Solar is now ‘Cheapest Electricity in History’, confirms IEA

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the best locations and with access to the most favourable policy support and finance, the IEA says the solar can now generate electricity “at or below” $20 per megawatt hour (MWh).

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

LOL, maybe you are brainwashed? It's so sad that people like you are the progeny of those who stood on a road and yelled, "get a horse" as the first cars drive by.

Our roof panels have reduced our cost for electricity to an average of $1.00 for every 60 day bill. Annually we receive a small check.


When cars were first built, they didn't require subsidies. That's the point. If solar electricity is so cheap, if your view, why should the taxpayers have to pay you to take it?

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.


That story is bullshit. Ford rose the wage rate for assembly line workers to earn loyalty from them and reduce turnover. In addition, it gave him more leverage to rule over their lives, which he liked to do as well. I don't think there were any critics of Ford's wages, the outfit was a sole proprietorship for years, he could do what he wanted to do and did it.

REALLY? Did Henry (or Hank as you called him) tell you all this? Wow, that's amazing.
 
In the best locations and with access to the most favourable policy support and finance, the IEA says the solar can now generate electricity “at or below” $20 per megawatt hour (MWh).

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

LOL, maybe you are brainwashed? It's so sad that people like you are the progeny of those who stood on a road and yelled, "get a horse" as the first cars drive by.

Our roof panels have reduced our cost for electricity to an average of $1.00 for every 60 day bill. Annually we receive a small check.


When cars were first built, they didn't require subsidies. That's the point. If solar electricity is so cheap, if your view, why should the taxpayers have to pay you to take it?

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.


And the lame duck Congress wrote a tax reform bill which eliminated the top two tax brackets, giving them a largess while the national debt continues to grow.

Did AOC teach you economics?
 
In the best locations and with access to the most favourable policy support and finance, the IEA says the solar can now generate electricity “at or below” $20 per megawatt hour (MWh).

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

LOL, maybe you are brainwashed? It's so sad that people like you are the progeny of those who stood on a road and yelled, "get a horse" as the first cars drive by.

Our roof panels have reduced our cost for electricity to an average of $1.00 for every 60 day bill. Annually we receive a small check.


When cars were first built, they didn't require subsidies. That's the point. If solar electricity is so cheap, if your view, why should the taxpayers have to pay you to take it?

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.

Wrong......twice.


There's an argument you see around sometimes about Henry Ford's decision to pay his workers those famed $5 a day wages. It was that he realised that he should pay his workers sufficiently large sums to that they could afford the products they were making. In this manner he could expand the market for his products.

It should be obvious that this story doesn't work: Boeing would most certainly be in trouble if they had to pay their workers sufficient to afford a new jetliner. It's also obviously true that you want every other employer to be paying their workers sufficient that they can afford your products: but that's very much not the same as claiming that Ford should pay his workers so that they can afford Fords.

So, if creating that blue collar middle class that could afford the cars wasn't why Ford brought in his $5 a day wages, what was the reason?

Actually, it was the turnover of his staff.

At the time, workers could count on about $2.25 per day, for which they worked nine-hour shifts. It was pretty good money in those days, but the toll was too much for many to bear. Ford's turnover rate was very high. In 1913, Ford hired more than 52,000 men to keep a workforce of only 14,000. New workers required a costly break-in period, making matters worse for the company. Also, some men simply walked away from the line to quit and look for a job elsewhere. Then the line stopped and production of cars halted. The increased cost and delayed production kept Ford from selling his cars at the low price he wanted. Drastic measures were necessary if he was to keep up this production.

The Story of Henry Ford's $5 a Day Wages: It's Not What You Think (forbes.com)

The result was that the blue collar middle class could buy cars.

The result was that the blue collar middle class could buy cars.

Baloney.

In 1913, Ford hired more than 52,000 men to keep a workforce of only 14,000.

If one looks at the history of labor unions, and specifically the labor movement in he early 20th Century, no singular explanation of Ford is sufficient.


 
In the best locations and with access to the most favourable policy support and finance, the IEA says the solar can now generate electricity “at or below” $20 per megawatt hour (MWh).

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

LOL, maybe you are brainwashed? It's so sad that people like you are the progeny of those who stood on a road and yelled, "get a horse" as the first cars drive by.

Our roof panels have reduced our cost for electricity to an average of $1.00 for every 60 day bill. Annually we receive a small check.


When cars were first built, they didn't require subsidies. That's the point. If solar electricity is so cheap, if your view, why should the taxpayers have to pay you to take it?

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.


And the lame duck Congress wrote a tax reform bill which eliminated the top two tax brackets, giving them a largess while the national debt continues to grow.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.

First, there is 278 times more, never 278 times less.

In comparative terms, CEOs now make 278 times the average worker.

Second, bullshit.

1614966668637.png


Chief Executives (bls.gov)

Mean annual CEO wage is less than $200,000

If you want to take the CEOs of 350 of the biggest corporations on the planet
as covering the over 200,000 CEOs in the US, you're either dishonest or a moron.
 
In the best locations and with access to the most favourable policy support and finance, the IEA says the solar can now generate electricity “at or below” $20 per megawatt hour (MWh).

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

LOL, maybe you are brainwashed? It's so sad that people like you are the progeny of those who stood on a road and yelled, "get a horse" as the first cars drive by.

Our roof panels have reduced our cost for electricity to an average of $1.00 for every 60 day bill. Annually we receive a small check.


When cars were first built, they didn't require subsidies. That's the point. If solar electricity is so cheap, if your view, why should the taxpayers have to pay you to take it?

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.


And the lame duck Congress wrote a tax reform bill which eliminated the top two tax brackets, giving them a largess while the national debt continues to grow.
you still don't get it. They don't make their wealth amount annually you fking idiot.
 
Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA


""The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

That is according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020. The 464-page outlook, published today by the IEA, also outlines the “extraordinarily turbulent” impact of coronavirus and the “highly uncertain” future of global energy use over the next two decades....."

`

Not only this, but our 2017 Chev. Bolt has never needed to buy gas or have tune ups/oil changes. It has paid for itself, and with out solar panels we haven never needed to use charging stations.
which your double negative means you did. Doh!!!!

I saw the error in my sentence, too late to make the correction. Being a captious jerk and a syntax nazi allows you to pound your chest, like a Trumpanzee.
I only read what is printed. I never imply your thoughts or intentions. So how did you charge your old Bolt, or did you mean Volt?

We own the Bolt, not the Volt. We charge the Bolt (EV, all electric) with a 2020 outlet installed in the garage by SUNPOWER, the company which installed our panels. We recharge all of our rechargeable batteries overnight, wash the dishes in the dishwasher and our lap tops overnight too. We have no lawns, and have replaced the grass with both drought resistant plants and use the drip system to water at night too.

BTW, we also wear masks when we infrequently go out of our home and respect social distancing: Usually to the grocery stores; Costco and twice a week to take out dinner in restaurants in our community BTW, my wife and I will be getting our shots on March 16th. Even then we will keep the masks and respect the six foot margin when we go out.
 
Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA


""The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

That is according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020. The 464-page outlook, published today by the IEA, also outlines the “extraordinarily turbulent” impact of coronavirus and the “highly uncertain” future of global energy use over the next two decades....."

`

Not only this, but our 2017 Chev. Bolt has never needed to buy gas or have tune ups/oil changes. It has paid for itself, and with out solar panels we haven never needed to use charging stations.
which your double negative means you did. Doh!!!!

I saw the error in my sentence, too late to make the correction. Being a captious jerk and a syntax nazi allows you to pound your chest, like a Trumpanzee.
I only read what is printed. I never imply your thoughts or intentions. So how did you charge your old Bolt, or did you mean Volt?

We own the Bolt, not the Volt. We charge the Bolt (EV, all electric) with a 2020 outlet installed in the garage by SUNPOWER, the company which installed our panels. We recharge all of our rechargeable batteries overnight, wash the dishes in the dishwasher and our lap tops overnight too. We have no lawns, and have replaced the grass with both drought resistant plants and use the drip system to water at night too.

BTW, we also wear masks when we infrequently go out of our home and respect social distancing: Usually to the grocery stores; Costco and twice a week to take out dinner in restaurants in our community BTW, my wife and I will be getting our shots on March 16th. Even then we will keep the masks and respect the six foot margin when we go out.
so when you go out, you never have to recharge, ever since 2017? holy shit, you don't go nowhere.

BTW, good for you that you have sunpower. It isn't your only power in your home, I'm sure of that. sunpower isn't good for 24 x 7.
 
In the best locations and with access to the most favourable policy support and finance, the IEA says the solar can now generate electricity “at or below” $20 per megawatt hour (MWh).

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

LOL, maybe you are brainwashed? It's so sad that people like you are the progeny of those who stood on a road and yelled, "get a horse" as the first cars drive by.

Our roof panels have reduced our cost for electricity to an average of $1.00 for every 60 day bill. Annually we receive a small check.


