this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5288 readers
957 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Access options:

I think that what's not in this article, but needs to be, is that rooftop solar in the rest of the world costs about 1/4 what it does in the US. Getting US prices down to where they are elsewhere would do wonders for closing this big gap.

top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

The article is basically about economies of scale.

Large solar farms are much cheaper to set up per kilowatt hour of electricity produced than home-based solar panels.

But large solar farms are generally owned by corporations.

So the issue isn't solar but again capitalism. If we had a socialized or cooperative solar farm people could invest in, rather than putting panels on their homes, we would all be better off and get our solar for cheaper.

Of course, we could just socialize the electric companies. And considering the climate crisis is an emergency (hurricanes for example), it would be within the powers of the federal government in the United States to do this.

But, the fossil fuel industry would throw a fit, and we'd see somebody like President Trump get elected because campaign donations are really what tend to determine our elections.

So, the first step should be socializing the fossil fuel industry. And then smaller electric companies.

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 6 points 1 month ago

Part of the problem in the US is that residential solar installers have been allowed to run scams and provide no customer support. NPR did a great podcast on it: The Dark Side of Rooftop Solar

[–] silence7 5 points 1 month ago

It's not just that; residential rooftop in the US is about 4x the cost of doing it in other countries, and would be cost-competitive with utility-scale if it was as cheap as it is elsewhere.

[–] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As with most issues in the US, this seems like another battle between individual needs and corporate profit incentives. Rooftop solar costs more than a solar farm because of economies of scale, but also because the more capacity and storage individuals have, there will be less and less demand to have utility companies act as the arbiter of our energy supply. That’s not in the best interest of utility companies, but is absolutely in the best interest of consumers and the environment.

My parents got scammed into leasing solar panels, so their energy bill is tiny, but their monthly lease payment is as much as their electric bill used to be. Who does that help? The corporation, not the consumer. Once storage capacity has parity with solar power generation, particularly in terms of cost and size, every house/apartment should come standard with a battery that can store any excess power without needing to be connected to the grid. Power companies will really hate that, so they’ll probably do all they can to keep control and keep rooftop prices high.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm planning to lease rooftop solar and from what I'm hearing from others who have it, it's anywhere from 30% to 60% cheaper than what they were paying before (and that includes the $15 fee) depending on their roofline.

I totally agree with what you're saying, though. I just don't want people avoiding looking into it because they think it's not a money saver when it might be. You HAVE to get quotes. The companies will give you all the number estimates up front based on map data and pictures

[–] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That’s a really good point. It completely depends on the locale and companies involved, don’t let me discourage anyone from looking into getting solar. I think my parents got into it a little too early, so there were very few options, and they’re locked in to a shitty plan now. Regardless, solar is still probably the best option for most people.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, there's a lot of solar companies around here now so I'm getting quotes from several to compare.

One caveat I should have added is that I have no idea if any of them have home batteries which definitely affects both the lease fee and your usage of utility electricity (no/small battery = paying for electricity at night). I am hoping to get a battery that will cover the essentials for at least 3 days but I don't know if it's cost-prohibitive

[–] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

Yeah, adding a battery to the plan was totally cost-prohibitive for my parents when they were getting started, but I'd assume those costs have come down a good amount. It'll still probably be a big expense, but the math might work out better these days.