Here’s the article this is responding to if anyone wants to read it. Here’s the study it’s reporting on.

I’d say the tweet is at least a little bit disingenuous because the article is not arguing against the adoption of solar power, rather the focus is on what the challenges to California’s solar goals are and what possible solutions might be. The tone is “economic constraints might slow down solar, how can that be addressed?” This is all from 2021, and it looks like since then the slowdown in solar capacity increase it cites as a concern has not materialized, still lots of consistent growth since then. I haven’t read enough to know whether this is because the study was wrong somehow, or that it’s premise that solar installation costs might not continue to drop just didn’t pan out, or that the increased subsidies it suggested came through, but it’s an interesting topic.

It’s colosally stupid to tie solar power generation to It’s economic value. We are quickly heading to a future with climate extremes without doing something different.

It’s not stupid to acknowledge that individuals and businesses make decisions on the basis of money. That isn’t the same thing as giving climate concerns a lower relative priority. You can have climate as your highest priority, and still pursue that priority much more effectively by considering financial incentives and their effects, and to me that is what this article and connected study seem to be doing.

When the last tree has fallen and the rivers are poisoned, you cannot eat money.

You are missing the point. Why have you, RamenJunkie not personally set up enough solar panels to provide everyone with all the energy they need? You can’t afford it? Well, surely there must be a bank somewhere that would loan you the money. All that electricity would be really valuable. Oh, the bank doesn’t think the economics make sense.

One way or another the economic problems need to be addressed and, in order to do that, they must first be acknowledged and understood. That’s what the article was trying to do. You can’t just sweep it under the rug and figure some sucker will pay for it for the rest of us.

If the provate sector can’t handle itnthen the government should do it, preferably with bull shit war machine funds, and provide it to the populace.

And you don’t think some kind of economic analysis is necessary before deciding if the private sector can “handle it” or exactly how the government can beat interveine?

You’re not exactly wrong about anything, but understanding exactly how the economics break down is important, regardless of how we break down responsibility between the public and private sectors.

Of course this is all academic when the country elects Republicans and the Democrats keep nominating neoliberals. At least with a private marketplace solution it wouldn’t get shredded the moment Republicans win power.

I mean, we have had like a decade or more now to prove out that the private sector can’t handle converting society to solar.