• Kompressor
    link
    fedilink
    English
    174 months ago

    “Well you see there is generations and generations of ghouls that have made their entire livelihood off the established and continued monopolization of vital resources such as water and power and for some reason the rest of us haven’t gotten together and solved that clear and obvious threat to everyone and everything collectively, I know I don’t get it either.”

  • okgurl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    454 months ago

    oh no the power is too cheap. God forbid our trillions of tax dollars go to something actually useful and good for the people oh well looks like we will get the F-47 instead and pay it to private military contracts 😂

    • Bakkoda
      link
      fedilink
      English
      154 months ago

      Supply side Jesus says put your faith in the wisdom of the CEO.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    344 months ago

    Why not do something with all that power? In the past there were some projects where they pumped water upstream when there was too much power on the grid. Then on low energy times, the water was released making energy again. Or make hydrogen (I think it was hydrogen). Or do AI stuff

    I also seen energie waste machines that basically use a lot of power to do nothing. Only the get rid of all that extra energy so the power grid won’t go down/burn.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      34 months ago

      Some hobbyists turn up the set point on their electric water heater to store the power as domestic hot water.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        24 months ago

        Now that’s a good idea! I have a couple of ideas to automate that. Crank the hot water balls out during peak production hours, but cut it off at night. Something like that?

        Sounds like a deal for power companies that change prices during on/off peak hours. But wait, am I backwards? Typically peak power costs more? Anyone?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          You seem confused.

          Peak Solar hours and peak utility rate hours are different. Often both are shorted to “peak hours”.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      44 months ago

      We still have hydroelectric turbines that can reverse themselves to pump water to a higher elevation reservoir to store surplus energy. We call them pump-gens at my job. The problem is that, as nearby areas develop, that water gets reserved for other things, so they can’t pump it back up because it’s needed further downstream for irrigation or communities or whatever.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      114 months ago

      Or use it on large scale computing for protein folding simulations, or something.

      And yeah, gravity batteries is the best I think we have, with water being the most common medium with pumped-storage hydroelectricity. But the scales of the things are kind of incongruent and… Autoincorrect actually got it right trying to correct that to inconvenient. Still really cool. I think we may need some innovations to cut down on scale issues though. Although it looks like the total power storage available is about one day worth of power for the US in PSH, I’m curious if the instantaneous output is sufficient for the grid and how spread out the storage locations are, as I somewhat doubt they’re often in flatter regions. All in all, I’m not a power engineer, I just know a few and I should bug them sometime.

    • partial_accumen
      link
      fedilink
      English
      104 months ago

      Why not do something with all that power?

      This is a relatively new problem, so it will take awhile for the market to respond to make industries optimized to take advantage of this.

      I saw an article a few months ago (couldn’t find it quickly just now) about a small manufacturing company (metals maybe?) that set up shop specifically to run during the excess power events. So its starting to happen, but its not going to be a perfect fit. It means spending lots up front for infra, but only being able to use it a few hours a day cost effectively.

      In the past there were some projects where they pumped water upstream when there was too much power on the grid. Then on low energy times, the water was released making energy again.

      This is already done with pump hydro. But this needs existing hydroelectric infrastructure to take advantage of. Even then there are usually holding ponds upstream and they themselves have limited capacity.

      Or make hydrogen (I think it was hydrogen).

      This is being done too at small scales right now. There’s difficulties with it. Hydrogen really sucks to try store and transport. The H2 molecule is so small it leaks out through valves and gaskets that are fine for containing nearly all other gases and liquids. So this means the gear needed is hugely more expensive up front. What a few are doing is using the hydrogen to quickly make Ammonia (NH3), which is much easier to store and contain. However, the efforts doing this are still fairly small.

      Or do AI stuff

      AI aside, this is one place I haven’t seen develop yet. That being: cheaper compute costs during excess power events.

      I suspect its the same problem for the manufacturing. It means spending money on expensive compute infrastructure but only able to use it during the excess power events. As in, the compute in place is already running flat out at full capacity all the time. There’s no spare hardware to use the excess power. If you had spare hardware, you’d add it to your fleet and run it 24/7 making more money.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      04 months ago

      Why not do something with all that power?

      Because profits are a result of deprivation not progress.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      Historically, people have worked due to real scarcity in order to meet their basic survival needs. We don’t face such scarcity in the modern, developed world.

      I’ve often conceptualized UBI or other such schemes (e.g. negative income tax) to provide a basic, spartan standard of living. If you want luxury, you need to work for it. Of course what constitutes “luxury” might fluctuate over time. And in times of greater abundance, UBI might be more generous while being scaled back in times of scarcity. If too many people opt out of working and only collect UBI, then real scarcity may indeed become and issue requiring such programs to be reduced.

      But the point here is that we produce FAR more than what people actually need. This “must work and produce for the sake of it” leads to a lot of make-work in the form of things like artificial scarcity, planned obsolescence, or people producing and selling solutions in search of problems. The amount of actual fucking trash produced is mind-boggling. Something like fast fashion that produces low quality apparel only intended to be worn a few times has an enormous impact on our environment.

      Imagine a world where we worked towards quality and making sure that actual needs were being met rather than being fixated on highest profitability at the exclusion of everything else. A more collaborative society instead of a hyper-competitive “winner take all” freak show.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      The same way arts and crafts were invented - humans want to do things whenever they aren’t stressed out of their minds.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14 months ago

        Who wants to clear out sewage pipes? Who wants to do underwater welding? Who wants to work on an oil rig?

        A lack of stress isn’t going to get anyone to do jobs like these.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      34 months ago

      Capitalism isn’t “when people get paid for working.” And people getting paid for doing a job isn’t the problem highlighted in this post. In any case, there are any number of ways people might be motivated to do something useful.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        This problem goes beyond capitalism. Even in a communist, socialist, anarchical, or whatever system you have to figure out a way to get people to spend a good portion of their lives doing things they don’t typically want to do.

        In this case how do you get hundreds of people to continue working at these power grid companies if they’re in the red and eventually run out of money? People won’t stay around without a paycheck.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      44 months ago

      Economists have long forgotten that society has been around a hell of a lot longer than capitalism.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      74 months ago

      A big flaw in German energy policy that has done a great job in expanding renewables, includes not giving its industry variable rates, that lets them invest in batteries, and schedule production more seasonally, or if they have reduced demand due to high product prices from high energy costs, just have work on the good days.

      Using EVs as grid balancers can be an extra profit center for EV owners with or without home solar. Ultra cheap retail daytime rates is the best path to demand shifting. Home solar best path to removing transmission bottlenecks for other customers. Containerized batteries and hydrogen electrolysis as a service is a tariff exempt path at moving storage/surplus management throughout the world for seasonal variations, but significantly expanding renewables capacity without risking negative pricing, and making evening/night energy cheaper to boot.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          24 months ago

          Batteries for something like this would be something like a lake on top of, and at the bottom of, a mountain.

          Then you use excess power to move water up, and when you need power, the water comes down through a turbine.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        204 months ago

        Not saying we shouldn’t do both, but in reality waiting to destroy capitalism before fixing the grid just means you have too much theory and not enough praxis.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        64 months ago

        Honestly, this attitude is downright suicidal for our species right now. Capitalism took centuries to develop. Anything that replaces it will form over a similar time scale. And with climate change, that is time we do not have.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          74 months ago

          I’ve got some bad news though. If our markets keep ignoring the environmental cost of… well, pretty much anything, as they always have, capitalism will also fuck us over in the long run. I’ve even heard it’s already happening…

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            64 months ago

            Capitalists People in just about every system ignore negative externalities, which are defined as costs borne by other people for the benefits that they receive themselves. Ironically, capitalism might be the best short-term solution, if only we had the political will. One of the major functions of government is to internalize negative externalities, via taxes and regulations. It’s easy for a factory owner to let toxic effluent flow into the nearby river, but if it costs enough in taxes and fines, it’s cheaper to contain it. We just need to use government regulations to make environmental damage cost too much money, and the market would take care of re-balancing economic activity to sustainable alternatives. The carbon tax is a well-known example of this technique, but we’ve seen how well that has gone over politically. Still, it’s probably easier to push those kinds of regulations in a short time frame than to fundamentally revamp the entire system.

  • LostXOR
    link
    fedilink
    284 months ago

    Just install a bunch of spotlights that point back at the Sun so when power prices go negative you can return all that excess energy! Come on MIT, I thought you were supposed to be smart.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    514 months ago

    It’s funny how capitalist apologists in this thread attack the format of a tweet and people not reading the actual article, when they clearly haven’t read the original article.

