Yes. All of my problems are the government’s fault.
Well that’s a rediculous mischaracterization. All my problems are capitalism and how it influences the government’s fault.
If only the government would government me out of this!
Thankfully that is going to happen anyway through simple economics. Fossil fuel extraction is functionally already a peak technology, out of which every bit of efficiency has been squeezed by over 100 years of frantic and lavishly funded scientific development, whereas solar, battery, and wind technologies have been absolutely plunging in $-per-Kw to deploy and have much much further to go. So governments can try to slow this down as much as they wish, but it’s as much a fool’s errand as trying to rescue the horse industry in about 1920.
Now as for the question of “why isn’t this more efficient technology resulting in savings for, me, the consumer?” I can only encourage you to look at the entire history of extractive, investor-driven capitalism for the answer.
Yeah, oil used to be the cheapest energy source for most situations (with the notable exception of mass power generation, were coal - an environmental even worse fossil fuel - was cheaper), but over the last couple of decades due to pressure on both the supply side (the easilly and cheaply extractable stuff gone) and from competing energy sources (like solar and wind-generation) oil stopped being one of the cheapest energy sources and it was pushed into just those uses were its high energy density gave it an advantage (i.e. transportation).
With better battery technology even that advantage is being lost (so electric cars are becoming the standard), which leaves only some chemical synthesis processes as places were oil is the best option.
Coal was kind pushed out of most of its markets long ago (hence you don’t see that many steam trains around) so it is mainly used in power generation, and the falling cost of solar is making coal uncompetitive in it.
Gas is a little behind oil, with its main uses being domestic heating and cooking - now transiting to electric - and power generation - where renewables are now cheaper.
The trend for fossil fuels has been obvious for decades but there is naturally a TON of inertia in the pricing changes actually resulting in the needed infrastructure changes to transition away from them plus the Economic interests which extract rents in those areas are very literally paying politicians to delay this change as much as possible hence phenomenons like many more rightwing political parties pushing anti-renewables policies.
This is really a huge oversimplification of a complex and nuanced topic. But the main thing worth mentioning is that your utility bills, in all likelihood, are already insanely cheap if you compare what you get to any other time in history. Like, keeping your home temperature at a perfectly pleasant temperature 24 hours per day probably costs you only a couple hours of labor each month. Compare this to gathering sticks in the forest and lighting a fire inside a mud hut - which, btw, also gives you lung cancer faster than cigarettes.
Should the government invest more in renewables? Yes, obviously. They should also fund the infrastructure necessary to make renewables work at scale, and research to improve renewable generation, transmission, and storage tech in order to close the gap between what is practical now and what we need to achieve. And while they are at it, they should introduce improved pricing schemes to head off increased wasteful usage. But will any of this actually have a direct impact on consumer pricing…? Probably not, since almost all utilities are already state owned or else heavily regulated. The cost of electricity is determined more by committee and political maneuvering than the actual price of, say, coal or solar on a day to day basis. The actual mechanism of paying for power to be generated and delivered to your house on demand is a combination of the price you pay per kwh, property taxes, government revenue in general, debt taken on by the government or utility, investments made in the past, etc. If you actually want a cheaper price per kwh, the solution is simply petitioning whatever regulatory body is in charge to lower it.
Of course, the problem with lower prices is that they encourage wasteful usage. If electricity becomes free, then aunt Ethel will start blasting the AC while leaving the windows open, because she likes to be comfortable while listening to the birds chirp. Without appropriate pricing schemes, people and companies will use up as much additional renewable capacity as is built as soon as you finish building it.
My heating bills runs close to $800 a month in the Winter. That is more than a few hours of labor.
heating bills runs close to $800 a month
You are spending WAY too much per month on heat. Upgrade the insulation in your home and seal air leaks.
Also, do not use resistive heat. It is the most expensive heating solution by a wide margin.
Trust me, I have been eyeing a heat pump for awhile now.
The house is close to 4k square feet, but I do have 10 people living there so it is being well utilized. I also live in Alaska so we get entire months of sub 20 temperatures.
It is still hard to deal with when you get that fuel bill.
Hence why I said “in all likelihood”. There are always exceptions to the rule. Apparently you are one of them.
The average for the whole US during the winter is just under $1,000. That is around $250 a month. This is also not a “few” hours.
Central air can easily run +$200 a month during the summer.
I will admit I have a big house that is heated with diesel. My bill would be half that if I had a heat pump.
Considering most Americans were living paycheck to paycheck before this recent bout of inflation, I don’t think most have any extra money to play around with anymore. It is time for tough decisions like keeping the house warm or eating things other than ramen.
Taking away (partially or completely) reliance upon carbon or nuclear energy will reduce costs and help save the planet. Like my solar set up, it costs less to run my home and workshop in summer than it does in winter.
