this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
131 points (92.8% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5324 readers
1 users here now

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


RULES:

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
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 33 points 6 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months 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.

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

It's a sign of a grid stability issue. A power grid needs to balance input, output and losses. An imbalance in either direction is bad.

A negative price means the grid is worried about a collapse. They are willing to pay sinks to come online NOW, or for production to go offline.

The solution isn't less renewables however! It's more storage, and better smarts on the grid. Most grids are poorly designed for renewables, and their loads characteristics. That needs to change rapidly.