13 ms·
Despite all the data about climate change, the thing that is actually shifting us away from fossil fuels is that solar panels are cheap.
by neallindsay 1y ago
Despite all the data about climate change, the thing that is actually shifting us away from fossil fuels is that solar panels are cheap.
- stavros 1y agoThat's all we've ever cared about, unfortunately.
- pyfon 1y agoYeah I'd be subsidising panels coming in from China personally.
- xbmcuser 1y agoLol this to me was the greatest stupidity from Europe. I get Petro states like US or maybe even Canada complaining about China subsiding energy and hurting their oil and gas but what the fuck did Europe protect. They even got fucked over by US into a Russian war and now they are stuck buying US gas.
- pjc50 1y agoThe Russian war is entirely the fault of the Russians, along with massive complacency after Russia shot down a planeload of Dutch nationals and used chemical weapons in a UK city.
- Gibbon1 1y agoWhat's interesting is the US has always been opposed to Europe being dependent on Russian natural gas. And historically the US is an importer of natural gas. so it's not like the US wants to sell it's natural gas to Europe instead.
- NooneAtAll3 1y agoany war is fault of diplomacy it's european version of Cuba crisis - geopolitical enemy in the underbelly of nuclear power
- LunaSea 1y agoIt really isn't, Russia was integrated in most diplomatic and economic circles before they started to invade multiple neighbouring countries. This integration is what led to Germany's Russian gas dependency in the end.
- NooneAtAll3 1y ago> Russia was integrated in most diplomatic and economic circles before they started to invade multiple neighbouring countries. ...and how did that help solve the "european version of carribian crisis"? ignoring reasons citing costs only expresses you having different values - but it doesn't solve the problem there were attempts to make safeguards - to allow Ukraine into EU, but not NATO. Those failed War is the result of those failures
- LunaSea 1y ago> ...and how did that help solve the "european version of carribian crisis"? Well it didn't, and that's my point. This was the diplomatic route and it completely failed. There was never going to be a diplomatic solution. > there were attempts to make safeguards - to allow Ukraine into EU, but not NATO. Those failed Yes, in 2013 Ukraine signed a trade deal with the EU and already at that time Russia pressured Ukraine to renounce this deal. Russia showed their hands at that point and clearly displayed to the world that it had nothing to do with NATO but rather about total control of Ukraine. > War is the result of those failures War started 11 years ago, after Euromaidan, at a time where Ukraine wasn't talking about joining NATO yet. NATO became a priority for Ukraine in response to the Russian invasion in 2014.
- mopsi 1y ago> it's european version of Cuba crisis - geopolitical enemy in the underbelly of nuclear power The Cuban Missile Crisis was about nuclear missiles only minutes from Florida. After the crisis, Cuba continued to host Russian fighter jets, bombers, tanks, and tons of other weapons until the USSR finally collapsed in 1991. Ukraine had nothing of this sort, and to this day, doesn't have. It is a lazy comparison thrown around to justify a textbook imperial land grab by Russia.
- hylaride 1y ago> They even got fucked over by US into a Russian war and now they are stuck buying US gas. Europe was stupid as they let "green" political groups (often historically clandestinely backed by Soviet/Russian government) get nuke plants shut down to shift to coal/gas. While Europe was incredibly naive to remain so udderly reliant on Russian gas, especially after the the annexation of Crimea and the shoot-down of MH17, the war is 150% the fault of the Russian government and nobody else (USA, NATO, Ukraine, etc).
- Workaccount2 1y agoThe irony that the Chernobyl meltdown was probably the most profitable thing to ever happen to Russia.
- rjsw 1y agos/Europe/Germany/
- hylaride 1y agoGermany was not the only one, but arguably the worst.
- Timon3 1y agoBut it was the conservative government in Germany that shut the nuclear plants down, the Greens were in the opposition at the time. When they were in power, the Greens even pushed back the shutdown. Kinda seems like you're assigning the blame unfairly.
