146

Solar energy could power all health facilities in poorer countries and save lives, experts say (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 11 months ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/world@lemmy.world

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 22 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] otter@lemmy.ca 11 points 11 months ago

People are misunderstanding the point of this article, and similar articles

This is specifically talking about instability in the power grid, and outages causing risks to lives. It's meant to be an additional support to the grid, and a step towards renewables.

That is also true for the bigger point. Solar, wind, geothermal, hydro, nuclear, etc. would all play a role. We don't need to pick one option for a region, let alone one option for the whole world.

These hospitals would benefit from some redundancy, and this could be one (supposedly easy and immediate) way to do that

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

All healthcare facilities in poorer countries could be electrified using solar energy within five years for less than $5bn, putting an end to the risk of life from power outages, experts will argue at Cop28 this month.

“I would like the international community to commit to a deadline and funding to electrify all healthcare facilities,” said Salvatore Vinci, an adviser on sustainable energy at the World Health Organization and a member of its Cop28 delegation.

Electricity is the lifeblood of a functioning healthcare facility, not only powering devices such as ventilators and cardiac monitors, but providing basics amenities such as lighting.

While lack of lighting puts maternal and surgery patients at the biggest immediate risk, an unreliable energy source makes long-term treatments, such as kidney dialysis, untenable.

As the burden of chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) rises in the global south, the strain on poorly electrified facilities will increase.

“Before we implemented the solar energy system the mortality rate in [one of our hospitals] was between 35 and 45 per 1,000 deliveries [of babies],” said Mohammed Gana of Niger state’s health ministry, a former colleague of Amadi.

The original article contains 769 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] interceder270@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Yes, until the sun goes down and they have to rely on stored energy they don't have.

experts

You mean the solar industry shills trying to push the narrative that we should spend money on solar above anything else?

Arm yourselves with knowledge.

[-] palal@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago

Would you rather rely on solar energy or no energy at all?

[-] SCB@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

Here are the words before "experts." I bolded the part you seem to have missed.

All healthcare facilities in poorer countries could be electrified using solar energy within five years for less than $5bn, putting an end to the risk of life from power outages,

[-] RagingRobot@lemmy.world -5 points 11 months ago

Batteries are a thing. Even large ones for houses or businesses.

Add that to your arsenal!

[-] 5BC2E7@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Then perhaps they should start with batteries if the problem is loss of power

edit: i guess people care more about increasing the use of solar power than the lives that could be saved with additional batteries in more hospitals with the same investment.

[-] interceder270@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Are batteries good enough to meet the needs of entire populations?

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca -5 points 11 months ago

Well, Australia built a 300 MW battery facility, so depends on how many people you are supplying and how big the storage is.

And you can get home battery systems that can provide upwards of 2 days worth of electricity.

The problem isn't whether it can be done. At this point it's just a logistics problem.

[-] interceder270@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

How expensive was that facility?

How much are the battery systems?

It's not just a 'logistics' problem. That's the saleman talking point that you're buying into.

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

You asked if they could meet the needs of a population. I pointed to real world examples of them doing this.

Every system has costs, and renewables with battery systems gets cheaper to operate over time. Unlike fuel, as that would be the other type of power generation.

Also not buying into a 'salesman's talking point', as I'm talking about the capabilities of technologies.

Something you might not be aware of, but is taught to people who fix things. There are 2 kinds of expensive when it comes to systems, expensive to develop and install, and then there's the expensive to maintain. Fuel falls into the second category.

What's the long term cost of sucking back exhaust?

[-] interceder270@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

If the costs of energy storage and generation are prohibitive with solar, then people will be forced to use additional methods in order to meet their needs.

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca -1 points 11 months ago

You sound like someone who hasn't actually talked to people about how the systems work.

What's the cost of continuous operation of fuel based systems over the lifespan of the system?

[+] palal@lemmy.ml -12 points 11 months ago

There's not enough solar production capacity to sustain China's demand, nevermind the world's.

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

One type of source is not even close to ideal. The grid should be diverse and decentralised.

Your idea is stunted.

[-] palal@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Who's meeting the demand of emerging economies for solar panels?

It's not the US, who's steadfastly adopted an economic protectionist stance.

It's not China, who can't keep up with their domestic demand for solar panels.

It's not the EU, who's too stuck in a regulatory quagmire to meaningfully invest in solar panel manufacturing.

It's not India, who, like China, can't keep up with their domestic demand.

It's also not going to be ASEAN, because they too are supply-constrained.

Solar panels don't magically appear.

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

What is your short sighted hardon for solar panels about? To me it shows that you aren't informed on the subject and think that a logistics problem is a vaild detractor from the use of the technology.

Windmills, hydro, geothermal, and gasp nuclear.

Like, fuck, you seem like you would walk into an apple store see a lack of Iphones and then delcare "there aren't enough phones available", while ignoring androids.

[-] palal@lemmy.ml -1 points 11 months ago

Let me just deploy nuclear, hydro, geothermal, and gigantic wind turbines in an emerging country.

Oh. Oops.

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

You really don't understand engineering do you?

Hydro, windmill, and geothermal have multiple different levels of size. These technologies are actually ideal for developing nations, as they can build their grid without fossil fuels.

Nuclear is incredibly safe when following IAEA guidelines and not a being chucklefuck like you.

I don't know what you are specifically arguing for, but you definitely aren't making your case or one against renewables and non fossil fuels.

[-] palal@lemmy.ml -3 points 11 months ago

Let me just build a 20 billion dollar nuclear reactor in a country without a functioning grid.

Oh.

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Oh, you don't actually listen to people and pretends they don't have an understanding of the world.

Have fun yelling into the void.

[-] palal@lemmy.ml -2 points 11 months ago

The article's talking about solar. Read it. Understand it.

this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2023

146 points (95.1% liked)

World News

38977 readers

1925 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.