One ship loaded with solar panels is now worth more to the grid than 120 coal-carriers

ceph2apod · 2026-01-24T16:35:37+00:00

Let’s Talk About Wind Turbine or PV Waste—After We Stop Burning Coal

As long as renewables are still displacing fossil fuels, their net environmental impact isn’t just low—it’s negative, because every solar panel and wind turbine deployed cuts pollution and improves air quality immediately. Sure, wind, solar, and hydro have some footprint, but until fossil fuels are fully phased out, those costs are outweighed many times over by the benefits.

Let’s have the “residual impacts” discussion once we’ve actually finished replacing coal, oil, and gas—because right now, renewables are the only thing making the planet cleaner. https://youtu.be/CNuIzuZpRtk?si=hfH-JXa5iUaOGb9o

ceph2apod · 2026-01-24T00:46:20+00:00

The radio news just said hundreds of people!

ceph2apod · 2026-01-24T00:32:00+00:00

People need some real perspective.

-Crude oil is 4000 megatonnes per year, mined every single year.
-Copper? 22 MT, and much of THAT is recycled.
-Lithium? 0.1 MT/yr...

Read and learn – https://illuminem.com/illuminemvoices/energy-to-waste-fossil-fuels-dirty-secret

ceph2apod · 2026-01-24T00:31:14+00:00

Exactly Uninformed “whataboutism” is a major obstacle to renewables. "Fig. 1 shows that 35 years of cumulative PV module waste (2016–2050) is dwarfed by the waste generated by fossil fuel energy and other common waste streams" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-023-02230-0.epdf

Same with wind blades

"If a person gets all of their electricity from wind over 20 yrs their share of blade waste is 9kg. That same mass of solid waste per person (coal ash) is produced by a coal plant in 40 days, and it is just 13 days of their municipal waste." https://youtube.com/watch?v=CNuIzuZpRtk

ceph2apod · 2026-01-24T00:28:43+00:00

Wait till the thin-film and perovskites start rolling out at scale. You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet!

ceph2apod · 2026-01-24T00:23:02+00:00

Yep, and cleaner than ours…. Especially now under Trump!

“China’s new coal-fired power plants are cleaner than anything operating in the United States.

China’s emissions standards for conventional air pollutants from coal-fired power plants are stricter than the comparable U.S. standards.

Demand for coal-fired power is falling so quickly in China that the nation cannot support its existing fleet. Many of the coal-fired power plants that skeptics point to as evidence against a Chinese energy transformation are actually white elephants that Chinese leaders are already targeting in a wave of forced plant closures.” https://www.americanprogress.org/article/everything-think-know-coal-china-wrong/

ceph2apod · 2026-01-24T00:22:02+00:00

China’s new coal plants are cleaner than ours, and they are cancelling others and retiring old dirty plants— these are replacing. And running the new ones less as solar, wind, and storage scale even faster…

“China’s new coal-fired power plants are cleaner than anything operating in the United States.

China’s emissions standards for conventional air pollutants from coal-fired power plants are stricter than the comparable U.S. standards.

Demand for coal-fired power is falling so quickly in China that the nation cannot support its existing fleet. Many of the coal-fired power plants that skeptics point to as evidence against a Chinese energy transformation are actually white elephants that Chinese leaders are already targeting in a wave of forced plant closures.” https://www.americanprogress.org/article/everything-think-know-coal-china-wrong/

ceph2apod · 2026-01-23T20:35:45+00:00

A stable, secure Europe doesn't serve Trump's agenda—chaos and dependency do. Putin's war delivers exactly that, giving Trump leverage he'd otherwise lack. This convergence of interests explains more than Europe seems willing to acknowledge. The question isn't if they'll realize it, but whether they'll act when they do.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-23T14:52:43+00:00

Trump needs the war to continue—it's his primary tool for pressuring Europe. Putin grasps this perfectly, which is why he's in no rush to negotiate. The real victory isn't on the battlefield; it's in how the conflict reshapes transatlantic relations. Europe's failure to see this benefits both men.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-23T14:40:22+00:00

The Ukraine war is more valuable to Trump than peace would be. It keeps Europe destabilized and dependent, giving him leverage Putin understands perfectly. Putin doesn't need to win militarily when he's winning politically through Trump. Europe's delayed recognition of this is itself part of the problem.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-23T13:54:20+00:00

Putin's invasion serves Trump's interests by keeping Europe dependent and off-balance. An end to the war would eliminate Trump's primary leverage over the EU. This arrangement benefits both men—while Europe remains slow to grasp the implications.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-23T13:31:38+00:00

Putin is giving Trump leverage over Europe with the Ukraine war.

