Solar causes a lot of fluctuation on the grid.
Add to that that those grids were set up to delivery power from one point to many user, not to have those users alternate between user and supplier.
"Here's some free power, please use it" does sound a lot better than "You need to use this electricity to prevent blackouts or other issues".
It's kind of like Iceland asking people to crank te heat with the windows open to help get rid of their excess thermal heating energy.

Let's hope home batteries are going to become cheaper quick, they will prevent the grid from failing and supply back-up power when it does.
The obvious fix is for (local) governments to install batteries in neighborhoods, but I wouldn't count on that happening too much. Them being a little slow on the uptake is a big part in the cause of this issue.

If sounds like they don't have their duck in a row.
Adding more complexity is going to make things worse.

The bigger problem is that, like many businesses, they don't take the software seriously. Most of it is invisible and too abstract to grasp so it just gets ignored.
Years of mediocre (at best) MS software has turned people complacent. "I'm not good at computers", No the manufacturer could not be bothered to make the computer good at you. It's crappy product.

Tesla is essentially and IT company that deliveries their software with a car around it.
I recently testdrove a number of new compact electric cars and none of them felt fun to drive, but at least one didn't frustrate the hell out of me with how incredibly poorly designed their software is.
Worst offender: VW. Complete garbage, had to end that drive after less than 15 minutes because I could not get the heater to defog the windows. It's not just bad UX/UI, it's a safety hazard.

Wrong. He's independent.

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

But I'm not surprised reading non-sense like this.
Any Dutch person not supporting Gaza, LGTB, and basic communism is considered a far right extremist these days.

Blaming this on just Trump or his administration is peak TDS.

Seems like science isn't really science when politics get involved.
Certainly on a complex subject like this is very easy to leave important factors out and bend the outcome of any publication.
It happens both with D and R governments, malicious people on both sides. Both sides.

That point may come. I'm no expert but I'm going with: at least not in the first 50 years.
Production of hydrogen is the problem.
By far most hydrogen produced today is made from fossil fuels and is equally polluting.
A much smaller part of it is made by electrolysis, which is very wasteful and results in hydrogen that is 3 times as expensive as that made from methane.
So with current tech we would need massive amounts of excess green electricity to make hydrogen a better option than ICEs and BEVs.
This is besides the issues of storing and transporting it.
Any company promoting a hydrogen powered product is purely doing so for PR, not because it's a good idea.

In C it's half. In F it's only 20%. Still sloppy journalism.
But there are bigger issues, the headline mentions hydrogen fuel but the article does not relate to actual hydrogen production.

The headline is misleading.
This research relates to making hydrogen fuel cells more affordable and practical.
Hydrogen fuel cells turn hydrogen and oxygen into water and electricity.
The production of hydrogen is still the bottleneck and the tech in TFA does not change that.

Just shut down Wikipedia for the UK.
You only need a few big sites to do the same to get the UK government to reconsider this dystopian law.

To be fair, the Apollo program had plenty of fails before it managed a successful landing.
Not in the least one where they burnt 3 astronauts alive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Hydrogen is the fuel of the future. And it always will be.

Currently most hydrogen is produced by splitting up fossil fuels into hydrogen and CO.
The result is that it's just as expensive and just as polluting as those fossil fuels. If not slightly more due to the extra steps involved.

The alternative is splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen, electrolysis.
This process is clean if you don't account for how that electricity is generated.
Also, it's very inefficient. An EV with a battery would do three times as many miles as a hydrogen powered EV on the same amount of electricity if this is how that hydrogen was produced.
So the only way this makes sense is if we had an abundance of electricity.

Just tiny brushes moved around by a magnet.

People first.
I should be able to buy a self-driving car and schedule it to do taxi duties on Uber/Lyft when I don't need it.
This is no need to involve government incompetence or corporate greediness.

Paper straws are not a reasonable alternative.

They just bought them. The company that makes them is close to selling them for 10 years now.
https://www.saildrone.com/