[HN Gopher] Where did the Carter White House's solar panels go? ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Where did the Carter White House's solar panels go? (2010)
        
       Author : rndmize
       Score  : 67 points
       Date   : 2023-09-15 22:07 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.scientificamerican.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.scientificamerican.com)
        
       | anonu wrote:
       | We had solar-thermal panels on the roof of our house in Beirut in
       | 1995... they're still going strong - just need to wipe them of
       | dust every now and then. Hands down one of the best home
       | appliance investments - especially in a country where electricity
       | is sporadic.
       | 
       | The reason they haven't picked up in the US is because
       | infrastructure is good - electricity delivery is reliable. It's
       | much cheaper to install an electrical or gas water heater rather
       | than the complicated plumbing needed to add solar-thermal.
        
         | nemo44x wrote:
         | Pretty much. All in all they've been a very poor investment for
         | home owners in America. At best you break even after ~20 years
         | if they're even still functional.
         | 
         | Could change as tech improves but as of today they are
         | pointless for most people.
        
           | 15457345234 wrote:
           | > At best you break even after ~20 years if they're even
           | still functional.
           | 
           | This is misinformation.
           | 
           | I searched on google, bing and Yandex and all the results I
           | found implied that breakeven would occur substantially before
           | 20 years. The lowest breakeven time figure I found quoted was
           | 5 years. The usual quoted breakeven ranges were, I'd say,
           | 6-12.
        
           | Kerb_ wrote:
           | Source?
        
           | ComputerGuru wrote:
           | You're talking about PV, not solar thermal. Break even for
           | solar thermal can be one year.
        
             | reportingsjr wrote:
             | Even for PV, most payback periods are under 10 years at
             | this point. In sunnier areas payback periods can be just a
             | few years.
        
         | Tijdreiziger wrote:
         | IIUC investing in PV is actually more efficient for
         | heating/cooling than solar-thermal, because you can use them to
         | run a heat pump, and heat pumps have something like 400%
         | efficiency (i.e. with 1 kWh of electricity they can pump 4 kWh
         | of heat).
         | 
         | Here in the Netherlands government is now trying to ramp down
         | PV subsidies, because PV has been so wildly successful that
         | electricity spot prices are actually negative at peak sun
         | (midday). (Even without subsidies I believe the panels are now
         | cheap enough to be worth the investment, though.)
        
           | BoiledCabbage wrote:
           | > Here in the Netherlands government is now trying to ramp
           | down PV subsidies, because PV has been so wildly successful
           | that electricity spot prices are actually negative at peak
           | sun
           | 
           | Which means people should start buying batteries. Pull in
           | power during midday at a profit, and then send it back out in
           | the evening at a profit. I'm curious how long it'd take to
           | pay back the price of a battery.
        
         | sneak wrote:
         | I just a few days ago watched a really good fairly deep dive
         | video about the US' historical reasons behind this:
         | 
         | https://youtu.be/fAyY0kGmgmc
        
       | neonate wrote:
       | http://web.archive.org/web/20230915220736/https://www.scient...
        
       | JKCalhoun wrote:
       | > By 1986, the Reagan administration had gutted the research and
       | development budgets for renewable energy at the then-fledgling
       | U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) and eliminated tax breaks for the
       | deployment of wind turbines and solar technologies--recommitting
       | the nation to reliance on cheap but polluting fossil fuels, often
       | from foreign suppliers.
       | 
       | Crazy. You see all these wind turbines all across the U.S. If not
       | spread across the plains or along foothills, they're being
       | shipped along the highways one blade at a time. I look at the
       | transformation going on and figure we could have had this tech in
       | the 80's. What happened in the last four decades? Talk about a
       | lost generation.
       | 
       | It was so weird to grow up in the 70's when they were teaching us
       | the Metric System in public schools, when National Parks were
       | adding meters, kilometers to signage. Reusable spacecraft,
       | renewable energy, (and nuclear energy), computers, micro-
       | electronics....
       | 
       | To be sure there were warnings of an ominous, overcrowded,
       | polluted future ("Soylent Green", "Silent Running", just to call
       | out a couple films of the era) but as a kid I was infused with
       | the optimism of the time. Buckminster Fuller, NASA ... even the
       | hippies and their communes.
       | 
       | I think I still live in that world in my head. I hope maybe I
       | have expressed a part of that optimism to my kids as I raised
       | them.
        
