13 ms·
Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister
- kristopolous 11y agoThis is called Swanson's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swanson%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swanson%27s_law "The future is solar" isn't some hippy fantasy, it's a sincere market projection. Apparently, a robust, distributed, decentralized, sustainable power grid is unbelievably the actual long-term direction of free-market forces.
- jdale27 11y agoAstounding! Yet another example of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler's_law_of_eponymy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler's_law_of_eponymy !
- function_seven 11y agoI dub your comment: Function_seven's Law of Meta-Astoundment.
- chris_wot 11y agoYou stole that from dang I'll bet.
- netcan 11y agoThere is some other interesting economics at play. Solar is more suitable for local, small scale production for a few reasons including relative costs and the way those costs are distributed (capital cost vs variable cost). That in itself is interesting for all sorts of reasons, many of them applying to countries like India with infrastructure difficulties. About 7 years ago I visited Cow Bay, north of Cairns, Australia and past the end of the grid (it ends at the Daintree river, I think). All the B&Bs, houses, hotels and such were running on Diesel generators. Smelly, noisy... People turn them off at night. I wonder if solar has replaced much of this yet. If local solar reduces the need for power infrastructure in areas where marginal costs are highest, I wonder if the economics of grids changes in some sort of useful way generally. Maybe the cost savings in marginal infrastructure reduce overall costs meaningfully. If governments (or the quasi independent private energy players) are too broke or disfunctional to provide good central power, there's an alternative. When telcom infrastructure was simplified by mobile, that had a big impact in places that never had wired infrastructure in the first place but got mobile phones.
- dexterdog 11y agoCan't the same be said for local nuclear?
- yAnonymous 11y agoNo.
- aangjie 11y agoErm.. I assumed when he said about capital vs marginal costs of solar it was because the capital is not too high(compared to coal and other power stations/generators). Wouldn't nuclear be the opposite. I can imagine proper waste disposal alone costing more than a solar setup.(I know the solar setup for a small farm-house was very cheap).
- iSnow 11y agoIn the age of global terrorism, local nuclear is a no-go from the start. Dirty bombs hardly make sense in terms of headcount, but their psychological effects would be tremendous. Therefore, security around nuclear installations will remain high - and that's easier to organize and cheaper around big, centralized stations.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ageofwant 11y agoBill Gates disagrees http://terrapower.com/ http://terrapower.com/ Modern LFTR and TWR designs addresses most of your concerns and leaves the rest with less risk than the incumbent status quo. Update your ken on nuclear, the current narrative is hurting as all deeply.
- pjc50 11y agoLocal nuclear is not going to happen in the lifetime of anyone who remembers Chernobyl's fallout across half of western Europe.
- swah 11y agoIsn't "The Man" selling the solar panels though? Of course that is much less dependency than being connected to a power grid.
- azazqadir 11y agoThis will definitely lower the demand for coal, which in turn could lower its prices as well. This is good, because India might still need few coal power plants, considering its population size.
- shard972 11y agoConsidering that India is making progress on nuclear, it would seem inevitable that they shut down a few if not all of them.
- rathish_g 11y agoNo! Solar is solar; depends on available sunlight. India is not going to shut any nuclear power plant and is working on new one or next phase of existing ones.
- TheSpiceIsLife 11y agoI believe the parent meant they'd shut down coal plants in favour of nuclear.
- kristopolous 11y agoThe important part here is that solar is still under heavy R&D with consistent real-world non-zero advances in efficiency and cost reduction while coal has, AFIAK plateaued. Even under perfect market conditions, solar will still, eventually price-cut coal.
- mgnacl 11y agoThis is great news. Years ago it was considered an indisputable fact that solar (and wind) couldn't compete with the economics of coal and nuclear.
- StreamBright 11y agoAnd it is still true, wind will be never be able to compete with nuclear for the simple fact that wind blows when it blows and you need energy when you need it. Unless we develop a technology that is able to cope with the huge spikes that windmills put on the energy grid and store energy in a very efficient way (including gaining the energy back when we need it) wind will not be more than few percentage of the overall energy production with the cost of having gas turbines in the system to just to balance windmills. Solar is obviously far better, there are few things to sort out but the progress we made is definitely promising.
