Based on current deployment rates, it is likely that solar will surpass wind as the third-largest source of electricity. And solar may soon topple coal in the number two spot.

Looking ahead, through July 2028, FERC expects no new coal capacity to come online based on its “high probability additions” forecast. Meanwhile 63 coal plants are expected to be retired, subtracting 25 GW from the 198 GW total, and landing at about 173 GW of coal capacity by 2028. Meanwhile, FERC forecasts 92.6 GW of “high probability additions” solar will come online through July 2028.

all 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 46 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

"Will pass wind"

Haha

Cool

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    Even with an admin as renewable-hostile as the current one, you just can’t beat cheap, I guess.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    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 “patent thicket” can create barriers to innovative low-carbon technologies, particularly in markets requiring expensive licensing fees or with complex patent litigation (Cannuscio 2008). A strengthened IPRP can increase market concentration and reduce competition (Liu et al. 2018), with large corporations able to maintain market control in such environments through patents on key technologies. This control not only restricts the entry of emerging low-carbon technologies into the market but also perpetuates the reliance on existing high-carbon technologies.

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    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?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    You’re really discounting that fossil fuels have hella bang for the buck, loads of power per gallon. tl;dr: Energy dense

    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 comparably safe to transport. And it is simpler to use.

    Fine enough to warm your home or grill some meat. But you're not putting a rocket into orbit with coal.

    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.

    Sure. Broadly speaking you want to be hooked up to the grid to benefit from electricity. Anything portable is very ineffective for a litany of reasons.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Patents have a short life span.

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -5 points 1 year ago* (8 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-2 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    I'm not going to read propaganda from an Australian right wing think tank, 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. https://www.bbvaresearch.com/en/publicaciones/spain-more-renewables-to-continue-lowering-costs/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    JFC mate, you're linking to content by the traitor Jacinta Nampijinpa-Price, and you have the gall to accuse others of ideological bias? Fuck man, you couldn't be more out-of-step with reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 112 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    I've already passed wind in 2025.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Hell. In Florida, FPL is the electric provider, and they are fighting tooth and nail to keep people from installing solar on houses.... In Florida, we would have almost free electric for everyone if all houses could install panels....

    But FPL lobbied our GOP legislature and force anyone with solar to have a million dollar insurance policy payable to FPL in case something happens. Also got regulations passed to bar home windstorm insurance if any panels are bolted to the roof. So if you have panels, no hurricane insurance for you....and the mortgage holder gets to put their expensive policy on your home.

    Fuck FPL

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Bad phrasing. There are power walls for home use and FPL is still available.

    My point is that Florida could use solar as 1 prong on the challenge to provide clean, green energy but FPL must deliver profit to it's shareholders and will fight that effort

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Widely distributed solar + nuclear produces a generation curve that matches demand better than any other combination, minimizing battery or dirty on-demand generation needs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    To be fair, Florida building codes are pretty much static electricity holding cardboard together.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Florida has some of the strictest building codes in the United States due to the hurricane and flooding risks.

    May I ask the source of your comment?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    My father ran a small construction company in Ontario, he was asked to manage building a few house for a client in Florida and at the time, the codes were a complete joke compared to Canada, closer to what we grade as seasonal cottages. This likely had recently changed, only because people can't even get storm insurance any more. Then there's the 5,400 trailer parks in Florida. Ontario has 14, seasonal use only.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Yes, FPL has done a lot to prevent rooftop solar, but calling it "almost free" is not correct. Rooftop solar still comes with significant upfront costs. The weather of Florida degrades panels quicker with non-trivial odds of hurricane damage. Finally, Southwestern states receive much more solar irradiance.

    If you are willing to be pragmatic and want solar in Florida, FPL's solar together program is your best option. Like it or not, utility grade solar is 1/3 the LCOE.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] [S] 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Assuming Dear Leader Trump (and I hate calling him that even as a joke) don't stamp it out, of course.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I also always call him Dear Leader. We can't normalize these behaviors from a president, and using the "Dear Leader" title makes it unambiguously clear that his selfish actions are not presidential.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Sodium-ion batteries are becoming more viable, which will be necessary to buffer the solar energy surge during the day and lack of energy production at night.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    That's actually a problem.

