this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2025
1807 points (96.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

7756 readers
1625 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HalfSalesman@lemm.ee 60 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Capitalism makes abundance problematic.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] yagurlreese@lemmy.world 42 points 1 month ago (1 children)

oh no the power is too cheap. God forbid our trillions of tax dollars go to something actually useful and good for the people oh well looks like we will get the F-47 instead and pay it to private military contracts πŸ˜‚

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Atlas_@lemmy.world 59 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The answer is batteries. And dismantling capitalism, but batteries first

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 month ago

A big flaw in German energy policy that has done a great job in expanding renewables, includes not giving its industry variable rates, that lets them invest in batteries, and schedule production more seasonally, or if they have reduced demand due to high product prices from high energy costs, just have work on the good days.

Using EVs as grid balancers can be an extra profit center for EV owners with or without home solar. Ultra cheap retail daytime rates is the best path to demand shifting. Home solar best path to removing transmission bottlenecks for other customers. Containerized batteries and hydrogen electrolysis as a service is a tariff exempt path at moving storage/surplus management throughout the world for seasonal variations, but significantly expanding renewables capacity without risking negative pricing, and making evening/night energy cheaper to boot.

[–] TranslateErr0rs@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Nah, lets squash capitalism first.

[–] mholiv@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

Not saying we shouldn’t do both, but in reality waiting to destroy capitalism before fixing the grid just means you have too much theory and not enough praxis.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] merdaverse@lemmy.world 48 points 1 month ago (3 children)

It's funny how capitalist apologists in this thread attack the format of a tweet and people not reading the actual article, when they clearly haven't read the original article.

Negative prices are only mentioned in passing, as a very rare phenomenon, while most of it is dedicated to value deflation of energy (mentioned 4 times), aka private sector investors not earning enough profits to justify expanding the grid. Basically a cautionary tale of leaving such a critical component of society up to a privatized market.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Without reading the article, I could already see what the problem was.

Unless you have capital to invest, you can't expand or improve the power grid. That capital can either come from the gov't--through taxation--or from private industry. If you, personally, have enough capital to do so, you can build a fully off-grid system, so that you aren't dependent on anyone else. But then if shit happens, you also can't get help from anyone else. (Also, most houses in urban areas do not have enough square feet of exposure to the sun to generate all of their own power.)

Fundamentally, this is a problem that can only be solved by regulation, and regulation is being gutted across the board in the US.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 11 points 1 month ago (9 children)

That's not the problem the article gets to. The capital is there. Capital is being dumped into solar at breakneck speed. That's the problem.

As more solar gets built, you get more days when there's so much excess solar capacity that prices go near zero, or occasionally even negative. With more and more capacity around solar, there is less incentive to build more because you're increasing the cases of near-zero days.

Basically, the problem is that capitalism has focused on a singular solution--the one that's cheapest to deploy with the best returns--without considering how things work together in a larger system.

There are solutions to this. Long distance transmission helps areas where it isn't sunny take advantage of places where it is. Wind sometimes blows when the sun isn't shining, and the two technologies should be used in tandem more than they are. Storing it somewhere also helps; in fact, when you do wind and solar together, they cover each other enough that you don't have to have as much storage as you'd think. All this needs smarter government subsidies to make it happen.

As a side note, you seem to be focused on solar that goes on residential roofs. That's the worst and most expensive way to do solar. The space available for each project is small, and it's highly customized to the home's individual roof situation. It doesn't take advantage of economies of scale very well. Using the big flat roofs of industrial buildings is better, but the real economies of scale come when you have a large open field. Slap down racks and slap the solar panels on top.

If what you want is energy independence from your local power utility, then I suggest looking into co-op solar/wind farms. If your state bans them--mine does--then that's something to talk to your state representatives about.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Docker@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

This is what the Cabal is doing !!

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Hear me out: a giant water balloon. Roughly the size of the sun.

load more comments