- crdoconnor 11y ago>And it is still true, wind will be never be able to compete with nuclear for the simple fact that wind blows when it blows and you need energy when you need it. Unless we develop a technology that is able to cope with the huge spikes A) The spikes aren't actually that huge (fossil fuel companies exaggerate, who knew?). B) It's a problem that's relatively easily dealt with by overproducing and variable pricing. After years of championing free markets, fossil fuel companies 'forgot' that they are efficient mechanisms for mediating fluctuating demand and supply.
- mgnacl 11y agoOk. Maybe I shouldn't lump wind together with solar.
- jes5199 11y agoWind is getting cheaper and more reliable, too. I think I read that it's because we're building bigger wind turbines.
- forrestthewoods 11y agoI'm not sure I believe this. Is this due to subsidies on solar? Or taxes on coal? I'm not sure this headline is possible at face value.
- Kliment 11y agoNeither - just production-level economies of scale. Operating costs of solar are way below that of coal, and setup and manufacturing costs have dropped significantly with volume. Note the comparison is for new installations - coal power is only cheap now because the massive construction expenses were sunk long ago. Constructing a coal plant is a huge expense, particularly as it has to be centralized because it makes no sense below a certain size. Whereas with solar you can have very small installations closer to point of use that are still financially sensible. You win on capex, you win on operating costs, and you win on transmission losses. Capital expense used to be much much higher a decade ago for solar, and emission standards for coal plants were not rigorously enforced for old installations, making coal appear cheaper. Of course, if you count the expenses related to the pollution and health damage done by coal plants, coal was always more expensive.
- starving_coder 11y agoFrom the article: “Of course there are challenges of 24/7 power. We accept all of that – but we have been able to come up with a solar-based long term vision that is not subsidy based.” Headline is not possible at face value except that it is.
- forrestthewoods 11y agoAs best I can tell India's government is currently spending billions of dollars on solar. Maybe it will some day not be subsidy based. But as best I can tell it currently is. In fact the government appears to be spending one hundred billion dollars on solar in the next six years. By 2022. Furthermore, "The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy provides 70 percent subsidy on the installation cost of a solar photovoltaic power plant in North-East states and 30 percentage subsidy on other regions." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_India I'm all for renewable energy. Solar is great. At this point I don't see how the headline isn't clickbait bullshit.
- murukesh_s 11y ago“I sincerely believe that what the West is doing in this respect is anti-development and anti the fight against climate change,” he said, accusing rich countries of charging too much for clean technology." I really don't believe any country is sincere towards climate change. Every country puts their economy before others. So expecting another economy to help you is a foolish assumption.
- shirro 11y agoSincerity varies. There can be economic advantages in moving towards renewables if you do it right as you develop new companies and technologies. One thing is for sure though, every oligarchy puts their mates before others. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/coalition-wants-to-build-1-2gw-coal-plant-using-climate-funds-73755 http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/coalition-wants-to-build-1-2...
- beedogs 11y agoIt doesn't help that the developed countries want to flog off their increasingly-worthless coal reserves to developing countries.
- forgetsusername 11y agoI know, right? Why do those rich western countries like Indonesia and Colombia dump their worthless coal reserves into poor countries like the US, Germany, Japan and China?
- noisy_boy 11y agoYou are correct that every country puts their economy before others. However, India is not asking another economy to help them. India can develop its solar energy sector by itself. The west accuses the developing countries to be big polluters since they use less environmentally-friendly means of energy production. Then when countries like India try to subsidize the domestic solar energy market, WTO accuses them of illegally supporting domestic over international solar producers. Its like you are called a drug-addict first and when you try to wean off it on your own, you are accused of cheating the rehab centres. Excellent example of double standards.
- Aelinsaar 11y agoNow comes the agonizing process of explaining this to many millions of people who have been propagandized by the coal lobby for decades. Hopefully we can also work in some best practices around these photovoltaics that leads to less pollution from the process of mining elements for them, and making them in the first place. It's still better than coal, but "better than coal" is a very low bar.
