4 ms·

> Renewables are now cheaper than fossils They're cheap because they're produced in China (>80% of worldwide supply) that runs on fossils (>80% of their energy

> Renewables are now cheaper than fossils They're cheap because they're produced in China (>80% of worldwide supply) that runs on fossils (>80% of their energy). Try producing a solar panel using electricity from a solar panel and it becomes much more expensive. Use that new panel to produce yet another panel and it becomes prohibitively expensive. The whole thing is a mirage.

wslh 2y ago
Yes, it is common to forget the whole supply chain and externalities.
- oezi 2y ago
  But fossil fuels have the externalities of destroying our planet.
  - wslh 2y ago
    What I highlighted and was also answered in other comments, is that many times people focus in a local supply chain (e.g. Germany) without taking into account the whole supply chain (e.g. including China). Country X statistically reduces its fossil fuels because it is relying on country Y which isn't.
audunw 2y ago
That claim is obviously absurd. If solar power now is cheaper than fossils then it’ll be cheaper to make them with solar energy going forward. Maaaaybe that’s why China itself is building an insane amount of solar energy within their own country. It’s not like China has particularly cheap fossil fuels. They import most of it. A dependence they’re desperate to break I might add. Yes, they also build coal power plants. But a little known fact is that they’re built more as a backup for renewables in the transition. Possibly also as a short sighted GDP boost (see: all the empty apartments they’ve built). Gas power serves that purpose in Europe, but China doesn’t have a lot of gas. Coal power isn’t great in that role but it does work. The average coal plant utilisation rate has been steadily declining in China. China just had its largest drop in fossil fuel power output since the pandemic, with the share of coal reaching a record low https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-clean-energy-pushes-coal-to-record-low-53-share-of-power-in-may-2024/ https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-clean-energy-pus...
- alexey-salmin 2y ago
  > That claim is obviously absurd. If solar power now is cheaper than fossils then it’ll be cheaper to make them with solar energy going forward It would be absurd if your statement "solar is cheaper than fossils" was correct in a general sense but it's not. It may be true in a limited set of countries like US or Germany but it's not where the solar panels are actually produced. They are produced in China where this statement doesn't hold. The fact of physics is that energy ROI (how much kWh you can produce by spending one kWh) of coal cycle is much higher than ROI of solar panels. Solar panels can still make sense as long as the ROI is greater than one but they cannot be cheaper than coal unless you cheat (import panels from a country with much cheaper electricity).
  - oezi 2y ago
    Your logic only works if manufacturing of solar panels is an energy intensive tasks, which it isn't. The total energy expenditure of manufacturing, shipping and installing solar panels is recouped after operating the solar panel for roughly a year. Solar panels are now cheaper than coal because you need to dig up coal and bring it to the power plant, which costs more than the 4cents per kwh which LCOE solar now costs.
    - alexey-salmin 2y ago
      It is energy intensive. Studies I saw give 2 to 8 years to offset the PV alone, not counting inverters and the rest. One case of a heavy hail during that time and a panel becomes a net energy loss, a pure damage to the environment. > Solar panels are now cheaper than coal because you need to dig up coal and bring it to the power plant, which costs more than the 4cents per kwh which LCOE solar now costs. You're taking again the LCOE of solar produced from coal. Digging up coal and bringing it to the plant requires very little energy.

wslh 2y ago

Yes, it is common to forget the whole supply chain and externalities.

oezi 2y ago
But fossil fuels have the externalities of destroying our planet.
- wslh 2y ago
  What I highlighted and was also answered in other comments, is that many times people focus in a local supply chain (e.g. Germany) without taking into account the whole supply chain (e.g. including China). Country X statistically reduces its fossil fuels because it is relying on country Y which isn't.

audunw 2y ago

That claim is obviously absurd. If solar power now is cheaper than fossils then it’ll be cheaper to make them with solar energy going forward. Maaaaybe that’s why China itself is building an insane amount of solar energy within their own country. It’s not like China has particularly cheap fossil fuels. They import most of it. A dependence they’re desperate to break I might add. Yes, they also build coal power plants. But a little known fact is that they’re built more as a backup for renewables in the transition. Possibly also as a short sighted GDP boost (see: all the empty apartments they’ve built). Gas power serves that purpose in Europe, but China doesn’t have a lot of gas. Coal power isn’t great in that role but it does work. The average coal plant utilisation rate has been steadily declining in China. China just had its largest drop in fossil fuel power output since the pandemic, with the share of coal reaching a record low https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-clean-energy-pushes-coal-to-record-low-53-share-of-power-in-may-2024/ https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-clean-energy-pus...

alexey-salmin 2y ago
> That claim is obviously absurd. If solar power now is cheaper than fossils then it’ll be cheaper to make them with solar energy going forward It would be absurd if your statement "solar is cheaper than fossils" was correct in a general sense but it's not. It may be true in a limited set of countries like US or Germany but it's not where the solar panels are actually produced. They are produced in China where this statement doesn't hold. The fact of physics is that energy ROI (how much kWh you can produce by spending one kWh) of coal cycle is much higher than ROI of solar panels. Solar panels can still make sense as long as the ROI is greater than one but they cannot be cheaper than coal unless you cheat (import panels from a country with much cheaper electricity).
- oezi 2y ago
  Your logic only works if manufacturing of solar panels is an energy intensive tasks, which it isn't. The total energy expenditure of manufacturing, shipping and installing solar panels is recouped after operating the solar panel for roughly a year. Solar panels are now cheaper than coal because you need to dig up coal and bring it to the power plant, which costs more than the 4cents per kwh which LCOE solar now costs.
  - alexey-salmin 2y ago
    It is energy intensive. Studies I saw give 2 to 8 years to offset the PV alone, not counting inverters and the rest. One case of a heavy hail during that time and a panel becomes a net energy loss, a pure damage to the environment. > Solar panels are now cheaper than coal because you need to dig up coal and bring it to the power plant, which costs more than the 4cents per kwh which LCOE solar now costs. You're taking again the LCOE of solar produced from coal. Digging up coal and bringing it to the plant requires very little energy.