IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first • Hacker News Board

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#121

Post by quote » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 7:12 AM UTC

spwa4 wrote: post #29

I wonder what political and trade consequences can be expected when oil actually does start seeing real decreased usage. I mean one obvious thing has already started: governments taxing the sun (well, solar panels) pretty heavily (meaning above VAT), which I imagine will increase, and what the result will be. It's weird to say this, but solar panel smuggling is actually already a thing now. I used to have a Louis XIV…

I'd argue that the decreased usage of oil has -to some degree- already started, e.g. Chinas crude imports have dropped the last two years in a row and yet they're still adding ever more EVs at a spectacular rate. There's practically no way but down for those numbers. It's mostly similar for the EU, though they're not as aggressive re EVs.

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#122

Post by dzhiurgis » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 7:46 AM UTC

deaux wrote: post #115

dzhiurgis wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't really an alternative for jet fuel, is there? Synfuel still has pollution problem and represents like 0.1% of total jet fuel used. Yes some places choose to lower fuel taxes. But that's not really a subsidy is it. (And tbf nor is my mentioned Chinese solar panel export subsidy as it was actually a GST/VAT rebate).

> There isn't really an alternative for jet fuel, is there? Synfuel still has pollution problem and represents like 0.1% of total jet fuel used. There isn't an alternative for water, electricity and food. Easy to find places where the former two are taxed, the latter is taxed effectively everywhere.

All of these have alternative sources. Jet fuel has not.

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#123

Post by boxed » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 8:52 AM UTC

stavros wrote: post #95

boxed wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Murdering millions of people wasn't exactly "accidental evil", it was very deliberate. Which parts of what these guys did do you think were accidental? His belief that the jews were the problem was the issue. But Germany has still not recovered scientifically or technologically. He was just as wrong about jews as Mao was about sparrows, or Stalin about wheat. I don't see the distinction you're trying to make. Milli…

I'm not trying to make a distinction. I'm saying that they didn't kill millions of people accidentally.

Mao certainly did. So you're wrong there.

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#124

Post by citrin_ru » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 10:14 AM UTC

dzhiurgis wrote: post #112

deaux wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pricing fossil fuel pollution at zero is the biggest subsidy in the world bar none. Contrast this with for example nuclear power, where potential pollution risks as well as storage of its spent resources are some of the biggest costs. If they were subsidized equally to fossil fuels, the costs of those would be very low, with the public simply paying the price for any negative health effects. Oil is directly subsidize…

There isn't really an alternative for jet fuel, is there? Synfuel still has pollution problem and represents like 0.1% of total jet fuel used. Yes some places choose to lower fuel taxes. But that's not really a subsidy is it. (And tbf nor is my mentioned Chinese solar panel export subsidy as it was actually a GST/VAT rebate).

> There isn't really an alternative for jet fuel, is there?

But in many cases there is an alternative to air travel, at least for short distances. I don't really understand why railways (at least in the UK) such ridiculously expensive. Return flights from London to Edinburgh start at £30, train tickets between the same cities start at £100. A return ticket from a station in 50 miles from London is more than £65 (peak times).

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#125

Post by defrost » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 10:29 AM UTC

dzhiurgis wrote: post #122

deaux wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There isn't really an alternative for jet fuel, is there? Synfuel still has pollution problem and represents like 0.1% of total jet fuel used. There isn't an alternative for water, electricity and food. Easy to find places where the former two are taxed, the latter is taxed effectively everywhere.

All of these have alternative sources. Jet fuel has not.

Jet fuel has alternatives, as noted above SAF / Synfuel which is increasingly being blended into fossil fuel sourced trad "jet fuel" / kerosene (with a twist).

> Synfuel still has pollution problem and represents like 0.1% of total jet fuel used.

is a fairly lightweight critique of a product development path scarcely five years in:

  Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is an alternative fuel made from non-petroleum feedstocks that reduces air pollution from air transportation. SAF can be blended at different levels with limits between 10% and 50%, depending on the feedstock and how the fuel is produced. According to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), over 360,000 commercial flights have used SAF at 46 different airports largely concentrated in the United States and Europe.

