0
brenthutch

The Economic Argument for Green Energy

Recommended Posts

See Australia,
Solar is cheaper than coal electricity for the past year.

Wind is going be cheaper than coal or oil in the States by 2017 (average predictions) and 2019 according to oil companies`latest investor reports (BP predicts this will happen in 2020).


However, Natural Gas will stay king (and absurdly cheap) in the States until at least 2030; possibly 2040. Fracking is the equivalent of the Texas oil rush of the 1920s.


Cheers!
Shc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

See Australia,
Solar is cheaper than coal electricity for the past year.

Wind is going be cheaper than coal or oil in the States by 2017 (average predictions) and 2019 according to oil companies`latest investor reports (BP predicts this will happen in 2020).


However, Natural Gas will stay king (and absurdly cheap) in the States until at least 2030; possibly 2040. Fracking is the equivalent of the Texas oil rush of the 1920s.


Cheers!
Shc



hmmm. what's interesting about that is that in ontario, while costs might go down to generate solar and wind, the gov't signed 20 year contracts at fixed rates far above anything a reasonable person would have been willing to pay anyways. so it doesnt' matter what it costs to generate, we're overpaying anyways.

And of course, the contracts say we can't not accept wind power, even if we don't need it at the time, so we pay our neighbors (New York and mIchigan thank us) to take the excess power off our hands.

Of course since there's no manufacturing left in the province, in part at least due to skyrocketing rates of electricity, we have lots of excess power to pay other provinces and states to take off our hands.
If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Correct if I'm wrong but I don't think Harper has much of a green energy plan.

And even then, Canada is geographically misplaced for any sort of efficient system for solar or wind electricity.

+ Canada is having its own natural gas "fracking" boom which should be more or less insanely cheap as America's fracking.


Shc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Correct if I'm wrong but I don't think Harper has much of a green energy plan.

And even then, Canada is geographically misplaced for any sort of efficient system for solar or wind electricity.

+ Canada is having its own natural gas "fracking" boom which should be more or less insanely cheap as America's fracking.


Shc.



I wasn't commenting on harper or federal programs. I was commenting on the green energy plan brought in by the mcguilty liberals in ontario to bankrupt the province....
If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It does not appear that this town will do well economicly

Quote

Cape Cod community considers taking down wind turbines after illness, noise



Quote

Two wind turbines towering above the Cape Cod community of Falmouth, Mass., were intended to produce green energy and savings -- but they've created angst and division, and may now be removed at a high cost as neighbors complain of noise and illness.

"It gets to be jet-engine loud," said Falmouth resident Neil Andersen. He and his wife Betsy live just a quarter mile from one of the turbines. They say the impact on their health has been devastating. They're suffering headaches, dizziness and sleep deprivation and often seek to escape the property where they've lived for more than 20 years.

"Every time the blade has a downward motion it gives off a tremendous energy, gives off a pulse," said Andersen. "And that pulse, it gets into your tubular organs, chest cavity, mimics a heartbeat, gives you headaches. It's extremely disturbing and it gets to the point where you have to leave."

The first turbine went up in 2010 and by the time both were in place on the industrial site of the town's water treatment facility, the price was $10 million. Town officials say taking them down will cost an estimated $5 million to $15 million, but that is just what Falmouth's five selectmen have decided to move toward doing.

"The selectmen unanimously voted to remove them. We think it's the right thing to do, absolutely," Selectman David Braga said. "You can't put a monetary value on people's health and that's what's happened here. A lot of people are sick because of these."



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/26/cape-cod-community-considers-taking-down-wind-turbines-after-illness-noise/?test=latestnews



And this is just the beginning
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cleaner air, cheaper power, less coal! Good start.

============
EPA, Legal Battle Shut Down Power Plant
Tue, 02/26/2013 - 7:00am
Associated Press, Dina Cappiello

One of the largest U.S. electricity producers will stop burning coal at two of its power plants under a legal settlement reached with the EPA, eight states and several environmental groups.