- TheLogothete 11y agoSo his quote is "I think a new coal plant would give you costlier power than a solar plant" He thinks a NEW plant would give you costlier energy. Secondly, aren't the solar projects subsidized in a BIG way? I have seen many smart people say that solar is a sham. They say it's just an opportunist's play. Entrepreneurs want to get on the government's tit and the politicians are happy to portray themselves as environmentally friendly in front of the increasingly global warming wary voters. If anyone can argue against that, please speak up. I haven't seen anything other than wishful thinking and naive people patting themselves on the back because someone got their hands on tax money.
- nickysielicki 11y ago> federal subsidies have provided wind and solar developers with as much as $24 billion from 2008 to 2014, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. -- http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-05/say-goodbye-to-solar-power-subsidies http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-05/say-goodby... Absolutely ridiculous. Can you imagine if we spent $4BN annually on nuclear energy and public outreach on how it isn't dangerous? Yet another case where leftists would rather feel good than do good.
- megablast 11y agoWe did. We do.
- nickysielicki 11y ago> We did. We do. What a completely useless response. Why even bother commenting? Four words? Since you can't be bothered to come up with a source, see pages 3-10 of the following document from the Congressional Budget Office. [1] Renewables get the large majority of the cash, and nuclear isn't even close. [1]: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-12-EnergyTechnologies.pdf http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/...
- 11y ago
- gozur88 11y agoGreat! If he's right, we don't have to do anything, right? No direct subsidies, no feed-in tariffs, no cheap loans, etc. We can just let it happen!.
- tim333 11y agoIt'll happen better with feed-in tariffs though.
- TheLogothete 11y agoAnd if it doesn't happen at all?
- Daishiman 11y agoSay hello to another Permian-Triassic extinction event?
- ZeroGravitas 11y agoYour use of the suspiciously specific phrase "direct subsidies" suggests that you already know that coal receives plenty of government subsidies and that if those were removed, and coal had to account for the damage it does, then yes it would just happen.
- gozur88 11y ago>Your use of the suspiciously specific phrase "direct subsidies"... Was to contrast cash grants from other forms of subsidies like feed-in tariffs, cheap loans, net-zero metering, etc. There's no reason to parse my comments like some kind of religious text - I will tell you what I mean.
- sandGorgon 11y agoThis is the carrot to the Paris Agreement's stick (which India and China refused to sign until the differentiation of developed and developing is added). Its basically an attempt to show that as a country, we can move to cleaner power if the right technology transfer is supported by US and Europe. It is the second step after the agreement to transfer US nuclear energy tech to India (which has not signed the Non Proliferation Treaty). I think the US govt will have to open up its technology and patents to be used by India - if the climate change deal needs to be ratified. Otherwise there is zero chance of it being passed in the Indian parliament.
- eva1984 11y agoSounds exciting!
- levemi 11y agoWhatever the realities of the cost of solar, I tend to worry about a future in which we cover vast swaths of areas with solar panels and the impact such a thing will have on the environment. I don't know if anyone has done good studies on it. A bunch other sustainable forms of energy have environmental problems. Wind generators cause harm to birds, geothermal electricity sources like in Hawai'i raise the temperature of bodies of water disrupting wildlife. Nuclear power comes with great risks of radiation leakage. Biofuel is hugely inefficient. It seems any solution comes with problems.
- staticelf 11y agoIt will probably be less worrysome than what we do today, covering a lot of the earth with animals that is horrible for the environment.
- collyw 11y agoHumans are the only animals that seem to have a significant environmental impact.
- jessaustin 11y agoParent probably meant humans, or perhaps cattle as well...
- drjesusphd 11y agoThose problems you cited all pale in comparison to global warming. It's a disingenuous comparison.
- levemi 11y agoThese problems pale in comparison partly because these sustainable forms of technology aren't being used any meaningful scale yet. How much area do we have to cover with solar panels to power a largish metropolitan area?
- rathish_g 11y agoIndia has made huge investments in Solar and is gradually paying off. 1.World's first solar power airport is in India http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/14/technology/india-cochin-solar-powered-airport/ http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/14/technology/india-cochin-sola... 2.Solar power from dams http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-11-10/news/55956131_1_rays-power-experts-morbe-dam http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-11-10/news...
- asgs 11y agohow does subsidy vs no-subsidy matter here?
