Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Saturday January 10, @10:10PM   Printer-friendly

National Geographic published an interesting article about renewable energy myths.

Still, myths about renewable energy are commonplace, says Andy Fitch, an attorney at Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law who coauthored a report rebutting dozens of misconceptions. This misinformation, and in some cases, purposeful disinformation, may lead people to oppose renewable projects in their communities. Support for wind farms off New Jersey, for example, dropped more than 20 percent in less than five years after misleading and false claims began circulating.

"It's easy to prick holes into the idea of an energy transition," because it is a new concept to many people, Fitch says.

Myth #1 Renewable energy is unreliable.
There will always be days when clouds cover the sun or the wind is still. But those conditions are unlikely to occur at the same time in all geographic areas. "There's always a way to coordinate the energy mix" to keep the lights on, Fitch says.

Today that coordination generally includes electricity from fossil fuels or coal. In California, where more than half the state's power now comes from solar, wind, and other renewables, natural gas and other non-renewables generate the rest.

Improvements in storage technology will also increasingly allow renewable energy to be captured during sunny or windy days. Already, some 10 percent of California's solar-powered energy is saved for evening use.

Myth #2 Rooftop solar is super pricey.
Back in 1980, solar panels cost a whopping $35 (in today's dollars) per watt of generated energy. In 2024 that figure fell to 26 cents. Solar has become so cost-efficient that building and operating the technology is now cheaper over its lifespan than conventional forms of energy like gas, coal, and nuclear power.

Homeowners also save a significant amount of money after rooftop solar is installed, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. (The method remains cost effective, even after federal subsidies to purchase the panels ceased late last year.) A family who finances panels might save close to a thousand dollars a year in their electric bills, even taking into account payments on the loan.

Myth #3 Wind power inevitably kills wildlife.
With hundreds of thousands of turbines in operation, wind power now makes up eight percent of the world's energy. But alongside these sprouting modern windmills has come stories of birds, whales, and even insects and bats killed or injured in their presence.

In some cases, wind energy can cause a small fraction of wildlife deaths, but they "pale in comparison to what climate change is doing to [the animals'] habitat," says Douglas Nowacek, a conservation technology expert at Duke University. "If we're going to slow down these negative changes, we have to go to renewable energy."

When it comes to whales or other marine mammals, "we have no evidence—zero" that any offshore wind development has killed them, says Nowacek, who studies this as lead researcher in the school's Wildlife and Offshore Wind program. (Most die instead from ship strikes and deadly entanglements in commercial fishing gear.)

Myth #4 Electric cars can't go far without recharging.
Electric vehicles are an important element of the transition to renewable energy because, unlike gas-powered cars, they can be charged by solar and wind energy. EVs are also more energy efficient, since they use nearly all of their power for driving, compared with traditional cars' use of just 25 percent. (Most of the rest is lost as heat.)

Concerns that EVs can't make it to their destination likely spring from early prototypes, when cars developed in the 1970s got less than 40 miles per charge. Today, some 50 models can go more than 300 miles, with some topping 500.

Worries about the longevity of EV batteries are also unfounded. Only one percent of batteries manufactured since 2015 have had to be replaced (outside of manufacturing recalls, which have been negligible in recent years). Studies done by Tesla found the charging capacity in its sedans dropped just 15 percent [PDF] after 200,000 miles.

Myth #5 Renewables are on track to solve the climate crisis.
The world is in a better place than it would be without renewables. Before the 2015 Paris Agreement called for this energy transition, experts had forecast 4°C planetary warming by 2100; now they expect it to stay under 3°C, according to a recent report by World Weather Attribution, a climate research group. But even this target "would still lead to a dangerously hot planet," the report states. Last summer Hawaiian observatories documented carbon dioxide concentrations above 430 parts per million—a record breaking high far above the 350 PPM Paris target.

To sufficiently slow climate warming, experts say wind generation must more than quadruple its current pace by 2030, and solar and other renewables must also be more widely adopted. Yet while global investments for renewable energy rose 10 percent in the first half of last year, it fell by more than a third in the U.S.


Original Submission

This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only. Log in and try again!
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by corey on Saturday January 10, @10:43PM (13 children)

    by corey (2202) on Saturday January 10, @10:43PM (#1429471)

    These are really uninsightful low hanging fruit “myths”. I suppose there’s a bunch of people out there who think these, but I thought we were past this. Now the challenge is to get most people to care and prioritise helping the planet in their lifestyle choices and votes.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday January 11, @01:14AM (9 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 11, @01:14AM (#1429500) Journal
      For me, what makes the first two myths? Renewables really do make a grid more unstable. We have cases where a large region really did experience both lack of sunlight and lack of wind at the same. We also frequently have the opposite effect where renewables generate so much power that the grid operator has to pay someone to get rid of it. Germany has this problem frequently.

      Similarly, in the second "myth" they speak of $0.26 per watt. Well, that's the raw silicon and doesn't include mounting and installation costs. For example: [energysage.com]

      The typical home requires about 12 kilowatts (kW) of solar energy to meet its electricity needs, which costs an average of $29,649 before incentives, [...] Understanding solar costs means looking beyond sticker prices. Right now, systems average about $2.53 per watt before incentives.

      That's in 2025 prices. So actual price after installation is ten times as large as the "myth" price. When we look at countries [statista.com] that are highly reliant on non-hydro renewable like Germany or Denmark (~$0.40 per KwH and $0.36 per KwH), their prices are substantially higher than countries which don't do that (like France, $0.28 per KwH). You'd think with the great cheapening of renewable power, that it would show in nation-scale electricity pricing, right? So why isn't it? Something wrong with the narrative again.

      It's not a good sign when the two most serious "myths" on that list aren't myths.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by khallow on Sunday January 11, @02:38AM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 11, @02:38AM (#1429509) Journal

        We also frequently have the opposite effect where renewables generate so much power that the grid operator has to pay someone to get rid of it. Germany has this problem frequently.

        Cite [soylentnews.org] for that assertion.

        Such "negative prices" are not the norm in Germany, but they are far from rare, thanks to the country's effort to encourage investment in greener forms of power generation. Prices for electricity in Germany have dipped below zero — meaning customers are being paid to consume power — more than 100 times this year alone [2017], according to EPEX Spot.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Sunday January 11, @01:51PM (4 children)

        by bzipitidoo (4388) on Sunday January 11, @01:51PM (#1429581) Journal

        This matches my experience. I'm in Texas, and it sure seems like hydrocarbon energy interests have conspired to make rooftop solar a bad deal here. Last time I checked, a year ago, installers were asking $40k to install a 12kWh system. That's simply too much. I get the impression California installers offer better deals, deals that are not available in Texas. At $40k for the installation and the electricity rates I'm paying currently, the payback would be about 20 years, and the system is projected to last only 25 years. If any numbers have been inflated (and they probably have), the corrected numbers could easily indicate that the payback period is never. As for the incentives, yeah no. Incentives that work like the infamous manufacturer rebates on which I was cheated when I bought a new Pentium IV computer 25 years ago, I just can't trust. Knock the initial price down, don't make the incentive a borrowing from me that might not be paid back. Tax break? Bah. If I am already paying minimal taxes because I am retired, a tax break is worthless.

        I have heard further horror stories. Such as, to get the installation price real low, even "free", they sell the homeowner on a deal in which the home is stuck with extra debt that makes them much less saleable. Then there's the trick of the energy company inserting itself in between. Wire your system so that they collect all the energy, for which they pay you the wholesale rate, and then, for any energy you use, even that generated by what you thought were your own solar cells on your own roof, you pay them the market rate.

        It also occurred to me that this home improvement could result in higher property taxes. Oh, your home is worth $40k more now! That'll be $480 more per year in property tax! (I looked up the rate I was being assessed, so I know that's how much more I could be paying.) When I inquired of the installers, they blithely assured me that solar rooftop had some sort of property tax exemption. But they didn't show me any tax code that said that. Another expense is home insurance. I can easily see the home insurer telling me they're going to have to raise my rates because of this. That one, I totally guessed at. $200 more per year? I really do not know. Of course the installers conveniently ignore those considerations.

