This is not entirely correct anymore, many of the new features added to Reddit over the last 5 years have focussed on expanding precisely this aspect of the site.

This is what MPPT controllers do, as this maximum power setpoint will change as environmental conditions change.

I think this is where the confusion arises - what do you mean by ideal conditions? Ideal conditions for solar generation are not necessarily at the same time as the highest voltage operating conditions. VoC tends to be specified at Standard Test Conditions which has light-levels representative of a sunny day (1000 W/m2) and a cell temperature (not ambient) of 25 degrees C, which is already a lot cooler than most panels would typically be at that level of irradiance. So really, the label is already specifying a voltage higher than what you would typically experience during times of max generation.

However, the max voltage could exceed this rating at times when there are cold ambient temperatures with enough light for the module to function, but not enough sun to meaningfully heat the cells. So in this scenario you may have maximum voltage, but you're far from maximum power nor at 'ideal conditions'.

The label on the modules themselves tend to also provide these ratings at STC, e.g. this label from Jinko specifies the Open circuit voltage and also summarizes the conditions assumed for STC:

https://image.made-in-china.com/202f0j00LURcYuatWIqH/Jinko-M...

While I agree that the label could also add the temperature coefficient, I'm not sure if it's reasonable to expect that specialist electrical equipment details all of its operating parameters on an attached label without the expectation of consulting a datasheet or manual. For specific products that primarily target non-specialised consumers however, a different labelling approach may be warranted.

E.g. choosing a random Jinko datasheet: https://jinkosolarcdn.shwebspace.com/uploads/JKM600-625N-66H...

V_OC is specified at both STC and NOTC, and the datasheet clearly states which environmental conditions accounted for in those test conditions.

For instance, in New Zealand we have an aluminium smelter (Tiwai point) that constitutes about ~13% of national electricity demand. The smelter recently re-contracted its electricity supply with several of the major power companies (a 20-yr agreement) which includes a component for demand response when required. NZ has a ~80% renewable grid with hydro and wind as major variable sources, which creates both hourly and seasonal variation in the wholesale spot price (dependant on wind and rain resource). In the event of a major drought that pushes up prices due to a lack of hydro (this happened last year), the agreement with the smelter means it will shutdown some of its operating lines in exchange for demand response payments. This is exactly what occurred, whereas other industrial users that did not have such agreements in place or chose to take advantage of previously low spot prices without adequate hedging were then exposed and also shut down, without being paid to so.

You state this as if that's a fact - just because you haven't looked for them doesn't mean they don't exist. Here's two examples showing that wind [1] and solar [2] have good environmental payback times in my home country due to avoided emissions, a country which already has an ~80% renewable grid. Additionally, [3] is a good resource that puts the potential waste from solar farms into context with other sources (such as coal ash) and shows this is an unfounded fear. Do some research and challenge your biases before you spread misinformation.

[1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03036758.2024.2...

[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038092X2...

[3] https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-023-02230-0

[3 - sharing link] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-023-02230-0.epdf?shar...