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

[ding]

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.

`

You have me on ignore because you can't explain why you want the planet to be colder during an ice age, dummy.

But everyone else can see my posts and hopefully they will start asking you this question too.

 

[justoffal]

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.

`

You have me on ignore because you can't explain why you want the planet to be colder during an ice age, dummy.

But everyone else can see my posts and hopefully they will start asking you this question too.

He can't explain shit except for constantly asking for links to stupid shit like how to find his own ass with one hand....
If these dupes want to preach Solar as a higher morality then fine it's their choice ...but any fool who thinks it's cheaper is just retarded beyond rescue.

JO

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

`

You have me on ignore because you can't explain why you want the planet to be colder during an ice age, dummy.

But everyone else can see my posts and hopefully they will start asking you this question too.

When he made a silly claim, I'd point out his math errors. I think I made him cry.

 

[jc456]

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.

`

Dude, you need storage under load. How long can the current batteries last under load?

 

[jc456]

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.

`

You have me on ignore because you can't explain why you want the planet to be colder during an ice age, dummy.

But everyone else can see my posts and hopefully they will start asking you this question too.

he ignores everyone.

 

[Stryder50]

EDIT for brevity
Wind and solar are base load plants. Paired with grid scale storage, they are far cheaper than fossil fuel or nuclear generation.

The Big Cover Up: Wind Industry Burying Millions of Toxic ...
Wind Energy Has A Waste Problem: Disposing Of The Turbines ...
Wind Turbine Blades Can't Be Recycled, So They're Piling ...
50,000 Tons Of Useless Wind Turbine Blades Dumped In The ...

 

[Stryder50]

Guess there is a thread for the above already;

Not So Green Energy Wind Turbines

Brilliant Green Energy progress. What happens to "wind farm" equipment when they wear out...they are NOT recyclable. Got to be a better way… Welcome To The Wind Turbine Graveyard, Casper, Wyoming. Here is your ‘Clean Energy!' So much for clean power; note the size of the bulldozer...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[abu afak]

Guess there is a thread for the above already;

Not So Green Energy Wind Turbines

Brilliant Green Energy progress. What happens to "wind farm" equipment when they wear out...they are NOT recyclable. Got to be a better way… Welcome To The Wind Turbine Graveyard, Casper, Wyoming. Here is your ‘Clean Energy!' So much for clean power; note the size of the bulldozer...

www.usmessageboard.com

Yes and I refuted that RWer numb nuts too.
(Casper Tribune article)

Not to mention this a SOLAR-specific thread you 12 IQ PICTURE-SPAMMING clown.

You're not capable of any discussion, just putting up lotsa pictures/graphs.


`

 

[badger2]

The solar panel system to recharge an e-bike will consist of two 100W panels. These will be mounted on a trailer (in the case of a two-wheeled bicycle) that charges while the e-bike is moving. Otherwise, they will be mounted on am e-tricycle itself and charge while the tricycle is moving.

 

[abu afak]

He can't explain shit except for constantly asking for links to stupid shit like how to find his own ass with one hand....
If these dupes want to preach Solar as a higher morality then fine it's their choice ...but any fool who thinks it's cheaper is just retarded beyond rescue.

JO

I have the Troll Ding on Ignore (jc456, ToadStoolParrot, and skookerAssbill too.)
The board is instantly more readable, mainly less one-line harssasment and other clowns.

You would easily qualify for Ignore too, but you don't make enough posts to be a significant nuisance... yet.

`

 

[Wyatt earp]

He can't explain shit except for constantly asking for links to stupid shit like how to find his own ass with one hand....
If these dupes want to preach Solar as a higher morality then fine it's their choice ...but any fool who thinks it's cheaper is just retarded beyond rescue.

JO

I have the Troll Ding on Ignore (jc456, ToadStoolParrot, and skookerAssbill too.)
The board is instantly more readable, mainly less one-line harssasment and other clowns.

You would easily qualify for Ignore too, but you don't make enough posts to be a significant nuisance... yet.

`

Shut up old rocks sock

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

He can't explain shit except for constantly asking for links to stupid shit like how to find his own ass with one hand....
If these dupes want to preach Solar as a higher morality then fine it's their choice ...but any fool who thinks it's cheaper is just retarded beyond rescue.

JO

I have the Troll Ding on Ignore (jc456, ToadStoolParrot, and skookerAssbill too.)
The board is instantly more readable, mainly less one-line harssasment and other clowns.

You would easily qualify for Ignore too, but you don't make enough posts to be a significant nuisance... yet.

`

Shut up old rocks sock

I made Abu cry too often......

 

[ding]

He can't explain shit except for constantly asking for links to stupid shit like how to find his own ass with one hand....
If these dupes want to preach Solar as a higher morality then fine it's their choice ...but any fool who thinks it's cheaper is just retarded beyond rescue.