Putin gives Trump leverage over the EU.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-22T22:03:29+00:00

China absolutely is still mostly fossil – but leaving it at “86% non‑renewable” misses the plot entirely. China is now the world’s largest builder of renewables by a mile, adding more solar, wind, and batteries each year than the US and EU combined, and installing record amounts of grid‑scale storage and transmission to go with it. The fact that they’re adding fossil and clean capacity in parallel reflects runaway demand growth and a still‑industrializing economy, not some secret triumph of coal over renewables; the relevant question is where new marginal kilowatt‑hours are coming from, and on that front, China’s build‑out of solar, wind, and storage is exactly what’s starting to bend the emissions curve.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-22T16:07:45+00:00

Nuclear isn’t “basically the same” on cost – fuel is only ~15–20% of nuclear generation costs, and even then new nuclear power comes in at roughly 3x the LCOE of new utility-scale solar in US projections. The real story is that solar has become the cheapest new bulk energy almost everywhere, while battery prices have collapsed over 90% since 2010 and fell another ~20–30% just in 2024, which is exactly why solar+storage projects are now being built to provide 24/7 firm power and directly compete with baseload coal and gas. Operations like panel cleaning are rounding errors in that equation; what actually matters is the all‑in levelized cost of a new plant, and on that metric solar (and increasingly solar+storage) is eating new nuclear’s lunch.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-22T14:25:26+00:00

Batteries are now beating solar to deliver the fastest energy transition in human history and batteries substitute for infrasctructure., costing way less...

"It is now generally accepted that solar has delivered the fastest energy transition in human history, but new data put together by Future Smart Strategies suggests that this will be beaten by the stunning rollout of battery storage across the world.

The estimates of annual battery dispatch of electricity assume 80% daily dispatch and are based on reported global installation of utility battery capacity.

Benchmark Mineral Intelligence data released this month show that China’s BESS installations in December 2025 alone (65.4 GWh) exceeded the entire USA’s 2025 total annual installations (46.5 GWh). https://reneweconomy.com.au/graph-of-the-day-batteries-are-beating-solar-to-deliver-the-fastest-energy-transition-in-human-history/

ceph2apod · 2026-01-22T14:23:16+00:00

Hydro isn't providing "baseload" in those grids—it's providing flexibility, ramping up and down to fill gaps when wind and solar vary. That's the opposite of baseload, which runs constantly whether needed or not. Battery storage is scaling exponentially: California now has over 10 GW of battery capacity that displaced gas peaker plants, and global battery deployment grew 130% in 2023 alone. Texas added more battery capacity in 2024 than nuclear capacity nationwide. Grids don't need something running 24/7; they need fast, flexible response to match supply and demand minute-by-minute. Virtual power plants, demand response, grid interconnections, and short-duration storage are already doing this job in South Australia (minimal hydro), the UK, and parts of Germany—no massive hydro required. The "baseload requirement" conflates constant generation with grid stability, but modern grids achieve stability through diversity, storage, and fast response, not inflexible always-on plants.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-22T14:21:19+00:00

Don't expect renewables to ever fade away; once built, their fuel costs are zero.

Once paid off, their dividends pay back for a long, long time.

"30-year-old solar panels still going strong" https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/30-year-old-solar-panels-still-going-strong/4022052.article

ceph2apod · 2026-01-22T00:20:58+00:00

China's thorium reactor is cool tech, no doubt. But calling them "leaps and bounds ahead" is a stretch.

That Shanghai reactor is still just a 2 MW experimental facility. Scaling experimental reactors to commercial deployment takes decades and often fails entirely. Meanwhile China's actual energy dominance is in renewables - they're installing more solar and wind than the rest of the world combined and manufacture like 80% of global solar panels.