         | heresie-dabord wrote:
         | > I still live in that world in my head. I hope maybe I have
         | expressed a part of that optimism to my kids as I raised them.
         | 
         | You have been good to them, then. Those hopes were grown by a
         | generation of survivors, thinkers, and humanists who expressed
         | humanist principles in their work. They were agents of change.
         | Knowledge, compassion, and fairness have been almost completely
         | replaced in public discourse by cruel raving and demagoguery.
        
         | fbdab103 wrote:
         | Metrification was also killed by Reagan.
        
           | akira2501 wrote:
           | What, fundamentally, would be actually different if the US
           | was "metric?" Why should a federal government enforce one
           | particular standard or another?
        
             | throwawa14223 wrote:
             | I really like that the US hasn't adopted the metric system.
             | I like the idea that humanity has some redundancy even in
             | something like a system of weights and measures. It seems
             | like the world would lose something intangible if we all
             | went with the same one. Like if we all spoke the same
             | language or had the same government.
        
               | defrost wrote:
               | The official US foot has been based on a metric measure
               | for more than a century now though:                   The
               | Mendenhall Order marked a decision to change the
               | fundamental standards of length and mass of the United
               | States from the customary standards based on those of
               | England to metric standards.              It was issued
               | on April 5, 1893, by Thomas Corwin Mendenhall,
               | superintendent of the United States Coast and Geodetic
               | Survey, with the approval of the United States Secretary
               | of the Treasury, John Griffin Carlisle.
               | 
               | At this point every US unit of measure (length, mass,
               | volume, temp, second, etc) is defined in terms of a
               | metric fundemental.
               | 
               | The US public are really just pretending that they don't
               | use metric.
        
               | throwawa14223 wrote:
               | It seems like it should be a priority to fix that.
        
               | stonogo wrote:
               | Why?
        
               | pstuart wrote:
               | Redundancy is normally a good thing, but being that
               | weights and measures about communicating physical facts
               | accurately and broadly, moving to metric seems like the
               | most reasonable choice.
               | 
               | It's not clear how this "redundancy" your aiming for
               | would benefit us.
        
             | blooalien wrote:
             | Easier interactions around measurements when communicating
             | with nearly the entire rest of the world for starters.
             | Also, pretty much all of science is metric measurement
             | these days, so there's that. We could also do away with the
             | confusion of using two entirely different measurement
             | systems here as we currently do. Milk often comes in gallon
             | jugs but soda in 1 and 2 liter bottles for one example.
        
             | fbdab103 wrote:
             | It is literally in the constitution.
             | 
             | >To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign
             | Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
        
             | the_third_wave wrote:
             | The Mars Climate Observer would have been observing the
             | climate on Mars instead of becoming a crater [1] to be
             | observed by future Mars satellites.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Caus
             | e_of_...
        
           | WillPostForFood wrote:
           | Metrification was dying, and the plug was pulled by the
           | Reagan Admin. Biggest blow was probably the abandonment of
           | converting highway signs to km in 1977.
           | 
           | https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1977/06/30/metr.
           | ..
        