American Electric Power agreed in federal court in Columbus, Ohio, to retire or switch to natural gas two coal-burning units at power plants in Ohio and Indiana by the end of 2015.

In exchange, AEP changed the conditions of an earlier court settlement and will use equipment at another Indiana power plant that will not reduce sulfur dioxide as much.

Cheap natural gas and environmental regulations are causing utilities to shut down coal-fired power plants. AEP had previously planned to stop coal at one unit.

Environmentalists say the deal will ensure the company doesn't change its mind.
============

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Cleaner air, cheaper power, less coal! Good start.

============
EPA, Legal Battle Shut Down Power Plant
Tue, 02/26/2013 - 7:00am
Associated Press, Dina Cappiello

One of the largest U.S. electricity producers will stop burning coal at two of its power plants under a legal settlement reached with the EPA, eight states and several environmental groups.

American Electric Power agreed in federal court in Columbus, Ohio, to retire or switch to natural gas two coal-burning units at power plants in Ohio and Indiana by the end of 2015.

In exchange, AEP changed the conditions of an earlier court settlement and will use equipment at another Indiana power plant that will not reduce sulfur dioxide as much.

Cheap natural gas and environmental regulations are causing utilities to shut down coal-fired power plants. AEP had previously planned to stop coal at one unit.

Environmentalists say the deal will ensure the company doesn't change its mind.
============



Cheaper power?

You are funny:D
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>You are funny

Lots of people are laughing all the way to the bank!

==============
Turning Away From Coal
Utilities are increasingly looking to natural gas to generate electricity

By REBECCA SMITH
Wall Street Journal

Power companies are increasingly switching to natural gas to fuel their electricity plants, driven by low prices and forecasts of vast supplies for years to come.

While the trend started in the late 1990s, the momentum is accelerating and comes at the expense of coal. Some utilities are closing coal-fired plants; others are converting them to run on gas.
===============
Cheap natural gas hurting coal market

Where we stand Right now, coal is too expensive to use.

The Virginian-Pilot
© September 19, 2012

Every lost job is a tragedy. And so there is pain in each of the 1,200 jobs being cut by Alpha Natural Resources, the company that bought the beleaguered Massey Energy.

The jobs aren't disappearing because of Massey's myriad of safety shortcomings or its labor strife. Alpha Natural Resources will close eight Appalachian mines immediately because coal is increasingly uncompetitive in a power generation world that is turning to cleaner, cheaper natural gas.

The mine closings began Tuesday. In all, Alpha will lose 1,200 jobs, including 400 at mines in Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania.

Critics of the Obama administration will inevitably blame the president and his policies for the layoffs. They will point fingers at the Environmental Protection Agency. They will rail about a global warming "conspiracy" changing the course of American industry.

They will be wrong.

American mines are closing because coal right now is too expensive to use to generate electricity. Natural gas is so abundant, and so cheap, that electricity companies are using it in new ways.
====================

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes
Many companies, including mine ARE turning to gas

Gas is very inexpensive now
I have no problem with that

And it is a good thing we are still using fossil fuels because wind and solar can not provide our needs

But it will NOT be cheaper because of this law suit

Rates will go up because the costs of building new plants, or converting old plants, will be added to the base rate and prices will increase

Yes, the companies will make money. They have too

But the consumer will see prices rise faster than necessary because of the alarmist

BTW

What do you think of the town removing the turbines for the health of the comunity?
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Natural gas is so abundant, and so cheap, that electricity companies are using it in new ways.
====================




Frack you very much!



+1
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

In Reply To
Natural gas is so abundant, and so cheap, that electricity companies are using it in new ways.
====================


Frack you very much!

+1



The US is still a net importer of natural gas. And note - the more we get the more the price may rise due to the worldwide market for it. In Europe they're paying almost 12 bucks per thousand cubic feet of it. We're paying about a third of that.

