Just no
Comment on U.S. solar will pass wind in 2025 and leave coal in the dust soon after
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 month agoIt’s not actually cheap though, that’s the problem.
sucius@lemmy.world 1 month ago
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 month 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 1 month ago
Big surprise, running 50 year old plants lead to lower bills than new infrastructure. Now do new coal plants.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 month ago
Don’t need new coal plants.
Should be building nuclear anyway.
sucius@lemmy.world 1 month 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…
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 month ago
“I’m not going to read your link cause it proves my ideology wrong. Here’s a link that proves mine right, and mine is much much much narrower in scope so as to not show the global trend”
lol
DupaCycki@lemmy.world 1 month 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 1 month ago
x.com/jnampijinpa/status/1973660876793368808
cis.org.au/…/the-renewable-energy-honeymoon-start…
DupaCycki@lemmy.world 1 month 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 1 month ago
That’s what almost every “net zero” government has been pushing though. They claim it is doable with zero fossil fuel, just 100% “renewables”.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 month 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 1 month 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.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 month ago
They need regular cleaning otherwise they can very quickly drop to close to zero output, and storms - especially hail - can destroy entire solar farms at once.