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

US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 346 posts

Re: US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

#331

Post by briHass »

phil21 wrote: post #305
apexalpha wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over here installation takes 4 hours or so, probably less. How much more expensive can that be? It's probably much more in the planning process and tariffs on Chinese PV.

You don't really have that many competent solar installers in most locations in the US. I basically gave up trying. I'm sure they exist, but if you don't want some financed/leased/etc. financial-product-as-a-solar-install your options dwindle. It's entirely obvious that most of these places make money off the financial engineering, not the installation part. I'd sign a competent contractor today for my quite marginal…

Solar doesn't make sense for me financially (yet), due to location and PoCo rates, but I'd be tempted to be my own contractor and sub out the tasks.

Any roofer could do the panel install, and would do a far better job than a solar hack that had 3 days of training. Electrical would be an electrician.

Re: US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

#332

Post by youngtaff »

diego_moita wrote: post #258
youngtaff wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Burning gas also releases a lot of pollutants — we’ve a gas hob but always switch the extractor on when we use it because of this

> Burning gas also releases a lot of pollutants To be more precise: mostly CO2 and small amounts of CO. But the actual concentration of CO2 in your house can be affected by a lot of other factors (ventilation, urban environment, weather, etc).

It also releases NO2, PM2.5 and VOCs

Re: US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

#333

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

eldaisfish wrote: post #254
spockz wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think NG outperforms in high efficiency heaters when the outside temperature is around 1-4 degrees Celsius with humidity as it causes ice buildup on the external unit which then has to be cleared using resistive heating. Also if only little hot water is required sporadically, heating it just in time with gas is more efficient than keeping a buffer heated for long times. Also, heat pumps do best when the temperature…

Methane has lots of value in colder climates, especially much of Canada. Methane is cheap and does not lose heating capacity as temperature falls. Across most of Canada, the median construction year for a typical house is in the 1980. Half were built before that, meaning insulation standards were lower. The #1 problem with heat pumps in Canada is low temperature performance. The heat output drops but the rate of heat…

Toronto/Vancouver areas are both well within the temp range for heat pumps (e.g. ~50% of Canada's population). The further norther areas are a bit cold for air source heat pumps, but are still well within ground based heat pump temp ranges.

Re: US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

#334

Post by ssl-3 »

lazide wrote: post #323
ssl-3 wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the price of a thing is negative, the entity facing the negative price is being paid to consume it. We don't have enough automatic integration yet to make it happen, but: Residentially, that'd be a great time to charge millions of EVs and raise the temperature of water heaters. It'd be perfect for getting a head start on heating the glass kiln for Monday morning, or to supplement the used railroad ties and other…

The CapEx (and planning/timing) required to actually use it would almost certainly dwarf any actual gains - notably, because we’d already be selling the electricity for a profit if we could use it productively , the negative price is precisely because the equipment just isn’t there yet. Also, once said capex was spent so we could actually use that electricity - it’s marginal cost/value would no longer be negative. We…

It does tend to level itself out, yes. With sufficient adoption of cost-oriented controls, negative price conditions cease to exist and money flows in the normal direction.

And no, I don't think that's weird at all -- that seems like just a natural path towards the desirable goal of balancing generation and load, and turning a negative into a positive.

In terms of implementation: There's already lot of low-hanging fruit. It only takes software to get connected things like EVs and hybrid, grid-tied battery+solar systems to be centrally commanded to take advantage of negative price opportunities.

The hardware already exists, and more of it is being built every day. And software, once written, can be copied infinitely for free.

We already have sellers who would like to sell surplus energy, but find themselves in situations where they cannot. We also have avid buyers who would like to buy energy cheaper, but who cannot take advantage of the surplus condition when it exists.

That's not a inescapable curse. It is instead an opportunity for a new market optimization.

If I wake up on some hypothetical future day and find my hypothetical EV charged to 90% instead of the 80% I might normally seek to limit it to, and this 10% increase happened for free and without any action on my part, then: I win a little bit, and the generating station with the surplus also wins a little bit, and the distribution/transmission systems still get paid for their part.

I'm happy with my tiny win. The generating station is happy with many thousands of their own tiny wins. It's good stuff.

If this happens often enough (or for long-enough periods) for me in my region, then I might seek a normal limit of 70% or even less and be able to opportunistically absorb even more of the surplus when it happens.

The advantage that participation offers me does decrease over time as things balance (if they can ever become balanced), and that's OK too: The generating station still wins.

(We already have systems that do exactly the opposite of this in the consumer space, and we've had them for a very long time. The oldest I'm aware of are radio-controlled relays for water heaters, and the newest I'm aware of involve smart thermostats. These are utility-controlled systems that are intended to shed load instead of generate load. But if it works in one direction, then it can also work in the other direction.)

