• Victoria@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    From a grid stability point, you can’t produce more than is used, else you get higher frequencies and/or voltages until the automatics shut down. It’s already a somewhat frequent occurence in germany for the grid operator to shut down big solar plants during peak hours because they produce way more power than they can dump (because of low demand or the infrastructure limiting transfer to somewhere else)

    Negative prices are the grid operator encouraging more demand so it can balance out the increased production.

    • kippinitreal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Spot on! I hoped this comment would be higher! The main problem isn’t corps not making money, but grid stability due to unreliability of renewables.

      To be fair, the original tweet is kinda shit to begin with. They’ve unnecessarily assigned monetary value to a purely engineering (physics?) problem.

    • Mobilityfuture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      As someone with a technical background this is the stupidest problem with solar that I don’t get… just turn off the panels in groups until generation is closer to demand… how have engineers not figured that out. And if they have why does this still get written about.

      Someone is an idiot. Maybe it’s me?

      • antimongo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m adjacent to this problem, so I have a little context, but am not an expert at all.

        To my knowledge, we don’t have granular control over panels. So we can shut off legs of a plant, but that’s a lot of power to be moving all at once.

        Instead, prices are set to encourage commercial customers to intake more power incrementally. This has a smoother result on the grid, less chance of destabilizing.

        A customer like a data center could wait to perform defragmentation or a backup or something until the price of power hits a cheap or negative number.

    • MaxMalRichtig@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Well I wasn’t expecting to find THE right answer in the comments already. Kudos!

      And to everyone reading through this post: If you have questions, need more explanations or want to learn more about the options that we have to “stabilize” a renewable energy system and make it long term viable, just ask!

        • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          Diversify, store and adjust demand.

          Diversifying means getting energy from different sources like wind, solar, hydro, geothermal and from different regions as there wind always blows somewhere. This is a major strength of the European grid.

          Storage mainly happens in pumped hydro, but for short term storage you can also use batteries and flywheels.

          On the demand side, energy intensive industry like steel can draw its energy when there is an glut of energy causing lower prices.

  • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Literal free goddamn energy from the sky and these greedy fucks are going to burn the world down because they can’t flip it for a buck

    • scutiger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It sounds dumb, but because you can’t turn off solar power, if it produces more then you need, you have to use it somehow or it can damage equipment. Hence the driving prices into negative territory. It’s a technical problem more than it is a financial one.

      • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        It is a financial problem. Technically you can just cover the solar panels. But that’s not good financially.

        • mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Your “technically you can” is actually a huge logistical nightmare to implement.

          Having electricity rates go really low is intended to incentivize people or companies to sink the excess energy to wherever they can. And also to discourage producers to produce more at that hour, if they are able to.

  • arc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    If only there were some way to take energy made from sunshine and store it in some form for later. Like in a battery. Or as heat. Or in a flywheel. Or just use the energy for something we’d really like to do as cheaply as possible. Like sequester CO2. Or desalinate water. Or run industries that would otherwise use natural gas.

    • weeeeum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Or use it to generate hydrogen for simpler, cheaper, more reliable, sustainable hydrogen powered cars.

      We don’t even have enough lithium to replace the average country’s existing cars, let alone all of them, or literally anything else that requires lithium.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Seriously if it was free for me to run a hot tub I would be a more relaxed person…but somehow these negative power prices never seem to trickle down to the consumer 🤔.

      • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        It still costs real money to maintain the infrastructure; so even if the power was always free; you would still have to pay something to cover the maintenance costs.