this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2025
1849 points (100.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

7523 readers
2448 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 90 points 4 days ago (33 children)

Ughh, no, negative prices aren't some weird "capitalism" thing. When the grid gets over loaded with too much power it can hurt it. So negative prices means that there is too much power in the system that needs to go somewhere.

There are things you can do like batteries and pump water up a hill then let it be hydroelectric power at night.

[–] [email protected] 81 points 4 days ago (3 children)

But it doesn't say "it can generate too much energy and damage infrastructure", they said "it can drive the price down". The words they chose aren't, like, an accident waiting for someone to explain post-hoc. Like, absolutely we need storage for exactly the reason you say, but they are directly saying the issue is driving the price down, which is only an issue if your not able to imagine a way to create this infrastructure without profit motive.

[–] loopedcandle 24 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yeah mate. The people writing here are economists not engineers, and that's the professional language for what they're talking about in their field. It's like if a nuclear engineer said "oh yeah, the reactor is critical" which means stable.

I hear the point your making and the point OP made, but this is how really well trained PhDs often communicate - using language in their field. It's sort of considered rude to attempt to use language from another specialty.

All of that context is lost in part b.c. this is a screenshot of a tweet in reply to another tweet, posted on Lemmy.

The way it's supposed to work is the economist should say "we don't know what this does to infrastructure you should talk to my good buddy Mrs. Rosie Revere Engineer about what happens."

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

All I know about nuclear reactors is that prompt critical is the "Get out of there stalker" one.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Your prompts are especially critical when you decide to let ChatGPT run your reactor controls.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Economists think in terms of supply and demand. Saying it drives prices down or negative is a perfectly good explanation of a flaw in the system, especially if you're someone on the operating side.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Why? Economists ≠ capitalists.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why is it a flaw from an economic perspective?

Both generation and consumption of electricity have a supply and demand. This is perfectly accepted in many other markets as well. We also had negative oil prices during the first Covid spike because the excavation cannot be stopped immediately. Certain industries like foundries also struggle with fully shutting down and restarting operations so sometimes they rather sell at a loss than stop operations. Farmers sell at a loss when the market is saturated just to sell somewhere and in other years they make a good profit on the same produce (assuming they actually have market power and aren't wrung dry by intermediate traders).

In terms of energy per capital investment and running costs solar power is among the cheapest energy sources, cheaper than fossils and much cheaper than nuclear power. So it is profitable overall to run solar power, even if sometimes the price is negative.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Nobody here is suggesting that we should avoid solar power because of this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

But the point is that it is not even a flaw from an economic perspective. There is demand both for short term flexible and long term stable energy production and energy consumption in the grid. If you assume prices to be a suitable instrument, which most economists do, then the negative price of the production is a positive price for the short term consumption.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago

this feels like someone just looking for an argument.. having negative pricing is a problem, and yes there are solutions like hydro and battery... hopefully this encourages that infrastructure to be created!

load more comments (29 replies)