5 ms·

... until import tariffs with China end the solar revolution here.

by api 10y ago

jacobush 10y ago
But then it will be cost efficient to mine coal, and America will be great again!
mtgx 10y ago
Good thing Tesla is going to manufacture its panels in the US.
infinite8s 10y ago
There is still the rest of the world...
toomuchtodo 10y ago
Lots of places around the world not the US. Those buyers will continue to drag the price of solar down. The US election doesn't mean a thing for the energy market. We'll be dragged along with the rest of the world by market forces.
- jacobolus 10y ago
  Furthermore, there is a world market for other energy sources, which are all somewhat fungible. So if solar takes off around the world, fossil fuel demand will slack and prices will continue to drop making their extraction less viable. Hopefully we also start to see some significant replacement of fossil fuels used for transportation.
  - sitkack 10y ago
    We need to use solar to pay for the extraction and transportation of fossil fuels.
    - vog 10y ago
      I don't get that. Could you elaborate?
    - throwayawnotime 10y ago
      LOL, very good point. Maybe for the back of the classroom you could clarify? It is clear that the calculation or real EROEI is very hard when you start counting all externalities and dependencies. Do you have any good sources of anylsis on this that you could recommend?
      - john_reel 10y ago
        What do those terms mean?
eva1984 10y ago
Trump is going to open those coal mines anyway, so don't worry. US is unlikely to lead the new energy revolution in, at least the next 4 years, I guess.
- woodandsteel 10y ago
  Trump is going to cause US fossil fuels production to skyrocket. One consequence will be oil prices falling much lower than they already are. And that will make his good friend Putin very unhappy. I wonder if Trump has thought that out.
greglindahl 10y ago
There are already large tariffs between China/US and China/EU for solar gear: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics#Anti-dumping_duties_.282012.E2.80.93present.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics#Anti-d...
xbmcuser 10y ago
Not really US electricity demand is going down in the first place. And the major energy demand is going to come from Africa and Asia. On avg 2-3 billion people in Asia and Africa use less than 5% of electricity per person compared to the US and Europe. When you consider the fact that is almost 5 times the population of US and europe combined. So the solar revolution is more important for the rest of the world as they will be the major users not the US.
noonespecial 10y ago
I'll answer the implied and straight up admit that I was pissed off by the presidential election in the USA this year. But the doom and gloom about it is almost as bad. The great thing about the USA is that in 4 years, if this guy sucks, we can change our minds again and get back to business. This too shall pass.
- mpweiher 10y ago
  In principle, yes. But... ...that assumes elections work, which is becoming more and more dubious. Remember that he actually lost this election by popular vote, just like Congress would be in Democratic hands if it weren't for gerrymandering. And I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to assume that this president will be even more brazen about undermining the election process than anything that's come before.
  - venomsnake 10y ago
    The popular vote does not matter. 1-2000000 of the popular votes could have just moved from NY, SF and LA to the rust belt and this would have made all the difference. The big corporations with democratic leaning CEO could have moved investment and jobs there. You could have moved a lot of federal jobs there too. And with them will come the people that will guarantee better demographic distribution. The US election system is on the stupider side IMO, but a candidate cannot lose the popular vote, because such thing as popular vote does not exist.
    - Johnny555 10y ago
      The big corporations with democratic leaning CEO could have moved investment and jobs there. If a big corporation with a democratic leaning CEO moved to a state where the population was mostly republican, then the company would have a workforce that is mostly republican. Few people align themselves with the company's CEO's values, and even if the company was made up of mostly democratic workers, few people will follow their company to another state. If my company changed states, I'd get a job with a new company, my life just isn't that portable that I can pick up and leave with ease.

... until import tariffs with China end the solar revolution here.

by api 10y ago

... until import tariffs with China end the solar revolution here.

jacobush 10y ago

But then it will be cost efficient to mine coal, and America will be great again!

mtgx 10y ago

Good thing Tesla is going to manufacture its panels in the US.

infinite8s 10y ago

There is still the rest of the world...

toomuchtodo 10y ago

Lots of places around the world not the US. Those buyers will continue to drag the price of solar down. The US election doesn't mean a thing for the energy market. We'll be dragged along with the rest of the world by market forces.

jacobolus 10y ago
Furthermore, there is a world market for other energy sources, which are all somewhat fungible. So if solar takes off around the world, fossil fuel demand will slack and prices will continue to drop making their extraction less viable. Hopefully we also start to see some significant replacement of fossil fuels used for transportation.
- sitkack 10y ago
  We need to use solar to pay for the extraction and transportation of fossil fuels.
  - vog 10y ago
    I don't get that. Could you elaborate?
  - throwayawnotime 10y ago
    LOL, very good point. Maybe for the back of the classroom you could clarify? It is clear that the calculation or real EROEI is very hard when you start counting all externalities and dependencies. Do you have any good sources of anylsis on this that you could recommend?
    - john_reel 10y ago
      What do those terms mean?

eva1984 10y ago

Trump is going to open those coal mines anyway, so don't worry. US is unlikely to lead the new energy revolution in, at least the next 4 years, I guess.

woodandsteel 10y ago
Trump is going to cause US fossil fuels production to skyrocket. One consequence will be oil prices falling much lower than they already are. And that will make his good friend Putin very unhappy. I wonder if Trump has thought that out.

greglindahl 10y ago

There are already large tariffs between China/US and China/EU for solar gear: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics#Anti-dumping_duties_.282012.E2.80.93present.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics#Anti-d...

xbmcuser 10y ago

Not really US electricity demand is going down in the first place. And the major energy demand is going to come from Africa and Asia. On avg 2-3 billion people in Asia and Africa use less than 5% of electricity per person compared to the US and Europe. When you consider the fact that is almost 5 times the population of US and europe combined. So the solar revolution is more important for the rest of the world as they will be the major users not the US.

noonespecial 10y ago

I'll answer the implied and straight up admit that I was pissed off by the presidential election in the USA this year. But the doom and gloom about it is almost as bad. The great thing about the USA is that in 4 years, if this guy sucks, we can change our minds again and get back to business. This too shall pass.

mpweiher 10y ago
In principle, yes. But... ...that assumes elections work, which is becoming more and more dubious. Remember that he actually lost this election by popular vote, just like Congress would be in Democratic hands if it weren't for gerrymandering. And I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to assume that this president will be even more brazen about undermining the election process than anything that's come before.
- venomsnake 10y ago
  The popular vote does not matter. 1-2000000 of the popular votes could have just moved from NY, SF and LA to the rust belt and this would have made all the difference. The big corporations with democratic leaning CEO could have moved investment and jobs there. You could have moved a lot of federal jobs there too. And with them will come the people that will guarantee better demographic distribution. The US election system is on the stupider side IMO, but a candidate cannot lose the popular vote, because such thing as popular vote does not exist.
  - Johnny555 10y ago
    The big corporations with democratic leaning CEO could have moved investment and jobs there. If a big corporation with a democratic leaning CEO moved to a state where the population was mostly republican, then the company would have a workforce that is mostly republican. Few people align themselves with the company's CEO's values, and even if the company was made up of mostly democratic workers, few people will follow their company to another state. If my company changed states, I'd get a job with a new company, my life just isn't that portable that I can pick up and leave with ease.