[tock]

We know. There are many reasons why countries choose more polluting sources of energy. Part of which is costs. The world runs on incentives. Maybe rich countries like the US can subsidize clean energy for poorer countries like India. Because consumption is definitely not going to come down.

[mulmen]

You say you know then directly contradict yourself by bringing up consumption again.

The United States already supports clean energy in India. India is not “poor”. It has a larger economy than the United Kingdom. 46.3% of India’s installed capacity is renewable and that mix is growing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_India

[tock]

> You say you know then directly contradict yourself by bringing up consumption again.

It's not a contradiction. Increasing consumption today will mean increase of greenhouse emissions. Any increase of consumption today still involves some increase in fossil fuels for many reasons like grid stability.

> The United States already supports clean energy in India.

They work together on projects. AFAIK the US doesn't subsidise anything for India or other countries.

> India is not “poor”.

It is. Its per capita GDP is $2,878. The US is $85,809. Thats a 30x difference. It is an incredibly poor country.

> It has a larger economy than the United Kingdom.

Philippines and Norway have the same total GDP too. It's silly to consider them equally rich.

> 46.3% of India’s installed capacity is renewable and that mix is growing.

Hell yeah! Hopefully it keeps growing. It's kinda hilarious that India is one of the few countries who will meet the Paris accord commitments. The US is still stuck at 23% and isn't even close to meeting its commitments.

[mulmen]

People in India are poor but that doesn’t mean the country is poor. The Indian government has resources to build out renewables as evidenced by them doing exactly that. The United States does not provide much direct funding but you are the only one suggesting that is necessary.

[tock]

> People in India are poor but that doesn’t mean the country is poor.

Please stop. By your logic any country with a lot of people is rich. I already pointed out Norway vs Philippines for you. It is dirt poor by all numbers. Their extreme poverty rate just dropped recently. Their annual budget is 1/10th of the US with 5x more people. Energy needs per person will grow by over 10x in the next few decades to match the US. There is a long way to go.

> The Indian government has resources to build out renewables as evidenced by them doing exactly that.

I'm actually very impressed to see India sticking to the Paris accords. What exactly is the excuse of the worlds greatest superpower? Maybe a century of polluting the world isn't enough.

> The United States does not provide much direct funding but you are the only one suggesting that is necessary.

You're right. It needs to first fix itself lol. Maybe ask India for help :p Then again if you don't understand why the rich countries need to try and incentivise the world to move faster to renewables then you don't understand the urgency of the matter.

[nradov]

The notion of subsidizing a foreign country that literally has nuclear weapons is ludicrous. US voters would never stand for that.

[tock]

No voter would. Humans would rather die from climate change than try and work together. Our innate tribalism is what makes solutions to this problem hard.

[usr1106]

That seems to be a very American perspective. Several European countries have or had Green Parties being part of the government. A German Land (state in US terminology) has a had Green prime minister for 10 years. One could debate whether they have made sufficient impact, but it's certainly very far from "no voter".

[mulmen]

Why the dig at Americans? This is nothing more than tock’s misinformed personal opinion. The United States does work with India to develop green energy.

California is famous for green initiatives and my state of Washington trades clean energy with Canada. I’d be shocked if we are unique in that.

These agreements have been in place for generations. It’s obvious they have voter approval.

[tock]

> Why the dig at Americans?

America deserves the dig. Pulling out of the Paris accords. 22% renewable usage compared to the 60% of Germany. And now climate change denial.

> The United States does work with India to develop green energy.

lmao.

> It’s obvious they have voter approval.

I mean they did just vote in the guy who calls climate change a hoax.

[tock]

I forgot about the Green parties! Good to see them having such support!

[usr1106]

Unfortunately support has not been growing for 10 years or so. Nowadays far right parties are making the headlines in most European countries.

[nradov]

And this is one of the reasons why the German economy has stagnated for years.

https://swiftpress.com/book/kaput/

[immibis]

Solar energy is currently the cheapest form of energy, cheaper than coal, cheaper than natural gas. You know the conspiracy theories about how the oil companies are keeping perpetual motion machines hidden? Solar panels are literally that. With the caveat that they only work in sunlight. So they're not great when you need energy at night. But even if you triple your costs to account for only working 8 hours a day, they're cheaper than anything else.

[nradov]

For a lot of industrial processes, being limited to running during sunny periods would cause costs to go up by a lot more than a factor of three. The grid scale storage necessary to make solar power work for heavy industry remains extremely expensive and capacity limited. Costs are starting to come down but it will take decades.

[specialist]

Solar + battery is now the cheapest. Except in the USA, where natural gas is heavily subsidized. Happily, deploying new gas plants is constrained by supply of turbines. So solar + battery wins by default.

[nradov]

Batteries (plus all the other associated equipment and maintenance) are hardly cheap in the quantities needed to keep heavy industry running 24×7. Battery storage holds promise for the future but so far it's only been used on relatively small demonstration projects. And some of those have been plagued by fires and outages.

[testdelacc1]

> relatively small demonstration projects.

California has got really good at building giant batteries - At peak times they provide 30% of the state’s electricity (https://www.economist.com/united-states/2025/05/22/californi...) - The Economist.

California is the 4th largest economy in the world by the way. A bit larger than a “small demonstration”.

[specialist]

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/solar-electricity-e...

https://www.volts.wtf/p/solarstorage-is-so-much-farther-alon...

What's your next objection?

[nradov]

I don't have any objection, I'm just stating a reality: it's going to take decades to build out enough battery storage to make renewable energy practical for the base load required for heavy industry. This stuff doesn't scale up quickly regardless of costs or incentives. The places where battery storage is used today generally have high electricity prices and low industrial capacity. If we want to have cheap stuff then we need to have cheap electricity (and cheap industrial heat) available to make that stuff 24×7.

[reliabilityguy]

> Solar energy is currently the cheapest form of energy, cheaper than coal, cheaper than natural gas.

Cheaper before the incentives?

[mulmen]

Yes. Even if you count the fossil fuel subsidies.

[reliabilityguy]

Can you share the source? I’m very curious.

[mulmen]

First search result: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wind-and-solar-en...

[s1artibartfast]

For some reason, these savings never cascade down to the consumer. Solar energy is typically a surcharge, not a cost savings.

When I log into my utility account, I can opt into solar generated power for X $/kwh more, not less.

[immibis]

Solar is also the most democratic, as long as you can tolerate it not working at night. I encourage you to experiment with a small portable system. I did - a 30W panel, 9Ax12V SLA battery, off-the-shelf car inverter, packet of crimp connectors, spool of wire, crimp tool, the cheapest over-voltage shutoff controller I could find (just search for solar charge controller - although lead-acid chemistries are moderately tolerant to charging out of bounds, unlike lithium, which is why I suggest lead-acid).

[mulmen]

I really think home battery power is going to be a standard feature in the near future. Like indoor plumbing and central HVAC.

My utility just adopted time of use billing and by my napkin math a battery system with one day of capacity will pay for itself in 5 years. And that’s without solar at all. The additional solar panel cost would pay off in under 3 years. And I have cheap electricity.

[tock]

Yeah main issue is elasticity. But otherwise promising. China is adding insane solar capacity yearly so I guess they see it as promising too.