             | shagie wrote:
             | The biggest blow was the British privateers... yes, the
             | British are why the US isn't on Metric.
             | 
             | https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-
             | way/2017/12/28/574044232...
             | 
             | https://www.military.com/history/why-pirates-might-be-
             | reason...
             | 
             | > Thomas Jefferson, secretary of state in 1794, was eagerly
             | awaiting a meeting with French physician and botanist
             | Joseph Dombey. The Frenchman was supposed to meet Jefferson
             | in Philadelphia to discuss a couple of critical
             | international trade issues between their governments.
             | 
             | > He was also going to revolutionize the way Americans did
             | business.
             | 
             | > But instead of meeting Jefferson in Philadelphia, Dombey
             | found himself in the Caribbean, where his ship was being
             | boarded by British privateers. Upon learning he was a
             | Frenchman, and a famous scientist at that, he was captured
             | and taken prisoner.
             | 
             | https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/pirates-
             | caribbean-...
             | 
             | > The marauders now swarming Dombey's ship were a
             | particular breed of pirate: British privateers--the state-
             | sponsored terrorists of the 18th century. These waterborne
             | gangs had the tacit approval of the government in London to
             | harass and plunder other countries' maritime commerce and
             | keep part of the spoils as their profit.
             | 
             | > After seizing control of the ship, the pirates came
             | across a sailor speaking Spanish with a curiously French
             | accent--Joseph Dombey. A French physician and botanist
             | acting under orders from the French government, Dombey had
             | left the port city of Le Havre, France, weeks earlier for
             | Philadelphia and the meeting with Jefferson, the United
             | States' first secretary of state and future president. But
             | storms had pushed Dombey's ship off course and deep into
             | pirate territory.
             | 
             | > ...
             | 
             | > Some historians view this event as a tragic missed
             | opportunity whose consequences we are still living with
             | today. When the U.S. became an independent nation, it
             | inherited an inconsistent collection of traditional British
             | weights and measures. Congress was aware of the flaws with
             | its British measures, and a congressional committee was
             | formed to recommend solutions. Thomas Jefferson, an admirer
             | of French scientific ideas, lobbied for a measurement
             | system similar to that of France. But Congress didn't adopt
             | it, and the British-influenced system took hold in the U.S.
             | instead. However, If pirates hadn't intercepted Dombey on
             | his way to Philadelphia, the situation might be very
             | different today. As historian Andro Linklater writes in his
             | book Measuring America,
             | 
             | > "The sight [in Congress] of those two copper objects
             | [Dombey's meter and grave], so easily copied and sent out
             | to every state in the Union, together with the weighty
             | scientific arguments supporting them, might well have
             | clarified the minds of senators and representatives alike.
             | And today the U.S. might not be the last country in the
             | world to resist the metric system."
        
         | hindsightbias wrote:
         | I don't think anyone not from that generation can understand
         | how much we're still living in Reagan's world.
        
           | WalterBright wrote:
           | I like Reagan's world better than Carter's world of hour long
           | gas lines and "Malaise Forever" stagflation.
        
             | hindsightbias wrote:
             | [flagged]
        
             | ok_dad wrote:
             | Japan seems to be doing fine with decades of stagflation.
             | Everyone is pretty much taken care of there. Meanwhile, the
             | USA has people dying of diabetes because they cannot afford
             | medicine. I also think if we used trains and other mass
             | transit more, we would be in a better position, like Japan.
             | 
             | I would prefer the stagflation and trains, personally.
        
               | simfree wrote:
               | The birth rate is cratering, people are eschewing dating,
               | and many live meaker lifestyles than their own parents
               | since they cannot afford to live as well as their parents
               | did.
               | 
               | Rail, healthcare and rent prices might be bright spots in
               | Japan, but I hardly would consider a regression in real
               | wages and living standards to be "doing fine". Your not
               | doing fine if you can't afford to support yourself and a
               | dependent.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | > I would prefer the stagflation
               | 
               | Biden's your man, then.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | > people dying of diabetes because they cannot afford
               | medicine
               | 
               | That's a problem stemming from government regulation that
               | prevents competition in diabetes insulin.
               | 
               | > trains
               | 
               | I'd prefer trains, too. But the government makes it far
               | too expensive to build lines and operate them.
        
               | femiagbabiaka wrote:
               | Your train of replies reminds me of a canard I saw once
               | on Twitter, can't remember by who: "Everything is
               | monocausal and the cause the the thing I care most
               | about." Your thing is regulation, apparently.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | > Your thing is regulation
               | 
               | Regulation affects everybody a great deal, whether you're
               | aware of it or not. In this case, insulin regulation has
               | created a single supplier and prevented the market from
               | working.
        
               | WillPostForFood wrote:
               | https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/JPN/japan/gdp-per-
               | capi...
               | 
               | Japan per capita GDP was 44k in 1995 and 33k in 2022.
               | 
               | People die in of diabetes in the US because they eat too
               | much bad food.
        
               | beached_whale wrote:
               | Thi is objectively and grossly wrong. Diabetes is genetic
               | and most of those you hear about rationing got it as a
               | child because of genetics(type-1), not because they over-
               | ate. Also, elderly get type-2 diabetes without being
               | overweight. It's statements like you made the perpetuate
               | the victom blaming of diabetes.
        
               | thowfaraway wrote:
               | Falsehoods like that are 100x worse than the price of
               | insulin. 90-95% of diabetes in the US is Type 2, and it
               | is crap diet that causes it.
               | 
               | https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/basics/type2.html
               | 
               | And if you want cheap insulin, you can buy it for $25 at
               | Walmart.
        
