decades or centuries before “man-made carbon pollution” was ever a thing.
For example, the media is frantic over the current drought and “record temps” in Europe this summer, warning that it could become the “worst drought” in 500 years. Of course, this claim opens the door to a question that climate scientists and propagandists don't want to answer: What happened 500 years ago?
A similar level of global warming hysteria was present during a heat wave in Europe in 2003, as well as in 2018. The few climate scientists still not bought and paid for by governments and the UN have had to point out that these droughts are nothing compared to the living hell that was the drought of 1540. This event is often termed a “mega-drought” because the region suffered historically hot temps while receiving almost no rain for a year.
Temperatures that year averaged 5°C to 7° C above average temperatures in Europe in the 20th century. In US terms, that means daily summer temps of around 104° F. Hundreds of historic accounts written at the time describe around half a million deaths, along with vast wildfires and a winter in Italy that “felt like July.” Keep in mind that carbon levels in Europe in 1540 were 30% LOWER than they are today, yet, the region suffered perhaps the worst warming event in its recorded history.
Today's climate data is based on records held by the NOAA and other institutions, and these records only go back to 1880. So, whenever you hear the mainstream media rant about record temperatures, they are using a tiny sliver of global weather history going back a little over a century. Any honest scientist in this field will tell you that the Earth's climate record is vast compared to the limited data used by global warming ideologues, and the majority of destructive weather crises have occurred well before man-made carbon emissions.
It certainly wasn't carbon pollution from cars, farming and industry that caused the crisis in 1540.
Try doing any research on the 1540 event and you will be buried in a pile of mainstream articles that acknowledge the disaster but then try to use it as an example of why we must comply with carbon restrictions and climate authoritarianism in 2022. They say “Look at what happened to Europe in 1540. You don't want that to happen again, do you?”
Of course, humanity had no say or control over the weather in 1540, just as we have no say or control over the weather today. There was no carbon based global warming back then, and there is no carbon based global warming now.
Scientists still have no idea what caused many of the warming events of the past including the crisis of 1540, so why should we have blind faith in their claims that carbon is the cause of warming in recent years? In fact, the NOAA and other climate research institutions still offer no concrete proof of a relationship between carbon emissions and rising temperatures. Their argument is that they have excluded all other possible causes, leaving only carbon as the remainder. This is not science, this is haphazard guesswork.
If there was ever a field that defies the logic, reason and analysis commonly associated with the scientific method, it is climate science.
Set aside the fact that billions of dollars in funding are paid out to climate scientists every year, but only those scientists that operate from the assumption that climate change is caused by human beings. That is to say, there are numerous incentives for scientists to discount other causes for global warming. They are not scientists, they are paid political activists. Luckily, temperatures are not that high. The NOAA's own data shows that the average temperature of the Earth has risen less than 1°C in the past century. This is nothing, so why all the panic?
Let's just say that carbon controls are a powerful tool for micromanaging the population and justifying authoritarianism in the name of the “greater good.” If the public is convinced to accept false climate change narratives, then government would have the ability to control every aspect of daily life, from the amount of electricity we use, to the food we eat, to the businesses we can run, to the level of production and the size of the population. This is not fiction this is reality, and it is happening much faster than many people realize, all in the name of saving the planet from a threat that doesn't exist.
Global warming is the greatest scientific fraud in history
By Guy K. Mitchell, Jr.In 1912, amateur archaeologist Charles Dawson claimed to have discovered the "missing link" between ape and man, known as "The Piltdown Man." He had found part of a human-like skull in Pleistocene gravel beds near Piltdown village in Sussex, England. Dawson submitted the find to Arthur Smith Woodward, keeper of geology at the Natural History Museum. Smith Woodward made a reconstruction of skull fragments, and the archaeologists hypothesized that the find indicated evidence of a human ancestor living 500,000 years ago. They announced their discovery at a Geological Society meeting in 1912. For the most part, their story was accepted as fact. However, subsequent chemical testing showed that the skull and jaw fragments actually came from two different species, a human and an ape.
The conclusion: Piltdown Man was an audacious fake and sophisticated scientific fraud. Forty-one years elapsed between the discovery of the "Piltdown Man" and the determination that it was a fraud.
In 1988, the United Nations formed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (U.N. IPCC). In its seminal report in 1990, the U.N. IPCC stated that "at the then current rate of world emissions of CO2, the global mean temperature would likely increase by 1°C by 2025." This statement formed the basis for the hypothesis that anthropogenic (man-made) global warming resulted from the increased concentration of CO2 in the Earth's lower atmosphere resulting from man-made activities. Central to the hypothesis was that the temperature of the lower troposphere would increase as the concentration of CO2 in the troposphere increased. Therefore, in its 1990 report, the U.N. IPCC established a direct linkage between the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere and the temperature of the lower troposphere.
The scientific method of inquiry has guided scientific research and investigation for over 400 years. In summary, the scientific method requires that a researcher observe a phenomenon, postulate a hypothesis for the cause of the phenomenon, and then conduct experiments or scientific investigations in an effort to falsify the hypothesis.
In adherence to the scientific method, a climate scientist who thinks that man has caused global warming should develop a complex hypothesis as follows:
- Global warming has occurred; that is, the temperature of the world's oceans, land mass, and relevant atmosphere has risen during the period under investigation by a statistically significant amount.
- Man's activities are responsible for the global warming that has occurred.
- The extent to which global warming has occurred, or is reasonably projected to occur in the future, will adversely affect life on Earth.
In 1978, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) began to launch a series of satellites to polar-circumnavigate the globe using microwave sounding technology to measure the temperature of the lower troposphere (first 8 km of the Earth's atmosphere). The results show that during the period 1979–1998, the average monthly temperature anomaly of the lower troposphere decreased approximately 0.3° C each year, while the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere increased from 335 ppm to 370 ppm.
Sometime during the period 1979–1998, an unbiased climate scientist at the U.N. IPCC should have observed that the temperature of the troposphere had significantly cooled while the concentration of CO2 had increased, contradicting the fundamental precept of the global warming hypothesis. A committee should have been assembled to verify the accuracy of the temperature and CO2 concentration data. The man-made global warming hypothesis should have been declared falsified if the data were accurate. No such action occurred.
Until the advent of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis, the Piltdown Man was the most remarkable scientific fraud in history. The anthropogenic global warming hypothesis has now assumed that title.
