75 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 72.7 ms ] thread
Curious if this will eventually change China's calculus with regards to Russia. If Europe is a big customer for Chinese exports, and Russia is antagonizing, it seems like China would have an incentive to put pressure on Russia.

It already seems like Russia is positioned to be completely subservient to China in the future.

If Europe were a big customer for Russia energy, it seems like Russia would have an incentive to not antagonize it.

Oh, see how well it went.

Your geopolitical views are so naive it's hard to take seriously.

EU is now an unwilling dumping ground for China, hostility and paranoia are growing by the day now that China is no longer a lucrative market itself and is pursuing its interests outside commerce, the cordial days are numbered.

Russia would never be subservient to China, once the war ends Russia would be back being a geopolitical player because of its vast natural resources, and they are already import substituting even Chinese products.

Russia can turn to the west to be a real western country whenever they see fit, the eternal fear for China.

This is why China is going as far as it can to accommodate Putin, even souring it's relations with the EU which isolated itself.

In this sense, it is China being "subservient" to Russia.

Solar prices in the US are criminal, protecting oil and gas who bought all the politicians.

Canada here. 7.6kw on our roof for $0 out of pocket thanks to $5k grant and $8k interest free loan.

It makes 7.72Mwh per year, worth $1000. Tight valley, tons of snow. We put that on the loan for 8 years, then get $1000 per year free money for 20 years or so. Biggest no brainer of all time.

Dad in Victoria Australia just got 10.6kw fully installed and operational for $4000 AUD. ($2,700 USD)

Australia has so much electricity during the day they’re talking about making I free for everyone in the middle of the day.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-03/energy-retailers-offe...

And that on-roof-solar helps (as it becomes widespread) mitigate the growing need for additional grid capacity. Canada is a big country and, outside the major cities, upgrading grid capacity is quite expensive per capita. It's a win-win in Canada, investing in self-sufficiency while reducing the maintenance burden of infrastructure.
The Greener Homes Grant and Greener Homes Loan you describe have ended, but the 160% tarrif on imported solar panels remains. Solar prices in Canada are still quite expensive, and regulations are needlessly strict. Solar fencing is illegal in many jurisdictions, balcony solar is illegal everywhere, and utility-scale solar is effectively prohibited in the regions with the most sunlight.

Solar production in Canada will continue to grow, but we're not doing nearly as much as Europe to encourage it.

It's not always a no-brainer. If you live in a good established neighborhood in a warmer climate you'd have to remove tree coverage. Even if you did that, it's the other guys not oil or gas that will make it a hassle.
Missing from your calculus is the cost of creating, cleaning, maintaining and eventually replacing the hardware. None of that is "free" - it is merely externalized to a vulnerable population or to your future self.
Canada is blessed with cheap energy, the abundance of hydro surely helps to bridge any intermittency other renewables have. I lived there 10 years back, your energy is less than half the cost of mine in Scotland. In Scotland's case we're part of the UK and the rest of the UK is less blessed with the geography for hydro. The incumbent Scottish government also has an anti stance to nuclear.

I hope the incentives for cleaner energy continue to stack up. With the surge in demand from AI surely productivity will be more tightly coupled with energy usage and cost.

450W-500W solar panels are as low as 52€ here in Germany if you buy a couple of them. Batteries are also very affordable and I look forward to them getting a lot cheaper soon, thanks to Sodium-Ion.
What? No Canada isn't cheap solar power -- last I checked rooftop ballasted solar is a 12-14 year payback on avoided costs. Inverter will go beforehand and that excludes any op costs. 8k$ free loan doesn't really provide as much value as you would think.

FWIW - I am all for solar but selling rooftop solar in canada as cheap and no-brainer is false.

3-4 year payback would be a no brainer. 8-13 year payback with an inverter upgrade and op-costs is definitely a decision that needs to be thought out.

The grid you are offsetting is fairly green to begin with so the net benefit is marginal.

If you are going to be isolated and put backup power into the equation. You ROI tanks further but at least you have about a day or two worth of energy in the storage asset.

We have similar problem with prices being high despise renewable energy being cheap ;/
What is the underlying reason in the US though? You would think if they are artificially inflated prices the market would fix that. What I’ve found is that a large part of the cost is the actual labor for the installation, how are other developed countries getting around this?
>Australia has so much electricity during the day they’re talking about making I free for everyone in the middle of the day.

Not just talking about it, if you get a smart meter and sign up for a plan that matches the grid rates you can actually be paid to take electricity during the day right now.

If you're wondering "couldn't you just make bank with a battery" yes you can. In fact Australia dominates the world in grid connected storage (per capita) and this chart itself is actually out of date (it's growing even faster than shown).

https://elements.visualcapitalist.com/top-20-countries-by-ba...

I'll also point out that gas and oil generation has declined rapidly.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/the-rise-of-battery-storage-and-...

For anyone that thinks renewables can't phase out peaker plants it happens very naturally and rapidly once there's enough solar to set rates negative in the day.

> Solar prices in the US are criminal, protecting oil and gas who bought all the politicians.

It would be worth including control of the people who vote for the politicians by direct investment such as when the oil producing Saudis bought the second largest stake in NewCorps which controls FoxNews controlling the content that influences voters. And, less than ethical control using bots on social media by Russia.

A lot of what influences "solar prices in the US" is controlled by foreign oil producing countries like Saudi Arabia and Russia controlling content and media consumed by American voters.

>Solar prices in the US are criminal, protecting oil and gas who bought all the politicians. >Canada here. 7.6kw on our roof for $0 out of pocket thanks to $5k grant and $8k interest free loan.

This very well may be true, but taken at face value Canada seems to be paying you around $7k to install solar panels on your roof (that's 8k interest free loan is losing out to inflation + any interest it would have earned).

Definitely a great deal if you own a home, if I was a renter/condo owner I'd be annoyed that everyone is subsidizing your free solar however.

US also tariffs Chinese EV makers out of the US market so they can keep peddling the fiction that EV sucks or China can't build anything we can't.

This has the same corrupt nexus with the anti-renewable mantra. Essentially subsidize oil and gas under the table and punish renewables then tell the electorate that the latter is worse than the former.

Instead of giving Americans free choice American automakers pay American politicians to prop up their uncompetitive prices and subpar offerings. All while they take in huge private profits. American workers could work on foreign automobiles, just as they do with other automakers not from China. It's not about workers, it's not about national security. You don't even have to go into all the environmental concerns that of course disproportionately affect poorer individuals.

It's corporate welfare. And yes, it should be criminal. At the very least, if the American people are going to inflate CEOs salaries they should have seats on the board.

This is actually not a wild idea. You might be surprised to find who one of the largest shareholders of the Volkswagen group is. It's not like that is an obviously mismanaged socialist hellhole company, it's a perfectly competitive and well regarded car company.

Americans need to start demanding more equity or oversight in operations their governments are already paying for. The fact most Americans think this amounts to communism just means more people have to call out the money is already flowing.

>Canada here. 7.6kw on our roof for $0 out of pocket thanks to $5k grant and $8k interest free loan.

€13.000 for this still seems expensive.

Are there tariffs on Chinese PV in Canada?

The quotes for solar on my home in the US ranged between $40,000 (local company) and $120,000 (Tesla). How did you get solar installed for only $13,000?
Almost identical array in the states (7.8kw) — $25K out of pocket, down to about $12K after state and federal tax incentives.

Still made sense financially, pays for itself after ~8 years and the panels are warrantied for 30... but we're seriously lagging.

There's a similar phenomenon with heat pump systems. Installation costs are absolutely absurd.

> Dad in Victoria Australia just got 10.6kw fully installed and operational for $4000 AUD. ($2,700 USD)

How the heck are the panels even installed and connected for that price? That's about 25 panels, IIRC. What about the installation material and the ac/dc converter?

OTOH, oil and gas prices in Europe are criminal, so there's that.
> Canada here. 7.6kw on our roof for $0 out of pocket thanks to $5k grant and $8k interest free loan.

So solar only makes sense when it's nearly completely subsidized?

That's not the statement you think it is.

It's criminal to not hand huge subsidies to people like you who are already likely well-off, so you can generate passive income for the rest of your life?
Another impact on solar adoption in the United States is that many home insurance companies are refusing to pay on claims against roof damage from poor installs. And there are a lot of poor installs, which has led to this problem. So now the homeowners are taking all of the risk on a solar install that already has an 8-10 year ROI.
“Solar prices in the US are criminal, protecting oil and gas who bought all the politicians.”

I think a big part of why the US GDP is so high is that a lot of things are just f…ing expensive. Education, health care, solar, restaurants and so on. You have to actively resist the “usual” lifestyle or you end up in a sea of debt.

> Solar prices in the US are criminal, protecting oil and gas who bought all the politicians.

Are you saying that because you assert cost is driven up “artificially” by taxes or other structural headwinds? Or are you saying that fossils enjoy an advantage due to lopsided subsidies? Or something else?

Figure out what you can do without a permit or inspections in your jurisdiction.

For example, in my jurisdiction it's: < 5 square meters of panels on your roof, <60V DC, AC on homeowner side of panel (as long as electrical work done by homeowner).

That's not a lot, but my primary purpose is as a generator replacement -- keep my fridge powered during a summer power outage or my furnace fan powered during a winter one. The other 364 days of the year it just slowly pays for itself.

Panels, battery, wiring and paying a roofer to install the flashings for the mounts all cost under $3000. A single one of the required inspections would have cost about that much.

But Trump explained to us yesterday, how wind and solar is for losers. Surely, we should be looking in to how we can transition back to fossils.
At the end of the day, the retail cost of electricity in many EU member countries can be two to three times the cost of electricity in the US. Ultimately that’s what matters to consumers and businesses.

Also, Trump called out the idiotic decisions by greenies such as shutting down nuclear power plants and make long your industries less competitive as a result.

Declining industrially and demographically, no innovation, soaring energy prices, and our share of the world economy has shrunk for ten years straight and is projected to continue shrinking in the future. By all metrics us europeans are losers.
(comment deleted)
Now, let's aim at total energy consumption, not just electricity generation.
The UK has some of the highest energy costs in the world due to the stupid Net Zero taxes. Our economy and manufacturing is suffering.
Every time, over the years, that there has been some kind of headline saying renewables have overtaken fossil fuels, when you look at it a bit more closely there is always a big 'but'. For example, it was compared to coal (not taking into account electricity from gas), or it was for one day, or it was a percentage of new installations, or it excludes winter, includes nuclear etc.

This time, however, it looks like it's actually true and that's just for wind and solar. This is incredible, and done through slowly compounding gains that didn't cause massive economic hardships along the way.

This of what Germany needed to do and not go nuclear… on nuclear.
Well, OK--but at what cost?

Electricity/heating and gasoline in the EU is many times more expensive than in the U.S., and as a result EVERYTHING is more expensive.

Mix that with lower buying power and taxes and we spend 2-3 times for stuff.

I would think that most people would happily choose lower prices over clean energy and paper straws.

Our companies are also less and less competitive because of these initiatives, and companies from China take over in part thanks to the complete lack if environmental and labor laws over there.

Seems to me like this is happening more and more, and it's so widespread and obvious that it almost makes you think that politicians are being bought by Chinese companies/government.

The article uses the words "more power" and "overtaking fossil fuels", but the graph is actually about electricity generation. They are not the same thing, at least, in my head, because not all energy consumed in Europe comes in the form of electricity. If I heat my home with natural gas and drive an ICE car, this is me using fossil fuels in a way that has nothing to do with electricity and it won't be reflected in that graph. This is an important stepping stone, but it is not "solar and wind overtaking fossil fuels in Europe"
I'm curious as to how this will shift once the shift towards more electrification continues. This is only about electricity generation, not total power consumption.