               | beached_whale wrote:
               | $75 for their Novolog analog. Almost no one should use
               | NPH, it's generally terrible and costs the same as we pay
               | in Canada for the name brand Novo insulin aspart(It's not
               | subsidized).
               | 
               | The issue is people, generally, see diabetic and don't
               | ask, just assume. Millions are not type-2, many are due
               | to pregnancies, old age too, or damage from disease. But
               | even with obeisity/inactivity it is a risk factor and
               | generally has a genetic component too. Plus, one the beta
               | cells are gone, they are gone.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | From the NIH:
               | 
               | "You are more likely to develop type 2 diabetes if you
               | are not physically active and are overweight or have
               | obesity. Extra weight sometimes causes insulin resistance
               | and is common in people with type 2 diabetes. The
               | location of body fat also makes a difference."
               | 
               | https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-
               | information/diabetes/overvi...
        
               | beached_whale wrote:
               | https://diabetes.org/diabetes/genetics-diabetes
        
             | selectodude wrote:
             | That's an impressively reductive way to describe the 1979
             | oil crisis.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | Want proof? The very first act Reagan did in office was
               | to sign an Executive Order that repealed all the oil and
               | gas price controls.
               | 
               | The gas lines disappeared literally overnight! And I mean
               | literally in the literal sense of the word. It was
               | amazing. Poof! I remember the next day well. I pulled
               | into a gas station right up to a pump, filled up, and
               | drove home. Aaaahhh! Gas lines never returned.
               | 
               | Reductive, true. Accurate, absolutely.
               | 
               | Carter just didn't have a clue.
        
               | selectodude wrote:
               | Carter was running against traitorous Americans.
               | 
               | https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/18/us/politics/jimmy-
               | carter-...
        
               | pstuart wrote:
               | This is not news, and certainly is in character with that
               | administrations.
               | 
               | The failure of your dialog here is further evidence that
               | partisanship does not serve us well.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | I let my subscription to the NYT lapse because of their
               | unrelenting propaganda.
               | 
               | In any case, Carter's ineptness at foreign policy left an
               | opening for his opponents. Not that that justifies his
               | opponents, but it's still ineptness.
               | 
               | P.S. Carter is a nice guy and well-meaning, and I like
               | him a lot. I'm glad he's been given a long life. He was
               | just not a good President.
        
         | xg15 wrote:
         | > _What happened in the last four decades? Talk about a lost
         | generation._
         | 
         | Neoliberalism and the Chicago school of economics happened.
        
         | bdcravens wrote:
         | "Hippy", "green", "woke": as time goes on, names change, but
         | the battles of us vs them don't. There's a lot of partisan
         | discussion around the idea of pushing back and "reopening" the
         | spigot of oil and pushing back on EVs, for example.
        
           | rootusrootus wrote:
           | It's too bad, I hoped EVs were one thing everyone could agree
           | on. Maybe because it's good for the environment. Or because
           | it's good for energy independence.
        
             | mlyle wrote:
             | In addition to other objections, there's the people who
             | think that EVs don't hit every use case yet, and they use a
             | lot of rare earth metals, etc... and that you can get 90%
             | of the benefit with a PHEV (and build/sell a lot more PHEVs
             | with current resources).
             | 
             | IMO, we're going to need a lot of different approaches to
             | solve climate. EVs, PHEVs, reduction of use of single-
             | occupant vehicles, more transit, more biking, more e-bikes,
             | blah blah blah.
        
             | bdcravens wrote:
             | Perhaps Elon can be the bridge there, since he's seen as a
             | bit of a free speech messiah by the right.
             | 
             | If nothing else, I'd think the "red-blooded" crowd would
             | love the speed that EVs give you.
        
               | LastTrain wrote:
               | That is his whole play - more than anything, US
               | conservatives want liberals to be humiliated and angry,
               | and Elon delivers, and that is the ONLY way owning an EV
               | can be palatable to that crowd.
        
               | lotsoweiners wrote:
               | I think that is just what you're being led to believe. I
               | meet pretty hardcore conservatives all the time who have
               | Teslas or other EVs. Hell, I can walk to the end of my
               | street and there is a front door covered with a large
               | Trump flag that has 2 EVs, a Model 3 and some Ford, in
               | the garage.
        
               | pbj1968 wrote:
               | They will convert at precisely the moment it makes
               | economic sense.
        
