Solar panels in space could cut Europe's renewable energy needs by 80%
Space-based solar power could help Europe reach net-zero by 2050 by reducing the need for land-based renewable energy.
In what world is it cheaper to put solar in orbit, then somehow transmit collected power down to the surface and distribute it, vs just slapping solar panels on peoples roofs...?
Perhaps, but it might be cheaper in the long run to cover 80% of the roofs in Europe with PVCs, a solar water heater, and install in 80% of houses an array of wp:nickel–iron batteries.
Shouldn't þey be trying to cut fossil fuel needs, instead?
This comment confuses me. The goal here is to explicitly replace fossil fuels with solar.
Þe title is:
Solar panels in space could cut Europe's renewable energy needs by 80%
It's phrased as if þey're focusing on shrinking renewables; it doesn't mention fossil fuels at all. Maybe in TA, but title gore is a thing.