    All realistic plans for 100% renewable (or even 95% renewable, which is substantially easier) rely on a multipronged approach of wind, water, solar, and grid upgrades. Each one has upsides and downsides, but you can use the upsides of one to cover the downsides of another. Combined, you get a reliable grid based on intermittent but cheap sources.

    Capitalism sees this plan and decides to deploy the one with the best immediate ROI. Which happens to be solar. Problem is that you can't just rely on solar. The grid is hitting limits where electrical production is sending prices to basically zero at certain times, but not able to provide enough the rest of the time. That will shift the economic incentives. Eventually.

    It'll figure out what researchers have already written down, but it'll take too long to get there.

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] [S] 8 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    SoCal has a huge amount of wind and solar right now. Utility sized battery installations are going in to deal with the times those two aren't producing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Even home battery solutions. We have solar panels & a Powerwall. Were part of a Virtual Power Plant along with around 1500 other Powerwall owners in the region. During peak usage in the summer all our PowerWalls feed back to the grid so that our utility provider doesn’t have to spin up expensive (and dirty) peaker plants. We get paid a premium for the power we provide during these events.

    I saw articles here on Lemmy just a month or two ago that Tesla successfully tested a VPP in California that consisted of 100,000 PowerWalls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 1 year ago

    The ones they've installed near us are Siemens and the only reason we even know they exist is we went by often during installation. The cabinets are now hidden behind a high wall. I'm guessing they're going in all over the place. Strange that I've never seen them mentioned in the news anywhere.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Our house is still powered by the panels and/or battery as well. We typically use 1 to 5 kWh, and during these events the batteries are discharging up to 10 kWh. Whatever we don’t use goes to the grid. Last year we received a payout of $1450 for 45 hours worth of energy, probably in the neighborhood of 300-350 kWh.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (10 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    What batteries exactly? The capacity required is huge.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    They can be distributed though. I Install solar, most of the systems we install with batteries end up selling back a significant portion of their charge to the grid (iirc our system wide average is 40% nightly resale)

    So not only is each house with a battery not using grid power at night, its powering almost half of an equivalently sized house.

    Granted, batteries are still on the expensive side, so these systems aren't coming enough ( I think we're at ~10% of our systems have a battery)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Yeah, that's a step in correct direction, but can you guarantee that everybody can be powered 24/7 through renewables/batteries, specially during winter? Unless that's the case you still need a shit-ton of non-renewable energy that's coming either from fossil fuels or nuclear. And if you want to avoid (co2) emissions, then you need nuclear to cover everybody, and if you have nuclear then it has to run 100% 24/7. OTOH if you don't have nuclear, you'll emit all sort or crap during those periods. And so on. Also, it's not just that batteries are sort of expensive, they are big. Also you are talking houses, but masses live in apartments where placing solar panels or batteries isn't possible (at least in quantity).

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago* (3 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Are you talking about batteries?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I think you are wrong then. First, even Li-ion batteries are recyclable to a huge amount, usually the problem is that different manufacturers pack them differently without any blueprint and then it's much harder to recycle them. Then there are a ton of different chemistries with ones really harmless (i.e. using sodium instead of lithium) but they come with less energy density. Which isn't that important when it comes to energy storage for the network purpose but it's important when it comes to cars and portable electronic devices. Also different chemistries have different lifetime, i.e. LFP batteries have better durability and are less fire prone than the standard li-ion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    You have some valid points. Yes, economical aspect is crap, countries should push laws demanding that producers guarantee recycling and/or state clear lifecycle of the battery (actually it should be applied to all products). Even still, there are companies that do recycle batteries for profit, so it's not that absurd. But you miss the whole other aspect with different chemistries, many even harmless to the environment. You are focused only on current li-ion it seems which are not very network storage friendly anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-2 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Preznit Numbnuts will be sure to start closing wind farms then, forcing us all back into using coal so he can slurp up lobby $$

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    A recent article about the state of the coal industry in the usa....

    Fossil Fuels and Fossilized Minds - Paul Krugman https://share.google/9gGFCB2MFShNzGJrp

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    You guys still burning coal? We dumped that ages ago.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    See, you can build coal plants in poor/black areas, so you don't have to see the pollution, nor your kids have to get cancer like those silly poors. And then you don't have to put up with woke shit like windmills. Sigh.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    Well despite Trump wanting to reverse it coal has been being phased out for decades. I'd look at how it does vs natural gas.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Heh heh. Heh heh.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    They knew what they were doing with that title.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›