               | bdcravens wrote:
               | There are those who may not - those who see the EV
               | subsidies as a symptom of the "woke mindvirus" and see
               | fighting it as a matter of fighting for their overall way
               | of life. They see the mandates some states are pushing as
               | an assault on freedom, and a communist incursion, and the
               | use of petroleum as a patriotic exercise.
        
               | the_third_wave wrote:
               | Remove the partisan blather and you're on to something.
               | It is the mandates, the top-down control based on
               | incomplete and often false premises and the holier-than-
               | thou attitude that drives people away from these "moon
               | shot projects". Once EVs make economical and practical
               | sense people will flock to them but that will take a
               | while a while for many people, especially those with
               | longer commutes and those who live in the more
               | northerly/wintry areas. If you live in places where the
               | sun always shines and have the space for a good-sized
               | solar array it already makes sense, elsewhere - not so
               | much.
        
               | LastTrain wrote:
               | Yeah... because f350s make so much economic sense...
        
               | bdcravens wrote:
               | I don't really believe it, but I wouldn't be entirely
               | shocked if we learn MAGA Elon was just a persona who
               | adopted to win over the relatively untapped market.
        
             | water-data-dude wrote:
             | I'm really torn on EVs now because of all the freaking data
             | collection (every new car, not just EVs). I want to do what
             | I can to reduce how much I'm contributing to climate
             | change, but I still might get another old car when this one
             | goes because I don't want to be spied on.
        
               | the_third_wave wrote:
               | If you're into building things yourself you could convert
               | an older ICE car to an electric by swapping out the
               | engine for an electric motor plus the necessary
               | electronics, removing the tank and replacing it with
               | batteries and adding more batteries wherever they fit -
               | you'll need them to get a reasonable range. Some
               | companies make kits to do this, otherwise there are
               | plenty of DIY forums where these types of activities are
               | discussed.
        
               | xg15 wrote:
               | > _removing the tank and replacing it with batteries and
               | adding more batteries wherever they fit - you 'll need
               | them to get a reasonable range_
               | 
               | Is this actually doable? I thought in modern EVs, the
               | battery takes up half the chassis. In a "retrofitted" EV,
               | you'll have lots of space (and therefore battery
               | capacity) taken up by mechanical systems which are
               | essential for a central motor, but relatively useless if
               | you could just use multiple electric motors.
        
             | Tanoc wrote:
             | There's a subset of the anti-EV crowd that's against EVs
             | not because they're brodozer drivers, but because they
             | realize individual vehicle ownership is the other half of
             | the problem. EVs still cost resources that are harmful to
             | harvest outsized relative to their use thanks to strip
             | mining and the chemical process used to separate cobalt
             | from manganese at a mass scale. Those people, myself
             | included, believe that mass transit needs to make a
             | resurgence instead of everyone switching to EVs. I even get
             | annoyed seeing EV "bicycles" that weigh as much as the
             | riders and cost as much as a scooter because I think
             | they're wastes of resources used to dodge taxes and
             | pedestrian right of way laws regarding motorcycles.
        
               | Tade0 wrote:
               | > and the chemical process used to separate cobalt from
               | manganese at a mass scale
               | 
               | Cobalt isn't necessary to build li-ion batteries,
               | considering that there are mainstream chemistries like
               | LFP which eschew cobalt entirely.
        
               | gonzo41 wrote:
               | I'm very pro ebike. But some American classes of ebikes
               | are just electric motorcycles with a set of crank arms
               | for show. Pedelec bikes are ebikes. Everything else is
               | with a throttle is a scooter
               | 
               | Cycling has more benefits than replacing cars. It
               | connects us with joyful movement. And the infrastructure
               | is cheaper to build and extend compared to railways.
        
               | aaomidi wrote:
               | I wish instead of the subsidies we shat out for EVs, we
               | did them for ebikes instead.
        
               | Tanoc wrote:
               | I'm not against bicycles and electric bikes. I'm against
               | "not" electric motorcycles. If your e-bike goes beyond
               | 20MPH under power and goes beyond twenty miles in range
               | then the primary mode of locomotion isn't supposed to be
               | the pedals. The pedals at that point are a backup, like a
               | reverse moped.
               | 
               | Ideally we'd return back to the 1890s-1910s with public
               | transport consisting of fixed line trolleys or light rail
               | covering distances larger than five or six blocks while
               | walking or bicycling covers distances less than that.
               | That's where EV technology would be ideal because you
               | could run a combination of overhead, third rail, and
               | battery power depending on available infrastructure and
               | space, all using the same cars city or town wide.
        
