• guldukat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    41 minutes ago

    Green energy can’t be scarce, therefore cheap. Solar, wind, water, never happen. They can always slow the generators, can’t slow the sun.

  • switcheroo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Yes but how would the fascists get kickbacks and bribes then? That’s a big chunk of their income. Won’t someone think of the oligarchy???

  • maplesaga@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Maybe Nuclear, given it can actually support the base load power, except they need to fully deregulate it first so Nimbys and lawsuits balloon the cost. It shouldnt cost more nowadays in inflation adjusted terms than France building them in the 70s.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      Your talking points are ten years out of date. The cheapest form of baseload power now is batteries plus solar. For seasonal variations? Nuclear is so expensive that it’s far cheaper to just build enough to meet your winter electricity demand and have abundant power the rest of the year.

      Fission is a dead end technology that people mostly support now so they can feel a sense of contrarian intellectual superiority. It’s all just vibes at this point.

      • maplesaga@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        59 minutes ago

        Do you have an example of a city that runs on renewables with battery storage with no duplicate backup base load generator?

        As far as I was aware there were none, as it is non-feasible outside of areas with hydro dams for power storage.

  • Creegz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Remember how now that countries have stopped recognizing US medial science we see cures for cancer coming out of the woodwork? Yeah…

      • Creegz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Generally speaking medical research in the US has been scrutinized due to the incredibly profitable privatized nature of it, so much so that people believe solutions are actively suppressed in favor of more expensive options. In the last few weeks after the US left the WHO a whole bunch of cancer cures started coming up. While probably a coincidence, after the last few months of conspiracy theorists being proven at least to some degree right it’s getting hard to ignore that this may not be a coincidence.

  • diabetic_porcupine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    So what you’re saying is - if the government spent more money, they would make less money off of us in utilities bills…. Makes sense

  • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Solar is so cheap now, that some people can just build their own solar and battery setup themselves.

    • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Yes, but at scale it is significantly cheaper to build larger and distribute it. It also means people don’t have to over invest in their own set up just to cover their peak usage. There is also a large amount of up front capital required to build with usually years before you get back what was invested. Its also almost impossible for renters or apartment buildings to do it themselves.

      • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Yes I know all of that, I’m saying that solar is so much cheaper than coal power that even private individuals can buy it, so we shouldn’t be wasting money on new coal plants or gas plants.

        • trongod_requiem0432@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Same for nuclear. U.S.-Americans are brainwashed on this topic.

          First, they pay with their tax dollars for the subsidies that the private for-profit companies use to build the nuclear reactors. After that, they pay again, because the private company charges them extra on the electricity bill for the electricity generated by the very same nuclear reactor so that they can make even more profit.

          It’s so stupid and they’re brainwashed to defend it to the teeth. They also always try to deflect from the fact that renewables are cheaper than nuclear and can be owned by them instead of a for-profit company, by pretending that everyone who opposes nuclear energy must be in favour of coal and gas. It’s mind boggling to watch.

          • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Nuclear power is really cool, but my biggest problem with building new reactors isn’t even the money issues you pointed out, it’s the fact that I live in the US and I don’t trust any regulatory agency to build a new nuclear power plant correctly/safely.

            Solar panels and wind turbines are monumentally cheaper AND they don’t potentially cause ten thousand year contamination problems.

  • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Of the quicker way: the government nationalised all power companies, and sold electricity for cheap… Because it’s necessary… For society…

  • slazer2au@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Will they really though?

    Have you looked at your power bill and seen how much of the bill is not power consumption?

    We have also seen multiple times where the wholesale price of electricity is below zero yet consumers are still paying for power during those times.

    • lost_faith@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Have you looked at your power bill and seen how much of the bill is not power consumption?

      Not in US, but after our power went private it literally doubled. The nice lady tried to convince me the “extra” charges were always there but not itemized, but while holding the previous bill with the same (within a few points) my usage was the same but the “fees” were as much as my power usage

  • pedz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    If the electricity bill would be lower people would use more energy and switch to electric cars real fast. I’m sure some people would not change their habits, but I’m inclined to think a lot of people would just use more and care a bit less about trying to use it as efficiently as possible.