When cars were first built, they didn't require subsidies. That's the point. If solar electricity is so cheap, if your view, why should the taxpayers have to pay you to take it?

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.


And the lame duck Congress wrote a tax reform bill which eliminated the top two tax brackets, giving them a largess while the national debt continues to grow.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.

First, there is 278 times more, never 278 times less.

In comparative terms, CEOs now make 278 times the average worker.

Second, bullshit.

View attachment 464446

Chief Executives (bls.gov)

Mean annual CEO wage is less than $200,000

If you want to take the CEOs of 350 of the biggest corporations on the planet
as covering the over 200,000 CEOs in the US, you're either dishonest or a moron.

There are liars, damn liars and statistics.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
CEOs see pay grow 1,000% in the last 40 years, now make 278 times the average worker

LINK: CEOs see pay grow 1,000% in the last 40 years, now make 278 times the average worker.
 
In the best locations and with access to the most favourable policy support and finance, the IEA says the solar can now generate electricity “at or below” $20 per megawatt hour (MWh).

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

LOL, maybe you are brainwashed? It's so sad that people like you are the progeny of those who stood on a road and yelled, "get a horse" as the first cars drive by.

Our roof panels have reduced our cost for electricity to an average of $1.00 for every 60 day bill. Annually we receive a small check.


When cars were first built, they didn't require subsidies. That's the point. If solar electricity is so cheap, if your view, why should the taxpayers have to pay you to take it?

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.


And the lame duck Congress wrote a tax reform bill which eliminated the top two tax brackets, giving them a largess while the national debt continues to grow.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.

First, there is 278 times more, never 278 times less.

In comparative terms, CEOs now make 278 times the average worker.

Second, bullshit.

View attachment 464446

Chief Executives (bls.gov)

Mean annual CEO wage is less than $200,000

If you want to take the CEOs of 350 of the biggest corporations on the planet
as covering the over 200,000 CEOs in the US, you're either dishonest or a moron.

There are liars, damn liars and statistics.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
CEOs see pay grow 1,000% in the last 40 years, now make 278 times the average worker

LINK: CEOs see pay grow 1,000% in the last 40 years, now make 278 times the average worker.
you can't read.
 
Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA


""The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

That is according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020. The 464-page outlook, published today by the IEA, also outlines the “extraordinarily turbulent” impact of coronavirus and the “highly uncertain” future of global energy use over the next two decades....."

`

Not only this, but our 2017 Chev. Bolt has never needed to buy gas or have tune ups/oil changes. It has paid for itself, and with out solar panels we haven never needed to use charging stations.
which your double negative means you did. Doh!!!!

I saw the error in my sentence, too late to make the correction. Being a captious jerk and a syntax nazi allows you to pound your chest, like a Trumpanzee.
I only read what is printed. I never imply your thoughts or intentions. So how did you charge your old Bolt, or did you mean Volt?

We own the Bolt, not the Volt. We charge the Bolt (EV, all electric) with a 2020 outlet installed in the garage by SUNPOWER, the company which installed our panels. We recharge all of our rechargeable batteries overnight, wash the dishes in the dishwasher and our lap tops overnight too. We have no lawns, and have replaced the grass with both drought resistant plants and use the drip system to water at night too.

BTW, we also wear masks when we infrequently go out of our home and respect social distancing: Usually to the grocery stores; Costco and twice a week to take out dinner in restaurants in our community BTW, my wife and I will be getting our shots on March 16th. Even then we will keep the masks and respect the six foot margin when we go out.
so when you go out, you never have to recharge, ever since 2017? holy shit, you don't go nowhere.

BTW, good for you that you have sunpower. It isn't your only power in your home, I'm sure of that. sunpower isn't good for 24 x 7.

I really hate to have to explain to you such simple things. My son and wife use the Bolt 100% of the time. When we travel we take the RAV 4, which is a hybrid. My son commutes less than one mile to his job (he drives for UPS). A full charge on the Bolt will go 220 miles.
 
Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA


""The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

That is according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020. The 464-page outlook, published today by the IEA, also outlines the “extraordinarily turbulent” impact of coronavirus and the “highly uncertain” future of global energy use over the next two decades....."

`

Not only this, but our 2017 Chev. Bolt has never needed to buy gas or have tune ups/oil changes. It has paid for itself, and with out solar panels we haven never needed to use charging stations.
which your double negative means you did. Doh!!!!

I saw the error in my sentence, too late to make the correction. Being a captious jerk and a syntax nazi allows you to pound your chest, like a Trumpanzee.
I only read what is printed. I never imply your thoughts or intentions. So how did you charge your old Bolt, or did you mean Volt?

We own the Bolt, not the Volt. We charge the Bolt (EV, all electric) with a 2020 outlet installed in the garage by SUNPOWER, the company which installed our panels. We recharge all of our rechargeable batteries overnight, wash the dishes in the dishwasher and our lap tops overnight too. We have no lawns, and have replaced the grass with both drought resistant plants and use the drip system to water at night too.

BTW, we also wear masks when we infrequently go out of our home and respect social distancing: Usually to the grocery stores; Costco and twice a week to take out dinner in restaurants in our community BTW, my wife and I will be getting our shots on March 16th. Even then we will keep the masks and respect the six foot margin when we go out.
so when you go out, you never have to recharge, ever since 2017? holy shit, you don't go nowhere.

BTW, good for you that you have sunpower. It isn't your only power in your home, I'm sure of that. sunpower isn't good for 24 x 7.

I really hate to have to explain to you such simple things. My son and wife use the Bolt 100% of the time. When we travel we take the RAV 4, which is a hybrid. My son commutes less than one mile to his job (he drives for UPS). A full charge on the Bolt will go 220 miles.
so you're on record, you never once plugged it in to the grid? I call bullshit. You can't prove it, nor can I. but logically, that isn't possible.
 
That article is a great example of Environmental Wacko stupidity.

Every major solar project in the world is subsidized by some stupid confused government and does not take into account the full production/transportation/ maintenance/disposal cost. It doesn't even include the full cost of the batteries that are necessary to maintain any kind of power continuity.

Without the moronic government subsidizes there never would be a solar array or wind farm ever built in the world.

Then of course comparing it to fossil fuels when the filthy ass idiot governments inflates the cost of fossil fuels by putting on stupid taxes and prevents the free production and distribution is also dishonesty. Just look at the corrupt asshole China Joe that stopped Canadian oil from being shipped by pipeline and having it come by rail cars (owned by Soros) and adding $30 a barrel to the cost as an example.

Solar and wind may be an uneducated Environmental Wacko's wet dream but engineering and science says it is a failure for any significant generation of electricity.

Just ask the Texicans how solar and wind worked out for them when they needed the electricity the most. The solar arrays were covered in snow and ice and most of the stupid wind turbines were frozen up something fierce.
 
In the best locations and with access to the most favourable policy support and finance, the IEA says the solar can now generate electricity “at or below” $20 per megawatt hour (MWh).

In the entire article, there's only a single sentence about the cost of solar electricity ... 2¢/kW-hr ... with massive subsidies ... I don't believe that ...

FAKE NEWS ...

LOL, maybe you are brainwashed? It's so sad that people like you are the progeny of those who stood on a road and yelled, "get a horse" as the first cars drive by.

Our roof panels have reduced our cost for electricity to an average of $1.00 for every 60 day bill. Annually we receive a small check.


When cars were first built, they didn't require subsidies. That's the point. If solar electricity is so cheap, if your view, why should the taxpayers have to pay you to take it?

Henry Ford paid his workers $1 an hour which was outrageous for the time.. His critics raised holy hell demanding to know why.. His answer: So they can buy cars.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.


And the lame duck Congress wrote a tax reform bill which eliminated the top two tax brackets, giving them a largess while the national debt continues to grow.

An example that few CEO's in major corporations today even consider. Profits go to the CEO's as the average workers are paid 278 times less than them.

First, there is 278 times more, never 278 times less.

In comparative terms, CEOs now make 278 times the average worker.

Second, bullshit.

View attachment 464446

Chief Executives (bls.gov)

Mean annual CEO wage is less than $200,000

If you want to take the CEOs of 350 of the biggest corporations on the planet
as covering the over 200,000 CEOs in the US, you're either dishonest or a moron.

There are liars, damn liars and statistics.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
CEOs see pay grow 1,000% in the last 40 years, now make 278 times the average worker

LINK: CEOs see pay grow 1,000% in the last 40 years, now make 278 times the average worker.

There are liars, damn liars and statistics.

I agree, the guys at EPI are a bunch of damn liars.

With wealth disparity continuing to accelerate, particularly since the financial crisis, the Economic Policy Institute reports that the gap between CEOs at the top 350 U.S. firms and the rank and file remains wide.

Durr.
 
After that, they will obviously outperform the continuing and volatile, cost of fossil fuel

Volatile cost is better than volatile output.

The real dirty little secret behind renewable installations that they will NEVER EVER tell you about is the three hundred percent rule. It takes three watts of renewable to replace one watt of hydrocarbon generated electricity because of the uncertainty of wind and solar. Now before Aboob Afuck asks for a link rest assured that this is an industry standard.

As a result to replace a 500 megawatt generating plant located in town you need 1500 megawatts of wind and solar divided into three separate installations and they have to be far apart from each other so that they are not subject to the same sun and weather conditions. Whereas the intown hydrocarbon plant needs a certain number of linear feet (X feet ) to deliver the 118k to the substations the three renewable installations need 3x plus ( variable dependent on miles of separation and distance of location ) of delivery line to do the same job. This places the need for delivery line installation at a cost of up to ten times the cost of the standard delivery line installation. This cost gets tucked into your bill as the ahem... " Transmission fee " This is just ONE of the many dirty little secrets that make renewable far more expensive in the final analysis than current conventional.

Now if they want to be PROUD of themselves they simply need to stop claiming that its cheaper or even as cheap and just say...... I am glad to pay more because its the right thing to do.

JO
 
Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA


""The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

That is according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020. The 464-page outlook, published today by the IEA, also outlines the “extraordinarily turbulent” impact of coronavirus and the “highly uncertain” future of global energy use over the next two decades....."

`

Not only this, but our 2017 Chev. Bolt has never needed to buy gas or have tune ups/oil changes. It has paid for itself, and with out solar panels we haven never needed to use charging stations.
which your double negative means you did. Doh!!!!

I saw the error in my sentence, too late to make the correction. Being a captious jerk and a syntax nazi allows you to pound your chest, like a Trumpanzee.
I only read what is printed. I never imply your thoughts or intentions. So how did you charge your old Bolt, or did you mean Volt?

We own the Bolt, not the Volt. We charge the Bolt (EV, all electric) with a 2020 outlet installed in the garage by SUNPOWER, the company which installed our panels. We recharge all of our rechargeable batteries overnight, wash the dishes in the dishwasher and our lap tops overnight too. We have no lawns, and have replaced the grass with both drought resistant plants and use the drip system to water at night too.

BTW, we also wear masks when we infrequently go out of our home and respect social distancing: Usually to the grocery stores; Costco and twice a week to take out dinner in restaurants in our community BTW, my wife and I will be getting our shots on March 16th. Even then we will keep the masks and respect the six foot margin when we go out.
so when you go out, you never have to recharge, ever since 2017? holy shit, you don't go nowhere.

BTW, good for you that you have sunpower. It isn't your only power in your home, I'm sure of that. sunpower isn't good for 24 x 7.

I really hate to have to explain to you such simple things. My son and wife use the Bolt 100% of the time. When we travel we take the RAV 4, which is a hybrid. My son commutes less than one mile to his job (he drives for UPS). A full charge on the Bolt will go 220 miles.
so you're on record, you never once plugged it in to the grid? I call bullshit. You can't prove it, nor can I. but logically, that isn't possible.

It's simple really.....maybe...just maybe he eats discarded batteries and craps out electricity!
I've heard of such things...hmmm.

JO
 
After that, they will obviously outperform the continuing and volatile, cost of fossil fuel

Volatile cost is better than volatile output.

The real dirty little secret behind renewable installations that they will NEVER EVER tell you about is the three hundred percent rule. It takes three watts of renewable to replace one watt of hydrocarbon generated electricity because of the uncertainty of wind and solar. Now before Aboob Afuck asks for a link rest assured that this is an industry standard.

As a result to replace a 500 megawatt generating plant located in town you need 1500 megawatts of wind and solar divided into three separate installations and they have to be far apart from each other so that they are not subject to the same sun and weather conditions. Whereas the intown hydrocarbon plant needs a certain number of linear feet (X feet ) to deliver the 118k to the substations the three renewable installations need 3x plus ( variable dependent on miles of separation and distance of location ) of delivery line to do the same job. This places the need for delivery line installation at a cost of up to ten times the cost of the standard delivery line installation. This cost gets tucked into your bill as the ahem... " Transmission fee " This is just ONE of the many dirty little secrets that make renewable far more expensive in the final analysis than current conventional.

Now if they want to be PROUD of themselves they simply need to stop claiming that its cheaper or even as cheap and just say...... I am glad to pay more because its the right thing to do.

JO
Ooh.
You have a "secret" you made up!
Of course technology has gotten much better and so has storage. (and up front cost mortgaged at much lower rates)
Thus the OP.

BTW, I have the No-Content TROLLS ToadStoolParrot, jc456, and 'ding'bat on Ignore.
The board clears up and reads much better!
More content, less one-line juvenile harassment.
Try it.

`
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top