Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

popsci.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 314 posts

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#191

Post by irrational »

goodluckchuck wrote: post #183
lube wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your vision is too US centric, US hegemony lead to disruptions to foreign nations like afghanistan, iraq, libya, etc. My pov from latinamerica is that my country could be next, and neither your culture nor your "business class" seems the future(we reflect your cultural hegemony with our version of shitty role models), si why not challenge US hegemony?

Hegemony is inevitable, prosperous, and peaceful. Anyone who would challenge US hegemony would either intend to establish themselves their own hegemony or would be patsies creating a situation where another force could do so. Do would we be better off under a global islamic caliphate deriving from afghanistan, iraq, libya, etc… or a Chinese hegemoney, or a German hegemony? I’d put American hegemony up against any civ…

I’d put American hegemony up against any civilization that the world has ever seen in terms of guns, mass shootings, and being okay with children being killed in their classrooms.

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#192

Post by kragen »

landemva wrote: post #188
kragen wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

transmission lines do not connect to houses, so it is not clear that you understand the distinction i am asking about

There are various lines at various voltages. Some are 18k+. In commercial manufacturing may be 13.8k, which is further stepped down to 480 and 220 and 110. The point is that unless a residence can independently provide for their own electricity every hour of the day, then the generation and distribution will be sized for full load.

it still seems that you are unaware of the distinction i was focusing on between transmission systems and distribution systems

a residence that can provide some of its own power during peak hours does not need distribution, transmission, or (utility-scale) generation sized for full load; a neighborhood that can provide some of its own power during peak hours does not need transmission or (utility-scale) generation sized for full load, just distribution. this is a much less onerous requirement than the one you erroneously believe to be necessary

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#193

Post by locallost »

soitgoes511 wrote: post #121
locallost wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's some rewriting of history considering it's less than a year old. The scramble to get France's nuclear plants back online was because they completely failed in the first place, and at a critical time. Half of the fleet was offline most of the year, and half of those were completely unplanned and difficult to fix [1]. And it's still happening [2]. This failure was one of the biggest reasons for the electricity c…

I don't know how anything I said was re-writing history. The fact was over half the reactors were down due to corrosion and need of maintenance, yes. There was indeed a push to get them back online. I am happy the nytimes and reuters gave you such an informed perspective. The fact is we needed the nuclear reactors back online or we wouldn't have had power in sub-freezing tempetatures. So, sure.. thank God for the ren…

It's the framing that we were having energy shortages because of renewables and that renewables were somehow responsible for the high prices. That is clearly not the case.

1) the shortages stem from the failure of France's nuclear power to deliver

2) the high prices were partly because of shortages, and the wholesale prices were the highest in France all year

I am too lazy to post prices for lst year, but they can be easily verified - besides you are not really interested in facts you don't like. Another thing that can be verified is that those coal plants that were put on emergency stand by had a very very low capacity factor and all the coal that was stockpiled early in the year was basically left unused. Because for all the talk of base load and reliability, when push came to shove, renewables kept the lights on.

The high prices are not so bad overall, there is and was a big incentive to build more capacity fast. Next years will be transformative, and it will all be led by renewables.

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#194

Post by pyrale »

epistasis wrote: post #92
thehappypm wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Net metering is a bad deal for utilities, though. The “delivery” part of the cost of electricity is more than half; it accounts for the maintenance of the grid etc. People dumping energy into the grid doesn’t lower that cost.

This is an important point that applies more broadly: anything that lowers electricity costs for consumers is a "bad deal" for utilities. Since in most areas, utilities are monopolies that are not subject to competition, they should not be allowed to deny cost-saving tech advances just because it lowers overall system cost and their overall percentage of revenue and profit goes down.

The thing is, there are issues with handling a grid that go beyond the money aspect.

Balancing a grid that relies on a few production plants is already a non-trivial endeavour. Changing the network is usually a slow process. Adding a new power line to fix some topologic issues can take years to plan and millions to build. Having a robust grid means grid operators have to know details of the network, and be able to know how to reroute power when a line becomes too close to its limits or (worse) when a circuit-breaker opens. Studying the current network takes time.