        The manner of the typical solar rooftop sales pitch is uncomfortably similar to the dual pane window sales pitches my parents received. $10k to convert all your home's windows from single pane to dual pane! So many pitches did they receive, I finally worked out what such a home improvement might really be worth, and came up with just $2k. None of them were anywhere close to that low. So, sent them all packing.

        I'm willing to put solar on my roof. I'm not willing to be cheated. Make that 12kWh system $15k, and I'm interested. But $40k? No.

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by Whoever on Sunday January 11, @10:38PM (3 children)

          by Whoever (4524) on Sunday January 11, @10:38PM (#1429639) Journal

          It also occurred to me that this home improvement could result in higher property taxes. Oh, your home is worth $40k more now! That'll be $480 more per year in property tax!

          Most states exclude solar systems from property tax valuations.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 12, @03:06AM (1 child)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @03:06AM (#1429676) Journal
            Apparently not so in Taxas.
            • (Score: 2) by Whoever on Monday January 12, @03:50PM

              by Whoever (4524) on Monday January 12, @03:50PM (#1429729) Journal

              You appear to live in a bubble of ignorance. A simple search would show, that, yes, Texas allows a property tax exemption for wind and solar installations.

          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 12, @06:57PM

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday January 12, @06:57PM (#1429759)

            >Most states exclude solar systems from property tax valuations.

            This year.

            Wait until "the majority" of voters are sucking down $2/gal gasoline and they "discover" that a small minority of their neighbors, who all want their cheap gas to get more expensive again, are getting a free ride on their property taxes on those eco-weenie solar panels... I wouldn't be surprised to see a wave of politicians surf through on platforms of double-taxing all that hippie-freak eco bullshit.

            --
            🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 3, Informative) by Rich on Sunday January 11, @02:57PM (1 child)

        by Rich (945) on Sunday January 11, @02:57PM (#1429585) Journal

        You've got some nasty middlemen there (but we do, too in Germany, with the price composition of grid kWhs, or heat pump installation. (UK 9000£, DE 35000€ or such for the same stuff...)).

        Quick look on German ebay for the raw hardware, prices as of today:

        Items (127377015661, 226302658403, and 326691884576)

        Trina Solar TSM-NEG9R.25 450W Vertex S+ Solarmodul Solarpanel fullblack PV Modul
        69€
        28 x 69€ = 1932€ for 12600Wp

        Deye 12kW Hybrid-Wechselrichter SUN-12K-SG05LP3 3-Phasig inkl. WIFI & DC Switch
        1589€

        For good measure, throw in a 10kWh battery pack:

        10,5 kWh Batteriespeicher PV Solar Speicher Akku Stromspeicher LiFePO4 für Deye (item)
        1199€

        ------
        4720€

        • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 12, @07:01PM

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday January 12, @07:01PM (#1429761)

          >You've got some nasty middlemen there

          Around about 2004 I was shopping for "wind farm land" in Western Nebraska... my enthusiasm blew away when I learned about "spinning fees" - which is basically the locals squeezing the wind farm power generator owners for every last cent they can get without completely putting them out of business. It translates to: the only way to run a wind farm for-profit is to get creditors who are willing to let your corporation run at risk, uninsured, and then go bankrupt in the event of any unusual high-cost events. Meaning: shirking liability laws through the bankruptcy shield. It's the business plan that put a new ballroom on the White House.

          --
          🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 12, @06:54PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday January 12, @06:54PM (#1429758)

        > France, $0.28 per KwH

        Yeah, France is a great "typical" country to look at electricity costs for reference. /s

        France's electricity mix is heavily dominated by nuclear power (around 65-70%), providing a large, low-carbon base, supplemented significantly by renewables like hydro (around 11-14%), wind (around 10%), and solar (around 4-6%), with fossil fuels (gas, coal, oil) playing a minimal role, making France a major net exporter of clean electricity.

        --
        🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by turgid on Sunday January 11, @10:52AM (2 children)

      by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 11, @10:52AM (#1429557) Journal

      Now the challenge is to get most people to care and prioritise helping the planet in their lifestyle choices and votes.

      I won't live long enough to see the two metre sea level rise. I might see the AMOC collapse [wikipedia.org], though, and I will be directly affected by it since it maintains temperatures here in the UK.