- invalid-access 11y agoShameless plug: If you want to participate in India's progress towards bigger rooftop-solar, please consider joining http://www.oorjan.com http://www.oorjan.com. We believe we are doing something unique in leveraging banking and financial relationships to productize solar deployments. And looking for great devs right now - esp frontend :-)
- sandGorgon 11y agopretty cool. I dont know if you applied for YC this time, but I encourage you to do this for the next batch. Contact me if you need any gyaan.
- invalid-access 11y agoThanks - might just take you up on it!
- saravanannkl 11y agoIs solar viable for small installations without any subsidies ? I was recently looking at a 30KW proposal for a small enterprise in Tamil Nadu. The quoted price is Rs. 36 lakhs. At the rate of Rs 6.75 per unit, it doesn't even cover the interest costs. Does this match with your capex costs or is this way off ?
- parimm 11y agoSolar is viable, you will be looking at a 6-7year payback on the system with interest, 36Lakhs is very high for a 30kW system. The prices should be in the range of 25-27L for an on grid system with a simple structure. Where in Tamil Nadu is this? Ping me if you are looking for more details(mail Id in profile), I work for a company that does solar installations.
- saravanannkl 11y agoThanks for the reply. I could not find your mail id in your profile. You can send me an email to {My HN username}{at}gmail and I can send you more details
- duncan_bayne 11y agoCheaper, or better subsidised? Politicians are usually quite keen to describe their pet projects as either cheap or free when in reality they're just taxpayer funded.
- sambe 11y agoThis was in my inbox this morning: http://www.vox.com/2016/4/18/11415510/solar-power-costs-innovation http://www.vox.com/2016/4/18/11415510/solar-power-costs-inno... Suggesting that costs are not falling fast enough to overcome value deflation. Seems quite US-focussed though. The numbers in the two articles don't seem directly comparable.
- caminante 11y agoGreat article. Sivaram's an impressive kid... For the near term, financial engineers have not done solar any favors with recent "yieldco" abuses.[1] Though with value deflation, financial innovation and regulatory protection may not be able to save solar. [1]http://on.wsj.com/1SW1BPH http://on.wsj.com/1SW1BPH
- Gibbon1 11y ago> Value Deflation. When enough of the worlds billionaires and other powerful riffraff get spooked by climate change, you'll see carbon taxes imposed. And countries like China and India will simply phase out burning coal.
- Osiris30 11y agoThis is being discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11520789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11520789
- reacweb 11y agoWe will need big wires to bring electricity to the dark side of the earth ;-)
- davedx 11y agoYou mean like this? :) http://www.pv-tech.org/news/asian-super-grid-could-get-go-ahead-after-china-and-russias-grid-operators http://www.pv-tech.org/news/asian-super-grid-could-get-go-ah...
- dimitar 11y agoAren't warm countries incredibly suitable for solar power? I assume most of the electricity is used during the day for things like electric motors during the work hours and air-conditioning. So they don't need to store that energy to keep homes warm during the colder night (even if residential AC is kept running during the night it will consume less energy since the temperatures will fall)
- skoocda 11y agoAbsolutely- factoring in refrigeration as well, it seems like an ideal location for widespread solar. On top of that, power transmission in a developing country would benefit a ton from decentralization. The tough aspects of managing a decentralized grid (sensing and load shedding) are much easier today than when the North American / European power grids were developed. I'd even wager to say that some non-industrial areas should push for HVDC transmission and start to move away from AC altogether. With most of our household amenities trending towards relatively low DC voltages, the AC losses don't seem as worthwhile if we can avoid it.
- __Joker 11y agoInteresting times for the energy economics and geopolitics. If people believe that solar(renewable energy) is getting cheaper, the prices of the oil is drop faster. And you don't want to keep holding to oil when the music stops. I would argue this trend is showing off. The oil producing countries pumping out their oil, because they don't see value reducing the capacity, while the oil prices are historically low.
- masklinn 11y ago> And you don't want to keep holding to oil when the music stops. Or you want to be the only one holding to accessible oil, and pretty much sole provider of oil for plastics and other non-fuel petrochemical products.
- __Joker 11y agoYes. Still OPEC cartel doesn't seems to be working, neither does any kind monopoly. Given the wide and often conflicting interest between the oil producers I like to view this as less probable outcome.
