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

Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

seanobannon.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 187 posts

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#51

Post by bee_rider »

naasking wrote: post #29
buckle8017 wrote: post #16

The Texas grid was deregulated in an era where solar and wind were not price competitive. The price competitive producers were all stable fossil fuels, natural gas and coal. They failed to take into account unreliable low cost producers forcing reliable but marginally more expensive producers out of the market. If solar/wind producers had to guarantee power 24x7 at fixed rates the cost would vastly exceed natural gas…

> If solar/wind producers had to guarantee power 24x7 at fixed rates the cost would vastly exceed natural gas costs. Possibly, but neither usage nor generation is 24x7 at fixed cost, so what would be the point of that requirement?

Artificially hamper renewable uptake.

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#52

Post by baggy_trough »

epistasis wrote: post #32
baggy_trough wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's basically zero insulation in all homes. This is completely false.

Well all I can talk about is the 1970s-era boxes that dominate in the Bay Area, which is the major population center that PG&E serves. If your experience with these homes is different somehow, let me know. But go to SF, go to the peninsula, and you'll find that most homes barely stop air coming in and out of the house, much less have proper insulation. A blower test for SF homes would shock most people in the modern…

Yes, my experience is that you are simply wrong.

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#53

Post by outer_web »

leetharris wrote: post #9
makotech221 wrote: post #5

Gimme a break. Compare China's centralized economy's solar/wind/nuclear production to the entirety of the west's decentralized, privatized economy. not even close.

Good, all we need to do is become China and we're set!

I don't think that's what he was saying.

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#54

Post by _bin_ »

mmanfrin wrote: post #12

CTRL+F 'Enron' 0 results. Don't really trust something advocating for deregulated energy markets to not mention the elephant in the room.

the big issue with enron was semi-fraudulent accounting, not market manipulation. the stuff they puleld in cali was pretty slimy but i don't think something nearly thirty years old needs mention. any more than it does if a company wants to use mark-to-market accounting.

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#55

Post by toast0 »

epistasis wrote: post #23
Spivak wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and making EVs about the same cost as a gas car At first I was like, isn't that great EVs are the more expensive car but then I realized you meant that the electricity costs as much as the equivalent gas. Oof. Yikes. That's really bad.

Thanks for pointing out that ambiguity, I hopefully edited for better clarity! The other problem in California is that most heating is done via natural gas, and though heating needs are fairly low if houses had any sort of insulation, there's basically zero insulation in all homes. Which means that every winter, people experience massive natural gas bills that should be close to zero, making it very problematic to sw…

Insulation in California homes depends a lot on where they were built and when. My parents' home in southern california was built in the 1960s, and was pretty much uninsulated, but none of these homes had a/c and the gas heater would be run a few days in the winter. You've got to have a heater to be an inhabitable home by California law, but if it only runs a few days a year, insulation almost doesn't matter. If there's little climate control, not being air sealed is generally a benefit rather than a negative, as it provides passive ventilation, and much of the old housing stock is in areas where the climate is generally pleasant enough all year that outside air is nice enough.

If you've got an attic, it's not too expensive to from zero insulation to basic insulation, and the ROI is pretty quick. Of course, some areas of California had neighborhoods built in the Eichler-style with no attic space; those are hard to add insulation to. A nice large tree over the home can help with summer heat, but large trees over the home have risks and costs too.

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#56

Post by krapp »

themaninthedark wrote: post #45
andrepd wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To manufacture products exported to the west. It's always this argument... You need to look at emissions by country of final destination of the products, not by country of manufacture. In an age where a simple t-shirt is made in Bangladesh with cotton from Afghanistan it's ridiculous to use the latter measure.

This is a large part of why I think we need to move manufacturing for domestic products back to the US. The argument was always that the labor and regulations cost too much but the labor abuse and pollution are costing us more.

You don't think domestic manufacturers will abuse labor and pollute?

The same party that wants to move manufacturing back to the US also wants to deregulate as much as possible, roll back labor rights and repeal environmental laws. The cost of moving manufacturing out of China and to the US is that the few Americans who can get work in a mostly AI driven and automated industry will eventually get treated and paid like Chinese labor.

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#57

Post by baggy_trough »

triceratops wrote: post #49
baggy_trough wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's basically zero insulation in all homes. This is completely false.

I read "zero insulation" as "shit-tier insulation" and that is approximately accurate for a lot of Bay Area housing.

That's closer to the truth, but to say that all homes have basically zero insulation is just wrong.

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#58

Post by ahf8Aithaex7Nai »

kccqzy wrote: post #37
monadINtop wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in what world is the incentive of cutting costs and price gouging - of necessities no less - aligned with the incentives of the vast majority of mankind who would just like energy, healthcare, housing, public infrastructure, etc. to be as affordable and high quality as possible.

The incentive of cutting costs directly leads to affordability.

Companies cut costs to increase their profits, not to pass the cost savings on to customers. If there is price pressure, they may pass on the savings. But at the latest when the market is sufficiently consolidated, they will prefer to keep these savings themselves. And even if this were not the case, there would still be no direct implication of affordability.

Re: Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

#59

Post by Tepix »

username332211 wrote: post #36
mmanfrin wrote: post #12

CTRL+F 'Enron' 0 results. Don't really trust something advocating for deregulated energy markets to not mention the elephant in the room.

Deregulation is such a funny word. The California deregulation you are referring to, involved the powers that be pushing utility companies to sell their power plants. The current energy deregulation in the EU involves forcing utilities to trade electricity in a spot market, that treats the on-demand production of conventional power plants and the random and unpredictable production of solar and wind, as if it's compl…

In the EU there are fundings for strategic reserves in various countries that coal/gas/nuclear/geothermal/biogas plants receive.
Post reply on HN