Re: US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

#335

Post by LeFantome »

MarsIronPI wrote: post #311
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is NG good for? Induction cook tops perform better than gas ones, heat pumps do better than gas heaters. The only gap I can think of are just in time hot water heaters.

Natural gas is good for when the power goes out. I've never seen natural gas go out in my life. If you have an electric stove and the power goes out, you simply can't cook stovetop meals until the power is restored. Oh, and if you're thinking of using a generator to power your house if the grid is out, know that most generators run on natural gas.

Power went out in my area at night the other day. It was easy to spot the guy with the solar panels and home battery. His was a fountain of light in the darkness.

Re: US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

#336

Post by LeFantome »

trollbridge wrote: post #129
jordanb wrote: post #91

While I'm concerned about the environmental challenges of reversing the trend and increasing energy consumption, I'm happy that people are living in more comfortable homes, that the Amercian industrial base is being restored, that more and better services are being provided (better healthcare, inexpensive and healthy food, comfortable, efficient and inexpensive transportation). That is what we're using this electrici…

I spoke with two working class people last week who are facing power shutoffs because they got an unexpected $700 power bill. Not sure if it were a sneaky electricity supplier change or if costs have simply gone up. But the problem of consumer rates just always ratcheting up needs addressed.

A huge bill probably means there were on a plan that charged them a set amount each month based on estimated usage. They probably used more than projected and then had to make up the difference at the end of 12 months. This is how my electricity works. You can end up with a refund as well if it goes the other direction.

Re: US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

#339

Post by einpoklum »

phil21 wrote: post #308
einpoklum wrote: post #230

The title is somewhat misleading. First, US demand increased by 3.1%. That is bad - demand should be going down, since there is a need to conserve electricity while much of it is provided by CO2-emitting sources. That said - it is not such a huge "surge" that the fact that 61% of it was covered by an increase in Solar capacity is so impressive. Second, Solar generation is said to have reached 84 TW. But if the increa…

> First, US demand increased by 3.1%. That is bad It is not bad. Energy usage is the best proxy we have for societal wealth. It's starting to somewhat decouple, but I'd posit that's largely due to financial woo-woo than actual real wealth. Time shall tell. A lot of energy (no pun intended) was put into short-term easy wins on the efficiency side the last couple decades, but those low hanging fruits are largely picked…

> is the best proxy we have for societal wealth.

You seem to be suggesting that we should continue to warm up the planet so as to increase "societal wealth". No, we should not, it is harmful and dangerous.

> Naw. If we want to actually regain any sort of self-determination as a nation

Avoiding global warming is an imperative. Your desire to feel "self-determination as a nation" is at most a nice-to-have.

That said - if the US were able to separate out a 're-importation of production capacity' from another country when estimating energy use, and could show a significant drop with that aside, and a drop relative to the energy use as part of that production activity, then - ok, that would be a legitimate argument that its conduct is better than the numbers suggest.

> This is a multi-generational project

So, you're claiming that it's ok for you to keep warming us all up and have the seas rise, and droughts, and fires, and agriculture failing etc. for at least, say, 50 years because of your multi-generational project.

No way. Now, of course, I'm just a guy on the Internet and the US is a global empire which invades and bombs kidnaps heads-of-state etc. But - that must be resisted. Also, the political elites within the US who subscribe to that view must be resisted internally.

> China ... Building everything possible as quickly as possible.

China's policies are a mixed bag; but they are certainly not building _everything_ as quickly as possible. And a lot of what they're building is non-CO2-emitting energy production capacity. Its official plan (IIRC) is no increase in emissions after 2030, and full neutrality by 2060 - which is absolutely not building everything nor as quick as possibly. Now, that is not good enough, but US policy (and your approach) seems to be "burn, baby, burn".

> This degrowth stuff is just a way to make poor and working class folks suffer.

Ah, yes, US society and economy these days are all about aleviating poverty and promoting working class interests.

Re: US electricity demand surged in 2025 – solar handled 61% of it

#340

Post by spockz »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #315
spockz wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think NG outperforms in high efficiency heaters when the outside temperature is around 1-4 degrees Celsius with humidity as it causes ice buildup on the external unit which then has to be cleared using resistive heating. Also if only little hot water is required sporadically, heating it just in time with gas is more efficient than keeping a buffer heated for long times. Also, heat pumps do best when the temperature…

Heat pumps do fine down to -20C or so. The modern ones have all sorts of tricks to avoid icing. (mostly they run the cycle in reverse which is extremely efficient since you are heating the ice on the compressor with the warmer inside air)

That is awesome to hear. I noticed that mine does fine sub 0, but when it is moist and around 1-4 degrees Celsius a lot of ice forms and it needs the resistive heating.

I didn’t see it reverse cycle yet. But I have air-air with one outside unit connected to three inside units. It’s a Mitsubishi Heavy from 2023.

Post reply on HN