11–20 of 256 posts
I'm not sure I believe this. Is this due to subsidies on solar? Or taxes on coal? I'm not sure this headline is possible at face value.
Headline is not possible at face value except that it is.
I'm not sure I believe this. Is this due to subsidies on solar? Or taxes on coal? I'm not sure this headline is possible at face value.
Also there labor cost, and the cost (and time) of navigating the political system to get permits are lower.
So a big project can be made a lot cheaper and faster from first shovel to producing electricity.
This will definitely lower the demand for coal, which in turn could lower its prices as well. This is good, because India might still need few coal power plants, considering its population size.
I'm not sure I believe this. Is this due to subsidies on solar? Or taxes on coal? I'm not sure this headline is possible at face value.
From the article: “Of course there are challenges of 24/7 power. We accept all of that – but we have been able to come up with a solar-based long term vision that is not subsidy based.” Headline is not possible at face value except that it is.
In fact the government appears to be spending one hundred billion dollars on solar in the next six years. By 2022.
Furthermore, "The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy provides 70 percent subsidy on the installation cost of a solar photovoltaic power plant in North-East states and 30 percentage subsidy on other regions." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_India
I'm all for renewable energy. Solar is great. At this point I don't see how the headline isn't clickbait bullshit.
"I think a new coal plant would give you costlier power than a solar plant"
He thinks a NEW plant would give you costlier energy. Secondly, aren't the solar projects subsidized in a BIG way? I have seen many smart people say that solar is a sham. They say it's just an opportunist's play. Entrepreneurs want to get on the government's tit and the politicians are happy to portray themselves as environmentally friendly in front of the increasingly global warming wary voters.
If anyone can argue against that, please speak up. I haven't seen anything other than wishful thinking and naive people patting themselves on the back because someone got their hands on tax money.
“I sincerely believe that what the West is doing in this respect is anti-development and anti the fight against climate change,” he said, accusing rich countries of charging too much for clean technology." I really don't believe any country is sincere towards climate change. Every country puts their economy before others. So expecting another economy to help you is a foolish assumption.
However, India is not asking another economy to help them. India can develop its solar energy sector by itself.
The west accuses the developing countries to be big polluters since they use less environmentally-friendly means of energy production. Then when countries like India try to subsidize the domestic solar energy market, WTO accuses them of illegally supporting domestic over international solar producers. Its like you are called a drug-addict first and when you try to wean off it on your own, you are accused of cheating the rehab centres. Excellent example of double standards.
Its basically an attempt to show that as a country, we can move to cleaner power if the right technology transfer is supported by US and Europe. It is the second step after the agreement to transfer US nuclear energy tech to India (which has not signed the Non Proliferation Treaty).
I think the US govt will have to open up its technology and patents to be used by India - if the climate change deal needs to be ratified. Otherwise there is zero chance of it being passed in the Indian parliament.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article: “Of course there are challenges of 24/7 power. We accept all of that – but we have been able to come up with a solar-based long term vision that is not subsidy based.” Headline is not possible at face value except that it is.
As best I can tell India's government is currently spending billions of dollars on solar. Maybe it will some day not be subsidy based. But as best I can tell it currently is. In fact the government appears to be spending one hundred billion dollars on solar in the next six years. By 2022. Furthermore, "The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy provides 70 percent subsidy on the installation cost of a solar photovoltai…
There are multiple people saying "sounds too good to be true, but it isn't. Solar is great because I said so!". This guy provides evidence to support that it is not true and gets downvoted? Wut?
For the umptieth time HN hears only what it wants to hear.