               | ferongr wrote:
               | >It connects us with joyful movement
               | 
               | This means nothing.
        
               | marssaxman wrote:
               | It meant something to me; I could certainly say that I
               | felt connected with joyful movement when I test-rode an
               | ebike last week. My partner and I were all smiles
               | afterward.
        
             | Baeocystin wrote:
             | I work with a lot of relatively conservative folks. The
             | F-150 Lightning is making huge waves in that crowd, in a
             | positive way. One of them owns a landscaping company, and
             | just swapped out their order of a half dozen regular trucks
             | over to the electric ones. FWIW.
        
               | beached_whale wrote:
               | I wonder how much not needing a generator helps too.
        
               | Baeocystin wrote:
               | It's a big deal to many of them. For the landscapers in
               | particular, being able to fast charge the pro-level
               | electric packs for leafblowers, weed whackers, etc in the
               | frunk is a big part of it as well. From what I
               | understand, there are contracts here in the Bay Area that
               | pay more if the landscaping crew is electrified.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | lotsoweiners wrote:
           | Is woke really the modern version of hippie/green? I feel
           | like a lot of people myself included can support and
           | appreciate environmental issues but have no interest in this
           | woke culture nonsense.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | jncfhnb wrote:
             | That's largely because woke culture is not a real thing. It
             | is vastly inflated by the same folks that said similar
             | things about hippies. The extreme views that are given the
             | most attention are fringe and not popular.
        
             | ttymck wrote:
             | Is "green" really the modern version of hippie? I can
             | support free expression and tolerance, but forcing me to
             | stop using my gas car is nonsense.
        
             | trilbyglens wrote:
             | Hippies were much more about social inclusion than
             | environmental issues though at the time. So I think yes the
             | woke movement is definitely a descent of the hippy
             | movement. Wokism has a stronger focus on racial elements,
             | bit that was definitely present in the 60s too, just less
             | militant in the hippy movement than it was in the black
             | power movement. Possibly you could argue that wokism fuses
             | black power and hippyism.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > Hippies were much more about social inclusion than
               | environmental issues though at the time.
               | 
               | I would argue that they weren't, as a movement, about
               | either, but more inward-directed self-discovery. They
               | were contemporaries with both movements for social
               | inclusion (the civil rights movement) and the beginnings
               | of environmentalism as a mass social movement, and were
               | distinct from both of those kinds of activist movements.
               | They had more in common and probably more overlap with
               | the environmentalist movement (like the hippies, a
               | predominantly white, middle-class movement.)
               | 
               | "Wokism" isn't an actual movement, its just a replacement
               | name for "political correctness" used as a label for same
               | right-wing general-purpose boogeyman that PC served as a
               | label for from the late 1970s until the recent
               | replacement with first and briefly "critical race theory"
               | and, when that proved a bit cumbersome as a generic
               | label, "wokism".
        
           | Anon_Forever wrote:
           | >"Hippy", "green", "woke"
           | 
           | I wouldn't add "woke" to that list. "Woke" people would get
           | rid of solar panels and/or better net metering because solar
           | panels are "inequitable" [0].
           | 
           | Also: https://calssa.org/blog/2021/6/5/debunking-the-cost-
           | shift-de...
           | 
           | [0] https://www.nrdc.org/experts/mohit-chhabra/four-point-
           | guide-...
        
             | stonogo wrote:
             | I'm unable to interpret the text in either of your
             | references in a manner which supports your "get rid of
             | solar panels" claim.
        
       | elihu wrote:
       | The thing I didn't know until I came across a similar article
       | posted here on HN a few years ago (maybe it was the same one?) is
       | that the White House panels weren't photovoltaic, they were
       | solar-thermal for heating hot water.
       | 
       | Basically, Carter wasn't deploying some cutting edge and
       | extravagantly expensive (at the time) technology that could be
       | deployed as a high-profile technical demo but not actually
       | economical to use, he was deploying a cheap, practical technology
       | that could be used on most houses, during warm months at least.
        
         | WalterBright wrote:
         | There were many books and how-to guides at the time to add
         | solar water heaters. Anybody who wanted one could install one.
         | I know people who did. They didn't need permission from Reagan.
         | 
         | Few wanted one.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | They still can be installed today, the sun hasn't changed
           | much.
           | 
           | And still they're rarely installed. I knew more people in the
           | 90s who were ripping them out or leaving them dry (they were
           | popular for pool heating in some areas) than installing them.
        