- gmuslera 1y agoMaybe not shifting, but adding. Alternative energy sources are being adopted in increasing ways, but in absolute numbers traditional sources keep increasing too.
- xbmcuser 1y agoThe shift is about to come now as LCOE of Solar + Bess is cheaper than coal in China now and getting cheaper https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43749571 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43749571
- wolfram74 1y agoNo, it's definitely shifting, based on [0] the carbon emissions per kwh globally are down from 542 g/kwh to 481 g/kwh in the last 10 years, that's over a 10% reduction. Countries that are staying flat are the exception, not the norm. [0]https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/carbon-intensity-electricity?tab=chart https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/carbon-intensity-electric...
- tialaramex 1y agoBecause we're talking about electricity the total power usage for the US is mostly stable. It's not declining like the UK (efficiencies mean total electricity production is down about 25% this century despite population growth) but it's growing only a tiny fraction, like maybe 2% in a decade - much less than the amount of new solar and wind. So it's definitely shifting, the biggest shift is away from coal. Coal is awful, it's too expensive and it's incredibly polluting, some of that shift is towards gas, which is also a fossil fuel but has the advantage that it burns cleaner and is often cheaper - but as we see in this data lots of the shift is to "green" sources.
- bryanlarsen 1y agoThat may no longer be true. For example, China's coal usage is down 5% YoY despite increased electricity usage. https://cleantechnica.com/2025/04/20/chinas-coal-generation-dropped-5-yoy-in-q1-as-electricity-demand-increased/ https://cleantechnica.com/2025/04/20/chinas-coal-generation-...
- testing22321 1y agoAnd getting cheaper everyday. A year ago I paid $8k for 7.8kw on my roof. My Dad just paid $5k for 10kw. Neither of us will ever pay for power again. Edit: Western, southern Canada for those asking.
- isoprophlex 1y ago... during daytime, in summer. Or did you install a load of batteries, too?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- testing22321 1y agoWe use the grid like a battery, getting a one for one credit for everything we put in. So during summer/daytime we put in enough to then use up our credit in winter/nighttime. The power we put in even covers the monthly connection fee. I’m just about to hit 12 months with mine, 8 Mwh generated, never paid a bill. In our area the cost of electricity is already Confirmed to increase 5% a year forever, so this will only get better for us.
- belorn 1y agoSubsidies like one for one credit are generally going away since those are prohibitively expensive and not sustainable when the ratio of renewables start to climb. It can be useful to jump start adoption, but having the government pay the true cost of the grid only moves the energy bill to the tax bill.
- testing22321 1y agoWhen that happens, I’ll get batteries.
- tasuki 1y ago
- baxtr 1y agoChina saving the Planet? How dare you…
- amima 1y agoTo my understanding, scaling production to bring prices down due to economy of scale is the part of the initial plan, which was based on the data about climate change. So these things are connected.
- moffkalast 1y agoNot to mention how much's been invested in government subsidies to develop that scale. Cheap solar is not a spontaneous occurrence by any means.
- toddmorey 1y agoThat's the only environmental hope I've been able to hang onto. It's now cheaper in most places[1] for net new energy installations to NOT use fossil fuels. I knew environmentally conscious approaches could never survive being the morally correct yet more expensive option. [1] IRENA 2023 report shows that solar photovoltaic (PV) generation was 56% less expensive than the weighted average fossil fuel-fired alternatives, despite being 414% more expensive back in 2010. Bloomberg New Energy Finance found in March 2021 that "renewables are the cheapest power option for 71% of global GDP and 85% of global power generation."
- Paradigma11 1y agoBut how much more expensive would it make the power for the last 15% of global power generation? What is the total cost for both scenarios?
- ls612 1y agoThere’s probably nothing wrong with using fossil for the last 15% of generation for at least our lifetimes. As well as for things like airliners and rockets where energy density is king.
- SirHumphrey 1y agoIt makes sense to start decarbonising where it’s easiest (cheapest) to do so.
