Satellite powered estimation of global solar potential

Sorry. The point of my post was to respond to the claim that you can't effectively integrate meaningful amounts of rooftop solar into an electricity grid in a cost-effective manner when the evidence from Australia is that you can and we have.

If I'd looked the example when South Australia's interconnector with the rest of the NEM went out, they had periods with the instantaneous penetration of rooftop solar was over 90%. AEMO, the body that manages the Australian electricity grid, are aiming to be able to support a 100% instantaneous renewable mix on the NEM within the next year or two.

As for Australia's overall electricity mix, that is rapidly changing (and the numbers get a bit distorted by the amount of self-consumption of rooftop solar). We're at 40% renewables overall now, and while it may not hit the government's 82% target by 2030 we will almost certainly reach 70% or so by 2030 and I'd think 90% by 2035 is very doable. The last 10% is harder, but there are enough options (gas with CCS, green hydrogen, biofuels, long-term energy storage of other kinds) that I reckon we can get there. We are in the fortunate position of not having solar completely go away for months in the winter.

As for nuclear, it's never, ever going to happen in Australia (despite the claims of the conservative side of Australian politics). Even if Australia could build nuclear power as efficiently as South Korea - an extremely big ask, given we have the same challenges at building large infrastructure as the rest of the English-speaking world - it still doesn't make economic sense.

Doing that is what installing solar is

So you’re assuming the big competition for home solar is… home solar but ignoring what makes home solar expensive (permits, electricians, tariffs etc panels are already shockingly cheap). Installing solar in 15 years also means you’ve lost 15 years of cheap solar power and are buying panels after inflation, waiting just hasn’t seen instillation costs drop for a while.

But you’re also wildly mistaken about the rest, it’s not actually 47% or now 47.1% efficient when placed outside. Panels get more efficient as extreme levels of light so people going after records create wildly irrelevant numbers as a dick measuring contest.

Further the day someone invents 60% efficient panels isn’t the day we put those suckers into mass production we hit 40% in 2006, but they are nowhere near commercially viable for home installations. We might see widespread use of 60% efficient panels long after we’re dead, but that’s not exactly relevant for these calculations.

It seems like we're talking past each other. My main point, as stated in the parent response, is that there is a plausible future where energy prices, adjusted for inflation, could decline rather than continually increase.

Many here are relying on inductive reasoning, arguing that since this hasn't happened historically, it can't happen in the future. I'm presenting a counterpoint: with current technology and 20 years of advancement, this outcome is entirely possible.

To clarify, I'm not suggesting that mobile generators and solar panels would be free. Rather, the energy they generate could become effectively free. The current challenge is that centralized grids are often necessary because we can't store enough solar energy in batteries. However, with advancements in battery technology over the next 20 years, it could become possible to go completely grid-less. If that happens, we could see significantly lower energy prices—something we should remain as open to as the possibility of higher prices, all on an inflation-adjusted basis.

I find this argument short sighted time and again based on personal life experiences as a former electrician given the life impacting results I have witnessed from power losses.

My electrical experiences are regional to my area in the NorthEast US where long duration events have caused many thousands of US dollars in lost food, tens of thousands of dollars in losses from flooded basements, and when temperatures in Winter often drop below freezing and the power goes out pipes begin to freeze causing even more damage structure wide. In time we will see insurance companies reducing rates for those with local energy storage as the corporate insurance machine catches up to understand the benefits of having such power storage locally. I laugh when people make this exact financial reasoning argument because so few people look at the big picture and fail to comprehend the impacts to their life when that switch on the wall leaves one in the dark. Then again I have designed and architected many successful software systems for high availability and my foundational starting point with any system is always energy. Most of those in society assume that switch will always turn on that light and when it does not then those impacted begin to realize what a "centralized grid" truly means.

Decentralizing the grid is already happening as CA very recently announced any new residences built as of 2026 and beyond must be constructed with PV and storage. Individuals can act in ignorance on the energy problems for now however in time everyone will be forced to participate as the issues continue to compound.

Proactive versus reactive, because by the time it matters it will already be too late.

Electricity is not free and when one really needs something money talks right?

Given the distance from my home to others some people I cannot help because the voltage drop would be to great over the needed corded run. Those within proximity to me that would not suffer voltage drop and undue strain on my own storage system I would gladly help but my own storage is finite and if I help just one person then...

My proactive planning and execution for my decentralized energy generation and storage system was done for my own families quality of life continuity based on my life's experiences. Everyone's life experiences are different and therefore your mileage will vary.