Page 16 of 20 FirstFirst ... 6121314151617181920 LastLast
Results 376 to 400 of 480
  1. #376
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I was never able to read your mind, this is correct. If you stated your argument sooner I could have refuted it for you immediately so you did not have to go through two days of falsely believing you made a relevant point.
    "Look at how much the government is spending on future power generation! I divided by the spending on future power generation by this years total generation of power."

    That is, in essence, what you said.

    Your number is meaningless, unless you could break it down into how much installed capacity went in.

    Even then, you really need an NPV value to get anything really worth while, simply because the patterns of the cash flows is so divergent between forms.


    Let's break out all the spending in 2010 on future generation we will call it "X", and divide that by the amount of power generated in 2010 by those planned projects, and not constructed in the year the funds were allocated:


    X/0

    Is this operation going to get you a relevant bit of data to decide on the ultimate efficacy of the investment?

  2. #377
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I simply don't like wind power. I haven't seen enough to convince me it's a worthwhile investment.
    Building Wind Energy Can Save Midwestern Consumers $200 Per Year



    Let's examine regional variances, since no utility operates on a national average.

    According to this table, what is the minimum LEC cost for:

    conventional coal based on 2009 prices per mWh?

    For wind?

    ---------------------------------------


    That is for starters. There are some VERY windy places in the US onshore, and once you build the transmission to the wind corridors, the marginal costs drop considerably, this is already being done.

    Further, the intermittancy problems that PoopDeck is hanging his rhetorical hat on, are compensated by the same infrastructure investments. It is always windy somewhere, and as you get more capacity built, and more interconnection between grids in the continental US, you get the ability to move power from where it is being generated to where it is not.

    The cost savings from the first link stems from avoided costs for fuel.

    Wind is, overall, cheaper than solar in terms of energy provided per dollar spent.

  3. #378
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Sophist, please keep up,

    Do the EIA's levelized costs factor in stand-by power generation for wind and solar?
    Since we are in the question asking game, here is one for you:

    When does solar produce the most energy?
    Last edited by RandomGuy; 05-24-2012 at 08:18 AM.

  4. #379
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Sophist, please keep up,
    Next question:

    Your preferred data table, from the good professor at MIT used data to construct his LEC table from the 2006 EIA outlook.

    The EIA has recently examined its track record for predictions.

    Below is a link showing how well their predictions about coal prices, including 2006, has done.

    From the 2006 line, how much off was their prediction of coal prices in 2010?

    http://205.254.135.7/forecasts/aeo/r.../table_11b.pdf

    (for those following along, the green parts of the bottom table are the parts where they wildly underestimated future prices)
    Last edited by RandomGuy; 05-24-2012 at 08:18 AM.

  5. #380
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Now let's play the economics supply and demand game.

    Coal and natural gas prices are lower in the US than world prices, generally.

    The primary reason for this disparity is global prices for this is new demand in Asia, as this new demand has been pushing up the price point (i.e. intersection of supply and demand curves) for these two commodities relative to global supply.

    US producers of coal and natural gas, are currently limited by their ability to export their products to the places where these commodities are most in demand, this means they have to accept lower prices for their product from the primary consumers of their products in the US, i.e. utilities.

    Currently we are building natgas (LNG) export facilities.

    At the same time, there are proposals underway to build new coal export facilities in the pacific northwest.

    The LNG project is a bit easier to get through politically, but I think we can assume that at least one, if not more coal export facilities will get built, and the Canadian port facility will have its capacity upgraded, from what I have read.

    US coal and natgas producers will then be able to sell their products to the highest bidders worldwide.

    What does this imply for future coal/gas prices to US consumers of coal and natural gas?

  6. #381

  7. #382
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    So I am confused, are you supposed to run a business based on current data/projections, or are you supposed to run a business on older (3+ year old) numbers? and if so, do you think that myspace would be a good buy right now?

  8. #383
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    So I am confused, are you supposed to run a business based on current data/projections, or are you supposed to run a business on older (3+ year old) numbers? and if so, do you think that myspace would be a good buy right now?
    Well, here is another interesting tidbit, from 2012:

    Analysis: Shale energy boom dangles prospect of leap in economic growth

    Notable:
    TRUCKING AND PLASTICS

    Natural gas from shale deposits is already reshaping the long-haul trucking industry. Truck stops around the nation are adding tanks of super-cooled natural gas, known as LNG, because it is substantially cheaper than diesel.

