Africa's solar revolution is vast and speedy

(economist.com)

90 points | by andsoitis 1 hour ago

11 comments

  • sheepscreek 24 minutes ago
    The current geopolitical climate is becoming a blessing for Africa, and much of the developing world. With China's ties with the US all but severed, it is incentivized to redirect most of its resources into building Africa. That in turn will reinvigorate the Chinese economy.

    If Africa has abundance of electricity, they can become consumers of Chinese EVs, and more.

    • Affric 8 minutes ago
      And huge mineral wealth and quite a few countries with poor governance. Also far away enough from China that they don’t have any long standing disputes.

      Couldn’t be much better for the Chinese.

  • hunglee2 21 minutes ago
    Decentralised power generation is the future for Africa, many of whose countries cannot rely on central government to efficiently operate a national grid. I am thinking primarily of South Africa, where many businesses and (rich enough) home owners have back up diesel generators to fill in in moments of load shedding. Solar of course is the most decentralised form of power of all. Positive stuff for Africa. This is where China overcapacity really does lead to more equitable power (literally) distribution, so congrats to them also
  • dead_hn_theory 0 minutes ago
    Actual title: China's solar revolution is vast and speedy
  • happyPersonR 4 minutes ago
    With EVs providing transportation, lots of countries not just in Africa, are seeing rapid deployment of solar and batteries.

    It’s amazing :)

    Great for everyone and will change everything if allowed to continue

  • msy 33 minutes ago
    There are parallels here to the way much of Africa fixed land-lines phones and went straight to mobile. Which has also been powered by Chinese hardware.
  • blackoil 21 minutes ago
    Was this scale of solar revolution inevitable or did China willed (subsidized) it?
    • defrost 10 minutes ago
      Both, in the sense that it was absolutely inevitable (and predicted 20 years past in various looking forward forums), and that China made an informed high level plan to be first on the ground to make things happen in their favour.

      Is it smart or stupid business to lose money upfront (subsidise) to establish and secure a market for years to follow?

      Closely followed by, is China deeply sinister and evil for having long term plans and seeing them through, or are some simply upset to see China getting there first and doing it better?

    • throwaway473825 8 minutes ago
      It's inevitable, but China accelerated it (as did a few others). And solar isn't alone. Any professor in physics will say that EVs, heat pumps and LEDs are all inevitable.
    • numbsafari 11 minutes ago
      Probably both. Sunlight is all around us. Once the tech became good enough, it just needed growth capital and strategic willpower.
    • 0xCorn 4 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • nntwozz 45 minutes ago
    Meanwhile in Sweden we have skyrocketing prices each winter since the war started, even though we rank 3rd in the world for nuclear power per capita.
    • guepe 33 minutes ago
      Price of electricity is set by the last most expensive power generation. If peak power requires expensive gas… that’s normal.
      • stavros 25 minutes ago
        But why can't we get away from needing the most expensive form of power generation, even at peak power?
        • servo_sausage 4 minutes ago
          Because the peak requires on-demand power.

          So you either need surplus in some way, to over cover the peak, or storage.

          Both are still more expensive than fast gas turbines.

          • throwaway473825 0 minutes ago
            The old system with a nuclear surplus was evidently cheaper. If you don't care about emissions, coal is also cheaper.
        • blackoil 13 minutes ago
          Accept you'll have to work with China for solar and batteries.
          • stavros 12 minutes ago
            I'm working with China for everything else already.
        • motionlessveloc 18 minutes ago
          Because most of Africa is great for solar, while Sweden is not.

          Solar is also a great match for countries that need A/C during the day (like Africa), and less so for those that need heating at night (like Sweden).

        • throwaway473825 19 minutes ago
          Sweden used to have twice as many nuclear reactors as it does today. There's also more export capacity, and for Germany anything from Sweden is considered cheap.
    • IncreasePosts 4 minutes ago
      I think the prices would always skyrocket in Sweden in the winter - y'all use about 1.7x as much electricity in the winter as you do in the summer, and that's gonna cost you.
    • Barrin92 5 minutes ago
      not "even though" but "because of" nuclear power is expensive, in Sweden per kilowatt hour it's the most expensive part of the energy mix.
  • bawolff 35 minutes ago
    Things change quickly when the economics make sense.
  • shimman 31 minutes ago
    People need to realize this is going to make a massive difference for developing countries to not have to rely on expensive alternatives like LNG. There is a tremendous cost when you have to build very labor + resource intensive infrastructure versus just buying solar panels + batteries.

    Will follow a similar path of preferring cellular networks to fiber lines.

    An interesting podcast series that goes over just this from earlier this year:

    https://thepolycrisis.org/electric-world-order-ep-1-the-quie...

  • dan_grec 53 minutes ago
    Make no mistake, this is happening all over the globe with enormous success.

    Australians now get free power for three hours a day. India, Pakistan and many other developing countries are deploying solar and batteries insanely fast because it’s so cheap direct from China.

    China themselves add more solar capacity in a few months than the entire US grid.

    There really is only one country with prohibitively expensive solar and batteries thanks to tariffs. Fingers crossed that will change soon.

    • bruce511 32 minutes ago
      Solar is also unique in that it is both affordable and practical to deploy locally.

      Part of the difficulty in estimating growth is that a significant chunk of installed supply is not a "power station" that is easily counted and measured.

      Residential solar is a few kw here, a few there. But it adds up quickly to mw and gw.

      And yes, this results in a larger variable demand on the grid. Which makes planning harder. But it's cheap enough for any established business with a roof to install. It's cheap enough for residential. And from decision to power flowing can be measured in months not years.

      • dan_grec 4 minutes ago
        From the day I ordered all the parts for my residential 7.3kw system until it was fully permitted and back feeding the grid was three weeks.

        BC, Canada.

    • adrianN 25 minutes ago
      What do panels cost in the US? I can order a 500W panel from amazon.de for a little under 100€. It looks like amazon.com only has panels for $300+. Is Amazon just very expensive?
    • ihsw 48 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • yanhangyhy 24 minutes ago
    History doesn't always have to be linear. Africa can leverage modern technology to leapfrog many stages—much like how many elderly people in China never used a computer in their lives, yet became hooked on short videos powered by smartphones and AI. For Africa, solar energy and TikTok are profound transformations. Then there are cheap Chinese goods. The driving force behind all these changes is primarily China.