Comment by mantas

Comment by mantas 9 hours ago

Technically I could see some reasons. Grids need serious upgrades to support personal solar properly. Which is €€€ and, if end-customers would have to foot the bill themselves, very few people would install solar at home. On top of that, at least in my whereabouts solar is receives a fuckton of subsidies. In the long run lower energy prices will pay back those subsidies for the society, but for now I could see why some people ain't happy to foot the bill. Especially when it's usually better-off people installing solar. While poor people end up partially footing the bool.

Last but not least, Chinese domination in modern solar equipment is mind-boggling. At least when I was installing solar, buying western-made would have been much more expensive, to the point that it wouldn't be worth to go through.

P.S. I got solar on the roof myself. „Free“ electricity is damn nice.

soared 8 hours ago

This is a good reply since it feels accurate but generally is not, which captures the sentiment of those opposing solar.

1. “The grid needs an upgrade”. This is true regardless of whether solar exists or not. Energy demand, battery technology, etc have all changed but the grid has not kept pace (on purpose). End customers may foot the bill, again, regardless of solar.

2. Solar does receive more subsidies, intentionally. This is how you quickly drive adoption of new technology and stop the old technology (gas/coal) from using its market power to stop new technology growth. Subsidies jumpstart the switch to solar, which in the long term is good for our country (export more energy), our planet, and for individuals who want energy independence.

3. Taxes aren’t flat rates, so when you make more you pay more progressively. A poor person pays significantly less than a rich person does for solar subsidies.

4. Chinese domination isn’t a reason for not using solar. If we want to change that, the US should motivate buyers to buy US (subsidize), increase import costs (targeted, time limited tariffs), or promote growth of the industry (education, research, etc).

Reply View 2 replies

opo 5 hours ago

>2. Solar does receive more subsidies, intentionally. …
>3. Taxes aren’t flat rates, so when you make more you pay more progressively. A poor person pays significantly less than a rich person does for solar subsidies.
Yes, subsidies are done to help drive adoption. The key is that the subsidies should go where they can do the most good. Money is limited and is fungible - a dollar spent subsidizing utility solar will go much, much, further to decarbonizing the grid than a dollar spent subsidizing rooftop residential solar. It is understandable that anyone getting free money thinks it is good. But if the less well off people (renters, etc.) learn that they are paying a great deal more for power to subsidize wealthier residents (when that money could have gone MUCH further if spent on other solar projects) - it isn’t hard to imagine that might lower enthusiasm for government subsidizing the move away from fossil fuels. This sort of wealth transfer to the more wealthy actually hurts everyone in the long run. The goal should be to decarbonize the grid - not implement some kind of a reverse Robinhood scheme.

Reply View | 0 replies
mantas 8 hours ago

I am not an electrician, but big problem with home-solar is grid not being bi-directional. In my whereabouts it's common to have good „down“ power, but no permit for „up“ back to the grid. Which makes it not worth it for home users. Batteries make it somewhat better, but it's still far from ideal.
For big commercial arrays, the grid used to have main lines to certain old school plants. Now for solar new major lines are needed to middle-of-nowhere locations to connect solar and wind farms. While old-school plants were more concentrated and closer to major locations, it was less costly than major lines out-there and to many more locations. And, obviously, investors into solar/wind ain't willing to food those bills.
The problem with solar subsidies, especially when it comes to home solar, is that they're very skewed to favor better-off people.
As for Chinese, yes, something needs to be done. But for now I kinda understand people who ain't happy subsidies are ending up in China.

Reply View | 0 replies

FrustratedMonky 9 hours ago

Isn't US made equipment facing the headwinds of the US being anti-solar. It seems more like the US shot itself in the foot by letting the Chinese get the lead on this technology. And by subsidizing, and maybe regulating buying US, we could support our domestic industry.

Seems like all over the place we are giving up and letting China win the technology race. Robots, cars, solar, all the future tech is in trouble.

I don't know why anybody is against clean air. It makes no sense.

Reply View 2 replies

adabyron 5 hours ago

The US has invested a lot of money, lives, political capital & environment to become a big oil & gas producer.
One of it's potential weapons against China is that China imports most of it's oil & gas. China also has a few easy geographical choke points to prevent it from importing gas. Solar & wind plus electrical vehicles destroy this advantage.
So China has many reasons to push in this direction while the US is doubling down on it's bet, even while other historical oil countries like Saudi Arabia are diversifying away from oil.
It should also be noted that many Chinese companies are selling at a loss or very low margin, especially the electric car companies. https://www.reuters.com/investigations/china-is-sending-its-...

Reply View | 0 replies
mantas 9 hours ago

As an euro, here it's the same. Even though (most of?) europe is pro-solar.

Reply View | 0 replies