this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
981 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

34976 readers
154 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Solar now being the cheapest energy source made its rounds on Lemmy some weeks ago, if I remember correctly. I just found this graphic and felt it was worth sharing independently.

Source: https://ourworldindata.org/cheap-renewables-growth

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Infynis@midwest.social 121 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Imagine how steep that line would be if the fossil fuel lobbies hadn't been fighting it tooth and nail all these years

[–] heeplr@feddit.de 61 points 1 year ago (1 children)

much more important: we'd be years ahead with storage technology.

[–] NattyNatty2x4@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I could be wrong but I don't think there's any evidence that the fossil fuel industry worked to suppress storage research/funding. Pretty much every IT industry has a huge interest in improving battery tech and energy storage in general, it's just that we've already hit all the low hanging fruit from a chemistry standpoint

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

I remember hearing stories about oil companies buying up battery patents. But this may be because they want to collect the royalties, not necessarily to suppress any kind of research. But like you said, I don't think there is any evidence... But if they were suppressing the technology, we probably would never know about it.

[–] bradorsomething@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 year ago

My dad was a VP at an oil major and has a literal story of an LNG tech being bought and shelved. Yet he’s still just like the people he complains about in that story. They’re a strange generation, these boomers.

[–] Contend6248@feddit.de 14 points 1 year ago

Gotta keep prices high yo

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It would be less steep because solar costs would have come down earlier.

[–] corship@feddit.de 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That would make it steeper, no?

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago

This part of the graph (2009-2019) would be less steep, because this sharp drop would have happened earlier - we'd be further along the curve