Would companies make it cheaper or would they keep the price and pocket the profit?
They can’t, if you have a functioning market economy. There should be competition and renewables, due to their more decentralized nature even incite competition.
You seem to assume that mergers and acquisitions are not an essential part of a market economy. Left to their own devices, capitalists will always end up trying to form monopolies. You need a strong regulatory state to keep them in check. But then because they are inexorably pulled towards maximizing profitability, they will try to capture the state and deregulate. So, unless you go to a very aggressively anticapitalist set of policies a market economy will never be “functioning” for long.
I don’t assume that, and I won’t argue for an entirely free market. I also agree with your observation that accumulation happens, however we might have different views on how long that actually takes. Atm the shift to renewables is disrupting the accumulation we already have in the energy sector, because it requires very little capital to build your own little solar powerplant compared to a fossil or nuclear powerplant (or large hydro, btw.). Same thing for battery storage units. So with renewables, there’s more potential for competition.
That might change again in the future through continued accumulation and shitty policies, but my point is: as long as we don’t have either monopolies or cartels and thusly competition in the market still exists, even large corporations can’t simply dictate prices to increase their margins.
How about this: “a functioning market economy” is only possibly with strong overshight of a greater authority than “the Market”, which puts the interests of citizens above the interests of businesses.
If left to their own devices the Free Market only ever exists in low barriers to entry and low economies of scale markets, like teddy bears or soap, not in markets were it’s much harder for new entrants and being bigger is always better - and energy generation until recently was very capital intensive and required big power plants or dams located in very specific places so was not a flat-playing-field size-agnostic market and tended towards monopolies and cartels.
Even nowadays with solar, even in those countries were personal generation is viable unless governments have intervened and force it to be otherwise there are barriers for individuals and small companies to sell their self-generated power (for example were I live they get 1/4 of the price selling than they do buying), which are a mix of cost barriers to entry (the cost of a proper converter on top of the cost of the additional panels if you want to go beyond self-consumption), financial structures dominated by and best suited for large companies (mainly the wholesale and consumer markets being separate, with the large companies sitting in the middle and extracting rents from being an intermediary) and even regulatory barriers to entry (the product of governments activelly legislating and regulating to benefit the large energy companies).
What’s the context of the painting?
Reverse image search is a powerful tool
Holy shit, I always just assumed it was John Brown
It does look just like John Brown
He looks real good, for having been a’mouldering in the grave for 70 years!
Which reverse image search do you use? I use Tineye.
Norman Rockwell. He did paintings of Americana. This one is about the civic duty to speak up or something
If “our” means on the US, you may have to take a look at your electricity monopolies for it to make any difference.
The US has some of the cheapest energy in the civilized world. I’m not sure what to draw from that fact, but it is clear our energy system works pretty well for the end-user.
For a counterpoint, check out Germany’s expensive as fuck energy.
It’s also one of the oldest and poorly maintained for much of the country. As the data centers keep going up it’s making it harder and harder to meet customers energy needs.
You have some of the world’s cheapest electricity wholesale. You also have a huge variance in prices to end-user, with the people that complain on the internet being among the most expensive in the world… because, of course, people that get cheaper prices don’t complain.
Also, yes, electricity in Germany is expensive as fuck.
No they wouldn’t. Final consumer cost is based on what people WILL pay not what they WANT to pay. At the end of the day the overarching goal of capitalism is for 99% of the population to spend 100% of their earnings. You can’t funnel all wealth to the 1% if the 99% are holding on to it.
In a free market, people will pay less for the same service if they can.
Capitalistic utility monopolies are a scam.
Yes. BUT there are certain ways a government can help its citizens (and itself in most cases) by allowing them to be self sufficient that has nothing to do with electric companies or monopolies at all. The subsidies for solar panels were a great example of this. Depending on your personal needs, you could generate enough power to take yourself off the grid, and the government invested in your panels by way of those subsidies. In many cases the extra electricity from the panels that you don’t use can go back into a grid to be used by someone else. Theoretically helping you and the government. There are, of course some issues with the system but speaking from experience it can absolutely work and work wonderfully.
Unfortunately Trump (of course) has killed these subsidies so that will not be a thing as of new years 2026.
So you’re telling me if I found a way reach all my fellow power company customers we could strike and lower our power rates?
Yes. It’s like big telecom. When people install panels at home, power companies start inventing additional fees. If communities start looking for local grids, companies start lobbying to outlaw this.
Many states have very regulated utility prices: you may need just a half dozen buddies and get appointed to the oversight board that approves rates
This guy politics.
In the short term, yes. The money you’ve saved is now considered “disposable income” and will be absorbed by the next person in line.
