Y'all know this, right?

doogie

That the true cost of solar and wind power has been underestimated?

http://www.theenergycollective.com/gail-tverberg/2409208/researchers-underestimating-cost-wind-solar

2001400ex

So lets just do nothing then.

doogie

Agreed.

CuntWaffle

2001400ex said:

So lets just do nothing then.

What are YOU doing Hondo? You like to dodge this question.

doogie

advancing propaganda, of course

RedRocket

This article actually does a good job of framing the issue in a nonpartisan way. This shit always gets boiled down to some binary argument that renewables are either good or bad and you have to pick a side based on your political affiliation.

In some places wind and solar make economic and physical sense (Hawaii) and in other places they don't (Seattle). Technology could change this if large scale economic battery storage gets figured out or if the cost of small scale residential PV + storage comes down or becomes more efficient. Until that happens you need natural gas to make up the differnece when the sun isn't shinning or the wind isn't blowing.

Mosster47

Hydroelectric is 1 cent per KW to generate. Nuclear is slightly more and completely safe with the correct reactor.

Why any option besides these two are ever talked about is crazy.

RedRocket

Mosster47 said:

Hydroelectric is 1 cent per KW to generate. Nuclear is slightly more and completely safe with the correct reactor.

Why any option besides these two are ever talked about is crazy.

There isn't very much untapped conventional hydro potential in the US. It's also more expensive than 1 cent per kWh to generate hydro. BPA sells wholesale for like $35/MWh ~ 3.5 cents/kWh and they own huge dams, that were built decades ago and are mostly depreciated.

Nuclear isn't cheap either because of all the regulation and NIMBY surrounding it. Read up on WPPSS if you want to know why people don't build more nuclear. Nukes generate a shit load of electricity but they cost a fortune to build and if the load growth isn't there to support it then it turns into a massive boondoggle. Also Obama screwed th pooch by shutting down Yucca.

PurpleThrobber

Mosster47 said:

Hydroelectric is 1 cent per KW to generate. Nuclear is slightly more and completely safe with the correct reactor.

Why any option besides these two are ever talked about is crazy.

Nukes should be a viable alternative offered to the lefties when they want to blow up dams so the salmon and Sherman Alexie are happy.

dflea

Nuclear power is a no-brainer by almost any measure.

Therefore, we won't go that route.


We do shit like that.

UWhuskytskeet

RedRocket said:

Mosster47 said:

Hydroelectric is 1 cent per KW to generate. Nuclear is slightly more and completely safe with the correct reactor.

Why any option besides these two are ever talked about is crazy.

There isn't very much untapped conventional hydro potential in the US. It's also more expensive than 1 cent per kWh to generate hydro. BPA sells wholesale for like $35/MWh ~ 3.5 cents/kWh and they own huge dams, that were built decades ago and are mostly depreciated.

Nuclear isn't cheap either because of all the regulation and NIMBY surrounding it. Read up on WPPSS if you want to know why people don't build more nuclear. Nukes generate a shit load of electricity but they cost a fortune to build and if the load growth isn't there to support it then it turns into a massive boondoggle. Also Obama screwed th pooch by shutting down Yucca.

Mid-C doesn't trade at $35/Mwh in futures, it hardly reaches $30, and drops to $17 in spring. With California adding more and more solar, there is less demand served by expensive fuels, and in turn less of a demand for NW electricity, though plenty still heads south.

RedRocket

UWhuskytskeet said:

RedRocket said:

Mosster47 said:

Hydroelectric is 1 cent per KW to generate. Nuclear is slightly more and completely safe with the correct reactor.

Why any option besides these two are ever talked about is crazy.

There isn't very much untapped conventional hydro potential in the US. It's also more expensive than 1 cent per kWh to generate hydro. BPA sells wholesale for like $35/MWh ~ 3.5 cents/kWh and they own huge dams, that were built decades ago and are mostly depreciated.

Nuclear isn't cheap either because of all the regulation and NIMBY surrounding it. Read up on WPPSS if you want to know why people don't build more nuclear. Nukes generate a shit load of electricity but they cost a fortune to build and if the load growth isn't there to support it then it turns into a massive boondoggle. Also Obama screwed th pooch by shutting down Yucca.

Mid-C doesn't trade at $35/Mwh in futures, it hardly reaches $30, and drops to $17 in spring. With California adding more and more solar, there is less demand served by expensive fuels, and in turn less of a demand for NW electricity, though plenty still heads south.

True MIDC usually doesn't go much over 35 on futures but MIDC also isn't the best proxy for how much it costs to own and operate a dam because, in theory, MIDC price should be based on marginal cost. Natural gas usually sets the margin at MIDC, except during run off. A better proxy than MIDC is BPA's Block rate which is closer to $35 because it also includes all the fixed costs associated with operating a massive federal hydro system.

2001400ex

CuntWaffle said:

2001400ex said:

So lets just do nothing then.

What are YOU doing Hondo? You like to dodge this question.

Right. What do you expect me to do about it?

RaceBannon

Solar is great for Palm Springs air conditioning and southwest pools and stuff. The issue as always is how something scales out for mass use. Wind and solar are scars on the earth as it is in limited use now.

2001400ex

RaceBannon said:

Solar is great for Palm Springs air conditioning and southwest pools and stuff. The issue as always is how something scales out for mass use. Wind and solar are scars on the earth as it is in limited use now.

And oil refineries are a breath of fresh air.

RaceBannon

2001400ex said:

RaceBannon said:

Solar is great for Palm Springs air conditioning and southwest pools and stuff. The issue as always is how something scales out for mass use. Wind and solar are scars on the earth as it is in limited use now.

And oil refineries are a breath of fresh air.

Oil serves 7 billion people. I know you don't understand scale. My drive to Palm Springs isn't ruined by oil wells

CuntWaffle

2001400ex said:

CuntWaffle said:

2001400ex said:

So lets just do nothing then.

What are YOU doing Hondo? You like to dodge this question.

Right. What do you expect me to do about it?

Exactly. So stop being so smug and shut the fuck up.

Sledog

Funny how the green loons are fine with wind and solar killing birds, included protected species, in large numbers. I say we toss them into the beam from thousands of mirrors for a little tanning session.

Of course burning fossils fuel for solar is a wonderful idea....

http://www.pe.com/2017/01/23/ivanpah-solar-plant-built-to-limit-greenhouse-gases-is-burning-more-natural-gas/