You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
17 points

This is generally the right idea of a solution, but it’s a difficult engineering problem.

It’s not “just an economics problem” despite the headline.

The “cost of power becoming negative” is phrased in an economic way but what it really means is the grid has too much power and that power needs to go somewhere or it will damage infrastructure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Yes but there are many solutions already to that problem.

The first one being to shutdown a few stations production when overproducing. The second one being a myriad of storage solutions that already exists and scale them.

It is an economic problem because we already have many ways to skin the cat, but it won’t produce shareholder value in the short term.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

“Economic problem” isn’t merely short form for “if we had a socialist system we could solve it with free money.” These solutions require us to dig huge amounts of minerals out of the ground and tear the earth apart in the process. And we’re already doing that at a rate exponentially larger than we ever have in history. Plus these are the same materials we need to build the batteries for EVs, so building them for grid storage competes with the EV transition.

And then you factor in the rapidly increasing electric demand we’re producing by switching over to EVs and that means the demand on the grid is even higher. The grid wasn’t built to be able to source power from everywhere so putting solar panels on everyone’s rooftops is making the situation even worse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

It’s always funny to me that the first argument is always thinking that socialists want free money.

How many billions are we giving away to big corpos for them to do buy backs and pocket the change?

Being socialist means reusing the tax money for the benefits of the citizens, not the corpos. Trickle down economics are a sham and never worked

I agree that it takes resources, but we could finance the extraction of these resources instead of giving subsidies to fossil and fuel industry, or paying for sports stadium for that matter, or giving money to any corpos really.

And let’s not play coy here and think that the fossil industry isn’t destroying the earth.

We have the money, and the solutions right now, but the profits are in the way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I know that, and to incentivice people to use the power, they pay you to do it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Microblog Memes

!microblogmemes@lemmy.world

Create post

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:

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.4K

    Posts

  • 67K

    Comments