JO

I have the Troll Ding on Ignore (jc456, ToadStoolParrot, and skookerAssbill too.)
The board is instantly more readable, mainly less one-line harssasment and other clowns.

You would easily qualify for Ignore too, but you don't make enough posts to be a significant nuisance... yet.

`

Why do you want the planet to be colder in the middle of an ice age

 

[Crick]

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.

www.carbonbrief.org

https://www.fastcompany.com/90583426/the-price-of-solar-electricity-has-dropped-89-in-10-years

Solar energy reaches historically low costs

Solar could be the GOAT when it comes to cheap electricity

www.theverge.com

Plunging solar prices spell bright future for renewables – DW – 05/28/2020

Solar electricity has fallen in cost faster than predicted. Within a decade, it will be cheaper to shut down existing coal-fired plants and build new solar plants in their place, experts say.

www.dw.com

Solar is now the 'cheapest electricity in history', report says - triple j

"I see solar becoming the new king of the world's electricity markets."

www.abc.net.au

It would seem to be true. But a depressing number of people on this forum don't really care about the truth. They're easy to spot as they make lots of claims but never back them up with any evidence.

 

[justoffal]

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.

www.carbonbrief.org

https://www.fastcompany.com/90583426/the-price-of-solar-electricity-has-dropped-89-in-10-years

Solar energy reaches historically low costs

Solar could be the GOAT when it comes to cheap electricity

www.theverge.com

Plunging solar prices spell bright future for renewables – DW – 05/28/2020

Solar electricity has fallen in cost faster than predicted. Within a decade, it will be cheaper to shut down existing coal-fired plants and build new solar plants in their place, experts say.

www.dw.com

Solar is now the 'cheapest electricity in history', report says - triple j

"I see solar becoming the new king of the world's electricity markets."

www.abc.net.au

It would seem to be true. But a depressing number of people on this forum don't really care about the truth. They're easy to spot as they make lots of claims but never back them up with any evidence.

What is depressing is this.....your total lack of simple third grade math skills and your willingness to be spoofed, lied to and screwed in the name of Green bullshit. Solar is fine....but it is absolutely not the cheapest source of energy...and it never will be because it cannot be. There is no contest between the 100,000,000 times density of btu's in the hydrocarbon storage as opposed to in the moment generating via photovoltaic capture.....coal is also solar energy stored to the 9th power in comparison to the real time energy capture. Sure it's dirty to burn but calling solar cheaper is doofus-ville. You want to make it an ethical argument then just admit that you're willing to pay more for Solar.


JO

 

[abu afak]

Money continues to pour into the GND (esp Solar) without any 'Govt' because it's cheaper and cleaner.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Money continues to pour into the GND (esp Solar) without any 'Govt' because it's cheaper and cleaner.

Obviously. That's why Germans pay triple what we do.....all that cheap wind and solar.

 

[abu afak]

You dont know your ass from a hole in the ground.

Solar is not a one time cost, proof of that is the trillions proposed needed to be spent on solar, forever!
Solar barely produces any electricity, the scientific solution, is to cover the earth by the square mile, hundreds of square miles of solar panels.
Solar increased the use of oil, while giving us a huge financial debt, and very little usable electricity.

Solar vs Oil? A valid argument in this thread? Yet you were speaking specifically of Canadian tar sands, which has what to do with hertz buying electric cars?

Environment concerns? I am a piece of shit because of this, yet you are god when you bring up canadian tar sands?

Cheap shot logic? The ignorant fools are very good at, "projecting". Yes, cheap shot logic is what you practice yet stupidly accuse others of, dramatically pointing out to all of us that it is you who uses cheap shot logic.

You are a dope.

Ooops.
It's cleaner AND it's cheaper.

`

 

[elektra]

Ooops.
It's cleaner AND it's cheaper.

`

solar increases the use of coal, hence increases pollution. Solar also requires hundreds of square miles of land. No other way of producing electricity is so weak that it requires us to destroy an entire state. Yes, solar destroys the earth by the square mile and will give us no electricity when we get home from work.

Yet, will cost us $100 trillion dollars. Cheaper than what? I guess cheaper than putting solar on the moon, although that is an idea that the democrats are contemplating.

 

[abu afak]

solar increases the use of coal, hence increases pollution. Solar also requires hundreds of square miles of land. No other way of producing electricity is so weak that it requires us to destroy an entire state. Yes, solar destroys the earth by the square mile and will give us no electricity when we get home from work.

Yet, will cost us $100 trillion dollars. Cheaper than what? I guess cheaper than putting solar on the moon, although that is an idea that the democrats are contemplating.

LOFL!
What an idiotic argument.
Solar does rely on other energy to produce it, but increasingly that will Be Renewables, most likely solar itself.
That's why they call it 'renewable.'
What a desperate and lost post.


Edit: Note the Wetwall "disagree" feedback below.
Note the idiot/science illiterate could never actually explain that disagreement.