• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I don’t see the problem. Buy the underpriced Chinese Solar. If they raise prices, build a factory. It’s only a few years of overpriced panels, then prices go back down. If they are dumping panels, it’s the Chinese who are handing free money to US consumers.

    After the US is 100% solar we can worry about domestic manufacturing for maintaining infrastructure.

    • djsoren19@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      except the U.S. needs solar panels for military industrial complex reasons too, and they don’t want to rely on a notoriously hostile power to build the groundwork of that structure. a big part of selling the U.S. on solar is the promise of energy independence, you don’t get independence if your entire foundation is built on another country’s tech.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        The US exports oil and gas so we are already energy independent. If China sold Gold to US consumers at $1000 an ounce, should the US step in and stop China from giving Americans cheap gold?

        Yes I understand the need for domestic production. Factories take a few years to ramp up. Domestic production can be started after everyone has solar panels and old panels need replacement.

        • HobbitFoot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          The USA keeps several wartime industries afloat with subsidies in case of war. The big one is steel, but there are others as well.

          There has been a recent rethink of what industries are needed during war and solar capacity is part of that.

      • hark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        If it was that important then the US should’ve invested in local manufacturing.

    • Chocrates@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Solar panels degrade over time, I don’t know what the numbers are but they used to be dysmal, like 30% reduction in generation capacity over 5 years. Whatever the actual numbers are, we will constantly be replacing panels. I am sure we can figure out refurbishing too at some point.

      • Juvyn00b@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah they’re definitely better now, I’m reading anywhere between 1% per year or 12.5% at year 25. There are other things that can pop up though, micro cracks causing localized overheating of the panel - to backing failures and other physical issues. I’m interested in standing some up at some point but the capital eludes me at the moment.

        • Chocrates@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          I’m am certainly wrong, that figure was something my dad told me as a kid, we were on solar back then.

          • Juvyn00b@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            No worries at all. Like you said though, with advancements people will likely do upgrades over time anyways. I don’t have numbers off the top of my head, but even just the per panel efficiencies have grown fantastically since your last experience.

        • Chocrates@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Do you know the type of pv panel that was used 20+ years ago? I lived in an off grid house and my dad mentioned that at one point.

          • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Monocrystalline silicon was used 20 years ago. It’s the oldest solar technology.

            According to the source data in a link in the page I linked thin film CIGS rollable solar sheets was the least durable. Panels installed before 2000 had a degradation of 3.5% a year. That’s 10 years to lose 30%. But CIGS solar systems installed after the year 2000 show only .02% degradation a year. The document talks about manufacturing defects that were corrected.

            http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/51664.pdf

          • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah but your point is that solar panels degrade 30% after 5 years, and then you reframe the context for 20 years ago?

            Go astrosurf somewhere else.

            Any grid has a maintenance cost and degradation. Solar panels isn’t any different.