    "When we call up trucking companies now, it's one of the first things they ask about," said Jimmy Haslam, CEO of Pilot Flying J, one of the country's largest truck stop chains.

    Trucking moves roughly three-quarters of American freight, so lower transportation costs will reverberate throughout the economy, attracting investment, freeing up capital for new projects and increasing corporate profits.

    Natural gas provider Clean Energy is partnering with Pilot Flying J to add LNG tanks at over 100 truck stops by the end of next year to allow coast-to-coast refueling.
    And over time, the U.S. will likely lose its energy cost advantage from shale as other countries tap their deposits. China and Argentina, for instance, are thought to have vast reserves. But they are far behind in developing their fields, giving the U.S. a clear running start.

    "They can eventually do it. It's just going to take some time," said Verleger.

    Companies in America now are paying just above $2.50 per million British thermal units for natural gas, roughly a quarter of what is paid in Europe and an even smaller fraction of the cost in Asia. As long as that lasts, the U.S. economy has an edge in benefiting from the energy boom.
    This will keep the decline of coal in powering US power plants, as companies facing the retirment of aging coal power plants decide that natgas is the way to go.

    This will push natgas demand, as will the LNG terminals. US prices will get closer to world prices.


    Some data on the aging coal power plant fleet:
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...S._Coal_Plants
    About a 1/3 of the capacity is older than I am. (1969 or older)

    More on retirements:
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...nt_retirements

    These plants will be replaced with natgas and renewables.

    As this happens, the line between "transportation" energy and "electrical" energy will blur, since those long haul truckers will be burning the same fuel as the natgas power plants.

    Add in the EVs that will become increasingly economical from the battery tech under development, and the line gets blurrier still. Easier to subs ute goods.

  9. #384
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672


    China was a net exporter of oil in 1993.

    They have recently become the #2 oil importer in the world, behind the US. Most projections have them importing more oil than the US within 15 years.

    Within about 5 years, China and India together will import more oil than the US, and their economies will continue to grow faster than ours.

    This rise in oil demand will push all other energy costs higher.

    Subs ution will push trucking companies even further to natgas, more demand for that, and less for oil.

    Tar sand companies will be sucking some serious wind at that point, as their really expensive per unit production costs bite them in the ass.

  10. #385
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    The professor's selected capacity factor for PV was 21, and this has changed due to advances in PV efficiency. The accepted 2011 baseline the EIA used was 25.

    Given this and the reductions in module costs in the intervening years, it would seem that your table here is still dated.

    What effect would these chages have on the data you have presented?
    Never did get this answered either.

  11. #386
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    There is nothing magical about "Hydraulic Fracking" it is a market based solution to rising energy prices.
    Can current methods profitably extract the oil from the formation noted in the article of the OP?

  12. #387
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I wonder how long this list is going to get. Can't fault the man for not having the time to get to everything, but at some point one will have to wonder why they are not being answered.

  13. #388
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    FWIW that is two PT log ins without answering any of those questions.

  14. #389
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Here's the kind of aggressive alternative energy policy we very probably won't see in TX for a long time, if ever. TX Repugs are too busy with tax expenditures for carbon industries, and their highly effective War on Women, on public schools, war on science, war on rationality and history, war on the poor, just about everybody in the 99%.

    Utility regulators more than double California's solar power goal

    SACRAMENTO — California is poised to more than double its targeted electricity output from rooftop solar panels.

    The state Public Utilities Commission on Thursday tweaked its rules to authorize an increase in the number of residential, commercial and government buildings that can participate in a program that allows solar users to lower their electricity bills by getting credit for excess power sent back to the grid.

    The move raises the maximum total capacity of all the state's rooftop solar systems to about 5,200 megawatts from a current 2,400 megawatts. That's enough new electricity to power about 2.1 million homes.

    Proponents said the PUC's 5-0 decision would ensure that California would remain the nation's leader in solar power. The state's solar industry employs more than 25,000 workers and has raised more than $10 billion in private investment, they said.

    http://mobile.latimes.com/p.p?m=b&a=...%3D0%26DPL%3D3

  15. #390

  16. #391
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Here's the kind of aggressive alternative energy policy we very probably won't see in TX for a long time, if ever. TX Repugs are too busy with tax expenditures for carbon industries, and their highly effective War on Women, on public schools, war on science, war on rationality and history, war on the poor, just about everybody in the 99%.