- bryanlarsen 1y agoUse it for the 85% first, and then when that's done, battery prices will have declined enough that the number will be a lot closer to 100%.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 1y agoAnd honestly 85% would be pretty damn good all by itself. That would significantly stem the bleeding and give time to address the long tail
- 1970-01-01 1y agoTariffs are changing this, however. Buy them ASAP if you're building.
- thinkingtoilet 1y agoI'm confused by your statement. What else would it be if not cheaper renewable options?
- jeffbee 1y agoYou could instead make the fossil fuels cost more.
- delusional 1y agoWhy would you do one or the other? We've done both so far. Let's keep doing both.
- TuringNYC 1y ago>> solar panels are cheap I want solar panels, but i'm also a skeptic on the cost, and not enough time has passed to prove how things will go. While I agree the metered cost may now favor solar -- what is the TCO for the average resident? Some things on my mind: 1. Everything seems inexpensive at first, before you have to pay for servicing. Just like with cars, HVAC systems, plumbing systems, or any complex system where you are at the mercy of repair companies that are highly local. With plumbers in our area, you cannot even effectively get multiple quotes because there is a "visit fee" of $125, which gets credited to repairs if you choose the provider. 2. Roofs in general are expensive to maintain and repair. Here on the costs, i've never seen even a minor repair be under 1k. Major roof replacements cost 5 to 15k for average homes. This might be a greater-metro-NY issue though. Part of it is the liability insurance of workers being on the roof, so I'm not saying the cost is unjustified -- just that it is really expensive. 3. What happens when these solar panels need to be serviced? Many of these solar shops are fly by night, looking to cash in on govt incentives. Will they be around to service malfunctioning or panels? What will repair costs be? Who guarantees the warranty? As an example, here in NJ even minor tweaks on a leaking showerhead will cost $500 to $1000. I can only imagine what a broken solar panel will cost. 4. I realize this is a very selfish opinion -- but just from a systems boundary perspective, traditional energy complexity is all upstream and I consume the end-product. Solar energy complexity is all local and I take the risk.
- jeffbee 1y agoNobody even mentioned rooftop solar.
- kadushka 1y agoMajor roof replacements cost 5 to 15k for average homes I just got some quotes to replace a tile roof on my very average 2400 sqft house in FL: 50-60k. Asked neighbors - seems reasonable to them.
- apercu 1y agoI assume Florida is an outlier due to storms, in most of the country you'd probably pay half that unless your roof is complicated.
- moomin 1y agoYes, but solar panels are cheap as a consequence of investment, partly supported by many solar promotion policies around the world, that were inspired by climate change concerns. This is actually a victory lap for political activism, we just need a lot more of it.
- ashoeafoot 1y agoWhat could real push a shift would be thermal longtime storage. Basically heatpump heating with a artificial heat stored underground in the summer.
- mulmen 1y agoWhat geological impacts does heating the ground cause?
- jandrese 1y agoIf you could figure out a way to do this economically you could have a real winner. Ground source heat pumps already exist, but they're so expensive to install that they basically never make their cost back vs. air source heat pumps.
- bufferoverflow 1y agoAnd it doesn't make almost any difference, because other countries are building hume amounts of coal plants. China started 95GW of coal plant construction just last year.
- bryanlarsen 1y agoChina's coal usage is down 5% in the last 12 months: https://cleantechnica.com/2025/04/20/chinas-coal-generation-dropped-5-yoy-in-q1-as-electricity-demand-increased/ https://cleantechnica.com/2025/04/20/chinas-coal-generation-... They're adding coal capacity quickly, but they're lowering the capacity factor of that usage even faster. Those coal plants are peakers that only run when solar & batteries are empty.
- jahnu 1y agoI think it was on Volts podcast where I heard that many of them are built as political insurance for regional governments who don’t want an angry population if they have an unusually cold winter and a lot of them are going to end up as stranded assets which the population gets way less mad about.
- bryanlarsen 1y agoIronically building coal plants probably helps wean China off coal. They use a lot of coal for heating. But nobody is going to want to switch to a heat pump unless they have reliable electricity.
