Well it is pretty pointless to argue with one who has made up his mind and does not listen to facts or arguments.
How much seacoast is there, and how much transmission loss is there getting it to places with no seacoast?
The losses are the same as any long distance power transfer, so why do you care? (Hint: you can google how much it is, and the value is astonishing low)
However, multi-junction cells and some of the highest efficiency cells are built on substrates of rare earths. That is wrong. Because they are made from Silicon, too; or Gallium Arsenid. Rare Earths would actually destroy them, facepalm.
Only thin film solar cells use rare earth elements. So does any laptop battery ... go figure. "Rare earth" is just a name those elements got 100 years ago, they are not rare.
Actually PV is best built in areas with maximum days of sun and away from obstructions that might interfere with solar coverage.
Like parking lots, roofs of buildings etc ... aka in cities. So I see we agree. Finally.
Except the waste from the mine would be controlled differently. What waste does a mine have that only mines stones and grinds them to sand to be refined into metals? (*facepalm*)
The amount of energy we produce with biomass is big enough that it is a majour player in the balancing power market.
So your idea of a "major player" and mine are somewhat different.
No they are not. You are simply bad in reading or lack some understanding: do you know what "balancing power" is?
As said before and made it now bold again: balancing power (or reserve power). In germany biomass is a majour player in balancing power. No idea what biomass plants you have, burning wood is imho not a good idea but waste.
Please stop mixing up your retarded energy market with the rest of the worlds.
Will locals or government ALLOW you to build there?
The same problem you have with nukes ...