The current regime could not less about cost. They will probably stamp this out.
Comment on U.S. solar will pass wind in 2025 and leave coal in the dust soon after
aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
Even with an admin as renewable-hostile as the current one, you just can’t beat cheap, I guess.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 4 weeks ago
It’s not actually cheap though, that’s the problem.
DupaCycki@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Solar panels crom China made it a lot cheaper than it used to be. There are also other major advatnages, such as increased independence. You just buy a bunch of solar panels and now you can indenepdently generate energy for the next 30 years.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 4 weeks ago
DupaCycki@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
This is an important point to consider. However, to me it seems somewhat separate from your previous comment.
Of course, no sane government should push for a country to rely solely on wind and solar. Ideally you have a mix of various energy sources, even potentially including some fossil fuels. Hitting that 20-30% sweetspot, as mentioned in the paper, looks to be fairly cheap and beneficial for everyone.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 4 weeks ago
Solar panels are not the expensive part of using solar to power the country - the storage and transmission is.
Although having said that, the cost of regularly cleaning panels, replacing them, throwing them in landfill, and mining materials to make new ones every 15 years or so is also huge - and destructive to the planet.
DupaCycki@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
True, batteries are quite expensive and very much not environment-friendly when built on such a scale. Though it should be noted good solar panels last longer than 15 years. Even cheap panels can last 20 years.
sucius@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Just no
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 4 weeks ago
Some reading for you, which I hope you’ll read:
cis.org.au/…/the-renewable-energy-honeymoon-start…
x.com/jnampijinpa/status/1973660876793368808
Since I doubt you or anyone else will, I’ll take some bits from it:
“As the proportion of weather-dependent energy in the grid grows, the costs and difficulties of integrating this energy also grow at an increasing rate.”
…
The paper found (as per the graph):
• Countries with less than 21% wind and solar generation have electricity prices of around US $0.15/kWh on average.
• Countries with between 21% and 33% wind and solar generation have electricity prices of around US $0.24/kWh on average.
• Countries that exceed 33% wind and solar generation, have electricity prices of around US $0.37/kWh on average.
…
The research notes, “No country has achieved penetrations higher than 60%, let alone 90%, without costs going up. A low-cost, wind-and-solar-dependent country simply does not exist.”
Jason2357@lemmy.ca 4 weeks ago
Big surprise, running 50 year old plants lead to lower bills than new infrastructure. Now do new coal plants.
sucius@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I’m not going to read propaganda from an Australian right wing think thank, you’re right.
It’s not actually cheap though, that’s the problem. Basically every country that is pushing “renewables” are having their power bills increase over and over and over with no sign of slowing down because it’s not cheap.
I can’t speak for every country, unlike you, but in Southern Europe the trend is exactly the opposite of what you’re saying. bbvaresearch.com/…/spain-more-renewables-to-conti…
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
That’s been the joke of Solar for a while. Engineers could have told you all the way back in the 1970s (really, the 1910s) that it costs less money to leave a big plate out in the bright sun than to drill a giant hole and hope there’s enough spicy rocks at the bottom of it to justify the expense.
We should have crested this hill a lot sooner, but the heavy emphasis on subsidized fossil fuels during the 80s, 90s, and 00s kept these fuels artificially cheap. Meanwhile, fossil fuel firms actually did invest in Green Energy R&D but only for the purpose of erecting “patent thickets” that would hinder competitive growth of these alternatives.
This has lead to big surges in the development and deployment of Green Energy grids outside of the countries doing most of the cutting edge research. Americans are only now catching up.
shalafi@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
You’re really discounting that fossil fuels have hella bang for the buck, loads of power per gallon. tl;dr: Energy dense
I can run my little generator at camp all night long if there’s as little as 3 gallons in there. Space heater or AC unit, lights, all that. I’d have to have many panels and batteries to compare to that output. My best battery is a huge LIPO4, trolling motor can’t kill it, not even close. But leaving the LED lights on for a little over a day drained it dry.
We need way more solar infrastructure to get where we’re going, and I’m all about it. But since since the GOP has decided to go back in time, China is going to smoke America, both in renewables and the associated economic benefits.
Did not know about the patent thing! Know any examples?
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Coal is generally the worst of the lot. Oil and gas burn cleaner and have more combustible by weight. Coal is energy dense but also heavy af and dirty as hell. It’s also very common place and compatibly safe to transport and simple to use.
Fine enough to warm your home or grill some meat. But you’re not putting a rocket into orbit with coal.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 4 weeks ago
And you’re definitely not with wind and solar lol.
Coal is cheap, abundant in supply, and easy.
whereyaaat@lemmings.world 4 weeks ago
This is why I have no problem [CENSORED] members of the ruling class.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
It’s [REDACTED] or be [REDACTED] out there
bluGill@fedia.io 4 weeks ago
Patents have a short life span. The patent wall keeps expiring and then everyone can use it no cost. the big improvements are long gone and all they can patent is small improvements you can do without (though you may not want to). They also run into those making things do their own r&d and have their own patents.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Years, depending on how it is used and renewed. But the point is that you’ve got a minefield of potential legal liabilities every time you try and launch a business. You don’t know whether what you’re doing is patented until you check. And if enough entrepreneurs have their businesses blown up early on, it delays how quickly alternative energy can be built out and deployed by at least as long as these patents survive.
When the government is in your corner, handing out subsidies, leaving environmental rules unenforced, securing new oil fields overseas through military force, and generally making your life as an energy tycoon easier, you’re at a comparative advantage to the wind farm guy who has to argue with the Kennedys over hurting a bird or obstructing the Massachusetts Bay skyline.