- puranjay 11y agoWith the amount of light we receive here in India, it's a shame this didn't happen sooner.
- stevetrewick 11y agoOnly if it includes the price of all the overcapacity and storage required to produce baseload and still comes in lower can solar be considered to cheaper than coal (or more usefully whatever fossil/nuclear mix is actually currently providing that).
- Osiris30 11y agoNo. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11520789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11520789
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- mentos 11y agoSolar is nuclear energy as Elon Musk has put it we have a reactor in the sky we can harness
- forgetsusername 11y agoOh yes, let's credit Mr. Musk with recognizing the sun's potential.
- rfrey 11y agoI think that was an attribution for the qoute, not credit for inventing solar.
- kbart 11y agoVarious sci-fi authors wrote about that long before E. Musk was even born. I. Asimov is one for example.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- nano852 11y agoInteresting...
- aaron695 11y agoA politician make a statement in a speech and HN eats it up as scientific truth. People really can't leave their bubble worlds can they?
- forgetsusername 11y agoThere's quite a bit of disillusionment regarding the reality of energy production. But solar is getting cheaper. Is anyone shocked?
- nxzero 11y agoAny country using fossil fuels is stuck in the past; solar is the future, economies are driven by energy, and refusing to act on this is irresponsible.
- douche 11y agoSo..., every industrial country in the world?... I wish I lived in an alternate reality where the hippies and greens didn't effectively scuttle nuclear power development.
- nxzero 11y agoWhen it comes to energy, there a lot of options, but doing nothing because you're stuck on your solution makes no sense.
- known 11y agoSolar cost for domestic purpose http://nedcap.gov.in/PDFs/Solar_Net_Metring/Indicative_Cost_Economics.pdf http://nedcap.gov.in/PDFs/Solar_Net_Metring/Indicative_Cost_...
- a_imho 11y agoBit of a clickbait title, the article mentions only one case where solar was traded at a lower price than coal, which is still not lower than coal's average price. For a better comparison we should include the cost of manufacturing panels vs building coal plants and the money spent on r&d and pr. Also, afaik solar panels are not exactly eco friendly. I believe it is up to personal taste which power lobby agenda one buys in, for one, I see the most value in fission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_fast_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_fast_reactor
- Kliment 11y agoThe minister being quoted explicitly compared cost of new solar installs versus cost of new coal installs - that's where the "cheaper than coal" quote was taken from, it's not about spot prices for solar energy (which are a senseless comparison anyway, as they go to zero and even negative in times of low demand) EDIT: low demand, not high demand, of course
- a_imho 11y agoThanks for the clarification, it seemed to me that the writer was using these numbers to justify Goyal's claim. Without them we are left with the sentence that imo is worded exactly that way to reflect the minister's personal opinion/pr after Sun Edison bankruptcy. Which still makes it clickbaitish without any more facts.
- ck2 11y agoNow that would be amazing in the USA if they could stop blowing up mountains and polluting the entire area, or dig filthy toxic mines just to extract coal, which is a horrible, horrible job for any human being (who will resist changing their job until the early day they die). Too bad there is no "sexy" equivalent like a Tesla to make USA change from coal to solar/wind.
- downandout 11y ago"Solar energy prices hit a new record low in January with the auction of 420 megawatts in Rajasthan at 4.34 rupees a kilowatt-hour. In comparison coal tariffs range between 3-5 rupees/kWh." So the headline here is, as is usually the case with articles in this space, misleading at best. It's slightly cheaper than the highest-end coal, but dramatically more expensive - nearly 1.5X more - than the lower end. Overall, it's still more expensive, and that doesn't include the cost of batteries to deal with the fact that the sun sets each day. To be sure, advances are being made in this space. But this headline is nothing more than clickbait.
- Kliment 11y agoThe comparison is between the cost of new installations - coal power is very cheap because the facilities are old and the capital expenses were sunk a long time ago. New solar power is now cheaper to build out than new coal plants, which is reasonable enough given the cost of both raw materials and production processes for solar had plummeted over the last decade whereas coal is a very mature technology that is effectively at the end of its efficiency curve (and getting worse over time as the cost of extraction grows).
- downandout 11y ago>The comparison is between the cost of new installations That may be, but that isn't what the headline says. It simply says that solar is cheaper than coal, which of course is not the case right now.
- Osiris30 11y agoYes, all solar installations are not cheaper than all coal installations. But conversely, all coal is not cheaper than all solar! That applies globally and in India. The point is that solar costs are declining every year, by 10% p.a. In many sunny places it is already at parity or below (eg Arizona, Mexico, Rajasthan and Gujarat in India, Mexico). We have already seen several bids this year at US¢ 3/Kwh ($30/MWh). $20/MWh is in sight - that would be well under the cheapest coal. This link is useful summary http://cleantechnica.com/2016/04/15/why-energy-experts-are-still-shocked-by-the-rise-of-solar-the-fall-in-costs/ http://cleantechnica.com/2016/04/15/why-energy-experts-are-s... (And none of this accounts for the massive unpriced carbon + health externality of coal plants). Coal is staying at best flat + whatever the fuel cost.
- selimnairb 11y agoMany Indians already have backup battery systems because the grid, even in big cities, is so unreliable. This may make the switch to solar less burdensome, at least from a cogmitive point of view.
- selimnairb 11y agoMany Indians already have backup battery systems because the grid, even in big cities, is so unreliable. This may make the switch to solar less burdensome, at least cognitively, if not practically.
- toyg 11y agoThe real winners of the current movement towards decentralized tech (mobile phones, solar etc) will be BRICS and developing countries, if only they can keep their political systems consistent enough.
- ageofwant 11y agoThe beauty of decentralised systems like these is that they make central governtment less relevant. This is generally a good thing, but particularly so in place with less stable political systems.
- codecamper 11y agoWho would have thought that India outdoes all the west when it comes to making sustainable growth. Google CEO Indian. Microsoft CEO Indian. Watch out all you fox news watching Americans.
- vinay427 11y agoYou're going to claim that the Google CEO and Microsoft CEO being of Indian ethnicity somehow contributes to India's growth? I think it does the opposite, considering what people of their talent might or might not have achieved if they remained in India. I'm not saying that they should have remained in India (far from it), but they chose not to so they could contribute to largely American growth.
- thetruthseeker1 11y agoI do think ambitious & driven Indians can do very well in a global market place. I think the stiff competition in resources have made the cream of India very competitive at a global level and we see things like Indian at Microsoft CEO position. But I dont buy your argument that Indians are outdoing the west yet(not saying it can't be done), but there have been more American CEO's in the fortune 500 than Indian CEOs.
- chris_wot 11y agoEat your heart out Tony Abbott! Unfortunately, the Australian Government, which under the Labor Party was trying to phase out polluting industries via a Carbon Tax and then an ETS were voted out of power due to their own cromulence and internal dysfunction. We then got one Anthony John Abbott as the new Prime Minister who was backed by Joseph Benedict Hockey, his Treasurer. Joe Hockey attempted to shut down the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, and said the following: "If I can be a little indulgent please, I drive to Canberra to go to Parliament, I drive myself and I must say I find those wind turbines around Lake George to be utterly offensive. I think they're just a blight on the landscape." The first thing that the Abbott government did once they got into power was roll back the mining tax and stop the ETS. Tony Abbott said: "Coal is good for humanity, coal is good for prosperity, coal is an essential part of our economic future, here in Australia, and right around the world." Abbott lasted just under two years before his even more dysfunctional government (which barely passed any legislation and whose leader was the most unpopular and incompetent Australian leader of recent history) came to an ignominious end and Malcolm Turnbull was reinstated as the leader of the LNP, and thus was elevated from backbencher to leader of Australia. I am hopeful that Malcolm Turnbull can turn this around, but I think it's unlikely. Much of Australia's wealth is derived from coal exports, even though it never actually employed a large proportion of the Australian population (and employs even less now as there have been a lot of mine closures, especially in the Hunter area of NSW). Sadly, we squandered the huge wealth that it generated and although the Labor party made a start towards transitioning to a clean energy economy, it has all been rolled back in only two years and the momentum they got going is unlikely to be reestablished any time soon. Our leaders have let us down badly, and Abbott's risky bet on coal is going to cause Australia a lot of problems in the years ahead.
