Energy would be so abundant it'd be free, if we'd done Fusion 50 years ago.
this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
1430 points (98.2% liked)
memes
20173 readers
1262 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
What's more important? Cheap power for the whole country? Or the pockets of the people in charge?
just in case
/s
And housing would be cheaper if it wasn't treated as a value-retaining investment.
Well maybe, but only if they owned the infrastructure themselves.
As it stands, the price paid to renewable energy suppliers tracks the amount paid to fossil fuel suppliers.
There's a reason every farmer wants to fill their fields with solar panels, and it's got little to do with making electricity cheaper for the end user.
That said, there's no reason not to do it anyway, at least if we want more than a few more hundred years of humanity. A tough ask in a time where every decision is made based on an election that happens in the next 4 years by people who won't live another 20.
Clearly this sub haven't seen this video from Technology Connections. It breaks it all down for you step by step why the statement is true.
Its still crazy how great solar can be when doing the maths based off his states solar farms. Imagine how great the numbers would be if the sunny parts of the world did solar too
load more comments
(20 replies)
Where I live in Scotland about 73% of electricity generated come from renewables (mostly wind and hydro). I'm hugely in favour of this, but the bills keep rising.
I firmly believe the utility companies should be nationalised. I'm not against capitalism per se, but the current setup is a racket.
Water is essential to living.
Electricity is mostly essential.
Why these two utilities are privately owned is beyond me.
To pay dividends to shareholders whilst you let the utility degrade to the point where the government steps in to bail you out anyway. Perfect investment.
load more comments
(1 replies)
You know why right?
The grid is constraint and because of this it makes prices really high where the congestion is. Now the logical thing is to allow a different price where there is free energy like in Scotland verse where it is constraint.
But! The issue is where it is constraint and that's south east England. And as everyone in the country knows no one gets anything in the UK unless south east England has more of it for less.
So higher prices in SE England is not going to happen. If it was the other way around I'm certain the government would say fuck the Scots they should have more wind power if they wanted cheap electricity.
If the state of the Scottish energy grid is comparable to mainland Europe, then the prices go up due to increasing cost of infrastructure.
Renewables are a lot cheaper per kWh, but require a substantialy higher up front cost in infrastructure due to their decentralized nature.
Before renewables, the electricity only ever flowed in one direction, from the power plant down to the consumers. A few centralised main powerlines could deliver most of that.
With the increase in renewables that suddenly isn't true anymore. Smal villages often are net positive, we've reached a point where even the medium voltage grid of entire regions is net positiv and the energy has to be transported somewhere else, sometimes even outside the country.
All this requires substantially more powerlines (or at least thicker ones, so still new cables). But more importantly, devices to measure the current load of the grid at all times and modernized equipment that can remotely be operated to respond to variing load.
Not to say that we should stop building renewables. All this infrastructure will be needed eventually eather way, but at least in the short term, investments will be needed regardless.
Wind power is paid for if it is used or not.
It could be a lot cheaper up in Scotland where it is often wasted. If it's cheaper up there more industry will move up there and use more of that cheap electricity and it will mean less is wasted.
But this would benefit Scotland at the expense of England so it's not going to happen. As such electrical prices are same around country which keeps jobs down south and electricity expensive.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Just say it's better for AI and they're all for it
Government should be for the people not for the corporations
In many cities in America, private companies threaten cities demanding that they get paid to expand, or else they'll leave.
Comcast demanded they get city investments to expand wifi to more of the city and even promised free wifi to public places. And after millions of city dollars given, they said, "nevermind".
load more comments
(6 replies)
Why are utilities privatized?
Our energy provider increased our rates, then reported record breaking profits the next year. :(
(US)
Grid should be public and production should be privatised.
load more comments
(19 replies)
Anything cheaper for the consumer means less profit, which means less money for bribes, which means conservative governments are against it
Nah. They would be 50-60% cheaper if;
- They required the choice between two different administrators.
- They were ran as non profit (private equity is ruining utilities currently).
load more comments
(4 replies)
Energy is cheaper where the government has a public alternative. That goes for all utilities and services.
Technology Connections has a video on it...
But i doubt bills would go down; it's just that line would go up.
That's why republicans hate it.
It sounds evil and simplistic, and it is, but these are evil and simplistic people we're talking about.
"Oh, new innovations in technology can help consumers pay less to power their homes? We can't have that! It would affect the profits of my friends Oil Baron and Coal Baron."
In the end, green energy will win. It's already happening even though, right now, the black energy lovers are doing everything to pull the brakes on green energy. They will not be able to hold on to their power forever and many countries are already investing heavily in green energy. It's only a matter of time.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›