3 ms·
Bit 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 pri
by a_imho 11y ago
Bit 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.