1297

Up on the dam, almost everything that looks like a problem becomes an advantage.

The plant sits above the fog line, in thin, clear air that lets far more sunlight through.

The higher you go, the stronger and cleaner the sunlight becomes.

Cold actually helps, because solar panels work more efficiently when they are not baking in heat.

And then there is the snow, which acts like a giant mirror, bouncing extra light up onto the panels from below.

Scientists call it the albedo effect, and it can lift a mountain plant’s output well beyond anything possible in the valley.

A test site at a similar height recorded yearly output far above a typical Swiss plant.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago

...the assumption was simple, that solar belongs low and warm, on sunny roofs and flat fields, not up in the freezing thin air of the mountains.

Well that's a stupid assumption. what other kind of electronic works better when it's super hot??

The country makes plenty of power in summer, but runs short in winter, when demand climbs and it has to import electricity.

That gap is set to grow as the nation closes its nuclear plants.

Damn, two stupid ideas from the Swiss. At least the fabled "someone" put those solar panels up there. 🙄

[-] Randelung@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Yeah, the fears about nucular are global I'm afraid. The Swiss decided 40 years ago that they would no longer invest in nuclear energy and massively reduce upkeep on the existing reactors, thereby making issues a self fulfilling prophecy. Most of the reactors have now reached their end of life, if not ten years ago. So turning them off is really a necessity, but building new ones now would be stupid.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 13 points 1 day ago

Nuclear plants have a limited life time. You have to replace what ages out, and they haven't been. Probably because they decided that the cost didn't make sense anymore in the face of renewables.

[-] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago

The grid still needs baseline power when renewables aren't renewing.

[-] MangoCats@feddit.it 5 points 17 hours ago

Probably because they decided that the cost didn’t make sense anymore in the face of renewables.

The political costs of nuclear power are astronomical. Safety regulation is A) a very good idea, but B) grossly overblown and C) outrageously costly to implement to the levels NIMBYs demand. Satisfying them that a windmill isn't going to fall over and kill them is a lot easier.

[-] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

You should buy a home next to a nuclear power plant.

[-] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

oh yeah all that water vapor is real scary 😱

[-] gian@lemmy.grys.it 2 points 7 hours ago

I think that the Chernobyl disaster made much more psychological damages than real ones, in the long term.

[-] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago

It was very useful to Big Oil.

[-] Tacky4092@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago

Solar is much cheaper than nuclear in the long run, you dumbass

[-] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

you seem delightful. People must really like you in your personal life.

[-] gian@lemmy.grys.it 5 points 7 hours ago

Yep, but require much more space. And it could be not available when you need it.

[-] luciferofastora@feddit.org 3 points 10 hours ago

I agree with you, content-wise, but there's no need to insult people. It provokes emotions that add nothing reasonable and productive.

Let's work together on a better, kinder world <3

[-] oce@jlai.lu 2 points 17 hours ago

What's your source? Solar panels certainly are much easier and cheaper to setup, but what about over 40 years (average age of reacrors in France)?

[-] isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 17 hours ago

Levelized cost of energy. It considers the full lifetime cost. And LCOE of solar is less than half that of fission.

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2026/04/17/new-metric-shows-renewables-are-53-cheaper-than-nuclear-power/

[-] Ninjasftw@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

So you're happy to go without power after sunset then?
Until we have more storage options or diversified sources then that's what you get. Or do you think it will all happen by magic?
Maybe try being less rude unless you have a solution that doesn't just involve wishful thinking.

[-] karlhungus@lemmy.ca 7 points 19 hours ago

Wait till they find out about batteries!

[-] Ninjasftw@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Ffs this is exactly what I mean.... To power Switzerland for only 6 hours (38GWh), you would need approximately 30,000 to 35,000 utility-scale batteries. Where and how exactly are you building them?

[-] Ghoelian@piefed.social 1 points 3 hours ago

Not a problem if you have your own panels and your own battery.

I'm not a city planner so i dont know where they'd go if you want to support the whole country, maybe ask one of them?

Also, you don't need to immediately take over the electricity of the whole damn country. Just start with one battery park somewhere, that already helps somewhat, and build out from there.

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 23 hours ago

Supply controlled energy grid.

Money is extremely good at influencing energy demand. If your power bill increases tenfold per kwh at night then you will do your laundry during the day when it's cheap. It only requires smart electric meters which are starting to be the norm.

Electric cars can further function as home batteries if they support bidirectional charging.

[-] Commuting4375@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Ah yes, the abstinence technique. Brilliant.

I for one like the ability to heat my home at night in the winter, not have it be >30°C inside in the summer (system has to catch up at night), keep my living space at a reasonable humidity, cook food, and use modern amenities without incurring a ridiculous cost.

There's no other way to cut it. We will need more electrical capacity than today, not less.

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 21 minutes ago* (last edited 18 minutes ago)

Why would you be heating at night?

Like seriously, I don't know anyone who doesn't turn their heating significantly down before going to bed. You only need to heat the bedrooms which are also generally colder.

Same with air conditioning. It's primarily needed when it's actually hot, which - as it turns out - is when the sun is shining and energy prices are low.

Besides: It completely ignores decentralized energy storage. Households with batteries can just let them charge when energy prices are low and discharge when prices are high.

There's a reason smart meters are starting to be mandated. People will need to adjust their habits slightly¹ but that's just the price to pay for sustainable energy.

¹Like very slightly. As in checking the energy price forecast before doing laundry.

Edit: A couple basic introductions to the topic to read up on if you're interested:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_meter (also read up on AMI)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid

this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
1297 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

86110 readers
3244 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS