Photograph via snooOG


News and civil discussion about all things Energy related, how we use energy now, and how we will use it in the future.

Related Subreddits
/r/RenewableEnergy /r/NuclearPower
/r/SolarPower /r/Renewable
/r/Biomass /r/Solar
/r/Wind /r/Green
/r/SolarEnergy /r/GeoPolitics
/r/Fusion /r/MSR
/r/EnergyStorage /r/Climate
/r/Askscience /r/Environment
/r/Thermodynamics /r/Oil

Sockpuppet accounts will be banned. Personal attacks will likely get you banned - play nice, focus on the argument! Accusations of being a shill count as personal attacks.

Free Energy scam posts will be removed

Fresh users who join only to get in arguments on contentious topics will be removed and assumed to be sockpuppets.

Users posting on other subreddits encouragement to come here to start arguments will be removed for brigading. This subreddit welcomes respectful open discourse about all energy sources but does not take kindly to attempts to manipulate the discourse here by other reddit communities and or external organizations. Context Here

Posts are currently limited to a maximum of 2 per user, per day.

Interested in how the grid works? Check out this playlist on YouTube for the basics


185,924 Subscribers


[Rant] It seems to me that n* supporters mainly run on some sense of being smarter than uninformed people

Like they feel smart for not believing common uninformed misconceptions about N*P* that seem to prevail in the general population.

They would say things like "N*P*P*s emit less r*adiation than coal plants!!" and call it a day because obviously defeating a strawman is enough to convince anyone of your favourite source of electricty.

Or they would cite the funtion of a N*P*P* and say "See, it's just water being turned into steam, not some mystical processes like some ininformed citizen might think!!".

A lot of people might have an irrational fear of *N*E*, but a *N*E* simp will feel smart just for point out this irrationality and think they won the debate.

It baffles me how this group of people lift this form of energy to levels of adulation as if it's capable of solving all energy problems, no matter the many good, objective, non-emotional hard facts that speak against this hype.

Note: Asteriks to avoid removal by bot

09:26 UTC



Where can I find a generally accepted LCOE or some good way of comparing different costs of electricity in the US? I would have hoped that the DOE would have had something set up on their website, but I haven't found anything.

00:31 UTC


Free electricity available plans in Australia. Are there any others places with similar deals?

I recently changed plans to one that gives me zero cost power from 12pm to 2pm each day.

With my setup it feels like cheating as I can easily shift the bulk of my grid draw into these hours.

Was wondering if any other jurisdictions have similar deals?

For some context in the past ten days I brought 175 kWhs for $2.15 which is 1.2c per kWh blended.

22:39 UTC


Energy Procurement- Courses or Cert


I work for a small sized corporate approx $2B in revenue per year. We have had turnover in our energy department for various reasons over the past couple of years.

The Energy Director at our company is gone and that position will not be backfilled. We have delegated that role and function to a consultant company. I have been assigned as support to monitor and ensure appropriate procurement.

How can I get up to speed quickly on Energy procurement for Gas + Electric? Can someone recommend a course or a certification that will get me the basics?

I have an analytical background and am comfortable with Math, Finance, and Supplychain. But, I know zero about energy or engineering.

22:39 UTC


For those who accept climate science but oppose the carbon tax, can you share your reasons?

As someone who recognizes the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change, I'm curious about the perspectives of those who agree that climate change is a significant issue yet oppose the carbon tax as a solution. The evidence for climate change includes increasing global temperatures, rising sea levels, and more frequent extreme weather events, all linked to human activity, primarily the burning of fossil fuels. Experts warn that failing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions could lead to dire consequences, including severe ecological disruption, loss of biodiversity, and substantial economic losses due to climate-related disasters. Given these challenges and the urgency of transitioning away from fossil fuels and improving land use, I'm interested in understanding the arguments against the carbon tax as a policy measure. What alternatives would you suggest that might be more effective or equitable?

15:53 UTC

Back To Top