3 ms·

Realistically, can we expect anyone to want to build out solar without subsidies?

by nandomrumber 8mo ago

adrianN 8mo ago
Lots of people do today. Solar is profitable without subsidies.
- burnt-resistor 8mo ago
  Yep. Traditionalists hate renewables and facts. Here in Texas, there's been an absolute boom in solar post snowpocalypse. I'd gladly vote for shifting corn and soy subsidies to renewables, especially as grants for 1-300 MW solar/wind facilities for municipal co-operatives. And for solid state and sodium municipal and infrastructure energy backup and v2g. And, I think we should heavily tax data centers federally because they're electricity, water, and land extractive and sound pollution vampires hostile to communities they invade (often to the chagrin of locals because of NDA backroom deals with corrupt politicians).. they're tantamount to giant petrochem facilities in "sacrifice zones". The rich people can cry about leaving, as did FDR's friends did, but it's always an empty threat.
  - deaux 8mo ago
    I'm not convinced the data center numbers, especially water, are meaningful compared to absurdly wasteful agriculture like the corn for ethanol mentioned here, almonds in California, and cattle. Let alone the likes of Nestlé's water stealing and golf courses in hot, dry climates. Happy to be proven wrong by someone who has the numbers. For now like what this comment section is about with "the space needed for solar is nothing compared to what we're already doing", it seems like the water needed for data centers is nothing compared to how much we're already throwing away.
  - 6510 8mo ago
    I did a napkin calculation once for building wind turbines next to a city with a construction and a maintenance tax. A big initial bill (lone) and a sizable ration per citizen. In stead of a power bill you pay installments. When you sell the house the next owner will also have to pay for it. Thinking about it now, i have one more stupid idea, people have no faith in government, perhaps it is possible to contract a private insurance company. They can get paid to keep an eye on our bureaucrats. Make it a contract with teeth.
- spwa4 8mo ago
  Except transporting it over the grid usually doesn't make sense, and is neither easy nor simple nor cheap. So solar only really makes sense if you have a use for it nearby or even onsite. So for companies/factories/datacenters/... absolutely. To keep cities powered? Less so.
  - hedora 8mo ago
    It's simpler and cheaper than any alternative. You just need ultra high voltage transition lines and a grid that can real-time redistribute load + generation. Ultra high voltage towers are all over Texas. If they can make them work there (with the extreme heat, tornados and absurdly long distances involved in that state), they can work most places.
jdlshore 8mo ago
Yes, because solar is now the most cost-effective form of energy generation. That’s why grid-scale solar is being deployed on a massive scale world wide.
tenuousemphasis 8mo ago
Only if you like free electricity...
pfdietz 8mo ago
Globally solar is going gangbusters. At that scale it can't be subsidies.
deaux 8mo ago
Companies want to shut down coal plants despite subsidies but are being forced to keep them running. The government forcing private businesses to keep running in a certain way, doesn't get more state-directed than that, straight out of communism. It's really China with none of the upsides and all of the downsides.

Realistically, can we expect anyone to want to build out solar without subsidies?

adrianN 8mo ago

Lots of people do today. Solar is profitable without subsidies.

burnt-resistor 8mo ago
Yep. Traditionalists hate renewables and facts. Here in Texas, there's been an absolute boom in solar post snowpocalypse. I'd gladly vote for shifting corn and soy subsidies to renewables, especially as grants for 1-300 MW solar/wind facilities for municipal co-operatives. And for solid state and sodium municipal and infrastructure energy backup and v2g. And, I think we should heavily tax data centers federally because they're electricity, water, and land extractive and sound pollution vampires hostile to communities they invade (often to the chagrin of locals because of NDA backroom deals with corrupt politicians).. they're tantamount to giant petrochem facilities in "sacrifice zones". The rich people can cry about leaving, as did FDR's friends did, but it's always an empty threat.
- deaux 8mo ago
  I'm not convinced the data center numbers, especially water, are meaningful compared to absurdly wasteful agriculture like the corn for ethanol mentioned here, almonds in California, and cattle. Let alone the likes of Nestlé's water stealing and golf courses in hot, dry climates. Happy to be proven wrong by someone who has the numbers. For now like what this comment section is about with "the space needed for solar is nothing compared to what we're already doing", it seems like the water needed for data centers is nothing compared to how much we're already throwing away.
- 6510 8mo ago
  I did a napkin calculation once for building wind turbines next to a city with a construction and a maintenance tax. A big initial bill (lone) and a sizable ration per citizen. In stead of a power bill you pay installments. When you sell the house the next owner will also have to pay for it. Thinking about it now, i have one more stupid idea, people have no faith in government, perhaps it is possible to contract a private insurance company. They can get paid to keep an eye on our bureaucrats. Make it a contract with teeth.
spwa4 8mo ago
Except transporting it over the grid usually doesn't make sense, and is neither easy nor simple nor cheap. So solar only really makes sense if you have a use for it nearby or even onsite. So for companies/factories/datacenters/... absolutely. To keep cities powered? Less so.
- hedora 8mo ago
  It's simpler and cheaper than any alternative. You just need ultra high voltage transition lines and a grid that can real-time redistribute load + generation. Ultra high voltage towers are all over Texas. If they can make them work there (with the extreme heat, tornados and absurdly long distances involved in that state), they can work most places.

jdlshore 8mo ago

Yes, because solar is now the most cost-effective form of energy generation. That’s why grid-scale solar is being deployed on a massive scale world wide.

tenuousemphasis 8mo ago

Only if you like free electricity...

pfdietz 8mo ago

Globally solar is going gangbusters. At that scale it can't be subsidies.

deaux 8mo ago

Companies want to shut down coal plants despite subsidies but are being forced to keep them running. The government forcing private businesses to keep running in a certain way, doesn't get more state-directed than that, straight out of communism. It's really China with none of the upsides and all of the downsides.