• Aniki@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      22 hours ago

      IIRC solar panels produce about 100x as much energy for the same area than biodiesel.

            • Aniki@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              21 hours ago

              oh that yeah of course i saw it :D

              but that’s not why i said it. I did my own calculations here:

              Biodiesel takes much more area because the efficiency is much lower because plants metabolism isn’t so efficient, like iirc sth like 0.3% of sunlight energy end up in the fruits of the plants, compared to 20% efficiency for solar panels.

              • Gonzako@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                19 hours ago

                Is it me or does it look genuinely possible when most rooftop space is not being actively used?

                • Aniki@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  19 hours ago

                  i’m personally also against rooftop solar, partially for aesthetic reasons but more importantly for financial reasons:

                  flat-area solar parks are significantly cheaper than rooftop solar (source 1, source 2), and they also don’t require a lot of land area (see comments above).

                  “utility scale” and “PV frei” means flat-area ground-based solar parks, while “PV klein” and “PV groß” mean rooftop solar (small/big). “Stromgestehungskosten” means levelized cost of energy.