Price often condenses information and provides clarity.

For a while, solar/wind proponents have operated with two simultaneous but generally conflicting narratives.

-One narrative is that solar/wind are more environmentally friendly and should be subsidized. To the extent that they don't grow sufficiently fast, it's because we're not doing enough to artificially boost their adoption.

-The other narrative is continually remind how cheap solar/wind have become. Proponents will post charts/studies showing that solar/wind are cheaper than other types of energy, and that it "just makes sense now". In practice, a lot of caveats are often excluded.

The thing is, price usually cuts through confusion on these types of matters. Especially price over a significant amount of time and space, rather than just price in a snapshot of time and locality.

If solar/wind are indeed cheaper than other energy sources, why aren't they being built in place of others? Why isn't it a no-brainer for any megacorp to just install terawatts of them all over? For example, the percentage growth of solar power in India over the past 5-10 years is impressive, but in terms of raw numbers, way more coal power was brought online during that period than solar. The answer is often that they're *not actually* cheaper in an all-inclusive sense. And if they're not cheaper, why is that? The answer is often because they're more materially intensive, less durable, and not as environmentally friendly as many proponents argue, either. That cost (panels, turbines, batteries, maintenance, decommissioning, and replacement) is going somewhere, and usually quite materially.

That's not to say that solar/wind don't have uses (they do), but their usage is often hamfisted into places where they're not the most economic choice, and where they are not the most economic choice, it's often because they're not necessarily the most environmental choice either.

Price is often ignored or fudged in analysis, but it really does provide a powerful signal in aggregate that's worth paying attention to.

Bummer bitcoin mag has not responded. Since bitcoiners are already true believers maybe your real audience is Public Power magazine. Since you’re a APPA member maybe that will help. Also if you can get it to EPRI folks that seems like a win. Make sure to let us know when it’s published anywhere including just posting it to nostr so we can read it 🚁👍🏻

Bummer bitcoin mag has not responded. Since bitcoiners are already true believers maybe your real audience is Public Power magazine. Since you’re a APPA member maybe that will help. Also if you can get it to EPRI folks that seems like a win. Make sure to let us know when it’s published anywhere including just posting it to nostr so we can read it 🚁👍🏻

Bummer bitcoin mag has not responded. Since bitcoiners are already true believers maybe your real audience is Public Power magazine. Since you’re a APPA member maybe that will help. Also if you can get it to EPRI folks that seems like a win. Make sure to let us know when it’s published anywhere including just posting it to nostr so we can read it 🚁👍🏻

Sounds like an interesting article. Maybe try Decrypt. You could also try Medium. There's a Nostr blogging app but I can't remember the name.

This seems not good. Govt overreach. Don’t start letting govt pay your bills, govt should reduce your bills not pay them nostr:note15faj2jj6a97dggh8dxff3rlrg45kc93q5rgf3a3gkju3vgcuh9gs3r7v65

I’d love to learn more about where you are and how you’re approaching incorporating bitcoin into power markets. I’m kinda familiar with the opportunity to leverage bitcoin to stabilize grids and monetize stranded and underutilized production capacity but I’ve also experienced the challenges of orange-pilling (very) large, energy corporations.