Seems to me this could be a good model for the future in places that get a bit of sunlight. I don’t know that it could work for major cities due to the size of the array, but it’s a start. Rooftop solar is definitely appealing.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/02/us/solar-babcock-ranch-florida-hurricane-ian-climate/index.html
Interesting article. Thanks for sharing.
Yes, interesting and hopeful article.
Puerto Rico has also been trying to beef up solar
My guy’s neighbors (in PR) have definitely been thankful he was able to share some of his solar panels with them post Fiona.
Solar appears to be a great backup post storms in places where there’s sunshine. It beats having to try to get gas for a generator, plus, incorrect generator use causes some deaths.
Babcock Ranch didn’t receive hurricane damage. Their school was a hurricane shelter.
Sorry. This is a joke.
I’m not saying that the use of small generators with solar capabilities aren’t a good idea–they are extremely heavy and short living but I’m sure will be improved. But don’t think for one minute that Babcock Ranch fared better because it has some solar power. That’s false.
So you’re saying the article is a lie and the place flooded and went without electric? How do you know?
It’s a newer development, so wouldn’t surprise me at all if the houses were built to a better code, including at higher elevations than the roads (aka, water runoff channels) and that solar could survive far better than being on the typical grid.
So how do you know this is a joke? Seems honest and plausible to me.
My own son’s place in PR kept power due to being solar instead of on the grid during Fiona - and he created water runoff channels which seemed to help his place not get major mudslides like other places in the same area got. Fiona was only Cat 1 when it went over him, but his results seem quite similar.
Babcock Ranch rests on higher ground than much of the surrounding area – at least 25 feet or more above sea level – which the ranch says is “beyond the reach of coastal storm surge.” All of the buildings and structures in the community are developed to withstand winds of up to 145 mph, or what would be a mid-range Category 4 hurricane according to the Saffir-Simpson scale.
Most damage from the hurricane is dependent on WATER damage. Babcock ranch is very high land. Most all new building since Andrew hurricane has been built to withstand wind damage. Ian was extremely high winds. But water is water–if Babcock had been on the coastal land with storm surge it would be under water.
Which still seems to agree that it isn’t a joke.
There were 20+ inches of rain. Had it not been designed well - as other places midstate weren’t - houses would have flooded.
Had it not been on solar, residents would have still gone without electric or had to wait in gas lines to fuel generators/vehicles.
What part is the joke?
“Climate resiliency was built into the fabric of Babcock Ranch with stronger storms in mind, and Hurricane Ian was a major test.”
This is the subtitle of the headline. What part of it isn’t true? The community was well planned and survived well. I see no joke or anything misleading about it at all.
Babcock did do great. So did a whole host of other communities in FL. They are 25 feet above sea level much unlike everyone else. Not exactly waterfront. Not facing storm surge. Very nice community.
The hurricane did not hit them at full 145 mph no matter what you read. It’s a good community. They have been built to new standards (yea!) JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE in FL since early 2001 or so. They have prided themselves on trying new things but those innovations really haven’t been tested . Or better put–the new standards are just a part of the community because it IS a new community.
Having solar didn’t save them from anything because they didn’t need saving. That’s the joke. I doubt they would’ve spent a day without power if they didn’t have it.
My aunt lost power and she was much further from the storm center. She didn’t get it back for a day and a half. My friends were further from the storm and lost power, plus need to replace their roof.
You can be anti-solar if you want, no biggie to me, but I think after my son’s experience and seeing this that our plan is to get solar in the relatively near future if we can. Where we live we aren’t the first to get power after storms or cars take out the line(s). Solar would be much better than our generator, esp since we don’t need to fuel solar.
Regardless, the story certainly isn’t a joke. It just might not be your cup of tea due to a predisposition to disliking solar. To each our own.
Just saying. I have not read one accurate report of damage yet from any news source outside my local. The news people for some reason can’t even figure out one island from another. Everything is hyped for one reason or down played by another.
Nobody understands storm surge–nobody does really because it’s so rare–but here we are.
You simply do the best you can do at any point with the information you have.
I am NOT anti-solar. It’s a good short term solution perhaps with portable generators depending on where you live. But it’s not a end all solution. Talk to the people who had solar blown off their roof.
Having lived in St Pete for 5 years, vacationed there and further south a lot since, plus having friends and my aunt in the hurricane area - I fully get what you’re saying with that post!
H and I have often paused TV to look to see where they are really broadcasting from and about.
'Tis true about most disasters TBH.
For household needs in sunnier areas, why not?
Household needs? One. It needs to be much cheaper to rig up.
Technology will develop. It will get better. But I can’t run a home on it. Doesn’t work for anyone not in a sunny climate.
We already have some very cheap solutions for short term problems (like a hurricane).
My garden solar lights worked great when I had no power!
Agree it needs to be cheaper, but we are in MN and our panels provide 100% of our annual electricity. In winter we pay in some, and in summer they pay us. We make about $100 a year selling power back to the grid. Panels will pay for themselves in about 9 years. We don’t produce enough in winter so if you were trying to produce 100% all year round you’d need more panels.