5 ms·
If the subsidies were removed from fossil fuels and applied to solar it would transform the US energy landscape. However this is a difficult proposition as sol
by N_Lens 11mo ago
If the subsidies were removed from fossil fuels and applied to solar it would transform the US energy landscape.
However this is a difficult proposition as solar is inherently a grassroots energy source that can be deployed by people at their homes, it's democratizing and distributes power, capital and control away from central power structures.
The fossil fuel industrial complex is the opposite.
- idle_zealot 11mo agoSurely most deployed solar isn't owned by average people? I would expect that it's almost all coming from large-scale deployments, and a good investment opportunity.
- toomuchtodo 11mo agoBoth comments are true. We could go faster if fossil subsidies shifted to solar and batteries, but we will still go fast regardless. Most US solar is utility scale, but buying your own solar is cheap enough now you can almost go off the grid (battery price decline will catch up shortly) assuming you have enough space for panels. Utility scale solar is still a good investment, even with the loss of tax subsidies, and is the fastest way to deploy new generation capacity. Regardless, we’ve reached a global tipping point where solar, battery, and EV deployment continues to accelerate and peak fossil fuel demand is very near.
- mono442 11mo agoEU taxes fossil fuels heavily and the didn't really build more solar than the US.
- ahartmetz 11mo agoWhat's the source of such plainly wrong "USA #1" posts? https://www.bruegel.org/analysis/transatlantic-clean-investment-monitor-2-solar-pv-snapshot https://www.bruegel.org/analysis/transatlantic-clean-investm...
- mono442 11mo agoThe generation of electricity from solar is more or less the same.
- ZeroGravitas 11mo agoBut they did build more, the USA is just further south.