Hacker News Reader

Comment by mrleinad | Hacker News Reader

It's not silly if all there's to argue from the other point of view is photons per square meter. Weather also plays a role.

I don't mean to say I have the absolute truth, I want to see if they've even considered sun availability for different regions. It seems solar proponents really haven't analyzed it from that point of view, AFAIK.

View on HN

As far as you know, solar proponents haven't analyzed sun availability in the regions that they're installing solar? Perhaps they have done the analysis and that's why they're spending billions of dollars installing them? The industry has seen something like 75% decreases in cost-per-watt installation costs in the past decade, I can assure you, they're doing the analysis.

Unless you have evidence of those calculations (which should be public of course, right? I mean, it's government spending after all) I'd say they haven't, and they have just been pouring money into a fire pit because it won them votes to say they were going green.

What I mean is, I haven't seen those calculations. Have you, or are you just hoping they have done the math? I wouldn't put any faith on any politician doing any hard math on this whatsoever.

Ah, got it. You're basing this on your feelings and baseless conspiracy theories rather than looking at any of the actual profitable, privately owned renewable infrastructure that's being built. I get the distinct sense this conversation won't be productive for either of us, so farewell.

> actual profitable, privately owned renewable infrastructure

Exclude the tax exemptions and subsidies given to those companies and then check if they're profitable or not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com