Page 15 of 20 FirstFirst ... 5111213141516171819 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 480
  1. #351
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I am dealing with reality not your future fantasies. The irrefutable fact is that Coal and Natural Gas are the two cheapest forms of electrical generation.

    Thanks for demonstrating you are incompetent at doing research. That is the same exact chart from the EIA,...
    You stopped at the first graph.



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

    Tell me, according to this table, what is the minimum LEC cost for:

    conventional coal based on 2009 prices per mWh?

    For wind?



    I am not ignoring anything. The EIA's Coal numbers are ridiculously inflated which they explicitly admit.
    If you had bothered to read the notes, they also gave a "no GHG concern" case, where the 3% capital cost you base this statement on is removed.

    85.5/1.03 = 83 dollars for coal. POOOF the "gross inflation" is removed.


    Which is higher genyus, 83 or 81.9?

  2. #352
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    I see we are back to big boy fonts,

    Do the EIA's levelized costs factor in stand-by power generation for wind and solar?

    Do they factor in a level playing field removing government tax distortions to give accurate numbers?

    Do they arbitrarily inflate coal's levelized costs?

  3. #353
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    The wind costs are bogus and the coal costs inflated based on imaginary nonsense, here is the real levelized costs,

    Federal Tax Policy Towards Energy (PDF) (pg. 22) (Gilbert E. Metcalf, Ph.D. Professor of Economics, MIT)

    Real Levelized Costs of Electricity:

    $3.79 Conventional Coal
    $4.37 Clean Coal
    $5.61 Natural Gas
    $5.94 Nuclear
    $6.64 Wind
    $18.82 Solar Thermal
    $37.39 Solar Photovoltaic


    I would always recommend the most economically viable sources of electrical generation, coal and natural gas.

    Why would I lie to a utility company CEO about emotional energy sources like Wind?

    Wind Energy: The Truth Blows (Energy Tribune, October 20, 2010)
    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?

  4. #354
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I see we are back to big boy fonts,

    Do the EIA's levelized costs factor in stand-by power generation for wind and solar?

    Do they factor in a level playing field removing government tax distortions to give accurate numbers?

    Do they arbitrarily inflate coal's levelized costs?
    (nah)

  5. #355
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    I cannot find the EIA's calculation for stand-by power generation for wind and solar in their levelized costs. They at least admit to arbitrarily distorting coal's numbers.

  6. #356
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    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.
    Use either table, Solar is not economically viable and only a source of emotional energy.

  7. #357
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I see we are back to big boy fonts,

    Do the EIA's levelized costs factor in stand-by power generation for wind and solar?
    You tell me. You are good at research.

    (you might want to re-visit some of what I said about battery technology, and the advances being pushed there as well)
    Last edited by RandomGuy; 05-23-2012 at 10:54 PM.

  8. #358
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672

    "Re-considering the economics of photovoltaic power, Bazilian et al. (2012) "
    (drawn from the white papers at bloomberg energy finance unit:
    http://bnef.com/free-publications/white-papers/ )

    Note the reductions are in a logorythmic scale, on the Y axis.

    The PV industry has seen unprecedented declines in module prices since the second half of 2008. Yet, awareness of the current economics of solar power lags among many commentators, policy makers, energy users and even utilities. The reasons are numerous and include: the very rapid pace of PV price reductions, the persistence of out-of-date data in information still being disseminated (occasionally by those with an interest in clouding the discussion), the misconceptions and ambiguity surrounding many of the metrics and concepts commonly used in the PV industry, and ambiguities regarding underlying PV costs due to the numerous policy support measures that have been put in place over the last decade.
    As I have said, the world is changing.
    Last edited by RandomGuy; 05-23-2012 at 11:03 PM.

  9. #359
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Use either table, Solar is not economically viable and only a source of emotional energy.
    That wasn't what I asked, sophist.

  10. #360
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    Irrefutable fact: (Using either table) Solar is not economically viable and only a source of emotional energy.

  11. #361
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I cannot find the EIA's calculation for stand-by power generation for wind and solar in their levelized costs.
    Clever bait. Sorry, not biting.

