Resonosity

Wind turbines like solar and BESSs are inverter-based resources (IBRs), so any of them can curtail quickly.

I'm glad you responded to them point by point. So many myths, fictions, and bigoted beliefs wrapped up as valid opinion.

Solar/wind + storage is the way forward, as the latest IPCC report showed.

is a vastly inferior solution

How so?

local grid scale solutions

Which ones?

there is essentially 0 infrastructure designed to handle said batteries

If we're talking residential scale, people already have the infrastructure: it's the existing wiring inside their household. If we're talking Commercial & Industrial (C&I) scale, it's often the same answer. If we're talking utility scale, oftentimes battery developers get quoted grid improvement costs from the utility and the developer has to pay those costs in order to connect to the grid. You act like the grid can't change, and there isn't any money lying around to make improvements, when in reality there are a lot of investors in BESS because of the high ROI.

they wear out quite quickly at home scales

This is true at any scale, resi, C&I, or utility, but batteries are modular and you can augment your capacity over time to make up for degradation.

Elon popularized them with his "powerwall" bullshit entirely to pump the stock value of Tesla's battery plant

There are more manufacturers than just Tesla in the battery space, many of which who would benefit if the Powerwall failed or lost market share. Even if Tesla popularized them, their decline due to their idiotic, fascist CEO will mean that the existing demand will just look elsewhere for the same product, not exit the market entirely.

Batteries in the walls are useful in niches

In my opinion, every household could benefit from home battery storage just as much as people benefit from gas generators. They have widespread, not niche, appeal. The issue with low penetration in my opinion is lack of knowledge in both policymakers and customers.

the current technology which uses lipo/lion/lifepo4 chemistries is inherently flawed

While batteries do start to degrade the moment they leave the factory, the fact they have flaws doesn't mean they aren't still useful. You're using the argument that the perfect is the only solution to the imperfect, when that shortsightedness gets in the way of progress.

route to both dead linemen

BESS failures have been falling and bottoming out over the last few years while deployment has skyrocketed. Seems like you're telling a fiction.

massive amounts of E-waste

Recycling is projected to increase, especially as more and more battery installations reach End of Life (EOL), where as much as 60-80% of cobalt and lithium could be sourced from urban as opposed to virgin mines in the next 5-15 years. There is a sizable market opportunity for recycling to take off so long as good policy paves the way.

as it stands, it's really bad right now.

Sure, let's throw away one of humanity's better solutions to the climate crisis since it's bad now. It's not like it could get better in the future. Again, such a show of shortsightedness.

It's not like we can add some kind of magic automatic residential cutoff system

Of course we can. They're called Microgrid Interconnection Devices (MIDs).

that would just make it worse

Microgrids that can disconnect from the utility at appropriate times may in fact make it better. If homeowners responded to utility alerts of high demand and opted to disconnect from the grid during those times while still having power, that would just make grid operators and home owners happier.

residential distribution is already the problem!

Microgrids are the solution!

tho home batteries are largely elon propaganda...

While residential BESSs are largely Tesla based, they are absolutely key in the energy transition from fossil- to renewables-based power sources.

they only contribute to the above issue, not solve it.

How?

There are ways of addressing it, but they're complicated and unglamorous.

Which ways?

Ok, here we go:

I'm disgusted by people who threw their vote away

Throwing their vote away = not voting.

or refused to vote blue over genocide

Refusing to vote blue != not voting

Refusing to vote blue = vote red, green, PSL, RFK, literally anything else

Are we arriving at the issue at hand finally?

Your reading comprehension needs work.

Annnd classic troll move by resorting to insults instead of facts and claims at hand. How big of a waste of time you've been

Edit:

Unless you mean that both people that didn't vote nor voted blue are disgusting to you, in which case whatever. Personal sentiments can't fix hard facts. The more liberals like you cope, the more you'll lose elections.

You just said:

I said that I'm disgusted by people who sat out.

Your original post which I commented on said this:

Yes, and I'm disgusted by people who threw their vote away or refused to vote blue over genocide

Which is it?

The Uncommitted Movement was ~700k strong. Even if we assume the entire voting block didn't cast ballots in 2024, meaning I don't count them in the Green Party/PSL group, the impact of that would still only be less than 1 mn, which RFK and Libertarians similarly drew for their causes. It's a rounding error whether or not they contributed to the outcome or not.

The real problem is why more people either 1) changed parties or 2) didn't vote in 2024 when they did in 2020. Perhaps COVID had an effect in 2020, perhaps tightened voting laws had an effect in 2024, perhaps Democrats have now become Republican-lite, perhaps shit just sucks and there's no time when people need to work.

It is a politician's job to think about these things and determine a strategy best suited to acquiring power. If politicians don't do that, they lose races.

or refused to vote blue over genocide

In 2024, 155mn people voted, while 88mn didn't out of the entire 243 mn eligible voting population.

Of that, 77 mn voted R, 75 mn voted D, and 3 mn voted 3rd party.

In 2020, 158 mn people voted, while 79 mn didn't out of the entire 238 mn eligible voting population.

Of that, 81 mn voted D, 74 mn voted R, and 3 mn voted 3rd party.

Your claim is that the Uncommitted Movement had an impact in 2024 on the outcome of the election.

Wikipedia says that the movement got 700k votes. If we look to Ballotpedia, the Green Party received ~860k while the PSL received ~165k, meaning we can pretty much say those two parties captured the Uncommitted Movement's voting block. That's a total ~1 mn voters.

But JFK received ~760k votes in 2024 because he didn't file to leave the election before endorsing Trump. And the Libertarians which I doubt have any affiliation with the Uncommitted Movement received ~650k. That's a total ~1.4 mn voters.

The 3rd party vote didn't make or break this election. You can see that in how many people voted 3rd party in 2024 compared to 2020 despite the voting population increasing.

No, I reject your claim. The Democrats lost 6 mn voters in 2024, and failed to capture the eligible voting population. This wasn't the fault of people who give a shit about genocide.

Keep telling yourself that though while the Do Nothing Democrats roll over at every chance they get to aid and abet our fascist regime.

There's also rentry.co/megathread

most of whom were arrested en masse without any process resembling justice—just tattoos, zip codes, or looking nervous.

That's the price they pay for letting their culture get that bad.

Why are you talking about tattoos here?

The person you're responding to highlighted some text from the article, pointing to injustice of the regime by believing tattoos automatically = jail.

You said their "bad culture" is the price they pay, implicitly grouping tattoo, zip codes, and looking nervous defined by the previous comment all under "bad culture" of those who do go to jail.

You then gaslight me for pointing out your fascism and disregard for civil liberties by avoiding any correlation with tattoos because you didn't mention them explicitly.

Every knows what you were talking about bro. The fact you asked this question makes me think you're a troll with no convictions for attacking modern fascism. Thanks for giving that away so all of us can treat you as such.

Tattoos are not a sign of a culture getting bad.

Your behavior of intolerance is a sign, however.

People like you are why I wish the US had re-education camps like China. You need to unlearn your bullshit.

I never liked tattoos and they're more-often-than-not an indicator of people that I should avoid.

I never liked bootlicking, individualistic, snowflake fascists and they're more-often-than-not an indicator of people that I should avoid.

I'm honestly ok with sending you to a concentration camp with no regards for your safety or wellbeing after that comment.

Tattoos are a form of free speech that applies to one's body, and should be afforded all of the protections of the first amendment.

I cannot believe we're having this conversation in 2025.