Comment Re:Enh. (Score 1) 267
You are correct that solar isn't very efficient (usually no more than 20% efficient). But let's be clear that the steam turbines from coal-burning powerplants are usually on the order of 30% efficient. That's not great either.
A natural gas turbine, especially if you have a secondary, steam-based "bottoming cycle," can get north of 50% combined efficiency. In that regard, I'm all in favor of replacing coal with natural gas.
But those 20% efficient solar panels don't lose much transferring the power from my roof or back yard into my house. The 30% efficient coal-burning powerplant, located much further away, is going to lose some power in transmission over distance. Ditto for the natural gas power plant but it's starting from a level of higher efficiency. And solar panels don't impact my local air quality.
Also, if I install enough solar panels and some batteries, I can get to the point where I no longer give a s**t about the costs of coal vs natural gas. Because I'm not paying for either.
A natural gas turbine, especially if you have a secondary, steam-based "bottoming cycle," can get north of 50% combined efficiency. In that regard, I'm all in favor of replacing coal with natural gas.
But those 20% efficient solar panels don't lose much transferring the power from my roof or back yard into my house. The 30% efficient coal-burning powerplant, located much further away, is going to lose some power in transmission over distance. Ditto for the natural gas power plant but it's starting from a level of higher efficiency. And solar panels don't impact my local air quality.
Also, if I install enough solar panels and some batteries, I can get to the point where I no longer give a s**t about the costs of coal vs natural gas. Because I'm not paying for either.