  Worldwide, aviation accounts for 2% of all carbon dioxide (CO2) and 12% of all CO2 from transportation. ICAO's Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) caps net CO2 from aviation at 2020 levels through 2035. The international aviation industry sets goals for SAF usage globally. SAF presents the best near-term opportunity to meet these goals.

  The Sustainable Aviation Fuel Grand Challenge, announced in 2021, brings together multiple federal agencies for the purpose of expanding domestic consumption to 3 billion gallons in 2030 and 35 billion gallons in 2050 while achieving at least a 50% reduction in lifecycle emissions.

~ https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/sustainable-aviation-fuel

So, have some patience and remember the goal here is to reduce the use of fossil fuel as much as possible .. if Synfuel evolves into something that reduces fossil fuel usage by 50% in the aviation sector, that's a win on the path to ideally eventual elimination altogether.

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#126

Post by boxed » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 12:38 PM UTC

rexpop wrote: post #96

boxed wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean.. we do all the time no? Hitler tried to make Germany great and made it shit. Mao tried to make China great and killed tens of millions. Stalin, Pol Pot.. the list goes on. If we attribute accidental evil, why should we not attribute accidental good?

Accidental evil? No. Fascism is fundamentally driven by a realized nihilism where pure destruction is the actual goal , rather than an accident. From the very beginning, the Nazi party explicitly promised the German people wedding bells and death, including their own deaths and the death of the Germans. The population reportedly cheered for this not because they misunderstood the message, but because they actively de…

That sounds very tin foil hat to me. Yea, people who are angry don't act super rationally, and when losing Hitler acted like a toddler having a tantrum. That doesn't mean the failure and suicide was the point.

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#127

Post by fxwin » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 12:59 PM UTC

stavros wrote: post #21

fxwin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think that's why they used the word "accidentally"

Let me rephrase: You can't really attribute to someone something they did accidentally while trying to do the opposite.

That depends on your use of "attribute". We shouldn't give them (positive) credit (use 1), but we can recognize them as the cause (use 2)

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#128

Post by ahhhhnoooo » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 1:45 PM UTC

leonidasrup wrote: post #119

ahhhhnoooo wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The ecological impact of mining and refining of rare earths, used for permanent magnets in EV motors or in electric generators - wind turbines, is quite large. I don't think I ever said otherwise. FWIW I think cars are bad. Full stop. If they have to exist, electric cars appear to have fewer externalities.

Yes, if cars then electric. But much more importance should be placed on public transport. Air-travel should be in many cases replaced with high speed, electric trains.

No disagreement from me.

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#129

Post by ElectronCharge » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 5:42 PM UTC

pfdietz wrote: post #64

marcosdumay wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The man is an overachiever. He is in the process of killing the rise of neonazism, exposing those religious extremists that want constant wars on the Middle East, creating a multipolar world commerce chamber, turning the EU into a federation, popularizing socialism (and even outright communism) in the US, dismantling the US's foreign government overthrowing apparatus, creating actual diplomatic relations between the…

He's also making the case for radical downsizing of the US military, since he's shown the military's take that it won't obey illegal orders was a sham.

Illegal orders?

Re: IEA: Solar overtakes all energy sources in a major global first

#130

Post by rexpop » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 9:58 PM UTC

boxed wrote: post #126

rexpop wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accidental evil? No. Fascism is fundamentally driven by a realized nihilism where pure destruction is the actual goal , rather than an accident. From the very beginning, the Nazi party explicitly promised the German people wedding bells and death, including their own deaths and the death of the Germans. The population reportedly cheered for this not because they misunderstood the message, but because they actively de…

That sounds very tin foil hat to me. Yea, people who are angry don't act super rationally, and when losing Hitler acted like a toddler having a tantrum. That doesn't mean the failure and suicide was the point.

Yes, the entire fascist project is one big tantrum.