this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2025
267 points (98.2% liked)

World News

50787 readers
1291 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 71 points 4 days ago (5 children)

There are so many strategic advantages to China’s mass solar adoption.

Let’s say there’s a war, it’s going to be much easier to take out a few coal plants or nuclear plants than masses of solar panels spread out geographically.

They have well defined lifetimes and are easily replaceable.

They’re cleaner, plus good for domestic manufacturing.

The west needs to get our asses into gear.

[–] ms_lane@lemmy.world 17 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Not just solar, they started building new gen4 reactors 20 years ago.

Guess what forward thinking does for the future?

We seem to want to go only backward though.

[–] Yondoza@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 days ago

Quarterly profits is the only goal? Guess we'll only think 3 months ahead.

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

But it costs money to do anything, and using money is the realm of the private sector!

[–] Inaminate_Carbon_Rod@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Australia was perfectly positioned to take inspiration from China and run with it.

Unfortunately our mining companies have way too many fingers in our politics.

[–] stylusmobilus@aussie.zone 2 points 1 day ago

There’s also the problem of government supported solar only being available to homeowners, which means a vast number of households aren’t in the program. Those renters are the ones that fund it without benefit.

Another one of the points of separation between Australia A and the rest of us.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 5 points 3 days ago

The West is not united on the issue. The EU got a hard lesson from Russia, that fossil fuel dependence is a massive problem. So you see actually quite large investments into the green transition. This is building on some good progress earlier. Obviously Trump doing what he does scares the EU, which currently imports way too much LNG from the US to easily replace. There is push back from the fossil fuel industry, but the laws in place and general direction are good. It is too slow however.

The US as the other large Western power went in the other direction. They elected Trump and currently work on blackmailing the world using oil. This year alone, they bombed Iran, moved a massive fleet towards Venezuela and used sanctions to destroy Russian oil exports. So the three largest oil producers, who deliver a lot of oil to China and are not some sort of vassal to the US.

[–] Defectus@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Instead of bombers, you'll have planes filled with paint to dump on the panels =D

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 22 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The bombs and planes would cost more than the panels, and it could be countered with plastic wrap.

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 days ago

What about windshield wipers

[–] Rolder@reddthat.com 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But on the flip side I feel like it would take far less bombing power to render a field of solar panels inoperable.

[–] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

A couple bombs can take out a gigawatt+ generation plant. A couple dozen acres of solar panels will need much, much more, with each individual strike having far less impact and being far easier to repair after. On top of that, solar can be widely distributed and embedded in much smaller footprints, into civilian areas, and so on. Solar also has less infrastructure requirements such as access to water where destroying a dam for example can render one or more power plats inoperable.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

A shit load of bullets would destroy a solar farm.