4 ms·

Err, they say production grew by 580 GW in the past 20 years and that it must grow by another 5x580=2,900 GW in the next 5 years. Nothing misleading and indeed

Err, they say production grew by 580 GW in the past 20 years and that it must grow by another 5x580=2,900 GW in the next 5 years. Nothing misleading and indeed an unprecedented production increase. It's not the ratio that is hard, it's the raw amount.

tim333 7y ago
Depends if you are looking at it as growing linearly or exponentially. You can make an argument solar is growing exponentially, doubling ever so often, at the moment.
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  The point remains.
abdullahkhalids 7y ago
> their deployment would have to accelerate to an __unprecedented__ level Parent comments point is that the 5x growth is not unprecedentedly fast compared to the past 20 years, its unprecedentedly slow compared to the past 20 years. Contrary to what the quote claims, and in line with projections from the past, the solar business would have to seriously slow down to miss the 5x milestone.
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  And what I replied is that this is not the point of the article, and that ratios in themselves are not the relevant metric. The article is clear and accurate. Deploying close to 3000 GW is an unprecedented effort.
maxerickson 7y ago
You've picked the wrong number of years, the article says But over the next 20 years, nearly five times that amount would need to be added. The current linear growth trajectory is 2,000 GW over 20 years, and that is likely to be a hilarious underestimate.
- snowwrestler 7y ago
  Why is it likely to be a hilarious underestimate? That seems like a statement that needs some support. Graphs don't go up forever; growth curves level off; growth gets harder the bigger you get. Linear growth forever should not be the default assumption for any energy technology, even one that is growing fast now. Or do I misunderstand what you're saying?
  - beat 7y ago
    But why does the curve level off? Supply and demand. Assuming that renewable energy is superior to fossil fuel from both environmental and cost perspective (it is, or soon will be), then it can reasonably be expected to grow until all fossil-based sources have been displaced, and it is no longer profitable to build more capacity.
  - maxerickson 7y ago
    Because people want cheap, cleaner electricity and we haven't used up all that much space yet. Manufacturing capacity is still growing, the rest of the industry is still growing, it's not likely that there will be a year in the next 20 where global installations are smaller than this year.

tim333 7y ago

Depends if you are looking at it as growing linearly or exponentially. You can make an argument solar is growing exponentially, doubling ever so often, at the moment.

NotPaidToPost 7y ago
The point remains.

abdullahkhalids 7y ago

> their deployment would have to accelerate to an __unprecedented__ level Parent comments point is that the 5x growth is not unprecedentedly fast compared to the past 20 years, its unprecedentedly slow compared to the past 20 years. Contrary to what the quote claims, and in line with projections from the past, the solar business would have to seriously slow down to miss the 5x milestone.

NotPaidToPost 7y ago
And what I replied is that this is not the point of the article, and that ratios in themselves are not the relevant metric. The article is clear and accurate. Deploying close to 3000 GW is an unprecedented effort.

maxerickson 7y ago

You've picked the wrong number of years, the article says But over the next 20 years, nearly five times that amount would need to be added. The current linear growth trajectory is 2,000 GW over 20 years, and that is likely to be a hilarious underestimate.

snowwrestler 7y ago
Why is it likely to be a hilarious underestimate? That seems like a statement that needs some support. Graphs don't go up forever; growth curves level off; growth gets harder the bigger you get. Linear growth forever should not be the default assumption for any energy technology, even one that is growing fast now. Or do I misunderstand what you're saying?
- beat 7y ago
  But why does the curve level off? Supply and demand. Assuming that renewable energy is superior to fossil fuel from both environmental and cost perspective (it is, or soon will be), then it can reasonably be expected to grow until all fossil-based sources have been displaced, and it is no longer profitable to build more capacity.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  Because people want cheap, cleaner electricity and we haven't used up all that much space yet. Manufacturing capacity is still growing, the rest of the industry is still growing, it's not likely that there will be a year in the next 20 where global installations are smaller than this year.