    Negative prices are only mentioned in passing, as a very rare phenomenon, while most of it is dedicated to value deflation of energy (mentioned 4 times), aka private sector investors not earning enough profits to justify expanding the grid. Basically a cautionary tale of leaving such a critical component of society up to a privatized market.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      Negative prices are only mentioned in passing, as a very rare phenomenon

      Negative prices are occurring more and more frequently. The cause is baseload generation: it can’t be dialed back as quickly as solar increases during the day, and it can’t be ramped up as fast as solar falls off in the evening. The baseload generators have to stay on line to meet overnight demand. Because they can’t be adjusted fast enough to match the demand curve, they have to stay online during the day as well.

      The immediate solution is to back down the baseload generators, and rely more on peaker plants, which can match the curve.

      The longer term solution is to remove the incentives that drive overnight consumption. Stop incentivizing “off peak” consumption, and instead push large industrial consumers to daytime operation.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      84 months ago

      Without reading the article, I could already see what the problem was.

      Unless you have capital to invest, you can’t expand or improve the power grid. That capital can either come from the gov’t–through taxation–or from private industry. If you, personally, have enough capital to do so, you can build a fully off-grid system, so that you aren’t dependent on anyone else. But then if shit happens, you also can’t get help from anyone else. (Also, most houses in urban areas do not have enough square feet of exposure to the sun to generate all of their own power.)

      Fundamentally, this is a problem that can only be solved by regulation, and regulation is being gutted across the board in the US.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        114 months ago

        That’s not the problem the article gets to. The capital is there. Capital is being dumped into solar at breakneck speed. That’s the problem.

        As more solar gets built, you get more days when there’s so much excess solar capacity that prices go near zero, or occasionally even negative. With more and more capacity around solar, there is less incentive to build more because you’re increasing the cases of near-zero days.

        Basically, the problem is that capitalism has focused on a singular solution–the one that’s cheapest to deploy with the best returns–without considering how things work together in a larger system.

        There are solutions to this. Long distance transmission helps areas where it isn’t sunny take advantage of places where it is. Wind sometimes blows when the sun isn’t shining, and the two technologies should be used in tandem more than they are. Storing it somewhere also helps; in fact, when you do wind and solar together, they cover each other enough that you don’t have to have as much storage as you’d think. All this needs smarter government subsidies to make it happen.

        As a side note, you seem to be focused on solar that goes on residential roofs. That’s the worst and most expensive way to do solar. The space available for each project is small, and it’s highly customized to the home’s individual roof situation. It doesn’t take advantage of economies of scale very well. Using the big flat roofs of industrial buildings is better, but the real economies of scale come when you have a large open field. Slap down racks and slap the solar panels on top.

        If what you want is energy independence from your local power utility, then I suggest looking into co-op solar/wind farms. If your state bans them–mine does–then that’s something to talk to your state representatives about.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          24 months ago

          It doesn’t take advantage of economies of scale very well.

          You missed my point; I was talking about being entirely off-grid there. So unless the homeowner in question also has a large industrial building with a flat roof, we’re back to where I said that they didn’t have enough generative capacity to not be reliant on a power grid, at least in part.

          If what you want is energy independence from your local power utility,

          No, I want energy independence period. Not just from the local utility, I want independence from a co-op as well. I want to have my own well so I’m not relying on someone else to deliver water. I want enough arable land to grow most, or all, of my own food. This isn’t compatible with living in a city. (And part of the reason I want to generate my own power is so that I can use all electric vehicles.)

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            44 months ago

            You missed my point. What you assumed the article said was completely off base.

            No, I want energy independence period. Not just from the local utility, I want independence from a co-op as well.

            Then what you’re asking for is a more fractured human society. This kind of independence from others is an illusion and is not compatible with how humans have evolved.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              14 months ago

              Then what you’re asking for is a more fractured human society.

              No, I’m saying I want energy independence. I don’t want to be dependent on the vagaries of service providers, or politicians that decide one day that renewables are great, and then the next day fuck it all drill baby drill, or a utility–or government–that refuses to invest the necessary capital into infrastructure to maintain capability. I’ll pay my taxes so that shit can get done IF that ends up being the will of the people, but I don’t see the point of being dependent on a system that I both need and have no control over.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                24 months ago

                Drive to get groceries? You’re dependent on most of those same factors.

                Water? Same. Even if you have a well, you still don’t want that well to be polluted by people around you.

                Shelter? You presumably don’t want a neighbor’s rickety structure to fall over on yours during a storm.

                This kind of independence is a farce.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  14 months ago

                  Drive to get groceries? You’re dependent on most of those same factors.

