this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026
666 points (97.7% liked)
solarpunk memes
5876 readers
446 users here now
For when you need a laugh!
The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!
But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.
Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.
Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines
Have fun!
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How can the price go negative? There's always going to be maintenance costs that have to be covered if nothing else.
prices do not actually go negative if the solar parks are correctly installed.
the issue is simple: the solar parks forgot an "off" switch, so they continue to push energy into the grid, even when there's no demand. so that destabilizes the grid which is bad, so the grid produces "negative electricity prices" which just means they pay someone else for taking that energy out of the grid to stabilize it, and they'll also charge the solar parks for pushing more power into the grid than the grid can handle.
honestly, it's just a construction mistake. the solar parks should obviously have a simple "off" switch to stop pushing power into the grid. they just forgot it during installation, end of story, no big deal. this is probably not going to be a permanent phenomenon, i'm very sure.
Here in Sweden our electricity provider gives us a real time view of consumption and prices. When we charge the car during peaks of overproduction we get paid and the amount on our bill goes visibly down. It usually happens like 5-15 times a year during summers, and occasionally also because of excess winds on the farms year around.
It's like a dumpster filling up, where you have to pay a waste management company to come haul that stuff away, at least if people can't find a way to take it off your hands for free.
The system is overloaded so there is no need for more power, in fact putting more power into the system has a negative effect. So there is no value to putting more power in the system and it may actually have a cost.
The system still has physical hardware that has to be maintained, the company has to charge it's customers to pay for this maintenance at the very minimum. As well as any other cost to deal with the excess power, although I don't see why that couldn't be mitigated by simply disconnecting excess panels from the system. That price should never be negative. It makes no sense. A negative price would mean they're paying their customers. For what?
Livin where it was an actual thing - they actually "paid" in the form of counting returned power as borrowed. So when you powered the grid, supplier counted energy you supplied and then promised to return the same amount when you needed.
They backed off of it but my friend caught that version and he was pretty hyped about it. Even when his solar panels will die, he's gonna be set for at least next decade on that payment lol.
What negative effect do you have in mind?
More generation than load makes voltage go up. More voltage has varying effects on equipment, ranging from no problem to exploding in a shower of molten metal.
The idea is there such an abundance of energy that they are willing to pay you to consume some of it to keep the net stable at 50 (or 60) Herz.
In practice, there are always taxes and surcharges that the final prices is not negative, but is lower than the surcharges themselves.
Too much energy is not good for the system, so there must be a way of compensation.
Can they not just cut off some of the panels with some sort of breaker when the output exceeds consumption/storage?
Because its deterrent for people to supply electricity when its not needed.
I have a 10kWp system, sometimes I have to pay for the electricity I create and I dont use. There's no maintenance costs in my system
Who are you paying when that happens?
Also, the panels never wear out or get damaged or have to be cleaned or anything? This isn't me trying to make a point against solar, I'm just questioning how there could ever be absolutely no cost to having it. More in the sense of an electric company rather than private owners.
Cleaning solar panels is quite literally spraying them with water, it takes about 5 minutes once a year. They do "wear out" over time, after 20 years they may only put out 80% of what they used to... Damage is possible, but the system I had at my old house withstood several severe wind storms and a couple hail storms with no noticeable lasting effects.
I don't have solar panels but I'll try to answer your questions. Let's start with why you may be charged for supplying electricity to the grid.
The Electrical grid is amazing, we can transfer power from one place to another with ease because of it, although it has several limitations. One limitation is that for the most part electricy that is generated must be immediately used or else it decay into heat. The more electricity generated the more heat is produced, and unused electricity becomes extra heat. The components on the grid are only designed to operate within certain limits. If the grid is already supplying more power than it needs and then someone starts to supply even more electricity the grid will be in trouble, components will wear out faster or break. So extra electricity that can't be stored in just as bad as not enough. That cost is shared between grid suppliers in some areas resulting in a cost for supplying electricity.
Also solar panels have switches that regulate the electricity they provide to the grid and it's those switches which wear out and break. Solar panels don't need much maintenance or repair but the supporting circuits do.