4 ms·

It should be said that electrek.co is likely biased, and the report cited as well, by Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA). It doesn't have to be "wrong",

It should be said that electrek.co is likely biased, and the report cited as well, by Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA). It doesn't have to be "wrong", but the reliability of the prognosis would be improved by corroboration by other sources. That said, renowned institutions like the International Energy Agency (IEA) has notoriously been underestimating the trajectory of solar, always predicting it would level out, instead of recognizing the accelerated growth it has shown (with no sign of slowing down). [0] The SEIA report is likely closer to the truth than anything IEA has to say at least. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reality_versus_IEA_predictions_-_annual_photovoltaic_additions_2002-2016.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reality_versus_IEA_predic...

jillesvangurp 3y ago
Everyone is biased. Some of other popular sources that people like to cite are biased through their financing of which the fossil fuel industry and other special interest groups (e.g. the automotive industry) are providing a lot of. I think with electrek.co, their bias is pretty obvious and they are pretty open about where they stand. But I must say that I find them mostly very informative and factual. There's actually very little need for them to spin optimistic stories when the day to day news is basically very positive already. Just a constant stream of records being broken on investment, clean energy production, new breakthroughs, new products getting to market. There's no need for them to invent or spin any of that. You find the lies and deceit more on the other side where people try to spin myths, twist facts, etc. in order to convince people to keep on buying their oil, ice cars, dirty energy, and all the other stuff that they are peddling. Some of that stuff is blatantly obvious; desperate even. The IEA for example is indeed notable for having made a lot of projections over time that were more than a little wrong. And probably intentionally so.

jillesvangurp 3y ago

Everyone is biased. Some of other popular sources that people like to cite are biased through their financing of which the fossil fuel industry and other special interest groups (e.g. the automotive industry) are providing a lot of. I think with electrek.co, their bias is pretty obvious and they are pretty open about where they stand. But I must say that I find them mostly very informative and factual. There's actually very little need for them to spin optimistic stories when the day to day news is basically very positive already. Just a constant stream of records being broken on investment, clean energy production, new breakthroughs, new products getting to market. There's no need for them to invent or spin any of that. You find the lies and deceit more on the other side where people try to spin myths, twist facts, etc. in order to convince people to keep on buying their oil, ice cars, dirty energy, and all the other stuff that they are peddling. Some of that stuff is blatantly obvious; desperate even. The IEA for example is indeed notable for having made a lot of projections over time that were more than a little wrong. And probably intentionally so.