If a paycheck could make you wealthy, no one would give you a paycheck. A retirement account CAN make you wealthy but only after the machine has squeezed 40+ years out of you. But one way or another that money is leaving your hands and flowing back into the system.
This is sounding like you’re trying to do a socialism over here.
Sounds like you don’t understand what socialism is
The main problem with that is the large power consumption by industry. This is ensuring continued profits for the company and thereby weakens your influence, similar to hiring scabs.
The UK is leading the western world in renewables in many ways, yet our bills are some of the most expensive.
The UK isn’t leading they way. They’re dragged kicking and screaming because they no longer have access to cheap Russian fuel. They’ve made it into the 45% bracket, which is good but not exceptional.
Sweden, Finland and Denmark had the highest RES (Renewable energy source) shares among Member States in 2024 due to strong hydro industries (Sweden and Finland), wind power and wide use of solid biofuels for district heating. All of which are driven by public investment and administration.
UK drop off in carbon emissions over the last 40 years has largely been the result of deindustrialization and exporting of manufacturing abroad. They still consume a great deal of carbon per capita. They just do it by purchasing finished goods from overseas.
Of late, they’ve also been rebuilding their old dirty energy economy to power AI datacenters.
Also to add to what you wrote, another reason is that their North Sea oil reserves became pretty much depleted in the last decade or two with gas following it, which has pushed gas prices higher and hence pushed people to user more electricity (gas prices in Britain were famously low) and along with exporting all industry to places like China and Bangladesh that has naturally brought down Britain’s direct CO2 emissions.
Yet another reason is that the Crown makes money from licensing space for offshore wind farms since they’re the ones who officially own the seabed around Britain.
I used to live as an immigrant in Britain and, still today, it still never ceases to amaze me how so many of them keep falling for the “Britain is leading…” bullshit they’re constantly fed by the media and politicians over there, not just in this but in pretty much everything (Brexit didn’t happen in a vacuum).
Even my shitty shit country - Portugal - has long been beating Britain in this (as it’s a much poorer country, badly managed and with lots of problems) purelly because even in the time of Salazar (the Fascist dictator) there was a lot of investment in Hydro-generation, which continued after the Revolution in 74 and expanded into Wind-generation (actual in-shore wind, because unlike in Britain the NIMBYs don’t have the power to just push it to be the much more expensive offshore kind) and later Solar, so whilst Britain was mismanaging their North Sea reserves and burning oil and gas like there’s no tomorrow (part of the reason why Norway has a massive sovereign fund and the UK does not - the Norwegians didn’t just burn it like crazy and wasted the money of whatever was sold) my country was already generating a lot of its power from hydro and it just became more so since.
Shitty shit Portugal is now in the 75%+ bracket on renewables.
The idea that Britain is leading anybody in renewables adoption is hilariously wrong.
But the fossil fuel billionaires are bribing them now. What’s the point of creating solar and wind billionaires in ten years time? Who knows who will be in power and collecting their bribes then.
Truth, but the fossil fuels industry lobbies A LOT to keep your bills high and their pockets overflowing.
Legal bribing, if you will.
No, no, you can’t have green energy until corporations figure out how to make just as much money off it as they do fossil fuels. Don’t worry though, they’re innovating. Last summer some prick about had my dad convinced to pay him to put solar panels on his roof and then also continue paying for the power those panels generated.
Not to mention that in certain countries they could also get better public services if they didn’t need to spend money on a military sized for power projection into the Middle East …
I’m confused, how does this help shareholders?
Reminder that China’s competent government has done exactly this, and as a result they produce 93% of the world’s solar photovoltaic panels.
Can we get the competency with out the whole… Everything else?
Or is our choice between awful and ineffective or awful and effective?
It is what it is. The world is arguably better with them than without
awful and effective?
It’s bad to do green energy when you’re Chinese because… ?
What’s the awful everything else? China has consistently some of the highest government satisfaction rates in the world
As a Spaniard, it’s hard to conceive 90+% of the population being satisfied with the central government, everyone here hates our government and politicians.
Are you sure you’re speaking for Chinese people when you criticize whatever “everything else” you refer to?
Remind me. What happens when you speak ill of the government there? You think that might affect polls?
Ill freely admit China has many strengths… but it is definitely authoritarian also.
China has consistently some of the highest government satisfaction rates in the world
Surveyman: Hello random Chinese friendo, how is life under the glorious CCP?
Random Chinese friend: Can’t complain.
Surveyman: China has consistently some of the highest government satisfaction rates in the world
China has literally a fascist government. Authoritarians that seize corporate control for nationalistic interests while still deferring to original private property owners.
Cult of leadership is typical too. Which includes the satisfaction of citizens.
Makes me laugh when people here laud China. Especially when they’re commies who fell for the lie that China is communism.
