• Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 hours ago

      How do the solar panels generate constant fees?

      You see, people need to pay for electricity. Generally speaking, they don’t get it for free. Thus the owner of the solar panels makes money.

        • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          42 minutes ago

          I mean… Isn’t there though? You do a one time investment, and then you earn money for 20 years with negligible operating costs.

          Shouldn’t every capitalist get a priapism from this idea?

    • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      58 minutes ago

      Also, that’s a year for the solar panels to get 1.5 TWh but the tanker probably makes that in a month.

  • xxce2AAb@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    8 hours ago

    And with battery prices falling, the intermittency issues that made LNG useful despite the drawbacks is gradually becoming much less of a problem too.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      This is dead wrong (edit: kind of; see below). The dollars per million BTU for natural gas this February was $3.62, or 32% of the figure cited in the infographic. You’re thinking of oil.

      Solar is clearly more sustainable, economical, independent, and most importantly livable than LNG, but I still need to call out flawed assumptions on my side where I see them.


      Edit: I actually have no idea how this infographic reached its $11 assumption. Wholesale prices for natural gas were $4.88 per MMBtu in 2024. Emphasis on “wholesale”, but since this infographic doesn’t deign to cite any sources other than “Ember” (this Ember?), I have no idea what figure it means.


      Edit 2: After doing way too much digging into how global LNG prices are measured because this infographic barely even leaves breadcrumbs, they might’ve been using a metric like the JKMc1 (“LNG Japan/Korea Marker PLATTS Future”) (edit 3: or the TFAc1). The prices of natural gas (transported via pipeline) and LNG (transported via ship) are going to be quite different, and there’s no consistent “global average price” for LNG. The best you can really do is use some sort of proxy, for which it appears the JKMc1 is a reasonable one for reasons I don’t fully understand yet. That was approximately $11 in 2024 (it was actually seemingly higher, but close enough; probably close but separate figures) and was $10.73 this February. It was $15.92 March 1, showing at least in East Asia that LNG is about 50% more expensive than last month. I don’t know how well that applies to Lemmy’s predominantly American and European userbase, however (well, I know the US now supplies about 60% of Europe’s LNG and that American natural gas is currently cheaper).

      God, it’s so frustrating that this infographic barely cites anything. Anyway, to the person I responded to: you were at least somewhat right; the closing of the Strait seems to have clearly impacted East Asia… somehow. Iran and Qatar are the 3rd and 6th largest natural gas producers, respectively (no clue about LNG shipments), but I feel like I’ll end up with a doctoral thesis on the geopolitics of LNG prices by 2030 from knowing basically nothing if I don’t stop here. What all this does tell me is that an estimate of “global average price for LNG” means very little when prices per MMBtu (liquified or otherwise) seem to vary so heavily by region.

      • Rimu@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 hours ago

        It’s probably just AI generated bs.

        Generally, solar takes 10+ years to break even in a residential situation, I can’t see how things would be 10x cheaper at the TWh scale.

        • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 hours ago

          When energy prices went crazy in the UK a while back I heard of some people getting under a year payback times. My energy usage is much lower than theirs so it would take me quite a bit longer though. A lot of the costs are fairly static.

          At this point a battery alone might be a better investment. Cheaper install and using off peak rates to charge could drop my per unit costs from 24 to 8. But I think even that would take years to pay for myself. It’s also annoying because the grid should already be fucking doing this! Why should I have to do it myself in a setup that is going to be far less efficient in costs than doing it at grid scales with bulk buying of batteries?

          The tech exists today, I can buy it.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I don’t agree with the “AI-generated” claim. Gavin Mooney appears to be a real person working with Kaluza, an Australian company which presents itself as:

          The Energy Intelligence Platform

          An electrified future will be built on data intelligence.

          We turn energy complexity into growth opportunity so energy companies can make a cleaner, smarter system work for everyone.

          (So a financial conflict of interest, but one I happen to agree with.) I just attribute it to a “shitty, token attempt at sourcing because nobody really checks these things” mindset.

        • eleitl@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          For DYI plug-in small scale solar and meter running backwards (balkonkraftwerk scenario) for 0.3 eur/kWh break even is less than 2 years.

          DYI larger/meter not running backwards but with battery buffering it’s longer. Anything else requires a licensed electrician, and that does set you back.

          • Rimu@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Maybe.

            I can’t find any gavinmooney profiles on any socials… even x dot com.

  • 5715@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Sorry, but 9.1 million MMBtu are a lot less useful than 1 GW of solar panels: machines vs fuel