For energy generation, being close to the point of usage prevents waste from energy transport. For energy storage it’s probably more efficient to do this at larger scale, which means centralized systems.
So I think it’s more complicated and depends on a lot of factors. Stating “Centralization is more efficient and less wasteful” as a hard fact is misleading at best.
Though the rooftop solar isn’t optimal from an efficacy standpoint, it has other selling points. You have residential solar and a battery? Congratulations, you don’t have to worry so much about power outages. This is particularly a selling point for rural living, where outages happen more often and last longer.
The abstract “it’s greener” is a less potent sales pitch than “your fridge, heating, and a/c can still work even if the grid is gone”.
It could just be the same thing. Total houses in community. Apply solar cells to already owned government land or near where the current plant is anyway like most already have been doing. Just scale up and add wind in. Salt batteries all over. Bam.
The beauty of solar is it scales up/down without much fuss whereas you can’t just run a coal fire plant for your home. We can build what makes sense for each community/home.
Sure, but it’s more efficient to have the number of panels necessary for the community (neighborhood, city, etc) than having everyone get what they need for their individual peak…
Depending on the housing density, probably but not always. Again, we don’t have to determine this from the beginning. We can adapt the scale and approach to each circumstance. I imagine buy and large having one central array of solar panels feeding several properties/communities makes the most sense. But how many properties (and their average draw) per sq/km or sq/mi very much impacts what that translates into.
Centralization is more efficient and less wasteful.
For energy generation, being close to the point of usage prevents waste from energy transport. For energy storage it’s probably more efficient to do this at larger scale, which means centralized systems.
So I think it’s more complicated and depends on a lot of factors. Stating “Centralization is more efficient and less wasteful” as a hard fact is misleading at best.
Though the rooftop solar isn’t optimal from an efficacy standpoint, it has other selling points. You have residential solar and a battery? Congratulations, you don’t have to worry so much about power outages. This is particularly a selling point for rural living, where outages happen more often and last longer.
The abstract “it’s greener” is a less potent sales pitch than “your fridge, heating, and a/c can still work even if the grid is gone”.
It could just be the same thing. Total houses in community. Apply solar cells to already owned government land or near where the current plant is anyway like most already have been doing. Just scale up and add wind in. Salt batteries all over. Bam.
The beauty of solar is it scales up/down without much fuss whereas you can’t just run a coal fire plant for your home. We can build what makes sense for each community/home.
Sure, but it’s more efficient to have the number of panels necessary for the community (neighborhood, city, etc) than having everyone get what they need for their individual peak…
Depending on the housing density, probably but not always. Again, we don’t have to determine this from the beginning. We can adapt the scale and approach to each circumstance. I imagine buy and large having one central array of solar panels feeding several properties/communities makes the most sense. But how many properties (and their average draw) per sq/km or sq/mi very much impacts what that translates into.