Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Renewable Energy Is Now The Cheapest Option - Even Without Subsidies

2»

Comments

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    We NEED to do SOMETHING!

    Why? All for naught in 12 11.5 years anyway.
    I know you say that in jest. But I always find it funny when someone tries to be the smartest person in the room by taking a quote out of context.
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,499 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    We NEED to do SOMETHING!

    Why? All for naught in 12 11.5 years anyway.
    I know you say that in jest. But I always find it funny when someone tries to be the smartest person in the room by taking a quote out of context.



    But thank you for saying that
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    Gwad said:

    Any analysis that shows renewables as cheaper than a combined cycle natural gas plant is at best dealing with half-truths and ignoring the actual cost of delivered power. If this were the case then electricity prices would be declining in California rather than being the highest on the western US. Utility scale solar power and wind power generally come from nowhere and need to be transmitted to somewhere. Additional transmission costs are never factored into building a new wind plant in Wyoming in these analysis. Any solar or wind power has to be backed up by base load power from either coal, natural gas, hydro or nukes. There is no other alternative other than periodic blackouts. If renewables were now cheaper, we should immediately terminate the massive federal tax credit incentives associated with new solar and wind. We aren’t because they remain essential to new solar and wind construction. If they were now cheaper, we wouldn’t need states to pass renewable energy mandates forcing utility customers to pay for this supposedly cheaper electrical power.
    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/07/why-wind-and-solar-will-never-work.php
    WHY WIND AND SOLAR WILL NEVER WORK
    This paper by Mark Mills of the the Manhattan Institute and Northwestern University’s McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science, titled “The ‘New Energy Economy’: An Exercise in Magical Thinking,” does an excellent job of explaining why wind and solar energy will never replace fossil fuels or nuclear energy as a primary energy source. The problem is fundamental: the laws of physics. And, no, better batteries are not a solution. I really urge you to read the whole thing:
    * Solar technologies have improved greatly and will continue to become cheaper and more efficient. But the era of 10-fold gains is over. The physics boundary for silicon photovoltaic (PV) cells, the Shockley-Queisser Limit, is a maximum conversion of 34% of photons into electrons; the best commercial PV technology today exceeds 26%.
    * Wind power technology has also improved greatly, but here, too, no 10-fold gains are left. The physics boundary for a wind turbine, the Betz Limit, is a maximum capture of 60% of kinetic energy in moving air; commercial turbines today exceed 40%.
    * The annual output of Tesla’s Gigafactory, the world’s largest battery factory, could store three minutes’ worth of annual U.S. electricity demand. It would require 1,000 years of production to make enough batteries for two days’ worth of U.S. electricity demand. Meanwhile, 50–100 pounds of materials are mined, moved, and processed for every pound of battery produced.
    “Green” energy is the 21st century’s most egregious instance of cronyism. A great deal of money is being made on account of government mandates and subsidies, while consumers and electricity rate payers are needlessly paying inflated bills.

    THIS is the single biggest issue. Storage and peak use times.

    Rivers run all night. Natural gas plants chug on when the wind doesn't blow. Coal gives no fucks on whether the sun is out or not.

    Fossil fuels are formed from the remains of ancient organisms. Because coal takes millions of years to develop and there is a limited amount of it, it is a nonrenewable resource. The conditions that would eventually create coal began to develop about 300 million years ago, during the Carboniferous period.
    You sure about that?
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 105,824 Founders Club

    We NEED to do SOMETHING!

    Why? All for naught in 12 11.5 years anyway.
    We're down to a year and a half according to Prince Charles
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,860 Standard Supporter

    We NEED to do SOMETHING!

    Why? All for naught in 12 11.5 years anyway.
    We're down to a year and a half according to Prince Charles
    We're all dead and don't know by AlGore's estimate. Is this heaven?
  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,978
    Sledog said:

    We NEED to do SOMETHING!

    Why? All for naught in 12 11.5 years anyway.
    We're down to a year and a half according to Prince Charles
    We're all dead and don't know by AlGore's estimate. Is this heaven?
    Yes if heaven a massage table where he’s asking a not real attractive masseuse for a happy ending...
Sign In or Register to comment.