If the trade restrictions evaporate, rest assured our price will go up. Not that I have any philosophical objection to that.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Rates will go up because the costs of building new plants, or converting old plants,
>will be added to the base rate and prices will increase

And once the plants are built, costs will go down compared to keeping the older coal plants open.

>What do you think of the town removing the turbines for the health of the comunity?

Removing the turbines doesn't affect the health of the community - but no longer burning coal significantly improves air quality, so overall that's a health plus. A switch to natural gas has 90% of the benefits of just shutting the plant down since a natural gas plant emits zero particulate emissions, zero SOx emissions and a fraction of the NOx emissions that a coal plant does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

In Reply To
Natural gas is so abundant, and so cheap, that electricity companies are using it in new ways.
====================


Frack you very much!

+1



The US is still a net importer of natural gas. And note - the more we get the more the price may rise due to the worldwide market for it. In Europe they're paying almost 12 bucks per thousand cubic feet of it. We're paying about a third of that.

If the trade restrictions evaporate, rest assured our price will go up. Not that I have any philosophical objection to that.



There needs to be some pipe laid to get gas out of the Dakotas

I know of a guy who parterned up with a company out fo Switzerland. That company makes mirco fertilizer plants that need natrual gas. They set these up at drilling sites

North Dakota and the producers will damn near give them the gas cause right now many of them have to burn it off as there is nothing that can be done with it. So any money they get from that is a plus.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Rates will go up because the costs of building new plants, or converting old plants,
>will be added to the base rate and prices will increase

And once the plants are built, costs will go down compared to keeping the older coal plants open.
Only if the enviromental idocy remains as it is or get nuttier
>What do you think of the town removing the turbines for the health of the comunity?

Removing the turbines doesn't affect the health of the community - but no longer burning coal significantly improves air quality, so overall that's a health plus. A switch to natural gas has 90% of the benefits of just shutting the plant down since a natural gas plant emits zero particulate emissions, zero SOx emissions and a fraction of the NOx emissions that a coal plant does.



But having the turbines there DOES affect the health of the people

That and they are a waste of capitol dollars

As for the coal plants. More alarmism
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Only if the enviromental idocy remains as it is or get nuttier

No, even now gas is cheaper than coal.

>As for the coal plants. More alarmism

Do a bit of research, my friend. Compare SOx, NOx and particulate emissions between coal and NG fired plants. (Also compare CO2 emissions if you care to, although they are not direct health threats to local communities.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Only if the enviromental idocy remains as it is or get nuttier

No, even now gas is cheaper than coal.

>As for the coal plants. More alarmism

Do a bit of research, my friend. Compare SOx, NOx and particulate emissions between coal and NG fired plants. (Also compare CO2 emissions if you care to, although they are not direct health threats to local communities.)



I didnt say that they do not have these emissions. However, the health issues are not near what you like to post here (again I did not say did not exist)
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
> However, the health issues are not near what you like to post here

Natural gas is cleaner (you've admitted that.) Therefore a switch from coal to natural gas results in a cleaner local environment - specifically lower particulate emissions - and thus an improvement in health levels for the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

> However, the health issues are not near what you like to post here

Natural gas is cleaner (you've admitted that.) Therefore a switch from coal to natural gas results in a cleaner local environment - specifically lower particulate emissions - and thus an improvement in health levels for the community.



In that context I can agree

But the health improvements (as you like to call them) are really not measurable. It is just a talking point

I post generally because I know there are some really bad plants still out there
But the stated goal is to shut them all down
Do that and prices will skyrocket (which is wanted too)
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

There needs to be some pipe laid to get gas out of the Dakotas



Indeed. There is exiting interstate piping running through NDak and SDak but nothing much southwest of the James river. It'll take time to do it with all the EIRs and crossing the Missouri River in SDak would be no joke so they'd have to hook up westward.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0