The best time and place to speak about solar power is during a stretch of bad weather, in a country where you usually have both a lively sun and a moribund electric grid. Solar should be a no-brainer, although it's anything but ⤵️
Here, you can see in purple the moments where we received electricity from the public grid, over the past month, as well as their random distribution within a 24h hour timeframe. In yellow, our reliance on self-produced electricity. So far so good
The problem with solar is that, even with capacious batteries and a merciful climate, you struggle to align production and consumption. Here, note that every day of ours is not only different energy-wise: It involves either a surplus or a deficit
In fact, under optimal conditions, surplus is the rule, and the data doesn't account for it. When your batteries are full and your consumption is low, PV panels stop producing abruptly, as you can see here, when our office was empty last weekend
Although battery technology has improved, it will only make up for daily cycles and the occasional energy splurge. In bad weather, you must drastically curtail consumption. We use forecasts to reconcile today's "budget" with future needs
As we are willing to adjust constantly, our system is calibrated for sobriety. However, if you want to consume electricity by modern life's standards, you need excess PV panels and batteries, which also imply a much larger, wasted surplus
In sum, the effective use of solar power requires much more than good weather, especially if it is to meet environmental concerns. It calls for some form of scale, where users share on a mini grid at least: for example, our office with residential neighbors
Second, it implies an energy mix. We use gas for cooking and occasionally for heating, which illustrates how solar energy cannot reasonably be expected to cover all needs at all times. Third, to adapt consumption, you need much better data
The points above bring us to a fourth and final one: Equipments must evolve. Most solar systems are not designed for mini grids and provide really shoddy data. In turn, most appliances are still meant for the pre-solar age of plenty.
The energy transition is a learning curve!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We’re beginning to see plausible outcomes from the war on Gaza.
Of course, this analysis is speculative. But it’s important to think ahead, because short-sighted policy-making has been the greatest enabler of this conflict’s worst outcomes. 🧵
Within Gaza, Israel looks poised to adopt some aspects of the style of control it has honed in the West Bank: no real Palestinian partner for security or governance, extreme territorial fragmentation, and endless raids in response to a decentralized insurgency.
That may sound not sound like victory, but it depends on how you define it.
This is a war of revenge and subjugation. In that prism, two yardsticks measure "success": the amount of pain Israel could inflict, and how much it could get away with. It scores high on both fronts.
Given our recent work on the mental health crisis in Syria, combined with the distress we can all feel in and around Gaza, I wanted to share some very practical observations on the psychological effects of conflict, through the lens of "trauma". 🧵
It’s important, in this context, to understand the difference between two types of trauma. A single traumatic event can break the continuum of one’s life journey: Because we can’t process it, we stay stuck in a loop.
That’s what is treated, effectively, as PTSD.
But war can create conditions that are almost the opposite: a continuum of traumatic events that envelop one’s life journey.
The difference is similar to surviving a rape, on one hand, or building oneself despite repeated abuse, on the other.
If you don't follow closely events on Israel's northern border, it's easy to believe a regional war is unlikely, that things have already played out.
Seen from Lebanon, things look different: months of slow escalation, calculated but unrelenting and plausibly unstoppable 🧵
Spectacular attacks aside, this escalation is mostly based on "subtle" changes, across multiple variables: choice of targets, weapons employed, number of strikes, expected casualties, and so on.
Both sides are not just attacking each other but negotiating as they do.
For instance, Hizbollah's rocket systems make for an infinite graduation. They may strike near or far; many times the same day or the same target; with varying payloads; and hit either troops, sensitive military assets or civilian infrastructure.
Behind the destruction of the cities of Gaza lies another form of violence, ever so intimate and ominous: the destruction of home.
This is important to unpack, as a key to understanding the emotional shockwaves this war is causing across the region. 🧵
Gaza's fabric, even more so than other cities in the region, was largely built by its inhabitants, in ad hoc fashion. That makes for a punishing urban space: cramped, chaotic, weak on public infrastructure.
Thus the crucial importance of private fallbacks. Especially, the home.
The home itself may be small and have little daylight, electricity, or air. But it is home: It is filled with all the things of greatest importance: the people we love, the memories we treasure, the hopes we hold, the objects that anchor us.
In Gaza, this man-made tragedy not only never ends, but gets ever worse, which makes it hard to analyse the war underway. That in itself makes the war all the more dangerous.
I'll therefore try to distance myself from the suffering to formulate four broad analytic hypotheses. 🧵
The real battlefield.
The West Bank, arguably, is where it is happening. Israel is pushing consistently to dramatically change the rules of the game: no PA, more settlements supported by troops fighting a chaotic insurgency. In other words, Israel is set to absorb the West Bank.
A devastating diversion.
In Gaza, there is no end game. Man-made famine captures this absence of horizon, a permanent "humanitarian crisis" inviting only relief: no rights, no governance structures, no reconstruction other than consolidated camps. Yet it focuses all attention.
I've been trying to think about this deepening, dangerous split we are witnessing between Europe and the Arab world. In over 25 years living and working in the latter, I've never seen anything like it.
Why is it deeper and more dangerous than our other, age-old disputes? 🧵
What worries me most in that respect is the complete breakdown in communication. In the past, our narratives would often conflict, but within a framework that was mostly shared.
Today, Gaza creates a situation where differences are not only profound, but incommunicable.
Many Europeans see this war, whether they blame Hamas or Israel, as just another tragic conflict.
For many Arabs, however, this isn't yet another round: This time, the bulk of European states will have chosen to back, overtly or indirectly, a genocide on the Mediterranean.