Trump's Solar Wall

[Elind]

I thought this would already be a topic, but I'm curious if there are any thoughts on Trump's Solar Wall.

Personally I think it's idiotic for technical and practical reasons.

 

[Spindrift]

I thought this would already be a topic, but I'm curious if there are any thoughts on Trump's Solar Wall.

Personally I think it's idiotic for technical and practical reasons.

I think you've summed it up perfectly. No need for further discussion.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

It's mostly a good idea. He just need to drop the wall part and then it would be perfect!

 

[RedPillNeo]

Trump supporters think this is the perfect "Gotcha."

"Hurr durr, the lib'ruls can't oppose the wall without opposing solar power now. Hypocritical CUCKS!"

Like the wall itself, you can't ask about a cost/benefit analysis without being dismissed as a cuck.

 

[Trebuchet]

At least he's not proposing a wind-powered wall!

And in all seriousness, why aren't that thread and this one in the general Trump thread, which I fought to get reopened?

 

[Puppycow]

Is this discussion intended to also include the politics or just the technical and practical aspects? (Given that it's in the Science and Technology section)

Personally I think it's idiotic for technical and practical reasons.

Compared to just a plain old wall?

I'm skeptical too, but I haven't done any sort of rigorous analysis.

 

[Tero]

The wall would be wonderful target for shooting practice. It's just we Democrats don't carry guns.

 

[alfaniner]

Maybe he doesn't realize that the solar panels have to go on the south side.

 

[quadraginta]

At least he's not proposing a wind-powered wall!

<snip>

It could have been much worse than that.

Be grateful he isn't proposing a 2,000 mile long coal fired power plant on his wall.

 

[Beady]

It could have been much worse than that.

Be grateful he isn't proposing a 2,000 mile long coal fired power plant on his wall.

Politically, that would have been more consistent. At the very least, he could point to it as an attempt to bring back coal industry jobs.

This signature is intended to irritate people.

 

[Planigale]

I wonder if he plans a heliostat system?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanpah_Solar_Power_Facility
Of course the power generation unit would be in Mexico, but it would give him a potential death ray (at least during the day) to defend the US with.

 

[McHrozni]

I thought this would already be a topic, but I'm curious if there are any thoughts on Trump's Solar Wall.

Personally I think it's idiotic for technical and practical reasons.

The wall itself is idiotic for technical and practical (and political) reasons and covering it with solar panels to pay for it while you're trying to make coal power cheaper than solar is a whole new level of idiocy, but if such a wall existed, covering it with solar panels wouldn't be a bad idea.

You just have to rework the concept slightly and don't think of it as a single huge power plant stretching thousands of miles, but a series of power plants along the path of the wall, connected to the power grid at multiple points to provide local power. I played with the numbers a bit and it came out to about 600 MW of power, which is quite respectable, a typical nuclear power plant provides about as much.

A road solar plant is already being tested in France. A power plant on top of a border wall is significantly less ambitious and much more cost-effective.

https://www.theverge.com/2016/12/22/14055756/solar-panel-road-electricity-france-normandy

If we want to switch to solar-wind-hydro mix we should consider covering anything we can afford to cover with solar panels, or else we'll either run out of room or destroy vast habitats or both. Megastructures like the wall or national road or highway systems should be high on the list, since their surface area is already lost to nature and because their aesthetic beauty doesn't need to be considered.

McHrozni

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Actually, there is a way in which Trump might get the left/environmentalists on board:

make sure the wall contains a lot of wide breaks for wildlife to migrate.

Not a problem, right?

 

[RedPillNeo]

One of the main problems with this concept is, it's against the law. Ohm's Law.

A solar collection field a mile square collects the energy in a small area and steps it up to high voltage for less lossy transmission to where it's needed. If the same amount is made 4' wide along the top of a wall, the equivalent area would top around 1,300 miles of wall. This increases costs and complexity, and takes away the economy of scale having the collection in a small area.

Then, the cost/watt and efficiency losses to make the panels invulnerable to the billions of rocks conveniently available to vandals along the wall, because the panels will need to be angled Southward.

I tried engaging Trump supporters on this, they scoffed at the very question of a cost/benefit analysis before deleting my thread.

 

[Arcade22]

I thought Trump hated solar power for competing against true hard working (white) Americans in the coal industry.

 

[Spindrift]

One of the main problems with this concept is, it's against the law. Ohm's Law.

A solar collection field a mile square collects the energy in a small area and steps it up to high voltage for less lossy transmission to where it's needed. If the same amount is made 4' wide along the top of a wall, the equivalent area would top around 1,300 miles of wall. This increases costs and complexity, and takes away the economy of scale having the collection in a small area.

Then, the cost/watt and efficiency losses to make the panels invulnerable to the billions of rocks conveniently available to vandals along the wall, because the panels will need to be angled Southward.

I tried engaging Trump supporters on this, they scoffed at the very question of a cost/benefit analysis before deleting my thread.

You tried explaining science to Trump supporters? Silly rabbit. Trump's America is a magical place where the inconveniences of science and reality don't interfere.

 

[Arcade22]

Besides isn't the cost irrelevant since Mexico is going to pay for it all? Might as well make it as expensive as possible.

 

[Trebuchet]

Politically, that would have been more consistent. At the very least, he could point to it as an attempt to bring back coal industry jobs.

This signature is intended to irritate people.

I've got it! He could build the whole wall out of coal! It's a rock, after all.

 

[Steve]

I've got it! He could build the whole wall out of coal! It's a rock, after all.

Perfect. The people living along the wall, both sides, could burn it in the winter for heat. This would require annual replacement and would bring the coal mines back to life.

 

[lomiller]

One of the main problems with this concept is, it's against the law. Ohm's Law.

A solar collection field a mile square collects the energy in a small area and steps it up to high voltage for less lossy transmission to where it's needed. If the same amount is made 4' wide along the top of a wall, the equivalent area would top around 1,300 miles of wall. This increases costs and complexity, and takes away the economy of scale having the collection in a small area.

Then, the cost/watt and efficiency losses to make the panels invulnerable to the billions of rocks conveniently available to vandals along the wall, because the panels will need to be angled Southward.

I tried engaging Trump supporters on this, they scoffed at the very question of a cost/benefit analysis before deleting my thread.

Pfft who needs cost/benefit analysis when you have bankruptcy laws.