- dschiptsov 11y agoEspecially in the monsoon season.
- droithomme 11y ago1. The Indian government issues grandiose announcements of these sort on a regular basis. Each announcement is followed by international news waving their hands "it's happening!" followed by no follow up coverage when every single time the claims fall apart and the plan never happens. 2. "I think a new coal plant would give you costlier power than a solar plant." Someone's "I think" is a gut feeling by a government minister, not anything to do with reality. 3. The given cost comparison takes a one-time outlier lowest-price-ever in an auction to provide a 70Mw plant installation with certain assurances, with the overall average cost of the other technology. An invalid comparison, as well as inaccurate to imply that the lowest bid for 70Mw was also the bids for the other parts of the 420 mW projects.
- andraganescu 11y agoi don't get it, countries export electricity for ages. other than money and infrastructure, what are we missing so that we all, as a united humanity, use our shared sun to export, on a daily basis, electricity from the sun lit part of the planet to the other one. why must we still wait on the genius who will revolutionize batteries, considering we already have non stop sunlight. is this lack of political will? or is such a planetary scale effort impossible?
- jernfrost 11y agoI don't know how things work in India, but it seems to me that big government backed projects in India don't quite work out. The great thing about solar is NOT depending on government. If government puts the right regulation in place, that allows people to locally build solar cells on their houses, farms etc then that it where the great potential for solar power is. Not being dependent on central authorities doing their job. Solar scales down so much better than coal and that is its real advantage for developing countries with weak governments and lots of red tape.
- hackuser 11y ago> it seems to me that big government backed projects in India don't quite work out > The great thing about solar is NOT depending on government We have these theories on the one hand, and the evidence of solar's success in India as a government program on the other. I'll take empirical evidence over hypothesis.
- thetruthseeker1 11y agoIn general I understand the principle of the argument, that the government is not as driven as private sector because there is strong incentive structures in private companies. But with some good management decent incentive structures in govt, it can also work. Case in point, the some of the Indian banks which were nationalized, the Indian railways(the largest rail network in the world), and in many Indian States govt. diary companies have worked decently well as well.
- kumarski 11y agoThese are all red herrings from the most immensely important technology we must regulate.... We must put carbon capture technology on all coal plants as the immediate high impact stop-gap solution to CO2 emissions. I think the only way this happens is regulatory. The general utility verdict on solar/wind is that it's good for displacing natural gas peaking in a small way.
- ZeroGravitas 11y agoAs the headline says, solar is already breaking even with coal and the projection is for it to continue to drop for some time, even without further big breakthroughs. If you add carbon capture to coal, you decrease efficiency and increase costs to the point that it simply isn't viable. It's simpler to just regulate coal out of existence directly and replace it with a mix of gas/solar/wind/hydro/etc. The only people who care about carbon capture for coal are those invested in coal. Everyone else sees it as pointless (though it may have applications for other carbon producing processes like concrete). Solar and wind are ready for prime time, displacing peaker plants is just the beginning, solar will wipe out all contenders during daylight hours and then the stuff they displace into the off-peak hours will start getting eaten by storage that shifts solar into the evening.
- throwaway16419 11y agoIf you want to help make solar even cheaper, Genability is hiring a VP of Engineering and a full-stack developer. http://genability.com/careers/work_with_us.html http://genability.com/careers/work_with_us.html
- homido 11y agoIf solar was profitable (or saved money), we would see all power companies switching to it on a massive scale and with a sense of urgency (it would be good business after all). Where are the regional solar arrays on a massive scale being built in deserts across the US? We aren't seeing this (there are some token tax writeoff/marketing/PR ones only). Alert me when it happens because this will signify that solar is finally viable. Forget these stories and media hype, it's all BS. If you want to invest your money to save the world A La Prius owners who almost never break even financially, more power to you. It's mostly an illusion that you are saving the planet at this stage of efficiency and manufacturing environmental cost, but if it makes you feel good - Go for it. Sorry to be a downer, but reality agrees with me. Edit: One more thing, I can almost guarantee that the India energy minister is being compensated in some way for saying this. Either directly or he has financial investment in a particular solar company.