4 ms·
IMVHO renewables do not really became "so cheap" nor so fast. If we see the speed of innovation in the '40s, '50s, '60s, '70s actual evolution speed and outcome
by kkfx 5y ago
IMVHO renewables do not really became "so cheap" nor so fast. If we see the speed of innovation in the '40s, '50s, '60s, '70s actual evolution speed and outcome are far, far, far slow and almost "broken".
Anything get "better" but we seems to be unable to really produce something really new.
In personal terms: having built a new home (so insulated, airtight and properly ventilated, properly exposed/designed to passive heat/cool as much as needed and possible) with domestic p.v. the "progress" just means that now start to be possible not being autonomous but nearly autonomous and start to be interesting IF it's not much needed and not every day having an EV but that's not much because such systems became chap more than because other systems became far more expensive and hearing many source their higher prices are voluntary made to make renewable cheap enough to push people who can adopting them. In practical terms I'm satisfied by the outcome, quality of my life is improved, resilience also. BUT in absolute economical terms that's not cheap nor really "naturally interesting".
IMVHO renewable can only succeed naturally, not artificially, only if they will be the byproduct of PUBLIC research (not private one more or less publicly founded) producing FLOSS/Open hardware tools and standards for it. So far most products on the market, even the formally "FLOSS for software" are just crappy piles of crap, sold as production ready products when they really are just prototypes.