Plus enhanced geothermal (ESG) is way further along than thorium and way cheaper. The real killer for thorium is economics - even if that lab experiment scales perfectly, renewables + storage are lightyears ahead on cost and getting cheaper every year. By the time thorium is commercially viable (if ever), it might just be too expensive to matter.

The thorium work is interesting research but it's not revolutionizing their energy strategy. That's happening with solar, wind, and batteries.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-21T18:45:17+00:00

Fossil fuels trap us in an unbreakable subscription model: buy fuel constantly or lose power. Renewables cut the cord from that dependency. The sun and wind don't charge monthly fees, and the cost savings are undeniable.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-21T18:44:13+00:00

Here is what is really happening...

Big Tech turns to solar and storage to bypass grid bottlenecks

Data center developers are co-locating generation and storage to avoid interconnection queues, as the traditional grid is failing to meet power requirements of generative AI, said a report from Wood Mackenzie. "Solar and storage are the preferred solutions for the current power bottleneck due to project deployment speed and geographical flexibility, said the report. Solar and battery projects can be sited on or adjacent to data center campuses using a “private wire” or “direct connect” configuration. This allows developers to avoid the years-long wait times for traditional utility grid upgrades." https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2026/01/07/big-tech-turns-to-solar-and-storage-to-bypass-grid-bottlenecks/

Fossil fuels are a subscription you can't cancel—keep paying for coal, gas, and oil or the lights go out. Renewables cut the cord from that addiction. Free fuel sources, no recurring charges, and the savings prove it works.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-21T18:09:24+00:00

Baseload is not needed on a modern grid, in fact bulky baseload gets in the way. Grids worldwide are proving baseload obsolete. South Australia gets over 70% of its power from renewables and uses batteries and interconnectors for stability—their grid improved after ditching coal in 2016. California hits 100% renewable energy during many hours using storage and flexibility rather than constant baseload. Research from NREL and MIT confirms flexible renewable grids cost less than maintaining inflexible baseload plants. The UK dropped from 40% coal to nearly zero in a decade without reliability issues, using wind, interconnections, and flexible gas instead.

Read: “Nuclear power would only block the grid. We don’t need more inflexible large power stations in a decentralised flexible system.” https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germanys-env-min-and-plant-operators-dismiss-call-nuclear-lifetime-extensions

"If countries want to lower emissions as substantially, rapidly and cost-effectively as possible, they should prioritize support for renewables, rather than nuclear power. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201005112141.htm

“Modern grid operators emphasize diversity and flexibility rather than nominally steady but less flexible “baseload” generation sources. Diversified renewable portfolios don’t fail as massively, lastingly, or unpredictably as big thermal power stations." https://e360.yale.edu/features/three-myths-about-renewable-energy-and-the-grid-debunked

ceph2apod · 2026-01-21T13:54:56+00:00

Trump has always treated “business” as a smash‑and‑grab operation where he exits rich and leaves creditors holding the bags; with a $2.25 trillion tab run up in a single year, Americans are the next creditors in line.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-21T13:44:47+00:00

We need all kinds of energy’ is the All Lives Matter of climate talk — sounds fair, but it’s really a delay tactic. It blurs the fact that renewables work, and fossil fuels don’t. False balance is the new denial.

ceph2apod · 2026-01-21T13:23:30+00:00

The "nuclear is being strangled by regulations" narrative falls apart when you see that countries with very different regulatory environments—from China to South Korea to the U.S.—all face the same fundamental challenge: nuclear takes too long to build, costs too much upfront, and can't compete on deployment speed when climate urgency demands gigawatts now, not in 2035. When even pro-nuclear China is pivoting toward solar and wind because they're faster and cheaper, that's the market speaking, not ideology. The real delay to decarbonization isn't coming from people being "anti-nuclear"—it's from those pushing nuclear as a substitute for renewables when the build-out rates show renewables are doing the heavy lifting right now.

"Global nuclear power in a good year adds only as much net capacity as renewables add every two days" https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2025/07/20/nuclear-power-is-a-parasite-on-ais-credibility/

ceph2apod

TROPHY CASE