933
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by inari@piefed.zip to c/climate@slrpnk.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 43 points 4 days ago

What do the lobbyists get out of the solar panels? How do the solar panels generate constant fees?

[-] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 17 points 4 days 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.

[-] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 9 points 3 days ago

The issue with solar is, that the owner can be a simple home owner putting the panels on their roof. When you add batteries to that, it is entirly possible that they never need to buy electricity from the grid ever again. However we are still talking about some middle class person here, who is not going to be able to afford a lobbyist.

There are other ways well below lobbyist level as well, such a solar and wind cooperatives or some farmer setting up a few installations on his property. They do have more money, but still probably are well below lobbyist levels of money.

[-] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Considering that US congressmen can evidently be bought with like ten to twenty thousand bucks, or tickets to some resort, I don't understand how USians still don't have crowdfunded lobbying.

[-] matlag@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Because it would make it way too obvious that their representative are not really representing voters but only the biggest wallet around. Second is a crowdfunded lobbying would be a one shot thing, while corporate lobbying can provide a more stable "support".

Right, so before we see solar take hold, it needs to be illegal for a property owner to own the panels, and the power company has the right to put them anywhere they like.

[-] Droechai@piefed.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago

In sweden its set up so that the owners of household solar cannot ever make money, only save on cost

[-] 87Six@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 days ago
[-] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Gotta pay for grid maintenance somehow

[-] asg101@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 days ago

Same in most countries. In the U.S. many states penalize people for putting in solar through forced monthly payments to the power companies even if they use zero KWh.

[-] ButteryMonkey@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago

This is what happens in the area I was looking to move to.. at that point I’d just have myself removed from the grid entirely. Fuck that nonsense.

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

Right. There's not as much money in renewables, so there's less lobbying.

[-] smiletolerantly@awful.systems 10 points 3 days 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?

[-] Tiresia@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 days ago

Capitalism is about hierarchy more than it is about profit. Capitalists spent billions to put someone who bankrupted a casino in charge of largest economy in the world to stop the woke left. Capitalists pay for golden parachutes for nepo baby CEOs who shit the company bed. Capitalists sack departments with mission-critical institutional knowledge because that institutional knowledge gives the workers power.

In an ideal free market, the company that ends up with the largest market share is not the company that optimized for profit, but the company that optimized for murdering all the other companies so it's the largest by default. In real life, the rich and powerful let this mechanism roam free when it helps them oppress the working class, while regulating the market when it makes the game unfun for the rich, and while insulating each other from the consequences that were not guarded against by regulation.

I think the main problem is a lot of them are already entrenched in the fossil fuel market and most of the people holding the money aren't the entrepreneurial types because all the wealth is inherited so they'd rather just hold onto their existing property and fight to keep it relevant than start again somewhere else. It's dumb though because yeah it's free money printing. Am I assessing this right?

this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
933 points (98.2% liked)

Climate

8436 readers
385 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS