71–75 of 75 posts
A graph is easier. Here's California: https://www.gridstatus.io/live/caiso?date=2026-05-15 Here's Texas: https://www.gridstatus.io/live/ercot?date=2026-05-15
The most interesting insight from this chart is that Texas actually produces more solar electricity than California.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most interesting insight from this chart is that Texas actually produces more solar electricity than California.
But much less in terms of proportion of total energy usage. It's jarring how much less energy efficient TX is than CA. Over 2x the energy usage despite having a substantially smaller population.
https://www.eia.gov/states/CA/rankings https://www.eia.gov/states/TX/overview
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only problem with that is that coal plants are increasingly priced out at midday and no alternative exists for overnight.
Coal plants were mostly displaced by natural gas, but several states still rely on them for base load. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=54919 Independently of its horrendous impact on the environment, more people die from coal mining accidents every year than in the entire history of nuclear power (yes, including Chernobyl).
FWIW, in the 4 years after this chart was produced, 5 more states flipped over from Coal to either Natural Gas or Wind. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-what-powers-each-u-s...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, this article is horrifically misleading. An array of batteries discharging 12,000 megawatts for ... 5 minutes? 1 hour? 1 day? is not comparable to a nuclear power plant generating 1,000 megawatts continuously 24/7 for months without refueling. Also batteries are storage. They do not generate electricity. They store excess energy produced elsewhere, by actual electrical generation facilities, then release it…
> You can't compare batteries to actual power plants. Sure you can. It makes as much sense as comparing EVs to gasoline powered cars. Which is to say that it's perfectly fine if the question you're trying to answer is whether one can replace the other, which is in fact the question here. As long as the lights come on when it's dark out and your car goes when you hit the accelerator, does it really matter to you as a…
Your ICE/EV analogy is flawed and doesn't work here. Neither EVs nor ICE vehicles produce energy. Both release stored energy, produced at an earlier point in time. ICE vehicles release energy stored by photosynthesis millions of years prior. You imply ICE vehicles are classified differently than EVs because they create energy in the moment, which is untrue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well first of all TFA is not talking about individuals buying solar or anything, so do we at least agree that renewables make sense for countries/state? It seems like you have set an impossible bar for renewables so I don't know what to say to you. I do not think you'll be able to put a mini nuclear station, gas or coal one in your garden for less than the monthly electricity fee, so it's unclear to me what you are c…
I'm just saying what needs to happen in order for people to be lining up for solar in hordes and convert the country to renewable overnight. The IRS needs to say: "We value clean energy in our country, we can live without nickel-and-diming people on the income used to make their solar purchase" The Fed needs to say: "We value clean energy in our country, we can lend money to businesses at 0% interest, for the sake of…
This requires regulation unfortunately as it is inherently less efficient and cost optimized than the 1-2 solutions the market will coalesce around.
Solar + batteries are great but if the panels and cells all come from China we can’t base our energy future on that. We’d just be trading the Strait of Hormuz for the Taiwan Strait.
I know the USA can build forests of wind turbines that stretch from horizon to horizon. I’ve seen it in central Indiana. But can we do the same with solar cells and batteries?