                  I said I wanted enough arable land to grow my own.

                  Water? Same. Even if you have a well, you still don’t want that well to be polluted by people around you.

                  See above.

                  Shelter? You presumably don’t want a neighbor’s rickety structure to fall over on yours during a storm.

                  See above. I don’t intend to have neighbors within a mile.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Transmission is tough. But the solution from too much solar investment driving down profits would be to invest that same money into storage. That seems like a natural follow up.

          Imagine your profit if you can charge your storage with negative cost power!

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            14 months ago

            It’s one of the solutions, yes.

            But let’s look at this more broadly. The idea of combining wind/water/solar/storage with long distance transmission lines isn’t particularly new. The book “No Miracles Needed” by Mark Z. Jacobson (a Stanford Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering) outlined the whole thing in 2023, but was the sum total of the author’s insight that he had had over a decade prior. Dumping all the money in one was never going to get us there.

            Capitalism does sorta figure this out, but it takes steps of understanding as it focuses on one thing at a time. The first step dumps money into the thing that’s cheap and gives the best ROI (solar). Then there’s too much of that thing, and the economics shifts to covering up the shortfalls of that part (be it wind or storage or whatever). That makes it better, but there’s still some shortfalls, so then that becomes the thing in demand, and capitalism shifts again.

            It does eventually get to the comprehensive solution. The one that advocates in the space were talking about decades before.

            The liberal solution–the one that leaves capitalism fundamentally intact–is to create a broad set of government incentives to make sure no one part of the problem gets too much focus. Apparently, we can’t even do that.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 months ago

          Wow, someone actually explaining the problem correctly. I’ll also mention that part of the fix should be on the demand side. Using your home as a thermal battery can load shift HVAC needs by hours, and with a water heater, it works even better. That’s not even talking about all the other things that could be scheduled like washer/dryers, dish washers, EV charging, etc.-

          the real economies of scale come when you have a large open field.

          And before anyone bothers you about the impact of turning fields into solar farms, I’ll add that we (the US) already have more farmland dedicated to energy production (ethanol corn) than would be necessary to provide our whole electricity demand.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            24 months ago

            And before anyone bothers you about the impact of turning fields into solar farms, I’ll add that we (the US) already have more farmland dedicated to energy production (ethanol corn) than would be necessary to provide our whole electricity demand.

            Oh hell yes. 40% of the corn is grown in the US for ethanol, and it’s a complete and utter waste. Even with extremely optimistic numbers the amount of improvement is close to zero. It might be the worst greenwashing out there; sounds like you’re doing something, but its benefit is likely negative.

            We have the land. That’s so not a problem.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    184 months ago

    I get the sentiment but… When sun isn’t shining the negative prices cause problem for baseline power producers who need to turn off their power plants to avoid the zero to negative power prices.

    This causes the power prices to become volatile, since the investments for the power plants that run during the night need to be covered during the night only.

    Eventually though the higher price volatility will encourage investments into either demand side adjustability or energy storage systems. This will play out in energy only markets.

    The other alternative is to implement a capacity market, which will divide the cost of the baseline production across different production hours by paying producers more for guaranteed production capacity.

    • GingaNinga
      link
      fedilink
      English
      34 months ago

      Ya I’m not an engineer at all so I’m not sure how hard it is to store that much power but that always seemed like a good idea. Even for electric cars, if we designed a universal battery pack good for a few hundred kilometres that we could swap out at recharge stations I feel like that would be a smart way to do things. But again I have no idea if thats feasible or how it would be implemented.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Much harder than you’d think, though there are some interesting schemes (like huge tanks filled with molten stuff, superconducting rings, giant flywheels). And there’s always a loss with storage.

        TBH having a diverse array of power sources (including a little storage) is much better.

        Also, batteries in electric cars are unfortunately extremely expensive, and extremely heavy. They’re less efficient than you’d think. Standardization and swappability (and reusing idle batteries for the grid) is a great idea, but even just focusing on the technical aspects, challenging.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          But where are the opportunist industries, like a recycling plant[1] that will only run during high insolation hours, set inside multi storey structures, sharing land area with other, lightweight industries?


          1. or a desalination plant, or carbon capture, or H2O to Hydrogen generation ↩︎

        • GingaNinga
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          interesting! ya this is a whole world I know very little about but it seems very relevant these days.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            4
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            TBH the best solutions are boring and supply-side. Or regional.

