thoughts on human-computer interaction, user interfaces, design
I agree James. I think the difference is likely in the assumed efficiency. If you look at the original version of this graphic at http://www.landartgenerator.org/blagi/archives/258, it states an assumption of 20% efficiency, which is at the very upper end of what is commercially available. I believe other maps I have seen use something like 12%, which is more indicative of high-end thin film solutions. There are also no assumptions about transmission losses or storage efficiencies, which obviously make a huge impact if you were to use a centralized power solution.All this is not to knock the graphic - the point that there is plenty of solar power available to the world is still valid.
The calculation I did a couple of years ago suggested that 100km on a side was sufficient for solar (10 000 km^2). Which sounds like a lot until you draw it on a map, at which point it seemed to be smaller than some of these pink dots.- Witbrock
Post a Comment