That's why adapting to frequent changes isn't realistic, purely from the carrier's perspective, without even looking into power production aspects.

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#195

Post by tut-urut-utut »

goodluckchuck wrote: post #183
lube wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your vision is too US centric, US hegemony lead to disruptions to foreign nations like afghanistan, iraq, libya, etc. My pov from latinamerica is that my country could be next, and neither your culture nor your "business class" seems the future(we reflect your cultural hegemony with our version of shitty role models), si why not challenge US hegemony?

Hegemony is inevitable, prosperous, and peaceful. Anyone who would challenge US hegemony would either intend to establish themselves their own hegemony or would be patsies creating a situation where another force could do so. Do would we be better off under a global islamic caliphate deriving from afghanistan, iraq, libya, etc… or a Chinese hegemoney, or a German hegemony? I’d put American hegemony up against any civ…

For the Americans. In the meanwhile, the rest of the world is so sick of your hegemony, it would rather see anyone else, or better yet, state of a never ending direct fight between the contenders while the rest of the world is left alone.

Something like Star Trek no involvement rule.

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#196

Post by themitigating »

somesortofsystm wrote: post #185
nroets wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should the US try to lead solar panel technology ? China has many talented engineers and plenty of venture capital. I'd prefer them to invest it in solar panel manufacturing and power electronics rather than social media, ai or Telco technology.

Just stop. China as a manufacturing solution for anyone but the people of the region must cease. It is utterly inefficient to produce stuff far, far from where it will be used. Spreading things out like this is balls. Lets start building again. If we're to get off this dust-ball, we have to learn to do things ourselves, again.

Isn't it just economics? How can a US company compete with the cost of labor?

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#197

Post by pyrale »

kragen wrote: post #168
landemva wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who transmits electricity to the house at night? The lines will be sized for full loads.

transmission lines do not connect to houses, so it is not clear that you understand the distinction i am asking about

Doesn't really change the point. Current infrastructures are rarely built to have distribution networks feed back into the HT grid. They are also not as monitored as the HT grid is.

This may change in the future, but until some politician cares enough and passes the cost on to the taxpayer, there's going to be friction for these changes.

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#198

Post by adrianN »

Georgelemental wrote: post #133
adrianN wrote: post #7

Nice. The economics of renewables are really hard to beat. I hope we speed up the construction speed and at the same time electrify more sectors.

The economics of renewables are hard to beat until night falls and the wind stops blowing, at which point the cost jumps to $infinity/MWh

The cost jumps at most to whatever it costs to make, store, and burn hydrogen.

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#199

Post by ericmay »

wolfendin wrote: post #128
ericmay wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Replacing over a billion ICE cars seems with EV’s is going to be so much more work, for example. Instead we could replace ICE cars with no cars and get much more bang for our buck. A few changes to how we build so that you can walk/bike within 15 minutes for many daily needs would reduce energy consumption, save families money, still allow for a car, and everyone would be much happier and healthier. Cars for all tr…

A ‘few’ changes that include ‘modifying or replacing a large amount of the constructed environment built in the US over the past 75 years’ It’s not a bad idea but let’s be realistic about the amount of work it would take

We can start with new developments, and we can just allow someone to sell their house in an existing neighborhood to someone who wants to make it a neighborhood grocery store. No deconstruction if “75 years of infrastructure” required.

Re: For the first time, renewable energy generation beat out coal in the US

#200

Post by hamandcheese »

olddustytrail wrote: post #146
simplicio wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really understand the advantage of rooftop solar over just putting the same number of solar panels in a field somewhere. Id think it would be a lot cheaper to install the panels in one-place then having to distribute them to a bunch of differently shaped and oriented roof tops, and cheaper to have a few large inverters instead of a bunch of small ones.

An interesting selection of replies you got. Here's one that I'm sure Americans can appreciate: If the panels are in a field somewhere, an energy company gets the money. If the panels are on my roof, I get the money.

The American would of course insist that the energy company has a right to reach into their wallet.
Post reply on HN