    Utility regulators more than double California's solar power goal

    SACRAMENTO — California is poised to more than double its targeted electricity output from rooftop solar panels.

    The state Public Utilities Commission on Thursday tweaked its rules to authorize an increase in the number of residential, commercial and government buildings that can participate in a program that allows solar users to lower their electricity bills by getting credit for excess power sent back to the grid.

    The move raises the maximum total capacity of all the state's rooftop solar systems to about 5,200 megawatts from a current 2,400 megawatts. That's enough new electricity to power about 2.1 million homes.

    Proponents said the PUC's 5-0 decision would ensure that California would remain the nation's leader in solar power. The state's solar industry employs more than 25,000 workers and has raised more than $10 billion in private investment, they said.

    http://mobile.latimes.com/p.p?m=b&a=...%3D0%26DPL%3D3
    There is a concept in economics that concerns industrial centers.

    Basically, when you get a large industry presence in an area, you ac ulate a pool of talent and capital that is hard to replicate elsewhere.

    Silicon Valley is one example, Boeing's complex is another.

    California is well situated to take advantage of both wind and solar, and the investments in both will probably pay good dividends as it has to import less and less coal from other states to produce electricity.

    If it achieves a critical mass of research and talent with renewables, it will have an decided advantage as that industry gets bigger.

  17. #392
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    Here's the kind of aggressive alternative energy policy we very probably won't see in TX for a long time, if ever. TX Repugs are too busy with tax expenditures for carbon industries, and their highly effective War on Women, on public schools, war on science, war on rationality and history, war on the poor, just about everybody in the 99%.

    Utility regulators more than double California's solar power goal

    SACRAMENTO — California is poised to more than double its targeted electricity output from rooftop solar panels.

    The state Public Utilities Commission on Thursday tweaked its rules to authorize an increase in the number of residential, commercial and government buildings that can participate in a program that allows solar users to lower their electricity bills by getting credit for excess power sent back to the grid.

    The move raises the maximum total capacity of all the state's rooftop solar systems to about 5,200 megawatts from a current 2,400 megawatts. That's enough new electricity to power about 2.1 million homes.

    Proponents said the PUC's 5-0 decision would ensure that California would remain the nation's leader in solar power. The state's solar industry employs more than 25,000 workers and has raised more than $10 billion in private investment, they said.

    http://mobile.latimes.com/p.p?m=b&a=...%3D0%26DPL%3D3
    I guess this doesn't fit your narrative, but texas (currently) has more total installed capacity of wind and solar than california will have AFTER they hit that goal (and it isn't even close). This doesn't even include the solar plant in austin or the new san antonio plant that will start construction soon. Texas has FAR more installed MW/capita than does california.

    There are a lot of things that you can attack texas for, try to stick to the things that hold water.

  18. #393
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I guess this doesn't fit your narrative, but texas (currently) has more total installed capacity of wind and solar than california will have AFTER they hit that goal (and it isn't even close). This doesn't even include the solar plant in austin or the new san antonio plant that will start construction soon. Texas has FAR more installed MW/capita than does california.

    There are a lot of things that you can attack texas for, try to stick to the things that hold water.
    If you notice here:

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...S._Coal_Plants

    Texas generates more coal power than any other state. Most of that comes from old plants.

    Current projected retirements represent about 14% of the coal electric capacity.

    This will be replaced with natgas (the LNG terminal in Louisiana is right on the border of Texas, supplied by Eagle ford) , solar and wind.

    If one looks, Texas' coast is a good place to start, and the solar capacity is also pretty good. Most of the peak power generation from such solar plants looks attractive as a replacement as well.

    Wind map
    http://windeis.anl.gov/guide/maps/map2.html

    Solar map
    http://www.ecotechnousa.com/EcoTechn...ar-Myth-4.aspx

    Texas also has its own grid, which helps in planning.

    Also, Texas has faced some pretty severe droughts and water right fights that have made companies that operate plants requiring water for their boilers nervous. Yet another potential variable cost that will likely get expensive.