      My new house is going to be heated by renewables (ground source heat pump) and eventually I hope to get some sort of wind turbine. We have unlimited wind and rain here. In recent years the wind strength has increased greatly. Every year thousands of trees are blown down causing all sorts of trouble up to and including death.

      Life is giving us lemons. The lemonade I hope to make will come from that strong wind. I need to design a small, cheap turbine that works in gales that anyone can afford.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by krishnoid on Saturday January 10, @10:53PM

    by krishnoid (1156) on Saturday January 10, @10:53PM (#1429473)

    Here's a breakdown [engaging-data.com] of California's power generation, helpful to see how individual sources contribute to baseline/when-available/as-needed power generation. One thing that (doesn't) stand out is nuclear's poured-concrete-like baseline generation, which if increased, looks like it could eliminate fossil fuel use.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by jelizondo on Saturday January 10, @11:47PM

    by jelizondo (653) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 10, @11:47PM (#1429483) Journal

    Incase you are interested, the report is available directly here [columbia.edu] [PDF]. The link in the TFA goes to another site, than then links to another site where you can click the download, kind of a long way around.

    Its tone is more academic but covers 33 myths.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by SDRefugee on Saturday January 10, @11:50PM

    by SDRefugee (4477) on Saturday January 10, @11:50PM (#1429484)

    Prior to getting solar installed on my house in Las Vegas, my electric bill ran well over a hundred a month during our cool season (Oct-May) and a bit over two hundred a month during the "inferno" season (May-Oct) when the a/c runs 24/7. Now my electric bill runs well below a hundred the year round. Solar is especially useful here as we have sun nearly all year round.

    --
    America should be proud of Edward Snowden, the hero, whether they know it or not..
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 11, @12:51AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 11, @12:51AM (#1429494)

    There's a lot of places solar won't work well. Let alone if you have trees. Batteries aren't exactly cheap or environmentally friendly either.

    Neither here nor there tho.

    NatGeo only makes phony advertising articles now and someone posted one.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 11, @01:02AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 11, @01:02AM (#1429497)

    Myth #2 Rooftop solar is super pricey.
    Back in 1980, solar panels cost a whopping $35 (in today's dollars) per watt of generated energy. In 2024 that figure fell to 26 cents. Solar has become so cost-efficient that building and operating the technology is now cheaper over its lifespan than conventional forms of energy like gas, coal, and nuclear power.

    Thank China for that... All that "dumping":
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/sep/10/solar-power-china-tariffs [theguardian.com]
    https://www.dw.com/en/from-solar-to-evs-how-china-is-overproducing-green-tech/a-68782157 [dw.com]

    They've been dumping for decades:
    https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/business-spectator/antidumping-commission-to-investigate-chinese-solar-panels/news-story/9f0eeb7c211caf66f9592fde64a81388 [theaustralian.com.au]

    Guess it's kinda working in a way right? 100x cheaper. 🤣

    They're using it too: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/26/china-breaks-more-records-with-massive-build-up-of-wind-and-solar-power [theguardian.com]

    But still a long way from getting off coal > 50%.

  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by jman on Sunday January 11, @12:16PM (13 children)

    by jman (6085) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 11, @12:16PM (#1429569) Homepage
    Good article, though IMHO #4 is a red herring as it only talks about range. Charge time is also a big factor.

    Ten years ago I made a road trip for work, a little over 900 highway miles. A trunk full of equipment to be installed precluded flying.

    Starting with a full tank in my then year-old Prius, stopping twice along the way for gas, I arrived after around fourteen hours.

    An electric car would have added several hours to that, making it a two-day drive.

    Paul Harvey: With work done, the trip back was a tad more leisureful, though I did still have to hustle bit, barely returning home in time for Xmas eve. The ol' gal is going on 11 now, long paid off, still in great shape mechanically, getting not quite the mileage she did back then, but still filling up in just a few minutes for another 400 - 500 miles.

    Once I can top off the juice for that same kind of range in the same time it now takes at the pump, I'm in.
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by Undefined on Sunday January 11, @12:38PM

      by Undefined (50365) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 11, @12:38PM (#1429573)

      #4 is a red herring as it only talks about range. Charge time is also a big factor.

      These tend to be "heater off, AC off" mileage ratings as well.

      In my state, the number of days where one or the other has to be on... is most of them.

      I'm a huge fan of EVs, but here (very, very rural), people have to consider range more carefully.

      --
      I use a dedicated preprocessor to elaborate abbreviations.
      Hover to reveal elaborations.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Whoever on Sunday January 11, @10:43PM (10 children)

      by Whoever (4524) on Sunday January 11, @10:43PM (#1429640) Journal

      1. You need an employer who will pay for an overnight stay on your journeys there and back.
      2. If you drove for 14 hours, you were a menace on the roads.
      3. In the long journeys that I have taken in my Tesla, whenever I stop for food, usually, the car is charged to 80% before I have finished my meal, so the charging makes little difference to the journey.
      4. Once in 10 years! You would decide what vehicle you would buy based on a once-in-a-decade journey?

      • (Score: 1, Troll) by khallow on Monday January 12, @01:32PM (4 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @01:32PM (#1429713) Journal
        Your transparent excuses are always so enlightening.

        the car is charged to 80% before I have finished my meal

        So you can't even "fill" your batteries in a reasonable time? I assure you, you would have to eat fast in order to be done by the time I fill my gas tank to 80%.

        • (Score: 2) by Whoever on Monday January 12, @03:47PM (3 children)

          by Whoever (4524) on Monday January 12, @03:47PM (#1429728) Journal

          You ignore the obvious fact that you still have to eat after filling up your car. While the EV drivers are sitting comfortably and eating, you are filling your cat, then either eating garbage gas station food, or hunting for somewhere to eat.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 12, @06:44PM (2 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @06:44PM (#1429757) Journal
            Or I eat a sandwich while driving. When I do long drives I typically buy several sandwiches at the start and consume them over the course of the drive. And if I were ever serious about eating healthy, I would make the sandwiches ahead of time. End result: EV isn't going to win this angle especially with partial recharges.
            • (Score: 2) by Whoever on Monday January 12, @07:54PM (1 child)

              by Whoever (4524) on Monday January 12, @07:54PM (#1429773) Journal

              Or I eat a sandwich while driving.

              So you are a dangerous driver who should not be on the roads. Thanks for making this clear.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 13, @12:50PM

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 13, @12:50PM (#1429847) Journal
                If you say so. I already mentioned what I think is going on here.
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 12, @07:15PM (3 children)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday January 12, @07:15PM (#1429763)

        While there are all styles of road-travel, I personally used to do quite a number of "bounce trips" to avoid the hassle of an overnight stop. Adding an extra hour or two to one of those itineraries can be a real drag on the overall experience.

        Me, today, driving 14 hours in a 24 hour period, I would be far from a menace, but I avoid it because it's un-necessary and un-comfortable, I'll find a nice B&B along the way and stop - because I can easily afford the time and money and it's how I prefer to travel. Younger me, often did not have the money and/or time for a place to stay along the way, and so I did drive straight through up to 15-16 hours a day in some instances. I'll admit, the 22 hour straight through trip (I planned to stop at hour 12-14, then didn't) around hour 19-20 I became a "less than optimal" driver, but being 3-4am with no traffic on the roads, I opted to push on through for a 5:30am arrival rather than stop less than 2 hours from destination. That 22 hour trip started at 7am, took one 30 minute stop for food, and stopped for a 5-10 minute gas fill once every 4-ish hours.

        >Once in 10 years! You would decide what vehicle you would buy based on a once-in-a-decade journey?

        We bought a sailboat 8 years ago, in part because of its capability of sailing to the Bahamas. In the 8 years since, it has never been more than a 3 hour sail away from our marina slip. Know anybody who wants to buy a sailboat?

        --
        🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: 4, Informative) by Whoever on Monday January 12, @07:58PM

          by Whoever (4524) on Monday January 12, @07:58PM (#1429774) Journal

          We bought a sailboat 8 years ago, in part because of its capability of sailing to the Bahamas. In the 8 years since, it has never been more than a 3 hour sail away from our marina slip. Know anybody who wants to buy a sailboat?

