Costs for renewables far more expensive than advocates want to admit!!

[skookerasbil]

The investment company Lazard took a look at the costs of renewables across Europe...........this is what they found.............

Consistently, in a sampling of four countries (U.S., U.K., Korea, and France) conducted by the World Nuclear Association, natural gas and coal presented the cheapest options, while wind and solar presented the most expensive. Onshore wind was consistently the cheapest renewable option, which is in line with EIA and Lazard estimates. This raises the question: why subsidize solar (one of the most consistently expensive options) when onshore wind is much cheaper? Some figures show a 2-to-1 difference in cost between solar power and onshore wind, yet solar is the renewable most frequently subsidized.

Are Renewables as Cheap as We Think?


PS....the EIA consistently bases its cost expectations.........ready for this.........in expected technological advances. How ghey?

Lets face it........folks who back renewables as this new coming of wheat toast are frauds.

 

[skookerasbil]

PS.....when the members of the religion respond with their green energy company costs summaries on this thread, notice a couple of things..........

1) Does it include any costs AFTER it is "on the grid"?
2) Does it include costs to taxpayers to build transmission lines?
3) Does it measure depreciation costs at the rate of 15 years.............or 30 years?

 

[Coyote]

Why do you hate the idea of renewables? Renewables are booming and states are recognizing the potential there. Look at Texas.

Building the infrastructure is an investment needed for any energy.

 

[mamooth]

So, a certain Michael Vinci, whoever that is, wrote an unsupported opinion editorial.

Skook? He simply BELIEVED, because it told him what he wanted to hear. Religious fanatics are like that.

Now rational people, we need evidence.

 

[jc456]

Why do you hate the idea of renewables? Renewables are booming and states are recognizing the potential there. Look at Texas.

Building the infrastructure is an investment needed for any energy.

coyote, that is very obvious. the fact that after a decade the bar barely went up on use of renewables on the grid. That might be why. No one is against new technologies, we are against the fact they aren't cheaper. they just aren't.

 

[skookerasbil]

So, a certain Michael Vinci, whoever that is, wrote an unsupported opinion editorial.

Skook? He simply BELIEVED, because it told him what he wanted to hear. Religious fanatics are like that.

Now rational people, we need evidence.

lol........he wrote an opinion piece that cites RESEARCH. (link supported )

Who's not winning??

Know that that earns you s0n?



[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/cucumber_1.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[skookerasbil]

duh......doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand. If solar energy was such a bargain, why has it grown only 0.5% in the past 5 years to bring it up to............ready for this...........a whopping total of 1% of supplying our electricity needs! 1%

 

[gallantwarrior]

Why do you hate the idea of renewables? Renewables are booming and states are recognizing the potential there. Look at Texas.

Building the infrastructure is an investment needed for any energy.

Yup, TX sure has the right idea. I wonder why the "greenies" don't raise hell about the view, though.

 

[skookerasbil]

Why do you hate the idea of renewables? Renewables are booming and states are recognizing the potential there. Look at Texas.

Building the infrastructure is an investment needed for any energy.

Yup, TX sure has the right idea. I wonder why the "greenies" don't raise hell about the view, though.
View attachment 121479

LOL.........what a disgrace. And wait'll these people start getting their electric bills over time!!

 

[Old Rocks]

Damn those ultra-Liberal Texans.

Texas city opts for 100% renewable energy – to save cash, not the planet

Briggs, who was a key player in Georgetown’s decision to become the first city in the Lone Star State to be powered by 100% renewable energy, has worked for the city for 30 years. He wears a belt with shiny silver decorations and a gold ring with a lone star motif, and is keen to point out that he is not some kind of California-style eco-warrior with a liberal agenda. In fact, he is a staunchly Texan pragmatist.

“I’m probably the furthest thing from an Al Gore clone you could find,” he says. “We didn’t do this to save the world – we did this to get a competitive rate and reduce the risk for our consumers.”

In many Texas cities the electricity market is deregulated, meaning that customers choose from a dizzying variety of providers and plans. In Houston, for example, there are more than 70 plans that offer energy from entirely renewable sources.

That makes it easy to switch, so in a dynamic marketplace, providers tend to focus on the immediate future. This discourages the creation of renewable energy facilities, which require long-term investment to be viable. But in Georgetown, the city utility company has a monopoly.

When its staff examined their options last year, they discovered something that seemed remarkable, especially in Texas: renewable energy was cheaper than non-renewable. And so last month city officials finalised a deal with SunEdison, a giant multinational solar energy company. It means that by January 2017, all electricity within the city’s service area will come from wind and solar power.

 

[Old Rocks]

Fossil Fuels Just Lost the Race Against Renewables

 

[Old Rocks]

Verify: Wind and solar are becoming cheaper than fossil fuels

In 2015, wind became the cheapest source of energy in Colorado at 4.5 cents per Kilowatt hour, according to data provided by Xcel.

Coal and hydroelectric came in close behind, followed by natural gas and then solar.

That’s a snapshot of what Colorado already has, but large solar farms like the one built recently in Pueblo can make power for about 4 cents per Kilowatt hour. And the new wind farm Xcel’s building near Limon, Colorado will only cost 2.8 cents.

“We’ve had days where two thirds of the energy that’s been consumed inside of an hour has been from the wind that we have on our system,” Jackson said.

But there's a caveat.

Xcel gets federal subsidies that make renewable energy cheaper and those are ramping down.

“Wind really is in the hunt without the production tax credit that’s out there,” Jackson said. And solar continues to drop in price year after year.

Jackson suspects that wind and solar will reach parity with fossil fuels by the time the subsidies disappear.

Nukes are simply out of the race when considering economics.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Damn those ultra-Liberal Texans.

Texas city opts for 100% renewable energy – to save cash, not the planet

Briggs, who was a key player in Georgetown’s decision to become the first city in the Lone Star State to be powered by 100% renewable energy, has worked for the city for 30 years. He wears a belt with shiny silver decorations and a gold ring with a lone star motif, and is keen to point out that he is not some kind of California-style eco-warrior with a liberal agenda. In fact, he is a staunchly Texan pragmatist.

“I’m probably the furthest thing from an Al Gore clone you could find,” he says. “We didn’t do this to save the world – we did this to get a competitive rate and reduce the risk for our consumers.”

In many Texas cities the electricity market is deregulated, meaning that customers choose from a dizzying variety of providers and plans. In Houston, for example, there are more than 70 plans that offer energy from entirely renewable sources.

That makes it easy to switch, so in a dynamic marketplace, providers tend to focus on the immediate future. This discourages the creation of renewable energy facilities, which require long-term investment to be viable. But in Georgetown, the city utility company has a monopoly.

When its staff examined their options last year, they discovered something that seemed remarkable, especially in Texas: renewable energy was cheaper than non-renewable. And so last month city officials finalised a deal with SunEdison, a giant multinational solar energy company. It means that by January 2017, all electricity within the city’s service area will come from wind and solar power.

Yup! Large scale solar power production, almost as attractive as those wind generators arrayed over miles and miles of the landscape.

 

[Old Rocks]

And plowed land is prettier? Also, why not use the roofs of the warehouses, shopping centers, and manufacturing buildings in the cities? That would also cut transmission losses.

 

[skookerasbil]

Fossil Fuels Just Lost the Race Against Renewables

Ah but note........there is no graph comparing the fossil fuels right next to the renewables. They are presented separately NEXT TO EACH OTHER!! Its called a false presentation!


Here's the only graph that matters................


[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/EIA-annual-outlook-2011-2040_2.png.html][/URL]


Obviously.........in the real world, costs matter!!