  12. #362
    The Boognish FuzzyLumpkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,829
    Every time I see him write 'irrefutable' I only see 'I have aspergers so my brain cannot interpret anything as anything other than absolutes.'

  13. #363
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Irrefutable fact: (Using either table) Solar is not economically viable and only a source of emotional energy.
    Meh.

    You got owned by your own words, sophist.

    So much for admitting you make mistakes.

  14. #364
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Irrefutable fact: (Using either table) Solar is not economically viable and only a source of emotional energy.
    That isn't what I asked, sophist.

    If you don't want to answer an honest fair question, just say so.

  15. #365
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    That isn't what I asked, sophist.

    If you don't want to answer an honest fair question, just say so.
    What you asked is based on inaccurate information. Try and keep up sophist,

    Do the EIA's levelized costs factor in stand-by power generation for wind and solar?

    Do they factor in a level playing field removing government tax distortions to give accurate numbers?

    Do they arbitrarily inflate coal's levelized costs?


    All I am is honest and fair.

  16. #366
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Do the EIA's levelized costs factor in stand-by power generation for wind and solar?
    You do realize solar thermal can produce power 24 hours a day, right?

  17. #367
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    All I am is honest and fair.

  18. #368
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    I am dealing with reality not your future fantasies. The irrefutable fact is that Coal and Natural Gas are the two cheapest forms of electrical generation.

    Thanks for demonstrating you are incompetent at doing research. That is the same exact chart from the EIA,...
    You stopped at the first graph.



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

    Tell me, according to this table, what is the minimum LEC cost for:

    conventional coal based on 2009 prices per mWh?

    For wind?

  19. #369
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    You do realize solar thermal can produce power 24 hours a day, right?
    Producing power 24-hours a day and producing continuous base-load power are two different things.

  20. #370
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    You stopped at the first graph.
    Sophist, please keep up,

    Do the EIA's levelized costs factor in stand-by power generation for wind and solar?

    Do they factor in a level playing field removing government tax distortions to give accurate numbers?

    Do they arbitrarily inflate coal's levelized costs?

  21. #371
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    What you asked is based on inaccurate information.
    So the good professors figures for solar PV are based on module prices 5+ times more expensive than today, with lower capacity factors, and the PV "economic" life he selected was from a 2004 study of only 20 years.

    Most PV analysis indicates that PV panel lives stretch to 30 years, and quite possibly as long as 50.

    All of which strongly implies the need to revisit the table don't you think?

    Sorry, the world changed.

  22. #372
    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?

    Do they factor in a level playing field removing government tax distortions to give accurate numbers?

    Do they arbitrarily inflate coal's levelized costs?
    Meh, bed time.

    Quickly:

    No. Neither do they need to, for reasons that have already been explained to you.

    No. You used the wrong column from the 2007 report based on erroneous 2004 information anyway.

    No. You don't get to define arbitary, sorry.

  23. #373
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Producing power 24-hours a day and producing continuous base-load power are two different things.
    Meh, by the same token, PV is a "peaker" power source for most of the hot southwest.

    You can't simply dirctly compare these sources in the way you want to.

    Astonishingly enough, it is more complex than your attempts at simplifying things allows for.

  24. #374
    The Boognish FuzzyLumpkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,829
    Astonishingly enough, it is more complex than your attempts at simplifying things allows for.
    Beckons one of my favorite quotes:

    A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.

  25. #375
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Oh !!!

    Am I maybe wrong then?

    and so do many in the industry.
    It just seems practical this way. The more perpendicular your location on earth is to the sun, the more energy you have per unit area.
    What I do want is an incubation period, that has a definite end, in which there are subsidies and infrastructure investments to get the industry on its feet.
    If there is an advantage to build these, then it simply isn't needed. What we have is the law makers loving to hold the power they have. On the flip side, we have industry holding out for the free money they know the lawmakers will give them with the right sweet talking. This should stop. If it is a worthwhile investment, industry will build it with no free money.
    I would point out that wind in the winter balances a lack of solar. The two compliment each other well.
    I simply don't like wind power. I haven't seen enough to convince me it's a worthwhile investment. I think solar is a great idea though.

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
  •