this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
532 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

77769 readers
2684 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
532
U.S. solar will pass wind in 2025 and leave coal in the dust soon after (pv-magazine-usa.com)
submitted 2 months ago by spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works to c/technology@lemmy.world
117 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Based on current deployment rates, it is likely that solar will surpass wind as the third-largest source of electricity. And solar may soon topple coal in the number two spot.

Looking ahead, through July 2028, FERC expects no new coal capacity to come online based on its “high probability additions” forecast. Meanwhile 63 coal plants are expected to be retired, subtracting 25 GW from the 198 GW total, and landing at about 173 GW of coal capacity by 2028. Meanwhile, FERC forecasts 92.6 GW of “high probability additions” solar will come online through July 2028.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 2 months ago (26 children)

That's actually a problem.

All realistic plans for 100% renewable (or even 95% renewable, which is substantially easier) rely on a multipronged approach of wind, water, solar, and grid upgrades. Each one has upsides and downsides, but you can use the upsides of one to cover the downsides of another. Combined, you get a reliable grid based on intermittent but cheap sources.

Capitalism sees this plan and decides to deploy the one with the best immediate ROI. Which happens to be solar. Problem is that you can't just rely on solar. The grid is hitting limits where electrical production is sending prices to basically zero at certain times, but not able to provide enough the rest of the time. That will shift the economic incentives. Eventually.

It'll figure out what researchers have already written down, but it'll take too long to get there.

[–] AceBonobo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

That's actually a problem

Is it? Wind is 10% and solar is 4%

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us.php

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes, and we're already seeing prices go negative with that mix. This shouldn't happen (at least not very often) if it's built properly.

[–] AceBonobo@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Well that's an average and it will differ greatly with seasons. What percentage is problematic?

load more comments (24 replies)