             | WalterBright wrote:
             | The people I know who had them complained about maintenance
             | problems, and dealing with freezing weather.
             | 
             | I've considered it several times, and it came down to it
             | being too much work.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Yeah, having large amounts of flowing and standing water
               | on your roof is basically a recipe for maintenance
               | headaches.
               | 
               | PV is much simpler, and if it stops working you can just
               | ignore it.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | Apparently Carter's solar heater leaked, too :-(
               | 
               | I once designed a solar swimming pool heater that had no
               | moving parts and required no maintenance. I never built
               | it because I didn't have a pool.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | One fun thing about all this is learning that "no moving
               | parts" is a polite fiction when you have water at various
               | temperatures over long distances (and solar heaters are
               | long if unwrapped).
               | 
               | Temperature changes can cause glued pipes to move enough
               | that they become unglued. What fun!
               | 
               | Modern PEX offers significant advantages there (hundreds
               | of feet with no joints).
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | A good design allows for expansion and contraction with
               | temperature and stress, but those aren't usually
               | considered moving parts.
               | 
               | I once had a car that had aluminum cylinder heads and
               | bronze valve guides. The valve guides were a press fit
               | with no keepers. Aluminum expands at twice the rate as
               | bronze with temperature. So, when the engine got hot, the
               | valve guides fell out.
               | 
               | Fun!
        
         | swasheck wrote:
         | i grew up in central florida in the 80s and we had solar-
         | thermal water heating. we were not wealthy (dad was a
         | construction worker and mom was an odd-job secretary) but my
         | friends were all mystified by the things. i remember climbing
         | up on our roof giving tours.
         | 
         | something really did a number on society and it politicized so
         | many things that needn't be politicized
        
           | Loughla wrote:
           | So my grandfather turns 101 this year. He's kind of an ass in
           | his old age, and wildly out of touch with the world. Like
           | shockingly out of touch.
           | 
           | But he talks about politics from back in the day. Everything
           | has always been super politicized. Everything. But our
           | memories are short as a country.
        
             | hattmall wrote:
             | But what does he talk about though? There have always been
             | super political things, certainly, but the scope of what
             | was political vs common sense has had a huge shift.
        
             | mlyle wrote:
             | Things have always been politicized heavily... But that
             | doesn't mean that things aren't significantly worse than
             | the recent past.
             | 
             | We actually had a political landscape from the 30's to the
             | early 90's that was much less polarized than the rest of
             | our history. We're returning back to where we were in the
             | 1800's.
        
             | BoiledCabbage wrote:
             | There are polls, in the US at least, asking the same exact
             | questions gong back I believe half a century or more. It is
             | very clear from these polls that this is the most
             | poltically polarized time in politics in decades.
             | 
             | It's not just recency bias - things are really screwed up.
             | 
             | Why (my opinion) one side started caring more about winning
             | than any of their own positions. That then devolved into
             | only caring if the other side loses regardless of what the
             | policy is.
             | 
             | If a party's main focus is the other side loses rather than
             | to successfully govern - you end up here. And the fact they
             | more or less admit it, and people jump to justify it shows
             | how far things have fallen.
        
         | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
         | Sadly, I read often that at this point, PV is so good that it
         | makes more sense to install PV panels and power a water heater
         | via electricity. I don't want to believe it, but it's been said
         | often enough that I am starting to do so.
        
           | thsksbd wrote:
           | PV can beat solar thermal once a heat pump is used.
           | 
           | However that ignores the externalities of PV and heat pumps
           | manufacture, replacement and disposal so I think the argument
           | is BS.
           | 
           | Solar thermal is an aimed aluminum trough and a stainless
           | steel pipe painted black on its focal point.
        
             | 15457345234 wrote:
             | > Solar thermal is an aimed aluminum trough and a stainless
             | steel pipe painted black on its focal point.
             | 
             | No, it's actually these fairly sophisticated phase-change
             | evacuated tubes that have a heatsink at one end immersed in
             | the water, from what I remember reading.
        
               | BoiledCabbage wrote:
               | It sounds like you're talking about an "air to water"
               | heat pump. Or some other source to water heat pump.
               | 
               | Phase changes, and pressurized tubes screams heat pump to
               | me. This is different than solar thermal which is
               | essentially leaving a bottle of water sitting in your car
               | on a sunny day. Nothing more complex needed.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | There are two kinds of water-heating systems based on
               | heat-pump related ideas.
               | 
               | One circulates a non-water liquid between the panels and
               | the hot water storage tank, and it exchanges heat
               | obtained from the panel with the water in the tank. This
               | has the downside of being complex (pumps, weird liquids
               | etc.), but has the upside of keeping the fluid system
               | associated with the panels distinct, which can reduce
               | issues with freezing and can boost efficiency.
               | 
               | The other system doesn't use thermal panels at all, but
               | just uses electricity to drive an air-source heat pump
               | that exchanges with the storage tank.
        
               | thsksbd wrote:
               | Evacuated tube? Like the heat pipes on you CPU? Sure, but
               | completely unnecessary unless you want to get rid of the
               | pump [1]. And why get rid of the pump to substitute it
               | with an evacuated tube?
               | 
               | [1] which you don't even need if you route the system
               | well or use valves.
        
               | mlyle wrote:
               | It can be either. There's fancy thermosiphons, etc, but
               | you can also just preheat water going into a water heater
               | by pretty dumb means. You can run circulating pumps. You
               | can have a separate working loop. Etc, etc, etc.
               | 
               | The Carter panels were pretty simple boxes with pipes and
               | water circulated through them, I think.
        
           | the_third_wave wrote:
           | The best would be too use water-cooled PV panels with a heat
           | pump to cool down the coolant and transform the heat. Cool
           | panels produce quite a bit more electricity while the heat
           | can be used elsewhere. Water-cooled panels are available
           | commercially (with promises of far too high efficiencies,
           | salesdroids gonna salesdroid) so this is not a pipe dream,
           | especially not there where a water/water heat pump is
           | available anyway - just install some valves to re-route the
           | coolant through the panels.
        
             | pstuart wrote:
             | I've had this notion too. The kicker is, as always, cost.
        
           | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
           | It's an easy intermittent power sink for supplemental hot
           | water if you don't want to be grid tied or bother with a
           | battery bank.
        
           | nerpderp82 wrote:
           | I think electric solar heating makes sense for a lot of
           | installations.
           | 
           | Wires are easier than pipes, we still need electricity, make
           | the existing system larger rather than split between the two.
           | Heat water during the midday when output is high. I use
           | almost no hot water, so the system would have a long payback
           | period. But I can heat water in a 15A kettle.
           | 
           | I love solar thermal, Trombe Walls should be integrated into
           | the construction directly or added after the fact. They are
           | for building heat, not water.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trombe_wall
        
         | interestica wrote:
         | I didn't know they were solar water heating until right now.
         | Barbados has been a cool case study of large scale adoption of
         | solar water heating:
         | 
         | https://cdkn.org/resource/cdkn-inside-story-seizing-the-suns...
        
           | whoisthemachine wrote:
           | I was just on vacation in Greece, and solar water heaters are
           | on every home and building there.
        
             | tetris11 wrote:
             | Everybody and their dog had a solar heater on their house
             | in Cyprus, from 30 years ago. It was cheap deployable tech
             | accessible to literally peasant farmers.
             | 
             | I visited Sardinia recently for the first time, and saw the
             | exact same type of houses built there, with the same
             | climate, but not a single solar heater on their roofs. I
             | wondered aloud why, but got no answer.
             | 
             | My guess is that an energy company took an interest early
             | on in Sardinia, and Cyprus was thankfully missed for a few
             | decades.
        
           | morkalork wrote:
           | In Canada it's not uncommon too see some homemade looking
           | solar heating setups connected to people's pools. The coiled
           | black tubing on shed roofs is very distinctive.
        
             | rootusrootus wrote:
             | I'm well below Canada's latitude, and it costs me $250/mo
             | to heat a relatively small swimming pool (about 10,000 gal)
             | ... in the summer. If I keep it warm enough to swim in
             | October, it'll be at least twice that. The capital cost of
             | the heater is practically zero compared to the fuel. I can
             | totally understand janky DIY setups to try and defray that
             | cost.
        
             | ok_dad wrote:
             | There's a bunch of YouTube videos showing how to make them.
             | It's really easy, actually, and you can get like 250-500W
             | of heating from what seems to be a reasonably small device.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-16 23:02 UTC)