This is a false framing of the actual dynamic at play. The problem is not the unmonetizability of it. This IS an issue to certain capitalist forces but the much more serious problem in the eyes of the capitalist state is that solar is decentralized. Centralized power production relies on infrastucture controlled by the capitalist. Even a personal home generator needs fuel to function. Which must be bought from those who control oil supplies. Solar once bought is entirely decoupled from their control. You can have solar panels and they cannot cut you power off anymore. It is an issue of power. Not the electric kind but the political kind. Controlling energy gives a person significant power of a society. Part of this is the ability to monetize that control but it is also simply a mechanism for control. The proletariet is seen as a threat by the capitalist and so any technology or policy that would remove direct control over the lives of proles is a threat. If they cannot cut off our power it removes a way for them to stop us from rebelling against them. Food and water supplies are also centrally controlled for this region. In many regions it would be cheaper and make more sense to grow much of our own food locally and have small well or rain catchment water systems. These are not used as they would destroy central control over the proles means to live. Making the prole a threat that cannot easily be neutralized. “Off-grid” living will always be something they attempt to discourage and make possible only for the wealthy. As to live truly off grid would mean to break free from the majority of the control mechanisms that are used to keep you subservient.
This is a good argument for utilities and natural monopolies to all be state owned and operated.
It’s a social good to use solar and if the market is not able to operate in a way that enables a social good, then clearly markets are the wrong choice for economic management of the power grid.
Which is it? Is it that it doesn’t work or that you need batteries to make it work which is expensive? You know… the thing I literally mentioned in my comment that it is purposefully kept expensive to prevent proles from doing it en masse? Because it can’t be both.
I will answer for you. It is 100% possible to live entirely off solar you own as many people do it day to day and have no grid connection at all. It doesn’t even take that much solar if you don’t waste a shit ton of power like most people in the west do.
I also do not get your issue with me using ““they”” when I quite literally name the they I am talking about early in the comment. Should I continue to write out “the capitalist state” everytime to make it more clear for you?
Also your entire comment is operating off of a massive assumption that the goal is 24/7 luxurious power like you are used to in the west. Electricity is not a “yes” or “no” question. You can have some, a lot, an abundance, none, etc. You can get a lot done on very limited power. I have 500W of solar panels and a small portable power station along with various rechargable devices. When the grid goes down I have, a DC cooler I can use to keep food from going rancid, a rice cooker I can use, a handheld radio I can use, my computer/phone, and I can keep my home dimly lit indefinitely. Which is much better than pitch black darkness. Can I slow cook a roast or turn on a gaming PC with a big beefy GPU? Can I power my AC? No. That doesn’t make what I can do any less valuable.
In a revolution any decoupling from centrally controlled infrastucture is a force multiplier.
So anyway… no. They don’t have me by the balls. I can survive just fine with the power grid cut off. Speak for yourself.
This is a false framing of the actual dynamic at play. The problem is not the unmonetizability of it. This IS an issue to certain capitalist forces but the much more serious problem in the eyes of the capitalist state is that solar is decentralized. Centralized power production relies on infrastucture controlled by the capitalist. Even a personal home generator needs fuel to function. Which must be bought from those who control oil supplies. Solar once bought is entirely decoupled from their control. You can have solar panels and they cannot cut you power off anymore. It is an issue of power. Not the electric kind but the political kind. Controlling energy gives a person significant power of a society. Part of this is the ability to monetize that control but it is also simply a mechanism for control. The proletariet is seen as a threat by the capitalist and so any technology or policy that would remove direct control over the lives of proles is a threat. If they cannot cut off our power it removes a way for them to stop us from rebelling against them. Food and water supplies are also centrally controlled for this region. In many regions it would be cheaper and make more sense to grow much of our own food locally and have small well or rain catchment water systems. These are not used as they would destroy central control over the proles means to live. Making the prole a threat that cannot easily be neutralized. “Off-grid” living will always be something they attempt to discourage and make possible only for the wealthy. As to live truly off grid would mean to break free from the majority of the control mechanisms that are used to keep you subservient.
Having solar panels does not mean “they” can’t cut your power off and ruin your life.
The sun doesn’t shine 24/7, and the amount of batteries you’d need to be able to be completely off grid is prohibitively expensive.
“They” still have you bye the balls.
This is a good argument for utilities and natural monopolies to all be state owned and operated.
It’s a social good to use solar and if the market is not able to operate in a way that enables a social good, then clearly markets are the wrong choice for economic management of the power grid.
full stop here. For everything.
Which is it? Is it that it doesn’t work or that you need batteries to make it work which is expensive? You know… the thing I literally mentioned in my comment that it is purposefully kept expensive to prevent proles from doing it en masse? Because it can’t be both.
I will answer for you. It is 100% possible to live entirely off solar you own as many people do it day to day and have no grid connection at all. It doesn’t even take that much solar if you don’t waste a shit ton of power like most people in the west do.
I also do not get your issue with me using ““they”” when I quite literally name the they I am talking about early in the comment. Should I continue to write out “the capitalist state” everytime to make it more clear for you?
Also your entire comment is operating off of a massive assumption that the goal is 24/7 luxurious power like you are used to in the west. Electricity is not a “yes” or “no” question. You can have some, a lot, an abundance, none, etc. You can get a lot done on very limited power. I have 500W of solar panels and a small portable power station along with various rechargable devices. When the grid goes down I have, a DC cooler I can use to keep food from going rancid, a rice cooker I can use, a handheld radio I can use, my computer/phone, and I can keep my home dimly lit indefinitely. Which is much better than pitch black darkness. Can I slow cook a roast or turn on a gaming PC with a big beefy GPU? Can I power my AC? No. That doesn’t make what I can do any less valuable.
In a revolution any decoupling from centrally controlled infrastucture is a force multiplier.
So anyway… no. They don’t have me by the balls. I can survive just fine with the power grid cut off. Speak for yourself.