  19. #394
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    If you notice here:

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...S._Coal_Plants

    Texas generates more coal power than any other state. Most of that comes from old plants.

    Current projected retirements represent about 14% of the coal electric capacity.

    This will be replaced with natgas (the LNG terminal in Louisiana is right on the border of Texas, supplied by Eagle ford) , solar and wind.

    If one looks, Texas' coast is a good place to start, and the solar capacity is also pretty good. Most of the peak power generation from such solar plants looks attractive as a replacement as well.

    Wind map
    http://windeis.anl.gov/guide/maps/map2.html

    Solar map
    http://www.ecotechnousa.com/EcoTechn...ar-Myth-4.aspx

    Texas also has its own grid, which helps in planning.

    Also, Texas has faced some pretty severe droughts and water right fights that have made companies that operate plants requiring water for their boilers nervous. Yet another potential variable cost that will likely get expensive.
    I am not saying that we couldn't do better (we can), but we are not some sort of laggard where it comes to renewables (believe me, it surprises me every time I look at the data)


    Also, you are right, we do have a lot of coal, but you are also right, we are killing them off as they reach retirement age (some even years before) and replacing them with much cleaner power generation (and leading the nation in renewables while we are at it).
    Thanks for those charts I was looking for something exactly like that.

  20. #395
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I am not saying that we couldn't do better (we can), but we are not some sort of laggard where it comes to renewables (believe me, it surprises me every time I look at the data)
    That is what I mean when I say things like "the world has changed".

    Solid investment money is what is driving this trend.

    These people are the capitalist class that people like PopTech lionizes, and aren’t doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, but because they are looking at the same data I am, and reaching similar conclusions.

    That is a bitter pill for conservative ideologues to swallow, because it is so counter to their narrative.

    For a long time the argument “renewable are more expensive and a pipe dream” has held somewhat true, reinforcing this narrative and engendering a knee-jerk anti-green energy reaction.

    Given these are the kinds of people with very strong confirmation biases that suggests that there is a lot of money to be made betting against them.

    If I were more cynical and less ethical, it would be very easy to put together a sure loser fossil fuel portfolio investment fund that plays to their egos, and then turn around and short it behind their backs, I have come across a couple of funds that seem to be doing the first part, so I don’t think I am the only one that has occurred to.

    Hey, that’s capitalism for you. Make money on information asymmetry, and then blame the victim for not having the personal responsibility to invest wisely.

  21. #396
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    That is what I mean when I say things like "the world has changed".

    Solid investment money is what is driving this trend.

    These people are the capitalist class that people like PopTech lionizes, and aren’t doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, but because they are looking at the same data I am, and reaching similar conclusions.

    That is a bitter pill for conservative ideologues to swallow, because it is so counter to their narrative.

    For a long time the argument “renewable are more expensive and a pipe dream” has held somewhat true, reinforcing this narrative and engendering a knee-jerk anti-green energy reaction.

    Given these are the kinds of people with very strong confirmation biases that suggests that there is a lot of money to be made betting against them.

    If I were more cynical and less ethical, it would be very easy to put together a sure loser fossil fuel portfolio investment fund that plays to their egos, and then turn around and short it behind their backs, I have come across a couple of funds that seem to be doing the first part, so I don’t think I am the only one that has occurred to.

    Hey, that’s capitalism for you. Make money on information asymmetry, and then blame the victim for not having the personal responsibility to invest wisely.
    Agreed on all counts. Cant really add anything else ATM.

  22. #397
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    41,654
    That is what I mean when I say things like "the world has changed".

    Solid investment money is what is driving this trend.

    These people are the capitalist class that people like PopTech lionizes, and aren’t doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, but because they are looking at the same data I am, and reaching similar conclusions.


    How is this working out for the Germans?

  23. #398
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,319
    I guess this doesn't fit your narrative, but texas (currently) has more total installed capacity of wind and solar than california will have AFTER they hit that goal (and it isn't even close). This doesn't even include the solar plant in austin or the new san antonio plant that will start construction soon. Texas has FAR more installed MW/capita than does california.

    There are a lot of things that you can attack texas for, try to stick to the things that hold water.

  24. #399
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,319
    How is this working out for the Germans?
    Relevance?

  25. #400
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    How is this working out for the Germans?
    well.

    and...


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •