[qayxc]

> Solar technology, including the footprint is advancing rapidly.

Is it, though? The price drops have been significant, yes, but the efficiency of COTS panels hasn't seen any dramatic improvements in the past 20 years. Silicon panels have a theoretical limit of 29% efficiency and current models are close to 20%. There's not much room for improvement left there.

[skellington]

You would need 1 standard 400 watt solar panel ($250) plus batteries and inverter ($???) to power starlink 24 hours a day in this mythical zero power area that you all seem to be worried about.

[qayxc]

In which fantasy land would that be the case?

A 400Wp panel won't be able to provide 400W most of the time to begin with. Unless you're in the middle of a desert near the equator and have a sun-tracking installation, weather and varying daylight hours are a thing.

Under realistic conditions, a single 400W panel gets you between half and two thirds of the required power (e.g. up to ~1.5kWh/day, depending on location).

Just a quick reminder: 400Wp means the panel produces 400W of electricity when brand new (it'll degrade over time), at 23°C ambient temperature and an incident angle of 0° (i.e. sun directly over it). None of that is generally the case 8h a day on average, which is why your estimation won't work.

Depending on where you live, optimal sun hours vary between 3.5h/day and 6.5/day (continental US) or 2.9/h/day to 5.9h/day (most of Europe) [0].

You'd also need to plan for big batteries, since seasonal differences may be huge depending on latitude.

[0] https://solargis.info/imaps/