    Just take cars as an example. Everyone wants low gas prices, but when gas prices are low, people are buying bigger cars that consumes more gas/energy. Another example are places with renewable energy powering the grid, having cheaper electricity, but also ending up using more per person.

    The province of Québec is one of the biggest consumer of electricity per inhabitant in the world, behind Iceland and Norway. Source in French.

    Those places have super high percentages of cheap renewable energy being generated, but they also consume much more per inhabitant. Sure, if we cover the earth in solar panels, reservoirs, tap geothermal, and have enough energy to waste for everybody, and every manufacture. But this takes resources, space, batteries, and ends up polluting too. The less we need, the better it is for everyone.

    I’m not saying we don’t need renewable nor deserve lower bills. Just that the actual system of consumption cannot only be reduced to “more cheap renewable energy”. I’m in Québec and energy is mostly renewable and relatively cheap here. But we also can’t just continue to build giant reservoirs visible from space to quench our insatiable appetite for electricity. We’ll have to learn to use less energy too; be more efficient with what we have. Not just convert everything to renewable and call it a day.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      How does this article manage to say so many things about energy use in arctic tundras without even once recognizing that just maybe it takes more energy to heat a living space in an arctic tundra? Bafflingly stupid analysis.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        56 minutes ago

        Honestly, if anyone is talking the freaking arctic when discussing the energy transition, they’re a bad faith actor and can be completely ignored. We care about the bulk of energy usage. The tiny little remainder is irrelevant. A few innuit can keep their gas generators for all I care.

      • pedz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Have you read it? Translated or in French? Because this is a list of facts, with a conclusion addressing what you are pointing out. It’s literally from the government of the province.

        Le Québec, avec son climat hivernal rigoureux, connaît des besoins élevés en puissance électrique lors de périodes de grand froid, alors que toute la population doit se chauffer simultanément. Ces épisodes, appelés périodes de pointe de puissance, ne durent que quelques heures par année, mais exercent une pression sur le réseau.

        Translated: The province of Québec, with its cold climate, has high energetic needs during the peaks of extreme cold periods, because the whole population has to heat their homes at the same time. Those periods, called power peaks, are only lasting for a few hours every year, but are putting pressure on the network.

        Also, those places have summer. Most of the population in Québec and Norway don’t live in an arctic tundra.

        • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          I guess the issue I have is less the report itself, but the way you are trying to wield it to prove that the concept of induced demand which is not what the report is talking about at all.

  • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I vaguely recall a lemming posting a highway outdoor advertising “Green coal” or something like that. Guess that’s the green energy the USA govt is investing in (also crypto bros, because they got money to buy entire fucking power plants to run their stupid coins)

  • carrylex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Fun Fact: Doesn’t really work in Winter.

    Source: EU countries that don’t have a ton of cheap gas, flowing water or nuclear power and unlimited storage.

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    Plug and play solar and wind are the future:

    • Solar

    https://pluggedsolar.com/collections/featured/products/plug-and-play-solar-panel-power-with-680-watt-inverter-simply-plug-into-wall-expand-to-680watts

    https://www.amazon.com/SOLPERK-Maintainer-Waterproof-Controller-Adjustable/dp/B08GX19KT9?

    • Wind

    https://www.amazon.com/pofluany-Generator-Controller-Turbines-Windmill/dp/B0D1VHSHNH?

    • Wind, not plug and play, but you get the idea

    https://www.amazon.com/VEVOR-500W-Wind-Turbine-Generator/dp/B0D3T9Q6QC?

    • You would need a few of these and also not plug and play

    This 500W vertical axis wind turbine utilizes a helical design and a permanent magnet generator to operate effectively in low wind speed environments. Its high power output and low starting wind speed make it ideal for maximizing energy production.

    https://www.amazon.com/Vertical-Generator-Permanent-Intelligent-Controller/dp/B0DSC27VD1?

    • davad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      How does this handle grid power outages?

      In my area, you’re required to prevent back feeding if the grid goes down (otherwise it can be hazardous for the linemen repairing the issue).

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 hours ago

        They all have controllers? I’m guessing it’s all done through that. You’ll probably want to be careful when you get one for your specific area that it follows all of the laws.