this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
445 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

62073 readers
5227 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 27 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (5 children)

Home solar indicates a massive management failure of public utilities. If it is more cost effective and more pleasant to generate your own electricity without any economies of scale, something is very wrong.

Source: I live in California where the “public” utility is an absolute disaster that charges $.60-$.70/kW/hr so anybody who can afford the upfront cost of solar has done so.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Microgeneration makes way more sense to me. If you generate the power where it is used without pollution, we should. The unfortunate piece is we have to many landlords who's interest are too divorced from their tenets to put up more microgeneration

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

These microinverters aren’t made of fairy dust. Doing this stuff at utility scale uses a lot less nasty minerals and chemicals.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 minutes ago

a mix of both is good, there's arguments for doing local co-generation. Where you essentially turn a community into it's own power plant, and when you're talking about things like micro inverters, the cost doesnt really change.

Is it more efficient to do it at a utility grid scale? Yes, does that make it overall better? Not really, you still have to deal with grid inefficiencies, and maintenance, and well, you still have to deal with installations, so the cost isn't that significant at the end of the day.

Solar is one of very few renewable energy sources that you can actually locally build and maintain on a small scale, no sense in removing that utility from it, that's part of the reason it's so popular.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 minutes ago

Transformers, power lines, roads, trucks, and maintenance teams to move from large scale plants to houses also doesn't grow on trees, but if maintenance in remote places doesn't happen it can burn a lot of them.

Sometimes large scale plants make sense, but as the back up too microgeneration where the costs of infrastructure to move from unpopulated to populus areas make sense.

I am also a fan of less inverted power in microgeneration though. More and more of power usage is DC anyways. The need to convert to AC as much IMHO, but that is my far more radical take

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Makes sense mathematically or you think makes sense?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 minutes ago

Both.

The reduction of infrastructure and leveraging existing buildings without reducing their existing utility vs converting a new space to be a dedicated power plant plus the infrastructure to move power from less populus (normal case because the cost of populus land is high due to demand) to more populus space.

I also idealogically support it because it makes more controllable by people and less controlled by an outside entity (a corporation/state).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago

God, I love living in a nuclear plant evacuation zone

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 hours ago

Shoot, my electric is like $.0625/KWH

But there is also another 75-100 bucks tacked on as fees. Tempting to go solar and disconnect from the grid. Even without selling energy back to the grid, I would break even. (Savings over 20 years ~200 bucks)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 hours ago

The rent seekers making everything worse again

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I live in an area where there is a monopoly of power supply by one of the worse polluters in American history, in a small area within a county there's an existing co-op power company that was basically grandfathered in because it's been in existence for so long while no other competitors are allowed in the area.

That co-op when I lived in the area was about half the cost of the monopoly company, a relative gets actually paid to be a member because they received their fathers account when he passed away and extra funds are distributed among all the members based on how long they've been with them (a little weird, but at least better than shareholders getting the profit).

You are absolutely right that the electric companies as a whole have failed, they've been allowed to amass too much influence and coverage while squashing any kind of competition. Why electrical needs aren't considered a national resource is mind baffling to me. Our country and citizens way of life would literally grind to a halt without it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 hours ago

Infrastructure should be public, with regulated access for wholesale and retail. It works. The grid operator needs to make money for large scale projects like interconnectors, modernising, maintenance and build.