this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2025
211 points (98.2% liked)
Technology
75233 readers
3034 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Small wind turbines are really, really poor. You need to go high to access the good air-streams and wide to get useful efficiency out of the turbine. Any wind turbine you put on your roof will vastly under-perform for the cost spent on it.
Not true, a wind turbine is dirt cheap for the power it can generate compared to solar panels.
Here the problem is regulation that makes it impossible if you have neighbors within 500 m.
If it wasn't for regulation a wind turbine would be a clearly better investment than solar panels.
A huge advantage with turbines is also that it tend to generate power when you need it the most for heating your house.
That's because they are big mechanical whirring machines. Solar panels are dead quiet and don't throw intermittent shade and have a very low risk of causing damage in the surrounding. There's good reasons they are forbidden for the average household to put on top of the chimney...
I'd be pretty comfortable saying that buying enough battery storage to power-shift a year of power is more expensive.
O, absolutely. The reality is the only reasonably economic way to do off-grid is with solar, battery, and a diesel or propane generator to top off the batteries when solar isn't cutting it.
There is another option. Reduce your energy usage so much that you barely need anything. Cabin in the woods with wifi?
That's not really a viable option, you need to be able to wash your clothes, and make your dinner, and cool your food, and have light to see.
Sure it's possible to reduce it, but there is a limit where it becomes extremely inconvenient.
LEDs use very little power, with the cabin in the woods idea I would think its fairly safe to say a log fire is used for cooking, same thing to heat some water for cleaning. Fridge really doesn't use much power if you look for something energy efficient, or just don't have one. Its not like you can't live without it.
I would have thought saying cabin in the woods kinda implies not having some things and living a simpler lifestyle?
Bio-chemical reactor toilet?
Sure, why not. But I was thinking a 4/5G router takes very little power, then a steam deck doesn't take that much either. If that is all you need, few hundred w solar panels and a decent sized camping battery will probably do just fine. You don't need to store a years worth of energy in one go if you can produce more than you use which helps during lower output times.
Then if your employer is mandating return to office, charge the battery there. Make the fuckers pay for it.
based
"I'll go absolutely barebones on electricity usage. Just a router and my gaming console!"
I don't think it's a good idea to opt out of something like a fridge or lighting.
I lived without a fridge for several months before, it's not that difficult. Half the things I keep in a fridge don't really need it anyway, like chutney and jam would last a fairly long time without it. Eggs in the UK don't need the fridge either. IIRC the US wash off the protective layer on them so they do have to go in the fridge there.
LEDs use very little energy.