- dalyons 1y agoto add, given the governing structure in china, the coal plants don't have to make economic sense. one-party politics would thus prefer to overbuild as a hedge against the population getting mad at them.
- Aloisius 1y agoNot in the last 12 months. This quarter compared to a year ago. It was up 1.5% for 2024 compared to 2023: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chinas-thermal-power-generation-inches-up-15-2024-2025-01-17/ https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chinas-thermal-power...
- Tireings 1y agoYes but climate change made them so cheap. Lucky enough for us and everyone else economy of scale kicked in. I'm taking it
- r00fus 1y agos/climate change/China/ The US bungled its lead in photovoltaics and politics prevented us from catching up - so like most other things, China leads the way, and we benefit.
- jaco6 1y ago[dead]
- gamblor956 1y agoChina literally just subsidized soar panel manufacturing to the time of several billions of dollars with the express goal of killing manufacturing everywhere else and then raising prices once the competition was gone.
- cogman10 1y agoThere's really no reason the US or other major economies couldn't have followed suit. The chinese plan only works because the other major economies are more than willing to give them that manufacturing capacity since it means a local (although somewhat temporary) boon. The whole plan could have been snookered by the US similarly subsidizing their solar production 10 or 20 years into the chinese plan. Which would have put most of the cost onto China while we reaped the benefits of cheap power production.
- jandrese 1y agoThe Obama administration tried, but it was too little too late and they were raked over the coals by Republicans for "choosing winners". But fundamentally solar cell production was (is?) pretty dirty and US environmental regulations were always going to be a stumbling block. One used to be able to spot Chinese solar factories on satellite maps by looking upstream from deadzones, but apparently that has been enough of an embarrassment that even the CCP has started cracking down.
- gotoeleven 1y agoI keep hearing that solar panels are cheap but then I get my PG&E bill every month.
- porphyra 1y agoI personally think that it is amazing that we are likely going to shift away from fossil fuels out of pure capitalistic greed. Trying to convince people to give up fossil fuels out of some altruistic desire to save the planet was never gonna work.
- jandrese 1y agoIf you want to change the world you need to align the incentives.
- ZeroGravitas 1y agoIt has been the smart economic decision for a decade or more already. Capitalistic greed caused some to spread FUD around that issue, deny there was a problem and attack several useful tools for dealing with it. The fact that capitalistic greed has caught up with reality a decade later after most of the hard work was done and is now fighting on both sides of the issue is somewhat tragic. Doubly so if you consider what it means about every other global problem we face that might affect a powerful incumbent's short term profits.
- pests 1y agoCapitalism can solve anything it just needs to be directly threatened. Far off future maybes aren’t enough.
- hinkley 1y agoWe have at least subsidized solar enough to build up enough manufacturing to contribute to that price.
- tw04 1y ago>Despite all the data about climate change, the thing that is actually shifting us away from fossil fuels is that solar panels are cheap. It also requires the political will. Texas is showing us that the market is in fact not rational, and will absolutely do something that's universally contrary to everyone's best interests for the sake of grandstanding. https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/energy-markets/texas-bill-gas-over-renewables https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/energy-markets/texas-bi...
- 9283409232 1y agoThat is not showing us the market is not rational, it is showing us that Texas politics is corrupt. Texas is interfering in the market and picking the winners despite renewables being the favorable market option. Republicans are only in favor of no regulations and letting the market decide when it favors them.
- moate 1y ago>>That is not showing us the market is not rational, it is showing us that Texas politics is corrupt. Dear capitalists, this is not a bar: The first thing proves the second. The market is a real thing that exists in the universe we live in, not just in academic research. The markets are never "rational", because they're just people. They may be "predictable" or even "stable" but humans are not rational. The fact that the market can be manipulated, means that it is manipulated.
- alephnerd 1y agoTexas subsidized wind energy for 30 years now - it was actually George W Bush and Rick Perry's legacy making project when they were Governors of Texas [0][1][2] and made up 20-30% of total energy produced. Issue is, a significant proportion of Texas's budget comes out of NatGas and Oil revenue, so there's a perverse incentive when renewables end up pricing well below NatGas and Oil, and labor unions aligned to ONG like the UAW, ILU, and affiliates of the AFL-CIO like the United Steelworkers are VERY politically powerful. This will be a major hurdle in energy exporting countries like the US, Norway, Canada, Netherlands, the Gulf, etc and it can't be handwaved away. And no - rETraInInG doesn't work when much of the renewable industry is heavily automated, a major reason the ILU, UAW, and parts of the AFL-CIO ended up supporting the Trump admin's tariffs regime: either you drop the unions and cause tens of thousands to lose high paying jobs and radicalize a vast swath of Americans OR you do nothing and let the earth cook. [0] - https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/08/29/70295/george-w-bush-helped-make-texas-a-clean-energy-powerhouse/amp/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/08/29/70295/george-w-b... [1] - https://www.texastribune.org/2013/09/16/book-excerpt-go-get-smart-wind/ https://www.texastribune.org/2013/09/16/book-excerpt-go-get-... [2] - https://www.masterresource.org/texas/george-w-bush-wind-energy/ https://www.masterresource.org/texas/george-w-bush-wind-ener...
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- worewood 1y agoThat's why environmental "awareness" doesn't mean dog poo; environment-friendly will only be prioritized when it's cheaper to do so. That's why government subsidies and taxing are REQUIRED for the switch to more environmentally friendly alternatives--this applies to everything, from fossil fuels to packaging.
- newuser94303 1y agoSolar panels WERE cheap until 145% tariffs were applied
- DontchaKnowit 1y agoYeaaaahhh but the data on climate change informed government policy that subsidized renewable energy.
- paxys 1y agoSolar panels are cheap because of government subsidies. Goverments subsidize solar because of climate change.
- gnabgib 1y agoConfidently wrong. Solar panels are cheap because of manufacturing improvements, and in some (small) jurisdictions they're further subsided. They are not cheap because of subsidy.
- paxys 1y agoAnd you think the manufacturing just spontaneously improved? Governments worldwide have invested heavily into solar production in the last 20-30 years. Cheap panels today are a direct result of that.
- gnabgib 1y agoDo you think manufacturing improvements were government subsidised? Does China (the solar powerhouse @78% of the world's supply) get a direct kickback from your government? Perhaps it's market based. https://www.sunsave.energy/solar-panels-advice/solar-energy/where-are-solar-panels-made https://www.sunsave.energy/solar-panels-advice/solar-energy/... https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketeconomy.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketeconomy.asp
- paxys 1y agoThe Chinese government invested $818 billion in solar energy in 2024 alone, but sure, keep telling me about your magical free market.
- gnabgib 1y agoCould you provide a reference? The only $818B I can find.. is a purchase of $818B of renewables, not just solar and not a subsidy/tax break. Perhaps you have a better source. Their 887GW of solar capacity alone costs $887B at current market rates. https://deepnewz.com/china/china-leads-global-clean-energy-investment-818b-2024-contributing-10-to-gdp-us-d75a962c https://deepnewz.com/china/china-leads-global-clean-energy-i... https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chinas-solar-wind-power-installed-capacity-soars-2024-2025-01-21/ https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chinas-solar-wind-po...
- NoPicklez 1y agoBut that's what it was going to take, economic incentives to achieve a long term goal. It's also climate change that is pushing for an alternate method to make cheaper.
- thiht 1y agoOh don’t worry it won’t last, since Trump wants to impose 3000% tariffs on Asian solar panels. He’s doing his best to destroy the world at every level. https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Trade-war/US-sets-tariffs-as-high-as-3-403-on-solar-cells-from-Southeast-Asia https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Trade-war/US-sets-tariffs-as...
- a1371 1y agoIs it safe to say that would not have happened without China? With all of the strong energy incumbents that the US has and their lack of desire for disruptive innovation I wonder how much the US can take credit for this reduction.
- ashoeafoot 1y agoeven after tarifs?
- dornan 1y ago[dead]