“When you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds soon follow”
John Dean
So 1.4 billion Chinese are essentially suffering Stockholm Syndrome from the evil Chinese Government, and their satisfaction rates have nothing to do with the consistently increasing living standards?
It’s great being comfortable while your government is committing atrocities. Cozy cozy!
Waiting for the day someone finds a government who doesn’t commit atrocities.
In a field of shit, pointing at a specific turd and shouting “Look at that shit” is at best redundant, at worst sleazy propagandistic and hipocrite bollocks.
China’s present day level of support for atrocity is nothing compared with most of the West’s active support (diplomatic, economic and even with weapons) for the the present day equivalent of the Nazis committing a Genocide in Gaza.
Even what Russia is doing in Ukraine (with the support of China) is nowhere close to that shit if measured in terms of civilian casualties as a percentage of the population (even if including military casualties, it’s still well below the levels of bloodshed in Gaza).
We would need to go back to the time of Mao to find China supporting atrocities at such a level.
That “atrocities” flag is best waved from the top of the moral high ground, not from the top of a pile of Palestinian children’s bones.
Are you talking about the EU-supported genocide of Palestinians?
As a Spaniard, you should ask your parents and/or grandparents if in Franco’s day they would really tell their real opinions about their government to some random person doing a poll.
Government satisfaction data in an autocracy is always going to be poluted because people fear their words might reach the ears of somebody in a position of authority and them being punished in some way for being critical of the government, so they keep it to themselves and share it at most with family and close friends.
(And this is before we even count the effects from people’s main information sources being highly controlled in such regimes, so literally they might think other countries are shitholes compared to theirs because that’s what newspapes and TV tell them. Even though people are quite a lot more cynical about the “news” in such regimes - one of the Soviet times jokes was “There is no pravda [truth] in the Pravda [the newspaper], there is no izvestia [news] in the Izvestia [another newspaper]” - such total control in aggregate still pushes public opinion to be better than otherwise).
People have no such need to keep their mouth shut in Democracies. Further, I would even say that in Democracies people are incentivised to be loudly critical - those who support a different political party than the one in power tend to be loudly critical purelly out of tribalism, same as they would criticize the other team in a footbal match even if that team was playing well.
All this to say that we don’t really know how much people in China are satisfied or not with the authorities there because smart people living in a autocratic regime know better than to voice criticism of those in power, which polutes the data, whilst in Democracies political clubism also probably polutes the data but in the opposite direction.
Your comment can be wholly ignored by explaining to you that the surveys I refer to are done by western institutions like Pew Research, the University of California or the Ash Center for Democratic Governance (source).
You, as a westerner, believe your western propaganda that China is an antidemocratic autocracy where people can’t give their political opinions freely. Chinese people simply don’t feel that way as per any serious study, and your opinion can be safely ignored because it’s based on your misunderstandings as a misled westerner.
I happen to live next door to Spain, in Portugal, and I did ask my parents and older friends (some of which who are very leftwing and were Communists back in the days of the Revolution) and back then in our own Fascism (which ran parallel to Spain’s) nobody would tell their true opinion about the government to a stranger, much less a stranger claiming to be doing a poll for some university in a country which is viewed and views itself as an adversary of your own country.
Hell, in such a setup people would loudly tell the foreigner (or local working for those foreigners) just how great their government was just in case that was some kind of sting operation by the secret police or what you said leaked out: back when even your neighbours could rat you out to the secret police for saying something critical of the regime, criticizing the regime to somebody claiming to be doing a “poll” like this was a good way to end up a political prisioner (and, unlike those hailing from the middle class, politicial prisioners from poorer families didn’t get the velvet glove treatment, and most people were poor and working class).
So, it’s strange you didn’t ask such things from older people in the country you claim to hail from…
That and given how you phrased…
You, as a westerner, believe your western propaganda that China is an antidemocratic autocracy where people can’t give their political opinions freely. Chinese people simply don’t feel that way as per any serious study, and your opinion can be safely ignored because it’s based on your misunderstandings as a misled westerner.
all sounds a lot like you’re not a Spaniard. Which would make your earlier statement:
As a Spaniard, it’s hard to conceive 90+% of the population being satisfied with the central government
a lie.
Guess who would try and pass themselves as a “westerner” to seem more trustworthy in a forum mostly frequented by “westerners” when defending China?
A propaganda astroturfer.
(Funilly enough, there’s a ton of anti-China propaganda in the West, especially in the US, it’s just that this time you seriously overplayed that as a card when you tried to whitewash your own propaganda with it)
China has consistently some of the highest government satisfaction rates in the world
it’s hard to conceive 90+% of the population being satisfied with the central government, everyone here hates our government and politicians.
You’re so close to tripping over the fact that authoritarian governments can’t be trusted to provide honest answers. Who wants to say you’re unsatisfied when doing so could get you vanned?