Nowadays, for very energy intenive things like heating or driving a car, fossil fuels still are more prevalent than electric alternatives. Once demand shifts in favor of the electrified alternatives, electricity demand is continuing to raise (although not as steep as the drop in demand for the fossil fuels will be). Particularly in heating, where peak demand is in times with very little solar generation, it seems like this will be challenging.

While the prices of energy storage have come down significantly and are projected to continue to drop, there is still a noteable lack of cost effective long term storage solutions.

The most underreported part of this story is the battery piece at the end. Batteries are beginning to displace natural gas in evening peak hours - that's the exact window where solar critics have long argued renewables fall short. If this trend accelerates (and battery prices are dropping faster than most models predicted), the "intermittency problem" starts looking more like a solvable engineering challenge than a fundamental barrier.

The next milestone to watch: when battery-backed solar becomes cheaper than gas peakers for evening demand across most of Europe. We might be closer than people think.

There’s a certain poetic aspect to this.

Fossils are dead, slow.

Wind moves fast. Photons move even faster.

At the same time subsidies are being phased out. I was about to get 8kW panels + batteries installed when my country decided to pull them, and I'm not going to spend 10k out of pocket.
Imagine the powerhouse America would be (pun intended) if we subsidized nuclear energy to become the defacto producer of nuclear power plants world wide. Sometimes it is easier said than done but this really is as easy as said.
Now we just need to figure out scalable storage. Ideally something like the sand batteries that you can scale with construction equipment rather than just adding more rows of tiny lithium batteries
If you’re interested in this topic I highly recommend Tony Seba’s analyses.

He argues that because solar and wind are now the cheapest forms of new energy generation, they are on an unstoppable exponential "S-curve" that will make coal, gas, and nuclear power obsolete by 2030.

Look up his videos on YT, for example this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj96nxtHdTU

Solar with a modern LFP battery system is a no-brainer solution for 21st century energy infrastructure. The safety record beats pretty much everything else, and as long as the sun is out, it just works.
Don't forget wind.

For example in germany, wind is 31.4% of production, solar is 16.8%. For the EU it's 18.1% for wind and 11% for solar.

Wind is often producing more during the morning/night where solar falls short.

> In 2025, both Ireland and Finland joined the ranks of European countries that have shuttered their last remaining coal plants.

Interesting, they mentioned Finland. I wonder how Norway and Finland fair using solar since they have rigorous winters with polar nights.

WW3 called and said solar is harder to disrupt through bombing than massive power plants. Seems like a great deal even if it was more expensive.
Encouraging. However, it isn't clear from the article at first glance (or the deeper analysis being referenced) how electricity consumption by power source is changing.

In other words, as an example, a 10% increase in solar power generation does not necessarily mean that there was a 10% increase in electricity consumption where that electricity was generated via solar.

i.e. It is entirely possible for a growing solar fleet to generate more power during the middle of the day than previously, and simultaneously for not all of that increased power to be used / usable.

Batteries are relatively cheap and ideal for shifting solar power generation from noon into the evening.
It used to be the big worry among climate activists that you'd never get every country organize and move in one direction. Like you'd need some global body to clean everything up.

That's very fragile.

Luckily, we're moving to a world where a disjoint, self-interested response can be an advantage. Countries decide, for their own selfish reasons, to adopt green energy. For energy independence, affordability, clean air, etc.

So when one country politically rotates out for dumb reasons, other countries pick up the slack and make a bit of progress.

And in U.S., Trump stopped the coastal wind farms here in the east... for "national security" reasons.
I'm extremely skeptical of that graph because it has zero seasonal variation.

Solar performs dramatically worse in the winter than in summer.