this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
538 points (91.0% liked)

World News

38977 readers
2418 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] echo64@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This article is about profitability, not cost to net zero. They are very different things. It also ignores the cost of scale, go all in on say solar today and that doesn't make more panels available, the increased demand would raise prices and suddenly its not so profitable.

Nothing is as simple and easy as people want it to be.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

However, the researchers show that in terms of cost and speed, renewable energy sources have already beaten nuclear and that each investment in new nuclear plants delays decarbonization compared to investments in renewable energies. “In a decarbonizing world, delays increase CO2 emissions,” the researchers pointed out.

They talk about profit to get the attention of money people, but the ultimate goal is decarbonization. Hell, the title of the source article is "Why investing in new nuclear plants is bad for the climate".

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Two of the researchers are economists, and the third is an environmental economist. I'd rather get my opinions on decarbonization and nuclear energy from actual scientists and people who run research reactors.

It's just money people talking to money people. I don't trust an economist to make a value judgment on science when all they're looking at is profit. I actually actively distrust them. They're interested in investments and profit -- nuclear has an undeserved stigma and it makes its profit in the long term, not the short term that they all seem to love.

[–] gnygnygny@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Solar price still decreasing and the demand never been so high. That's the faster energy deployment.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Demand has never been so high. If we wanted to go all in on solar and get to net zero on it, that demand would be 100x higher.

Right now, the driving reason behind solar prices going down is to encourage more demand. If that demand were to jump suddenly, then that driving reason is gone, and suddenly it makes more sense to charge more as supply can't keep up.

Maybe you'll understand the point better now.

[–] gnygnygny@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was speaking about the market, the solar panel price. Many developing countries now invest in solar power to meet their energy needs with the cost of solar energy technologies decreasing and the availabilities of governments subsidies. The Ukrainian conflict may have an impact on the market but nothing is sure.

The path to Net Zero is mainly Solar and Wind. https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right now, the driving reason behind solar prices going down is to encourage more demand. If that demand were to jump suddenly, then that driving reason is gone, and suddenly it makes more sense to charge more as supply can’t keep up.

[–] rusticus@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Doubling down on ignorance is unbecoming.

[–] rusticus@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

You clearly don’t understand macroeconomics

[–] Numberone@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If people internalized that last line of yours we could get shit done. ..

[–] rusticus@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wait, do you really expect us to believe that increasing solar will increase its price? Have you looked at the cost of solar over the past decade? Do you understand the economy of scale as it applies to all 3 (solar, wind, and batteries) because I don’t think you do.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

my dude, did you really need to make three individual comment replies all to me