416
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Vendul@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

It’s kinda good but it completely destroyed the European manufacturing for solar

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 38 points 1 week ago

When panels were 30c/watt, projects at $1/watt in EU and US happened. 70c/watt was spent on labour, copper, support structures, and grid connection equipment. All of those can be locally produced, with possible exception of last item.

At 6c/watt, that is over 90% of power projects are local economy boosting instead of 70%. It provides cheaper energy that is useful for industrialization and cost of living benefits too. US tariffs on solar are entirely about protecting oil/gas extortion power instead of a $10B solar production industry that needs fairly expensive support.

Solar imports does not cause energy dependence. You have power for 30+ years with no reliance on continuous fuel supplies. Shoes and apparel is a $450B industry in US. You need new supplies every year, and it makes much more sense to secure supply in that industry for war on the world purposes.

[-] Allero@lemmy.today 18 points 1 week ago

It is good, period.

Local manufacturing is politically advantageous and may employ some people at the same time, but that's where benefits end.

Europe didn't reject Chinese face masks during COVID-19, and Europe shouldn't reject Chinese solar during a climate emergency.

Solve that first, and political struggles later.

[-] nexusband@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's not only a political struggle. Working conditions are tremendously better in Europe, Environmental Protection as well. Manufacturing photovoltaics takes a huge pile of chemicals that need to be handled properly to not cause any harm to the environment - China neither cares nor has any other incentives to actually do this properly, which is exactly why they are so cheap. Theres also the issue of poor quality, that if you're manufacturing something that can have a significant impact on the environment, it should "count" and not be waste 10 years later.

Not only that, China's subsidies are utterly unfair.

Destroying the environment in one part of the world to "save" a different one due to climate change is just ridiculously stupid and simple minded.

[-] Allero@lemmy.today 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I see where you're coming with that, and in principle, some of the points you make I would clearly share under different circumstances.

But to me, even with the side effects, rapid rollout of green tech (even if its production is not kept to the best standard) beats slow incremental growth with good standards in place, given the urgency with which world requires it. After all, even poorly produced Chinese options very much do offset their footprint compared to the alternatives.

There are some points for concern, such as the use of lithium ion batteries, for example, but Chinese companies also think ahead and implement alternative options - in case of batteries, they increasingly work with sodium-ion instead.

As per "unfair" subsidies - I'd rather urge all countries to go all in and compete on those, rather than complain about those who implemented them. Subsidies for green tech are essential to secure our future, they boost the green industry and expedite its expansion, and they should only be seen as a good, not the evil.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

Manufacturing photovoltaics takes a huge pile of chemicals that need to be handled properly to not cause any harm to the environment

Source for this? Cadmium is exclusive to 1 US manufacturer.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

The argument is always "solar/wind still use chemicals" and never "this is the net reliance on extractive industry by energy source".

That said, general energy conservation is still important. You can't cut emissions if all your new power just gets funnelled into Grok style AI.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

I don't know that processing silicon is a polluting activity. There is heat involved, and some Chinese producers are 100% solar powered for their processing. Though I'm sure bulldozers or shipps/trucks are involved in obtaining sand.

I'm not a fan of any appeals to gatekeep energy use to "just essentials" instead permitting growth that people want, and cleaning up the energy use involved.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I’m not a fan of any appeals to gatekeep energy use to “just essentials” instead permitting growth

There's a huge gulf between essential and wasteful.

[-] st0v@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

Solar manufacturing is not destroying China's environment, fossil fuels are. By a massive margin.

They need to get off that merry go round as quickly as possible. While the efforts they've made are incredible it needs to continue to accelerate.

I wouldn't say they've achieved these prices through subsidies in the way many people think. government support pushed their entire renewable industry ecosystem, western manufacturing went belly up, and now they are reaping the benefits.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

It seems like China is putting a lot of efforts into becoming environmentally cleaner in the last few years though. I'm hoping that they've finally realized that pollution is bad.

[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

There's something called an environmental Kuznets curve that suggests that a population will sacrifice environmental health to industrial degradation in favor of per capita income up to a point, after which they are affluent enough to care, and after this environmental health improves. China seems to be at the inflection point.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

They were at the inflection point back in 2008. They've been full tilt towards the improvement side of the curve for nearly two decades.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Local manufacturing is politically advantageous and may employ some people at the same time, but that’s where benefits end.

There are legitimate strategic concerns with sourcing things long-term from potentially hostile states.

Europe should absolutely take advantage of current Chinese production to improve their own green energy efforts, but looking into local production in addition is not just a 'for-show' move. As sanctions on Russia show, dependence on markets that can potentially turn hostile can be very damaging.

[-] Allero@lemmy.today 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Sure, that's what I threw in the "politically advantageous" bucket to not expand on it too much

Though I do not expect China to blackmail Europe with solar, but I see the concern.

[-] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yep the EU will be beholden to a dictatorial regime again. Instead of placating Putin for gas it will be Xi for solar panels and batteries.

[-] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

At least those items you only need to buy once.

[-] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

By providing big subsidies to green energy developement. Something the EU could also have done but refused to. And so they lost their entire lead.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Europeans demolished their manufacturing sector when they stripped all the wiring out of the walls during the austerity years.

You can't blame people for buying foreign when you've been defunding domestic infrastructure for over a decade.

[-] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

You’re either an astroturfer or useful idiot spreading oil lobby talking points.

Either you believe the climate science or you don’t. If you do, you know that we don’t have time for industry protectionism.

[-] Allero@lemmy.today 8 points 1 week ago

Do not assume bad faith over anything you disagree with.

While I disagree with the original statement, hostility never changed anyone's mind.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago

hostility never changed anyone’s mind

Chronic abuse absolutely shapes human perception and behavior.

In this case, a lot of Lemmy has been so battered down by "China Bad" propaganda that they'll straight up deny the threat of climate change to justify rejecting Chinese manufactured goods.

[-] peppers_ghost@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago

If EU wants to compete they're welcome to utilize the same style of subsidies that enabled China to produce these so cheaply.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago

0.001$ per watt would be way ducking better

this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
416 points (99.8% liked)

Technology

59708 readers
1528 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS