The most fascinating portfolio of pictures I've seen recently isn't art. It's called "Photos: The Scale of China’s Solar-Power Projects," and unfortunately it's behind a paywall. [UPDATE: Many readers are reporting that the content isn't walled off for them. So give it a try! —Ed.] Absolutely mind-boggling.
Solar energy is a significant fascination. The best short primer on energy I've ever read (not all I've read on the subject, of course) is the first 98 pages or so of a book called American Theocracy by the late Kevin Phillips. The section, Part I, was called "Oil and American Supremacy." It is in essence a long essay. As with other Phillips books, its connection to the rest of the book is rather loose—some of his volumes are redolent of collections rather than concerted, coherent, through-going argument. So the essay can stand alone. Unfortunately, it's behind a paywall too—you'd have to buy the whole book in order to read that one little section. In the late 2000s, ever a Don Quixote, I wrote a letter to Mr. Phillips and Penguin, his publisher, suggesting that "Oil and American Supremacy" really should be issued as a separate small volume at modest cost. Penguin at the time had a series of pamphlet-style semi-miniature books that featured important short-form writing from the past and present. Here's one of them:
I also have the translation of Ecclesiastes from the same series and one or two others, but I can't find them. Frustratingly, the books, which I saw in a bookstore display and which all had similar-but-varied form, format, typography, and cover design, don't seem to have been given a series name, and I can't find a page for them among Penguin's far-flung constellation of imprints, house names, and web pages. (There are only five major publishers in the USA, of which Penguin/Random House is the largest.) It's possible they simply under-performed and were unceremoniously dumped. Doesn't matter. Long and short, I thought "Oil and American Supremacy" would fit perfectly in the series, and it's one of those things—you know how it is with those things—that I urgently felt every citizen ought to read. But by now, Penguin's had 20 years to get back to me, which kinda makes my hope for a reply grow dim. (I'm joking.) And Kevin Phillips died in 2023.
Kevin Phillips was an interesting fellow, by the way. He was one of the founding theorists of Movement Conservatism and post-Goldwater Republican strategy—usually credited with originating the Southern Strategy—who later moved toward independence and became an outspoken critic of the Republican Party. In other words, he actually thought for himself, which would make him stick out like a sore thumb today. I went on a deep dive into politics during the Bush II years—I probably read 150 books, all of them except one now slumbering in boxes in the attic of the barn. Kevin Phillips, the essence of an iconoclast, was the best find. (Well, Thomas Frank too.)
Anyway, one of the points Phillips makes in "Oil and American Supremacy" is that rich and powerful national economies have historically had trouble moving away from the energy sources that made them rich and powerful in the first place. The Netherlands and wind power, Britain and coal. The Dutch windmills peaked in the 1600s and 1700s—yet there were still 9,000(!) windmills in The Netherlands in the nineteenth century! (There are some 1,200 left today—believe it or not, only partially for tourism.)
Assuming the pattern plays out, America is going to have a very hard time moving away from oil. We have long been the global powerhouse. We tend to think of the Middle East when we think of oil production now, but on this very day (and for years now) the United States is the world's largest producer of oil. Our big problem is not that we don't produce huge amounts of oil, it's just that we use even more than we produce—that's what gives Saudi Arabia such pull over us, and it's why we have willingly gone along with the largest transfer of wealth in the history of Planet Earth—American wealth shifted to the countries that make up for our oil shortfall. It's why our military budget is so huge—to protect the shipping lanes for oil coming from the Middle East. (If the military cost of protecting global oil extraction and importation were passed along directly to the pump, a gallon of gasoline in America would cost somewhere roughly between $13 and $18. That's including the offset for supplementary biofuels.) It's why we fought the Gulf War—by historical accident, Iraq has the largest and least exploited oil reserves left on Earth, and, consequently, America now has a dozen huge military bases in Iraq, all of them strategically "protecting" oil fields, oil production facilities, and oil shipping hubs. Of course that it is not their stated purpose, but it is their purpose. Never mind a wholesale switchover—it would make incredibly good sense for us to make it our national purpose to simply gain enough alternative energy production to attain energy independence. It would solve a large number of complications and eliminate vast expenditures of national resources.
Meanwhile, China has no such sentimental, historical, and institutional attachment to the energy sources of the 20th century, and the Chinese are killing us in the race to harness and develop solar. We've allowed them to get way, way out ahead of us. Photographs aren't proof, and photographs aren't argument, but what they certainly are is illustration, and I've never seen a more stunning illustration of China's emerging supremacy in what will surely be the dominant 21st-century energy source. No one sees the future, least of all me, but oil will not be the world's major source of energy in 2100—that much is easy to predict, simply because there's not enough of it left. With its electric cars improving by leaps and bounds (BYD just passed Tesla as the world largest EV producer), its battery research lapping us, and its solar power technology, implementation, and deployment crushing ours, China is setting itself up to rule the future. (Germany and Brazil are also well ahead of us in alternative and renewable energy.) One word describes the U.S.: behind.
I wish I could link to this set of set of pictures. The most symbolic one is captioned "Floating solar panels stretch across an aquatic farm built on land that subsided after extensive coal mining, in Suixi County, Anhui province, China, on April 28, 2025." But oh well. For those of you who subscribe to The Atlantic, be sure not to miss it.
Mike
P.S. I'm watching this morning what are indisputably the two greatest tennis players alive on our planet. Back to the tennis!
Original contents copyright 2025 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)
Featured Comments from:
John Shriver: "Dan Yergin's book The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power is also a great treatise on how the whole western world is wrapped around oil. I was half way through the book when my mother died in 2020, and had just gotten to the end of the Second World War. The Allies won that war much because of their control of oil. The Allies starved both Germany and Japan of oil. I took a course from Dan Yergin at the Kennedy School of Government on this topic about 1980, before he wrote the book. (Cross-registered from 'the small trade school down the river.') Very interesting; an enormous amount of reading. There's also a PBS multi-part series based on the book, which is accessible online. Here's the first part."
Mike replies: The Prize is now a trilogy: The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power (2008); The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World (2012); and The New Map: Energy, Climate, and the Clash of Nations (2021). The trouble is, their combined 2,336 pages (six and a half pounds of paper in the print versions, according to Amazon) isn't bathroom reading. I put a high value on primers (the word is properly pronounced to rhyme with trimmer) because they might actually be read, which is why I like Kevin Phillips' entertaining backgrounder. However, all you have to do is read the first page or two of the sample of The Prize at Amazon to realize that you're in the hands of a compelling and capable writer in Mr. Yergin. History well written is the only true page-turner. Like you, I read a lot of The Prize when it was more or less new, before ultimately being defeated. (I tend not to like histories as they butt up against the present, because they get less and less authoritative the closer they get to now. I learned that reading histories of photography.)
Jan-Peter Onstwedder: "I think you need to fact-check some of your post. The US imports crude oil, true, despite producing a lot. But it also is a net exporter of refined products. So imports + domestic production is greater than domestic demand, the balance being exported as fuels, plastics and other petrochemical products. It used to be true that OPEC had significant influence over prices and therefore US economics, but that influence is much smaller since US production has gone up so much. And the US now uses far less energy per unit of GDP than 20–30 years ago. All in all, oil is still important but no longer an excuse for meddling in other producing countries’ affairs."
Mike replies: And yet we still do. Oil imports have hardly abated. I admit I'm not up on "the Shale Gale," but the go-to book on it is for those who are interested is probably this one. Bear in mind that fracking in general might well be a sort of financial shell game: it succeeds by attracting huge amounts of speculative investment from the excess amount of capital "sloshing around the world" (a consequence of wealth hoarding) and has yet to prove that it's actually sustainably economically viable. At any rate, I'm not interested, because when the world is burning the last thing we need is more fire.
ASW: "Bill McKibben has a concise (online) article about recent and future growth of renewable energy sources, how China is in the driver's seat to dominate the space, and how our (America's) energy policies are both backwards and self-defeating, in The New Yorker. It's called '4.6 Billion Years On, the Sun Is Having a Moment.' It's well worth a few minutes of your time if you have access."
Mike adds: Here's a brief clip: "...Even though we’ve got used to seeing solar panels and wind turbines across the landscape in the intervening fifty years, we continue to think of what they produce as 'alternative energy,' a supplement to the fossil-fuelled power that has run Western economies for more than two centuries. In the past two years, however, with surprisingly little notice, renewable energy has suddenly become the obvious, mainstream, cost-efficient choice around the world."
I just read it. It's an incredibly hopeful article. And from Bill McKibben! (Who at times has sounded like the most pessimistic person on the planet.)
Mike wrote, "It's called "Photos: The Scale of China’s Solar-Power Projects," and unfortunately it's behind a paywall."
Available here ...
https://www.theatlantic.com/photography/archive/2025/07/photos-china-solar-power-energy/683488/
It tells me ...
"To read this story, sign in or start a DIGITAL TRIAL or DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTION." ... but all the images are available without either. And they are big and colorful and beautiful. Worth some time on a big screen.
Posted by: Speed | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 12:29 PM
FWIW: I do not subscribe to The Atlantic, but I *CAN* see the amazing photos, followed by a "to read this story, sign in, start a free trial, or subscribe today" tag.....
Posted by: Rick Neibel | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 01:03 PM
Mike, your link took me to the photos without a paywall, and there is a free trial. Incredible and your comment is too true. Shows solar farming in every sense.
Posted by: rusty | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 02:13 PM
Interesting about China. One opinion I keep reading is that we are seeing China and India returning to their historical global economic dominance, that the European/American rise was more of a several hundred year aberration, and now that some Western innovations have been fully integrated, they are shifting back into position.
Posted by: John Krumm | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 02:25 PM
FWIW the Atlantic web site showed me the pictures without me needing a subscription.
Posted by: psu | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 02:27 PM
You don’t actually need a subscription to The Atlantic to see the pictures. I was able to see them all just fine. And they are surrealistic! Very much worth looking at as photographs in their own right.
That’s an interesting insight on how countries become essentially locked in on the energy source that made them into a great power, and then subsequently find it impossible to reinvent themselves as something different when the technology moves on. The photography parallel would surely be Kodak, which knew all the digital photo technology (they even invented much of it) and knew that the film era must soon be over, but was utterly unable to re-configure the company to take advantage of the new technology. We know what happened there of course.
Posted by: Peter Wright | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 02:30 PM
OK, so I just added American Theocracy and On Tyranny to my Amazon Canada orders. Should arrive tomorrow. I had just been listening yesterday to Timothy Snyder talking about his move from Yale to Toronto, on Substack (where his book gets mentioned) and this just seemed like the universe was simply telling me to just get the damn book!
Posted by: Peter Wright | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 02:47 PM
China has turned to alternative energy sources because they have to import the majority of the oil they use. This, and their world strategy, is why they are attempting to monopolize rare earth mineral resources. To Make America Great we have to remain at the forefront of science discovery and new technology innovation and implementation. Some just don't get it.
Posted by: Rick in CO | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 05:30 PM
It's intriguing as an Australian to see homeless Americans interviewed. They can't get medical help and society has abandoned them, but they still hold firm that America is the greatest country on Earth. And for some reason think that being patriotic is uniquely American.
It's that lack of introspection combined with a disinterest in other countries that are leading you to the end of your empires time.
Which is cyclical and predictable. And because of human nature, unavoidable. One day, China will fall too. But my children's children will be long dead by then.
Posted by: Kye Wood | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 06:52 PM
We're still clinging to coal, so I see no hope at all for getting off of oil. We've been energy independent since 2019 when net exports of energy became positive. Not sure how long that will last with the consumption of AI data centers though.
Posted by: JimF | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 07:02 PM
China is doing a lot of good in renewable energy. But the problem with China is that it is a mix of (communist) government controlled ‘planned’ economy and rampant ‘uncontrollable’ capitalism. They regularly go overboard in their industrial development whether it is railway or building construction, steel mills, electric cars, packaging industry for manufacturing, and many other fields. Probably including wind and solar power. They build so much capacity that it drowns the world in over capacity and eventually leads into bankruptcies and commercial disaster also within China.
Posted by: Ilkka | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 07:29 PM
We actually produce more energy than we need. Oil is a little more complicated that one realizes.
The U.S. is one of the few countries where the majority of refineries (about 70%) can handle heavy, sour (lots of Sulphur) crude. Most other countries don't have such capability. They prefer light, sweet (very little Sulphur) crudes.
So the U.S. takes the heavy, sour from the Middle East, Canada, Venezuela, etc.) and sends West Texas Intermediate (light and sweet) out to other countries. This is a net gain for the U.S.
It does not cost significantly more to refine the sour crude (when you already have the specialized refineries). But the sour crude is cheaper than sweet crude. So there is an extra profit for the U.S. refineries that can handle the sour.
Posted by: Jeffrey K Hartge | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 08:47 PM
In a similar vein to oil, you could make the same argument for Kodak and digital photography. Keep film going as our "cash cow".
Years ago, Khrushchev boasted of burying us economically. Russia never did, but China is about ready to.
Photo with inspectors walking along a service is really striking. The panels look like a modern quilt.
Posted by: Mike Cawley | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 09:29 PM
Mike, as a subscriber, you can always include a gift link, which makes it widely accessible.
Here's mine for the Atlantic portfolio:
https://www.theatlantic.com/photography/archive/2025/07/photos-china-solar-power-energy/683488/?gift=Fw9TOfYLDgI2sUgDAsSlJeh-4Cz_x0xIQ7qpwzzYiuA&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
Here's a 2024 article, also from the Atlantic, on the incredible rise of cheap, decentralized solar panels around the world:
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2024/10/solar-power-energy-revolution-global-south/680351/?gift=Fw9TOfYLDgI2sUgDAsSlJVoKYAL3wEW7keVAdKKH9Cw&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
Posted by: Ben | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 09:36 PM
In glad you shared it because I could see the full article, The Atlantic offers one free article per month at least where I am!
Posted by: Sroyon | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 10:42 PM
Mike, I can't thank you enough for the article on solar power vs fossil fuels. The photos in The Atlantic are amazing, and really illustrates how far behind the United States is on energy. When people complain to me about clean energy subsidies, I explain that we have been subsidizing fossil fuels for decades through our military involvement in areas that we otherwise wouldn't care very much about.
We have two hurdles. One is a president who claims coal is "beautiful" and "clean", and leads the obnoxious "drill, baby, drill" chant. The other is that we seem to be unable to carry out large public works projects in a reasonable amount of time. It is too easy for projects to be delayed because of bureaucracy or for some sort of review. Ironically, some environmental activists have been responsible for delaying or killing projects that would have benefitted the environment. The Biden infrastructure bill passed in 2021 allocated $7.5 trillion for installing EV charging stations. Three years later, only 214 chargers were operational, and 24,800 had been started. That program was illegally stopped by the Trump administration earlier this year. If installation of these chargers as quickly as possible had been a priority, those chargers would have been available, and there would have been more confidence for people to buy an electric vehicle. That opportunity has been lost.
Posted by: R. Edelman | Sunday, 13 July 2025 at 10:51 PM
US - Saudi relations are a strand in Adam Curtis 2015 documentary "Bitter Lake". Worth watching for it's individual visual approach although opinions differ about the effectiveness of the narrative. Available on the BBC, althoough not sure about outside UK
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02gyz6b
Posted by: Richard John Tugwell | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 01:46 AM
I don’t know what we can’t see behind the paywall but just googling “ China’s Solar-Power Projects” for images yields an amazing array of stunning photos…
Posted by: Jez Cunningham | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 02:31 AM
In Europe (and I probably elsewhere too) we currently have an invasion of chinese EVs, a whole plethora of brands being built at brand new robotic factories. No longer just a cheaper alternative they are technically highly advanced, sleek, good looking cars that outperform their European competitors at the same price point. Here in Norway most buses in the major cities are now electric and chinese made (while American buses seem unchanged since the 1980s).
China's human rights violations has also faded into the background seeing that the US is currently operating concentration camps. There is no longer a good guy - bad guy dynamic, and if anything China is the more stable trading partner.
Posted by: Hansen | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 05:14 AM
"primers (the word is properly pronounced to rhyme with trimmer)"
Only in America, and goodness knows why, orthographically. See: dim and dimmer, dinner and diner...
But we've been here before, and must agree to disagree... Interestingly, though, the use of a double consonant to indicate a preceding short vowel seems never to have troubled the spelling reformers.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Chisholm | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 05:18 AM
Solar power is safe, clean and reliable ... when the sun is up and there are no clouds. [that's just not true. My friend Jim's solar panels charge batteries, which run his house. They're called house batteries and they're similar to but somewhat larger than car batteries. And his panels can generate power in cloudy weather. He has
Nuclear power is safe, clean, reliable and free from weather constraints.
Wikipedia ...
In the United States, nuclear power is provided by 94 commercial reactors with a net capacity of 97 gigawatts (GW), with 63 pressurized water reactors and 31 boiling water reactors. In 2019, they produced a total of 809.41 terawatt-hours of electricity, and by 2024 nuclear energy accounted for 18.6% of the nation's total electric energy generation. In 2018, nuclear comprised nearly 50 percent of US emission-free energy generation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States
[Re "Solar power is safe, clean and reliable ... when the sun is up and there are no clouds":
That's just not true. My friend Jim's solar panels charge batteries, which run his house. And his panels generate power in cloudy weather. He has a gasoline backup generator—looks like a lawnmower motor—that they have to run for several hours when the weather has been heavily overcast for 5 days straight and the days are short. They run it three or four times a winter. That's it for the year. His house has been solar for 30 years. In Vermont. On the West slope of a ridge that blocks the sun until midmorning.
From the article, which I'm suggesting you should read: "...here’s the current prediction from the I.E.A.: by 2026, solar will generate more electricity than all the world’s nuclear plants combined. By 2029, it will generate more than all the hydro dams. By 2031, it will have outstripped gas and, by 2032, coal. According to the I.E.A., solar is likely to become the world’s primary source of all energy, not just electricity, by 2035." –Mike]
Posted by: Speed | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 06:59 AM
If you can't see any website due to blocking for whatever reason, https://archive.is will usually make them available.
Here is the link to the China Solar portfolio
https://archive.is/OH3hp
In Germany we currently have 50-60% solar and wind energy powering the country, save the 1-2 weeks in January when there is no wind AND heavy cloud cover.
Usually, most of the year when the sun sets the wind will get noticeably stronger, so both complement each other rather perfectly.
Finally, industrial sized backup batteries slowly come online as well, but for the average household it would actually beneficial to have a few kWh battery storage on site to run your house/flat for the night hours. If you got enough battery capacity to last 2-3 days, you wouldn't have to dread short blackouts and the battery would last for ages.
Posted by: Marc | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 08:00 AM
Regarding primers, the Oxford Very Short Introduction books are an excellent way to become acquainted with virtually any topic. They’re short, pleasingly compact books written by experts for interested laymen. There are currently over 750 volumes.
Posted by: Rob Rogers | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 08:16 AM
A very “Ed Burtynskian” portfolio.
Posted by: Kenneth Tanaka | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 08:58 AM
Mike wrote, "Assuming the pattern plays out, America is going to have a very hard time moving away from oil."
"In the United States, nuclear power is provided by 94 commercial reactors with a net capacity of 97 gigawatts (GW), with 63 pressurized water reactors and 31 boiling water reactors. In 2019, they produced a total of 809.41 terawatt-hours of electricity, and by 2024 nuclear energy accounted for 18.6% of the nation's total electric energy generation. In 2018, nuclear comprised nearly 50 percent of US emission-free energy generation."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States
We were well on our way to moving from carbon to safe, clean and reliable nuclear technology to power our economy. Now the band wagon seems to be carrying only intermittent wind and solar.
Posted by: Speed | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 10:08 AM
I wonder how much it will cost for replacement solar panels after their short lifetime if up? According to Forbes ( https://www.forbes.com/home-improvement/solar/how-long-do-solar-panels-last/ ), the higher quality panels currently last around 25-30 years. (Solar inverters generally last 10-15 years.) Unfortunately, recycling of the solar panels is limited.
We need oil for lubrication, but as a fuel it is harmful, if not as bad as it used to be, thanks to catalytic converters.
Replacement sources for oil need to be recyclable. From what I've read about wind turbines ( https://www.delfos.energy/blog-posts/reuse-recycling-and-disposal-of-wind-turbine-parts-an-investigation-into-industry-practices ), ". . . 10-15% of the used materials are wasted during blade fabrication and then disposed of in landfills . . ."
"The high costs associated with recycling processes, coupled with the low market value of recycled materials, can deter investment in sustainable waste management solutions".
The recycling costs will need to be added to the overall cost of wind turbines, as well as other energy replacements for oil.
[Well, we were talking about solar, not wind. The article, which I'm suggesting you read, directly addresses the issue of recycling, and it's pretty amazing: read from the paragraph that begins, "Some experts feared that we might run out of the minerals necessary to build the panels and turbines and batteries, but that fear seems to be fading." --Mike]
Posted by: Dave | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 10:40 AM
And yet, ( https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/13/business/china-coal-plants-highest-level-hnk-intl ) China is building more coal plants that anyone.
Posted by: Dave | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 10:47 AM
If there is ever a war with China, and they try to starve our energy sources by blocking the Middle East oil shipping lanes, than by gosh we will just reciprocate by blocking out that shiny orb in the sky!
~ D. W. Orr Photo & Poetry
Posted by: Douglas Orr | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 11:10 AM
One big issue with solar panels is they occupy a vast surface area. Although if they are placed on top of warehouses or homes, then they use space that has already been ruined for agriculture or natural habitat. A second issue is the eventual need for disposing or recycling the panels.
A big advantage of chemical energy (oil or gas) is the compact footprint of a power plant.
The most compact energy (now) is nuclear, but no one can predict if there will be much future expansion. And in USA, we have been too cowardly politically to develop a waste disposal system or strategy.
Posted by: Kodachromeguy | Monday, 14 July 2025 at 12:32 PM
OK, I strayed into wind power from the original solar power discussion.
You quoted, "Some experts feared that we might run out of the minerals necessary to build the panels and turbines and batteries, but that fear seems to be fading." (That appears to be behind a paywall.)
My argument was that the recycling of old parts and structures is the problem, not the manufacture of turbine blades, solar panels, etc.
Posted by: Dave | Tuesday, 15 July 2025 at 09:30 AM
This has been an interesting set of comments -- thank you for letting us to briefly (I hope) wander off photography.
My recent experience researching simple and complex topics is moving me to AI -- as a starting point anyhow.
My last comment on the future of energy and electrification is a list of "Key Strategies to Reach 100% Clean Electricity" from Microsoft Copilot.
Grid Modernization
Building Electrification
Energy Storage
Public Lands & Rooftops
Transportation Electrification
Policy & Zoning Reform
These are in addition to how exactly electricity will be generated. We have some interesting years ahead of us. Makes the switch from film to digital look like a walk in the park.
Posted by: Speed | Tuesday, 15 July 2025 at 04:52 PM
Ok. THIS will be my last comment ...
Google spends $3 billion on securing energy for its data centers and AI expansion
A new deal with Brookfield Asset Management will yield the company 3,000 megawatts of hydroelectric power.
https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/google-spends-%C2%A33-billion-on-securing-energy-for-its-data-centers-and-ai-expansion-145145966.html
Makes a few solar collectors on the roof or in the back yard look like child's play ... and re-powering and re-wiring NYC look like a nightmare.
Posted by: Speed | Tuesday, 15 July 2025 at 05:10 PM