[toasty228]

Not to sound like an ass but that's your typical HNer hot take on a topic they don't know anything about (which is 99% of topics outside of tech).

I know that I don't know jack shit about the topic, but I can already tell you that if you do what you describe you'll quickly learn about why grids have frequencies, what generate these frequencies, and what happens when they drift.

[tapoxi]

Yeah that's what an inverter does, the "tie them to the grid" part. Every solar system has them, and they can islanding or not.

[toasty228]

> Yeah that's what an inverter does

No, that's not what an "inverter" does, not most inverters at least, you need grid forming inverters and batteries for that... which is my whole point, you don't just take them out of the crate and plug them in the grid, that only works if most of the grid is powered by legacy plants stabilising it.

Do you describe nuclear power plants as "just putting two rocks next to each other and plugging them in the grid"

[tapoxi]

You don't need a grid forming inverter to re-synchronize with the grid, you only need a grid forming inverter if you need a complete cold start or to support a grid island.

In the context of our discussion, adding more capacity, that's exactly what's needed here. We're not replacing 100% of energy sources with solar, we are replacing energy sources with _renewables_ which is hydro, solar, wind, arguably nuclear as well.

Even extending your argument to "well we need to only have solar" then you need a grid forming inverter with batteries. That's not a massive increase in complexity or time and supports the "just tie them to the grid" statement.

Trying to use the analogy of a nuclear power plant, which requires 10-15 years (including permitting), is ridiculous. A solar plant is 2-5 (including permitting) - by comparison.