• Aniki@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days 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
            ·
            2 days 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
              2 days 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
                2 days 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.