>>11713258No, it's called "Oil and Gas drilling" precisely because it IS underground.
There is over 791 oil rigs in the USA alone. Assuming that your 100,000km2 of land was actually on the surface, and each one consumes as much land, then that's 79,100,000km2!
70M+ BIGGER than the surface of the USA
So shut the fuck up.
No, it is NOT irrelevant. My 30% is just an estimation.. Brits have reported that as much as 60% of their electricity are being lost on the grid.
>you can just install 30% more capacityYou idiot!
The electricity is being lost on the cables itself because there is no perfect conductor in the world. As far as thermodynamics is concerned, energy would always be lost due to resistance. There are super conductors but none of them are available for commercial use.
And the further the distance, the greater the loss in energy.
No, you are not going to consume 3%
You are going to consume 10% of desert because you need to make up for the loses that would happenat night and allow for a margin of error as the city grows and malfunction happens.
10% just for the solar panels
And this is not including the amount of roads that must be constructed, power plants that would handle the power, tremendous amount of power grids, and of course, living quarters for the thousands of people that you need to hire in order to build and maintain your solar farm. People who need food, water, shelter, entertainment, and other good.
All in all, is possible that you would destroy as much as 20% of desert habitat just because lmao solar panels
At such a magnitude, you would not just end up killing a huge portion of the environment, you would literally cause widespread famine because desert dust are known to provide vital nutrient and minerals to surrounding forestry and many many other effects as you cannot just destroy so much land without any retaliation from nature. Ask ecologists
Solar rooftop are too weak to make you independent