            Random examples: heat pumps instead of heaters! Insulation! Geothermal loops or spacer panels for big buildings! Lightweight cars! All would save a hilarious amount of energy, but are way too dull to trend, heh.

            …And probably suppressed by industry interest groups. whistles

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        54 months ago

        We didn’t really have good batteries at that scale. I believe the large scale power storage is still done using water and gravity. Which is honestly pretty neat, but requires lots of land and a high location.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        54 months ago

        The problem with batteries is that they are costly to produce if we’re talking about ones that reverse chemical reactions. This is why I rolled my eyes at Elon suggesting we connect batteries to all our renewables. (The cost I learned from Factorio). Other types of batteries, like potential energy buffers are more practical, but also extremely location specific. There is a Technology Connections video about it. Also for example, some rollercoasters have flywheels to slowly build up rotational inertia and then release it all at once. So if we were to store the excess energy, it would probably be done so this way, but baseline power obviously just seems more practical

        Link https://uwaterloo.ca/waterloo-institute-sustainable-energy/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/magdy_salama_research_spotlight_poster_120716.pdf

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          24 months ago

          It’s a problem today, but in 50 years we’re projected to run out of non renewable sources. AI and EVs have the potential to skyrocket energy consumption well beyond our current capacity.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    114 months ago

    I would post that passage from Grapes of Wrath about oranges. But copy-paste doesn’t work on my phone

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      314 months ago

      I got you.

      The works of the roots of the vines, of the trees, must be destroyed to keep up the price, and this is the saddest, bitterest thing of all. Carloads of oranges dumped on the ground. The people came for miles to take the fruit, but this could not be. How would they buy oranges at twenty cents a dozen if they could drive out and pick them up? And men with hoses squirt kerosene on the oranges, and they are angry at the crime, angry at the people who have come to take the fruit. A million people hungry, needing the fruit- and kerosene sprayed over the golden mountains. And the smell of rot fills the country. Burn coffee for fuel in the ships. Burn corn to keep warm, it makes a hot fire. Dump potatoes in the rivers and place guards along the banks to keep the hungry people from fishing them out. Slaughter the pigs and bury them, and let the putrescence drip down into the earth.

      There is a crime here that goes beyond denunciation. There is a sorrow here that weeping cannot symbolize. There is a failure here that topples all our success. The fertile earth, the straight tree rows, the sturdy trunks, and the ripe fruit. And children dying of pellagra must die because a profit cannot be taken from an orange. And coroners must fill in the certificate- died of malnutrition- because the food must rot, must be forced to rot. The people come with nets to fish for potatoes in the river, and the guards hold them back; they come in rattling cars to get the dumped oranges, but the kerosene is sprayed. And they stand still and watch the potatoes float by, listen to the screaming pigs being killed in a ditch and covered with quick-lime, watch the mountains of oranges slop down to a putrefying ooze; and in the eyes of the people there is the failure; and in the eyes of the hungry there is a growing wrath. In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.

      • TFO Winder
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14 months ago

        Isn’t capitalism the opposite ?

        Competition and open market would promote sellers who quote lower because of abundance and consumers as well as sellers would benefit from the abundance.

        Sellers who try to restrict the supply ultimately would loose in the long run because in a competitive market the seller would always choose cheap prices.

        roots of the vines, of the trees, must be destroyed to keep up the price This would be valid if no one wan’t to be sellers and a all the sellers in a market cooperate together to do this or are required by law to do this.

        I know we like to blame capitalism for a lot of things but this here is a different situation i think.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          74 months ago

          It would in a properly free market. But late stage capitalism’s goal is monopolization, because it maximises profit. Or to quote Marx: “Monopoly is the inevitable end of competition, which engenders it by a continual negation of itself.”

          And this is exactly what Steinbeck is describing here: “you buy food from us, at our prices, or nothing at all. We’d rather destroy our product than to sell lower.” And they can do this because no one has access to the products, or the means of production (e. g. the land to grow produce).

          And this is where we are today with Amazon, Nestle, Walmart and so on. They don’t have any real competition anymore.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 months ago

          Slaughter the pigs and bury them, and let the putrescence drip down into the earth.

          This reminds me of 2020 when they shut down slaughterhouses due to COVID. They killed hundreds of thousands (likely into the millions) of pigs using ventilation shutdown. These were not diseased pigs, it was simply to dispose of them while the slaughterhouses were shut down.

          We live in a fundamentally sick society.