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

Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 260 posts

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#171

Post by Torkel »

boznz wrote: post #158
Torkel wrote: post #94

The growth of solar is astounding. I dug into data a while back and tried to do some visualizations of it, mainly for my own understanding: https://torkeldanielsson.se/solar-energy-forecasts/ Solar is already by far our cheapest source of energy. As solar expands, the learning rate means solar will be even cheaper. We should expect solar to be the single largest source of energy on earth by 2035.

A shame electricity is not the whole picture when it comes to energy. The resurgence in EV sales off the back of high gas prices is awesome, but almost 100% of bulk transport costs still rely on oil. Also, unlike EV's which can be plugged in at home for most of their needs, bulk-transport will require considerable new infrastructure to make the transition. Still a way to go.

It's a couple of months since I did the calculations, but I do believe 2035 is for all energy, not just electricity.

It's easy to drag out a flat line in an exponential graph - but the line better start bending soon or we'll end up with a truly mind boggling amount of solar energy.

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#172

Post by pfdietz »

coryrc wrote: post #100
Retric wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Total electricity produced by coal + gas is down over the last 20 years. Total electricity production is up, the difference is from wind and solar. This administration swapped to actively suppressing Wind and Solar via tariffs etc, and yet the trends continued because the underlying economic reality heavily favors battery backed solar.

The numbers for 2014-2024: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/table.php?t=epa_03_01... I doubted what you wrote, but everything you said is correct (for the last 10 years, at least). Over the time period, natural gas increased 740 TWh/year (to 1870) and coal decreased 940 TWh/year (to 650). Electricity production is up ~7%, but that's quite low compared to the growth of everything else. > This administration swap…

A new coal-fired power plant hasn't come online in the US since 2013, IIRC.

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#173

Post by pfdietz »

jwr wrote: post #103
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For whatever reason, there’s a strong motivation for people to dismiss the gigantic global effort to transition the energy system away from fossil fuels, and claim that all that effort isn’t really doing anything. Because renewable energy is Communism, or something. But seriously: $$$$. The Fossil Fuel industry, before it finally dies, will make big Tobacco look downright merciful. The owners of these companies and…

> The Fossil Fuel industry, before it finally dies, will make big Tobacco look downright merciful. This should not be surprising when one realizes that this industry is the biggest industry that humanity ever created (in terms of monetary value). Nothing ever is or was bigger than energy from fossil fuels. Predictably, those who profit from this, behave like selfish [...] and fight tooth and nail to keep their profit…

Energy is 10% of global GDP, about $10 T a year.

I remember this when anyone complains large scale use of solar and wind would be expensive. So is large scale use of any energy source.

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#174

Post by leonidasrup »

nutjob2 wrote: post #96
dnautics wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In absolute terms, china's coal footprint is increasing, and will continue to increase in the short term, as of early 2026, they were still opening new coal plants.

China is a semi-planned economy. The coal plants are more a form of insurance than a practical and economical source of power.

China is shifting it's coal use from direct burning in coal power plants to coal based oil, gas and chemicals, reducing the need for energy imports that could be cut off in a conflict. Carbon, in form of CO2, will still be released to the atmosphere from this products.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/chines...

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#175

Post by Retric »

Paradigma11 wrote: post #123
Retric wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite, current nighttime load is largely a function of cheaper nighttime rates. People don’t set their EV’s to charge from 11-5AM because that’s the only time their cars are plugged in. If rates crater at noon on Sunday, there’s many an EV happy to suck up power then. So yes batteries are going to continue to grow rapidly, but it’s a smaller role than it might seem.

Great, so now not only is power production nondeterministic, your cars tank also is. It was too expensive and the algorithm decided to wait charging, so no spontaneous road trip for you, sorry.

There’s nothing non deterministic about cheaper daytime rates as you scale solar production. Net result, lower average electricity prices but a slow rise in nighttime rates across decades.

Similarly people respond to price changes, that’s the foundation for how capitalism functions. You don’t need to care, but many people will choose to save money when possible.

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#176

Post by pfdietz »

jaggederest wrote: post #137
jwr wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This gets complex quickly, because temperature matters too: cells are more efficient when they are cold. These effects interact and the results are sometimes surprising. Many pure-numbers theoretical comparisons also make the assumption that you can consume all the power that the cells generate, which is not always the case. In an off-grid installation with a battery, for example, you might not be able to consume eve…

Curtailment and dump loads are pretty straightforward, though, so using all the power isn't as critical as people might imagine either. It's better to overbuild the dc-to-ac ratio moderately and just accept that on a summer noon you'll be dumping or curtailing, and still get useful percentages in the winter. I'm in the fortunate position of having an essentially infinite dump load (water pumping and heating) that wou…

One of Standard Thermal's use cases is excess DC power from existing solar farms that would otherwise be curtailed because of inverter/interconnect limits.

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#177

Post by XorNot »

mullingitover wrote: post #87
mrtesthah wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...while the US digs in it's heels is infuriating. And we shouldn't imply that this policy represents any sort of national consensus -- it's pure corruption plain and simple.

It's also sabotage of all domestic manufacturing. The price of energy sets a floor on the price of all manufactured goods. By kneecapping the cheapest sources of energy, the regime kneecaps all domestic manufacturers. China's aggressive buildout of cost effective energy production isn't because they're 'woke,' it's because it makes them more competitive. Every product they export at low prices is in part due to the t…

Its also just strategically sensible. China is well aware it has very long supply lines for oil, and the less of it they need the better.

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#178

Post by XorNot »

oblio wrote: post #58
horsawlarway wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LFPs are cheap and safe, with very good cycle counts. Sodium seems to be actually hitting real commercial production volumes (ex - GM just announced a sodium ramp up days ago, CATL has been producing them for a while). I expect we'll see sodium mature a good bit over the next decade (right now - it's just not quite as good as LFP, but it has a lot of promise in temperature extremes and cheap input materials) So sure…

I read some interesting things about crazy sounding technologies like vanadium flow and iron batteries. I think we're at most 10 years away from storage being not fully solved, but becoming an enabler more than a bottleneck.

Vanadium flow batteries are more expensive and less durable then LFP and the price won't come down because Vanadium is an expensive metal to get.

They were interesting but the whole concept just has problems and has for over a decade at this point despite commercialisation efforts.

Same story with iron: it's out there, but the scale on LFP and likely Sodium is going to shoot right past it.

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#179

Post by ninalanyon »

marcosdumay wrote: post #102
ourmandave wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could have used it to retrain coal workers or help them transition to some other job instead of a handout to plant and mine owners.

But then normal people would have more money, and centi-millionaires would have less. Apparently, both are against the US government's policy.

The centi prefix means one hundredth, as in centi-metre.

So a centi-millionaire would have only 10 thousand :-)

You mean a hecto-millionaire.

Re: Solar generates more energy in US than coal for first time

#180

Post by mbgerring »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #143
mbgerring wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also from focused efforts to close coal plants, and rapid, massive deployment of solar in the last 20 years, and new technology emerging (better batteries and dispatch technologies) to make solar into a 24/7 resource. For whatever reason, there’s a strong motivation for people to dismiss the gigantic global effort to transition the energy system away from fossil fuels, and claim that all that effort isn’t really…

> It’s also from focused efforts to close coal plants, For many years coal has been more expensive than solar and wind. That's why utilities are decommissioning the plants.

It’s true, and the strategy of climate activists in the early 2000s and 2010s was to do everything they could to make coal and other fossil fuels as expensive as possible: by reducing access to capital, increasing the cost of legal and regulatory hurdles, sometime delaying projects through physical blockades, etc etc.
Post reply on HN