[billbrown]

My personal true claim about solar that is generally ignored or unknown is that dust reduces solar efficiency by 40% and that the mitigation is frequent washing of panels, which results in considerable water use in precisely the worst areas for that.

This 2024 paper cites a 2016 paper about clouds and dusts that finds 10.4% reduction in efficiency when the relative humidity was 52.24% after two weeks. (The 2016 study is cited in footnote 184 under clasim 12). That's not a desert condition, I can assure you.

https://sustainenergyres.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s...

[IAmBroom]

I think it's important to note that "efficiency" means something different in solar versus ICE.

For combustion engines, a drop in efficiency increases your daily cost, and the carbon footprint.

For solar, it simply means a lower maximum energy storage per day, which implies a higher initial outlay. The "wasted" sunlight doesn't cost anything.

[billbrown]

What an odd response! I never mentioned ICE so I suspect you're arguing against someone else.

The 40% "wasted sunlight" doesn't have a cost—sure, yes, kind of besides the point—but it also generates no electricity. That efficiency is further compounded by reductions in incidence by latitude, cloud cover, and time of day. The diminishment thus could be quite serious on any given panel or farm.