          You have had one of the two best days in the life of a boat owner and are waiting for the second to happen.

        • (Score: 2) by jman on Monday January 12, @11:25PM (1 child)

          by jman (6085) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @11:25PM (#1429805) Homepage

          That reminds me of a wedding I attended for one of my service buddies after I'd gotten out. He stayed in Montgomery Alabama where we were all stationed, and met a gal there. I drove in from Houston and hung out for a few days reconnecting with folks.

          One of the other buddies drove down for the ceremony from New Hampsire. An ungodly long drive. He didn't even stay for all of the reception; just turned around and went right back after an hour or so.

          We all thought it was a bit extreme, but were happy to see him again.

          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 13, @01:01AM

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday January 13, @01:01AM (#1429813)

            >Montgomery Alabama ... from New Hampsire. ...just turned around and went right back after an hour or so.

            One day in Miami I decided I was bored and wanted to do something different, so I drove to Atlanta - looked up a friend from High School, hung out for the evening, crashed on the couch, then left out the next morning.

            In the middle of Tamiami Trail I got stopped (for speeding, obviously) - cop made the argument about how it doesn't get you there any faster - I was doing 75mph, at the time the limit was 55. He only held me up for 20 minutes, I could have been stopped three or four times like that and the trip still would have gone faster at 75mph than 55.

            --
            🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 2) by jman on Monday January 12, @11:19PM

        by jman (6085) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @11:19PM (#1429803) Homepage

        1. You need an employer who will pay for an overnight stay on your journeys there and back.
        Irrelevant to my desire for minimal time wasted when making a long trip from A to B.

        2. If you drove for 14 hours, you were a menace on the roads.
        Not true. Haven't had a ticket in years. If tired, I pull over. If not, no need to.

        3. In the long journeys that I have taken in my Tesla, whenever I stop for food, usually, the car is charged to 80% before I have finished my meal, so the charging makes little difference to the journey.
        Does it take 5 minutes? That was the point of my comment.

        4. Once in 10 years! You would decide what vehicle you would buy based on a once-in-a-decade journey?
        Absolutely! Electric cars are the future, they're just not yet for me due to the reasons stated. YMMV.

    • (Score: 2) by Covalent on Monday January 12, @04:34PM

      by Covalent (43) on Monday January 12, @04:34PM (#1429735) Journal

      This is a big point worth highlighting. I now own two EVs, and recently drove what would have been a 7 hour drive in a gas car (including stops for gas). It was about 9 hours with the EV. Slightly annoying, but not a game changer, regardless of the range of your EV.

      But the bigger problem was that nearly every charging station I could find was a slow (Level 1 or Level 2) charger. That would have turned the drive into a 15 hour drive - unacceptable. A Level 3 charger makes that drive doable, but those are rarer and often crowded.

      As a nation, we should be building out a level 3 charging network, complete with their own independent batteries and solar panels. With a reliable large network of those, driving an EV becomes a very attractive proposition. The driving experience with an EV is so much more enjoyable than in a gas car that adoption of this tech will skyrocket.

      --
      You can't rationally argue somebody out of a position they didn't rationally get into.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by jgfenix on Sunday January 11, @06:12PM (4 children)

    by jgfenix (40393) on Sunday January 11, @06:12PM (#1429604)

    1. Last year in Spain we had a global blackout because the excess of renewable energy made the system unstable. Of course the government denies it.
    3. It's undeniable. There are numerous studies that prove it. They do it in protected places and to endangered species. And big solar plants also kill a lot of birds.
    4. I can drive more than 800 km in my car without recharging. Try that in a electric car if you are not millionaire.

    • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 11, @10:47PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 11, @10:47PM (#1429641)

      I bet you think the 2020 election was stolen!

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 12, @01:34PM (2 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @01:34PM (#1429714) Journal

      There are numerous studies that prove it. They do it in protected places and to endangered species. And big solar plants also kill a lot of birds.

      It's also not a lot of birds compared to cats or large pane windows. This myth belongs on the list.

      • (Score: 1) by jgfenix on Monday January 12, @07:54PM (1 child)

        by jgfenix (40393) on Monday January 12, @07:54PM (#1429772)
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 13, @12:56PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 13, @12:56PM (#1429848) Journal
          Sure [usda.gov]. Check out the lower right on page 1037:

          Cumulative Mortality

          Based on the estimates derived or reviewed in this paper, annual bird mortality from anthropogenic sources may easily approach 1 billion birds a year in the US alone (table 2). Buildings, power lines and cats are estimated to comprise approximately 82 percent of the mortality, vehicles 8 percent, pesticides 7 percent, communication towers 0.5 percent, and wind turbines 0.003 percent. Other sources such as mortality from electrocution, oil spills and fishing by-catch are also contributors but estimates were not made and we have not even considered the impacts from loss of habitat which could also be considered anthropogenic.

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by ledow on Monday January 12, @10:40AM (8 children)

    by ledow (5567) on Monday January 12, @10:40AM (#1429693) Homepage

    Solar is getting stupid-cheap.

    I live in the UK (not the best place for solar) and started with a small "hobby" project 3 years ago when I bought a small house.

    It's an all-electric house and I now own the roofspace so... why not have a tinker and understand this stuff.

    Started with a small 12V system with an old car battery, a 160W 12V inverter I had in the back of my car and the cheapest panel I could find. And, you know, it was enough to keep some lights in the shed without having to wire the shed.

    So I started buying more and more bits for it and then some more panels, and then a proper battery, and then a bigger inverter, and then...

    And now I have something that - just from bits I've bought and put together - could easily run my house. Without compromise. Not just "oh it works fine so long as I don't turn anything heavy on" but literally... the solar controller I have could now service the entire house up to the highest peak power draw that it's ever drawn while I've lived in it (smart meter). Enough battery power to run the house for 24 hours (again... smart meter).

    At the moment I'm running it as an isolated system (it sits behind an ATS and the other source of the ATS plugs into a wall-socket in my house. So when the solar's working, whatever's connected to the ATS is powered by the sun, when it stops, it flips over to be powered from the normal household socket. This saves a LOT of electrical certification, etc. work). And you know what... you can see the huge dent it makes on my electricity bill. I know because, again, smart meter. And smart plugs. I literally know how much power I save - AT THE PLUG - after conversion, storage, inversion, etc. It has also provided several times where a power cut takes out the local grid and I don't even NOTICE... my Internet, router, networking, laptop, NAS, projector, etc. all just carry on working. I've been sitting there watching a movie, not realising that the neighbours have all been plunged into darkness for hours.

    Over Christmas a deal came up and I picked up enough panels to double my capacity for a pittance. Literally every time I buy a panel, or every time I buy a battery, the exact SAME product is vastly cheaper, or I can get a far SUPERIOR product for the same price. And I've only been doing this 3 years and make a lot of purchases (I have been spending the savings / surplus that I get back from the electricity as a refund - because they overestimated my usage - on something to go on the solar each month, which makes it cheaper, which means a bigger refund, which means more spent, etc.), but it's literally cheaper every time I look at buying something.

    The plan was that, before retirement (which is 20+ years away), I'd try to make myself utility independent. And I did not expect solar to make it THIS easy. I was expecting to spend ten times what I have just to get a system which saved me money, rather than eliminated my need for the grid. What started as a hobby project is basically a fully automated solar system capable of running my entire house. And there's still more to go. I have a tiny roofspace, I don't have a lot of space to dedicate to solar controllers/batteries/etc. and yet in the summer I'm there worrying about going over the fuse rating for several strings of panels, and trying to work out the maximum voltage/current/power that the system can handle at all points. And I'm due another upgrade. I fear the new panels I just got (but haven't put up yet) will take me over a certain limit (at least in theory, but in practice probably not) and I like to cover myself. So that might mean a capacity upgrade, rerouting the strings to balance them out, more fusing, monitoring very carefully in the summer, etc. etc. etc.

    I'm also looking at a water heater that can take direct connection to the solar / battery... and to be honest, that might well just be a "sink" for all the power I'm generating.

    The next "big" step is obviously tying it into my actual house electrics so the whole house switches over, but that requires professionals and a lot of expense. But I'm about 20 years ahead of schedule, and things are getting better and cheaper all the time.

    Honestly... if I can do that in the UK, with cheap commodity hardware, on a tiny roofspace, and it's as powerful and reliable as it is... I judge governments for not being able to just roll this out at scale and running entire countries entirely from solar.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by janrinok on Monday January 12, @11:35AM (7 children)

      by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @11:35AM (#1429699) Journal

      I judge governments for not being able to just roll this out at scale

      In fact, that is what some countries in Europe are now doing. They are giving subsidies to those who want to add solar/photovoltaic panels to their home supply with no repayment necessary. It will probably never completely replace large scale generation, well not until they have developed better storage capabilities for excess power that is generated when not needed. I live on the northern coast of France - the weather is similar to a line joining southern Wales to Norfolk, so not too dissimilar from much of England. I have 6 panels and although they are not generating very much excess electricity at the moment they are sufficient to keep much of my home powered up thus reducing my overall annual electricity bill. Summer is a different story, any excess power that I generate is sold automatically to the national grid generation companies.

      I was impressed by your story - I know I wouldn't have ever got round to installing a system myself, but I didn't mind using professionals to do the job which of course included the big-boy stuff like connecting to the national grid. However, I am now tempted to produce a stand-alone system to provide power for some external buildings, and I will look at it again as a project in Spring.

      --
      [nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 12, @01:38PM (4 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @01:38PM (#1429716) Journal
        If it takes government to roll out a stupid cheap solution at scale, then there's something wrong with the narrative. I'd start with the assertion that it is "stupid cheap". Looks like the huge problem presently is installation. I wonder if there's a nice engineering solution to that (which government might be able to contribute to BTW). Say put mount points on the roof so that the installers just attach the panels to the mount points and go on to the next job.
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Monday January 12, @03:40PM (3 children)

          by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @03:40PM (#1429724) Journal

          Say put mount points on the roof so that the installers just attach the panels to the mount points

          You are so far behind the technology. The latest development is that the tiles themselves are individual photovoltaic panels which all 'plug and generate' automatically. It is currently undergoing long-term trials in a handful of regions where they are being included in new-build homes - at no cost to the would-be home owners for either repair or replacement if the trial is unsuccessful.

          --
          [nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
      • (Score: 2) by ledow on Monday January 12, @01:43PM (1 child)

        by ledow (5567) on Monday January 12, @01:43PM (#1429717) Homepage

        I don't think governments should be expecting people to do it in their own houses, or subsidising "feeding back" to the grid.

        I think that if I can cover my energy costs with a tiny area of land, that the government should be able to do EVEN BETTER and far more reliable with just a handful of large solar farms, and they should be abandoning traditional energy generation in its favour (of course it will take decades but still... everything is still too slow).

        One of the reasons I don't bother to hook up to the grid is because I have no intention of using such schemes to sell any excess. Why should I be doing the job and then helping government, for a FRACTION of the cost of what that unit "apparently" takes to generate? No. I see no reason to help them. I'll generate what I can, use what I need, and then any excess will either go to waste or I'll put it into something else (e.g. heating hot water) and I won't even consider giving it back to the grid.

        And in the UK, we're charged based on the MOST EXPENSIVE method of generation. No matter how much solar we put in, the consumer is charged based on whatever is the most expensive price of CCGT (gas), coal, nuclear etc. That extra is supposed to go towards investment in the grid, but it clearly doesn't.

        And when feedback tariffs are a tiny fraction of the grid consumption costs... we're just being conned. I'm done with it. So my energy bills have dropped by 2/3rds since I moved into this house. That's partly the solar. Partly heatpumps (self-install). Partly sorting out the house (removing 1.5KW of lightbulbs! Filling gaps, sorting the existing insulation, etc.). This year I will have enough power to start looking at heating water. Beyond that... and maybe one more year of upgrades, I see no need for grid electric in my life.

        It's one of the reasons that I'm not just "installing some solar" but actively considering a retirement where I have absolutely zero reliance on utilities whatsoever.

        • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday January 12, @03:41PM

          by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12, @03:41PM (#1429725) Journal

          The pay me at an entirely different rate than you seem to be offered.

          --
          [nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(1)