top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 108 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks for giving us a bank's perspective, Business Insider.

[-] Jarix 30 points 2 weeks ago

This statement brought to you by Greed® and Capitalism™

[-] [email protected] 106 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

OH NO! IT'S WORKING! Someone think of the power companies!

[-] [email protected] 20 points 2 weeks ago

My rural electric coop limits the amount they will pay for end user generated solar power per month. They will never let the bill zero out or be negative.

[-] [email protected] 32 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

As long as that means there's a minimum fee that's going to maintain the grid, I think I'm okay with electric bills not going negative.

I was worried when Germany shut down their nuclear reactors but it's great news to hear they're embracing solar hard

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago

I shit down my reactor every time solar goes hard too.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah. Someone’s ass is going to be badly irradiated.

[-] hypnicjerk 65 points 2 weeks ago

"people are no longer paying for things they don't need! this is a disaster!"

[-] slazer2au 47 points 2 weeks ago

That sounds like a good problem to have.
Next step is get those power storage systems in to take advantage of negative pricing

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

Buy this battery, and the power company will pay you to charge it. Problem?

[-] cynar 2 points 2 weeks ago

That already happens on large scales. E.g. aluminium smelters will sync their smelters to the grid price.

[-] [email protected] 43 points 2 weeks ago

That sounds exactly like what a power company would say

[-] UncleGrandPa 35 points 2 weeks ago

Why Are they talking like it's a bad thing?

[-] stanleytweedle 20 points 2 weeks ago

Because it is a bad thing for the financial interests that Business Insider serves.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

In isolation, it's very obviously a bad thing, because it makes solar less profitable and might slow down the switch to renewables.

In a wider context, it can still be seen as a god thing as it means there has been a significant pivot to solar already and luckily it's also a very solvable problem. There just needs to be more energy storage.

[-] Shanedino 1 points 2 weeks ago

Won't energy storage help drive prices back up too?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I guess that depends. If the costs to invest in storage is cheaper long term than losing money from excess energy, then energy companies would lose less money and thus could offer cheaper prices. But it would definitely help decrease or get rid of negative prices.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 32 points 2 weeks ago

Negative pricing during peak solar hours has also been happening in California. Longer-term negative pricing has been happening for more than a decade in the Columbia River basin, due to high wind (and wind subsidies per MWh) and high hydroelectric flows.

It’s pretty simple. Negative pricing creates a strong incentive for energy storage. We need more energy storage to support more renewable energy. This was inevitable. I’d love to see a future where people driving their EVs get a pop-up alert: FREE CHARGING AVAILABLE FOR THE NEXT 35 minutes. And the charging network gets paid to take up excess load.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] TomMasz 31 points 2 weeks ago

Sell it to other EU countries. Why is this so hard?

[-] [email protected] 18 points 2 weeks ago

This is happening, to a degree, in most of Europe. Storage is the answer as described in the article. Unfortunately politics are not proactive, you need to break the system before something happens... and now the system is broken, yeah!!!

[-] Serinus 8 points 2 weeks ago

Most power is produced in the morning to early afternoon. Most power is used in the evening. We just don't have that much storage yet.

It's hard to say we're wasting energy though. There's a whole lot more solar power than what we're capturing, after all.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Also, It's no easy feat to sell lots of electricity far away.

It can be done and is being done, but it's not simple. If it were, Sahara would be covered in solar panels supplying electricity to Europe and Africa.

[-] TunaCowboy 22 points 2 weeks ago

Yo, businessinsider, suck my dick.

[-] [email protected] 18 points 2 weeks ago

I'd say that this a weird way to put it. We just have too few other sustainable plants - mainly wind - in our mix.

[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago

This is HORRIBLE! How will the JOB CREATORS (who keep laying off thousands of workers) make any MONEY for IMPROVEMENTS to give us CHEAPER and better product?

[-] [email protected] 12 points 2 weeks ago

When nuclear power was first adopted, it was championed as being "too cheap to meter".

That was never going to happen, and society will allways need people maintaining power infrastructure.

So there should be two charges on your power bill, one for power usage and a static one for use of power infrastructure.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago

That split system is how it works where I live. Obviously it's quite difficult to have competition for the infrastructure. So I can choose who delivers power (well, I mean it comes from the same grid. But different companies buying power from the same spot market charge you different amounts 🤷) but the infrastructure is a monopoly. Not only do we pay a fixed fee for the infrastructure, but also a transfer fee (and taxes, and also taxes on the taxes)

So in the end I pay more for the infrastructure part than the power consumption.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

The infrastructure one shouldn't be static either. I'm not fast charging an electric car to ride my non-electric bicycle, I'm not the reason the grid needs expensive upgrades so much...

It's being metered too now. In Belgium it's calculated on your max peak usage per month, averaged out over 12 months. You fastcharge 2 cars at once while running a washing machine, electric heater, vacuum, a bitcoinmine etc all at once: your infrastructure part of the bill rises. The only stupidness is that they put the "fictional minimum capacity used" too high, so you don't benefit from practically 0 capacity usage.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago

As predicted. The EU policies on solar will drive the same excess in every country. Germany is also going for hydrogen with a large hydrogen network already built and excess electricity would be a great source of power for green hydrogen production (which is vehemently inefficient, but if it's free...)

[-] A7thStone 10 points 2 weeks ago

One of the nuke plants I work at put in a hydrogen electrolyzer two years ago for this reason, and they are doubling it's size next year because it worked so well. Their "problem" is different than solar. Nukes constantly put it the same amount of power, so they feed the excess into the electrolyzer when demand is low, but it's basically the same idea. Electrolysis id inefficient, but if you're producing more energy than you can feed into the grid you may as well do something useful with it.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

Same reason I think carbon capture is worth looking into. It should not be a primary solution. I know some fossil fuel groups are behind it today. But in the not too distant future we are going to have excess green energy. Capturing carbon is worth seeing if we can scale to the point of being one of our tools. People are quick to scoff at the idea. Much like I've seen with hydrogen. But I'd rather try many options to reverse change that might not be perfect. Instead of hoping we transition power sources and that alone was enough.

[-] cynar 2 points 2 weeks ago

The 2 go well together. Hydrocarbons are an excellent carbon store. Carbon also stabilises the hydrogen, so it doesn't leak through the walls of your containers. Lastly, it can actually to replace oil in things like plastic production.

In a pinch, you can also burn the result, to get energy back.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Fedizen 8 points 2 weeks ago

this is like a bitcoin miner's wet dream.

[-] Ekpu 6 points 2 weeks ago

Nevertheless I am paying premium prices to charge my EV on public chargers in germany...

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Practically free solar power on the grid does not make the chargers and the infrastructure needed for them free. Tho yeah you're probably overpaying for it on days with high renewable power generation.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

well that’s because they’re preparing their secret new electric wonder weapons for wwiii

[-] Carrolade 6 points 2 weeks ago

Can't it just be transmitted over to France, Austria, Poland and Denmark?

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

This is great! No shortage of electricity in Germany thanks to green energy!

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

The risk is never this period. It's december-february, if there's the certainty of low solar production (during hours when it's needed least) and the possibility of low wind combined with a lengthy period of strong cold weather. That's when the fossil is needed...

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Can't they sell the surplus to neighbouring countries?

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

In fact we have to pay the neighboring countries to take the excess power in order to lighten the load on the grid. Switzerland and Austria will then use the power to pump up water to store the energy.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
131 points (92.3% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5120 readers
1 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!


1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith

Related communities:

Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago