Another "green" energy company bites the dust

[brenthutch 383]

DanG

All Chinese companies are highly subsidized by their government. That doesn't say anything about the technology.

It says the technology is not ready for prime time. It needs training wheels, expensive ones.

I know you guys LOVE solar, I get it, there is an emotional attachment, and a deep seated need, a sentiment unencumbered by rational thought.

I don't love coal and natural gas and I don't dislike wind and solar. I just like what works.

[billvon 2,384]

>Solar companies like these?

Nope. The industry as a whole.

I could list all the car, oil and coal companies that have gone bankrupt, but that would exceed the post length limits here. Let's look at how the industries as a whole are doing:

==============
Solar Industry Update

USA Today
January 13, 2016
12:35 PM

While American workers flocking into the solar-energy industry are helping make it one of the fastest-growing sectors of our nation’s economy, there are signs the “solar coaster” ride is far from over.

Nationally, solar companies are adding workers nearly 12 times faster than the overall economy, and accounted for more than 1% of all jobs created in 2015, says a new report by the Solar Foundation, a pro-solar industry group. More than 208,000 Americans now work in the solar industry, a 20% increase in a single year, and up 123% since 2010, the report said.
===============
That Crashing Sound Is The Fall Of The U.S. Coal Industry

January 15, 2016, 4:32 PM EDT

All signs point to coal’s long slow decline in the U.S.

The U.S. coal industry is having one of its most difficult years in decades as it faces a long, slow decline.

After years of coal plant closures, lost coal jobs, and the rise of cleaner forms of electricity like natural gas, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell announced on Friday that the government has put a freeze on issuing new leases for coal mining on public lands.

During the moratorium, the government plans to review how the coal mining leases are awarded and could potentially make the leases more expensive for coal mining companies. More expensive leases would both help offset the environmental damage from coal mining and power production and also bring in more royalties for the government.

The announcement is a yet another major blow to the U.S. coal industry. While coal will continue to provide the U.S. with power for many decades, it’s era as the dominant power source could be waning.Meanwhile, over the summer the 200th coal power plant in the U.S. was in the process of shutting down over the past several years. A study last year found that the coal industry contracted by 50,000 jobs over the past five years. The energy upheaval is particularly painful if you’re one of the coal miners or coal plant workers who lost one of those jobs.

But the shift away from coal is expected to help the U.S. move toward cleaner burning sources of electricity like natural gas, wind and solar. Natural gas releases fewer carbon emissions when it’s burned to make electricity than coal does.
===============

[rushmc 18]

DanG

Quote

I am very sure their motives are not that simple.

What are their motives?

Do you believe (like your candidate Donald Trump) that global warming is a Chinese hoax? That they are building lots of solar panels to fool the world into their AGW conspiracy?

Why do you think my theory (that they want to make money) is unrealistic?

Please, educate me.

Now wait a minute!
You are sure YOU know the motives.
Now you are sure what I think is incorrect.
You first.
Prove it is the profits.

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

[DanG 1]

Seriously? I have to prove that China is trying to make money? How do I prove that? What possible proof would you accept? Making money is what companies do. What more proof do you need?

On the other hand, you've got to prove that China has created the AGW hoax, and invested billions in it, to drive the West to bankrupcy. Good luck.

- Dan G

[Phil1111 908]

China is a bad example for any argument in this thread.

"DONGXIANPO, China — Just outside the southwest border of Beijing, a new coal-fired power and heating plant is rising in Dongxianpo, a rural town in Hebei Province. Cement mixers roll onto the site. Cranes tower above a landscape of metal girders.

When finished, the plant, run by a company owned by the Beijing government, is expected to have a generating capacity of 700 megawatts of power, more than the total of similar plants in Ohio. But whether it will actually be used to its fullest is questionable, despite the investment of $580 million.

That is because the plant is scheduled to come online in three years amid a glut of coal-fired power plants — an astounding 155 planned projects received a permit this year alone, with total capacity equal to nearly 40 percent of operational coal power plants in the United States.

China’s economic slowdown and the government’s pledges to use more renewable and nuclear energy make some of the country’s existing plants and most or all of the 155 new ones unnecessary, according to interviews with officials and scholars, a review of public statistics and a report released Wednesday about the “coal power bubble” by Greenpeace East Asia. There are already too many plants, as shown by a steady decline in the plants’ average operating hours since 2013.

China’s state-controlled economy creates strong incentives for provinces to manage their own energy sources to generate jobs and revenue. Coal plants have long been the easiest, fastest way for provinces to meet their own energy needs and stimulate local economic growth.

That system has created what appears to be a disconnect between the provincial building boom and the country’s overall energy requirements, making it harder for China to convert to a system that is not dominated by dirty fuel...

“Why do we see so much discarded water, wind and solar resources everywhere?” Mr. Zhang said. “Because all those coal plants need market share. Local governments need to maintain stability and employment, and to do so they need to give all the coal plants just enough market share to survive.”

Utility contracts guarantee that coal-fired plants operate a minimum number of hours to sell power to the grid, while renewable sources have no such guarantee. Wind power capacity has been growing in China, but so has the amount of wasted wind power, called curtailment, according to National Energy Administration statistics. In the first half of 2015, the rate of curtailment was 15 percent, almost twice that of the same period in 2014...

Last year, thermal power plants, mostly coal-fired, operated 4,706 hours on average, 314 hours less than in 2013, according to the National Energy Administration. “At any given moment, more than half of capacity is idle,” Mr. Myllyvirta said.

The report recommended that officials cancel many projects and that the central government “urgently institute a ban on issuing new permits for coal-fired power plants.”...

Provinces have an economic interest in keeping coal-fired power generation close to home, despite concerns over air pollution. Provincial state-owned enterprises running the plants have a guaranteed source of revenue. Also, officials can tax coal power plants but not renewable-energy projects. And plant construction improves economic growth, an important measure in evaluations of provincial officials.'
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/12/world/asia/china-coal-power-energy-policy.html

How many of these coal and green companies will go bankrupt because they are already operating at 50% capacity. Is anyone's guess. That 50% capacity is in the face of all that new construction in the face of slow power usage growth.

Then there is this story Scientific American/Climatewire Feb. 2016:

"China solidified its standing as the world’s wind energy behemoth in 2015, adding almost as much wind power capacity in one year as the total installed capacity of the three largest U.S. wind-producing states: Texas, Iowa and California.

New data from Bloomberg New Energy Finance show China installed just under 29 gigawatts of new wind energy capacity in 2015, surpassing its previous record of roughly 21 GW set in 2014. The country also accounted for more than 46 percent of all wind power installed globally for the year, eclipsing the next largest market, the United States, which added 8.6 GW (ClimateWire, Jan. 28)....

While investment in China’s power grid has risen substantially, the country still has some of the world’s highest curtailment rates for renewable energy, meaning thousands of turbines are taken offline, even under optimum wind conditions, because grid operators lack the knowledge and skills to integrate the clean energy with other sources, including baseload power from coal plants.

Because of those limitations, Lewis said the United States remains a world leader in wind energy because capacity factors and utilization rates are much higher on average for U.S. wind turbines than for Chinese turbines."
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-blows-past-the-u-s-in-wind-power/

And for the US:

"A fuel price comparison based on equivalent energy content ($/MMBtu) does not reflect differences in energy conversion efficiency (heat rate) among different types of generators. Gas-fired combined-cycle units tend to be more efficient than coal-fired steam units. The second tab shows coal and natural gas prices on an equivalent energy content and efficiency basis. For the fourteenth consecutive month, the price of natural gas at Henry Hub was below the price of Central Appalachian coal on a $/MWh basis. The spread between the two prices increased in February 2016, mainly due to the decrease in the price of natural gas at Henry Hub. The price of natural gas at New York City on a $/MWh basis was above the price of Central Appalachian coal for the second consecutive month, however, the spread between the two prices decreased due to the decrease in the price of natural gas at New York City."
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/resource_use.cfm

[brenthutch 383]

billvon

>Solar companies like these?

Nope. The industry as a whole.

I could list all the car, oil and coal companies that have gone bankrupt, but that would exceed the post length limits here. Let's look at how the industries as a whole are doing:

==============
Solar Industry Update

USA Today
January 13, 2016
12:35 PM

While American workers flocking into the solar-energy industry are helping make it one of the fastest-growing sectors of our nation’s economy, there are signs the “solar coaster” ride is far from over.

Nationally, solar companies are adding workers nearly 12 times faster than the overall economy, and accounted for more than 1% of all jobs created in 2015, says a new report by the Solar Foundation, a pro-solar industry group. More than 208,000 Americans now work in the solar industry, a 20% increase in a single year, and up 123% since 2010, the report said.
================

THAT IS THE PROBLEM!
It takes >200k workers to produce <1% of our electricity, and with regard to installation, does not benifit from economies of scale.
Coal on the other hand <200k miners to produce >30% of our electricity. It doesn't take a MBA to figure out why solar companies are not making a profit. (On second thought maybe it does)

It IS refreshing to finally hear you concede that coal will continue to provide the US with power for many more decades.

[billvon 2,384]

>It takes >200k workers to produce <1% of our electricity

That's right. And within ten years, it will take >200K workers to produce 5% of our electricity. Then 10%. Then 15%. By 2050, we will be producing 16% of our power, worldwide, with solar.

And since solar-PV does not need railroad workers, or coal miners, or scrubber maintenance people, or turbine overhauls, or ash shippers, or impoundment lake workers, those existing installations will keep right on producing while the work crews move on to the next installation.

(Feel free to now flip-flop and claim that solar doesn't generate ENOUGH jobs.)

>It IS refreshing to finally hear you concede that coal will continue to provide the US with power for many
>more decades.

You spin faster than RushMC on speed.

[brenthutch 383]

billvon

>It IS refreshing to finally hear you concede that coal will continue to provide the US with power for many
>more decades.

You spin faster than RushMC on speed.

Spin? What spin? I was quoting directly from your link.

[brenthutch 383]

billvon

>It takes >200k workers to produce <1% of our electricity

That's right. And within ten years, it will take >200K workers to produce 5% of our electricity. Then 10%. Then 15%. By 2050, we will be producing 16% of our power, worldwide, with solar.

And since solar-PV does not need railroad workers, or coal miners, or scrubber maintenance people, or turbine overhauls, or ash shippers, or impoundment lake workers, those existing installations will keep right on producing while the work crews move on to the next installation.

Then why can't solar companies turn a profit if it such a no brainer? Perhaps it is just that.... A no brainer

[billvon 2,384]

================
New Record Set for World’s Cheapest Solar
Lorraine Chow
May 4, 2016

The price of solar power dipped to another record low on May 1 when five international companies bid as little as 2.99 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) to develop the latest phase of work at Dubai’s enormous Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum solar park, which will be one of Earth’s largest solar plants when complete.

At less than 3 cents per kWh, that’s 15 percent lower than the previous record-low bid of 3.5 cents per kWh from Italy’s Enel Green Power for a solar project in Mexico, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

The latest bid is also nearly 50 percent cheaper than last year’s winning bid of 5.84 cents per kWh for developing the 200-megawatt second phase of the same solar park, which already broke records then, The National pointed out.

“This not only marks the lowest cost ever for solar power, but also easily beats all available fossil-fuel options in Dubai on cost,” explained Dr. Moritz Borgmann, a partner at of the cleantech advisory group Apricum.

Case in point: Borgmann pointed that the state utility, Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA), gave its planned 1,200-megawatt coal-fired Hassyan power station a much higher tariff of 4.501 cents per kWh.

Meanwhile, the power produced from natural gas—the United Arab Emirates’s main source of power—costs 7 cents per kWh on average.

http://ecowatch.com/2016/05/04/worlds-cheapest-solar/
====================
New Record Set for World's Cheapest Solar, Now Undercutting Coal
Anna Hirtenstein

May 3, 2016 — 12:20 PM EDT

2.99 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour is 15% lower than old record
Cheaper than new coal-fired electricity in the Gulf emirate

Solar power set another record-low price as renewable energy developers working in the United Arab Emirates shrugged off financial turmoil in the industry to promise projects costs that undercut even coal-fired generators.

Developers bid as little as 2.99 cents a kilowatt-hour to develop 800 megawatts of solar-power projects for the Dubai Electricity & Water Authority, the utility for the Persian Gulf emirate, announced on Sunday. That’s 15 percent lower than the previous record set in Mexico last month, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

The lowest priced solar power has plunged almost 50 percent in the past year. Saudi Arabia’s Acwa Power International set a record in January 2015 by offering to build a portion of the same Dubai solar park for power priced at 5.85 cents per kilowatt-hour. Records were subsequently set in Peru and Mexico before Dubai reclaimed its mantel as purveyor of the world’s cheapest solar power.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-03/solar-developers-undercut-coal-with-another-record-set-in-dubai
=========================

[billvon 2,384]

>Then why can't solar companies turn a profit if it such a no brainer?

They can. As in any other industry, the ones with brains do turn a profit. The ones without brains . . . don't.

[brenthutch 383]

Could you mention a few profitable solar companies? BTW I am not saying they do not exist, I just have not been able to find any.

"One of the most telling features of solar’s stock meltdown is that on a cumulative basis SunRun, Vivint, SunEdison, First Solar and SunPower posted record revenues and year-over-year growth but cumulatively posted a net loss. More alarming is that growth, in some cases, corresponds with deepening losses and debt, moving some of the largest solar companies further from profitability altogether."

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/09/wall-street-s-loud-and-clear-message-to-us-solar-companies-it-s-the-profitability-stupid.html

[SkyDekker 1,121]

brenthutch

Could you mention a few profitable solar companies? BTW I am not saying they do not exist, I just have not been able to find any.

"One of the most telling features of solar’s stock meltdown is that on a cumulative basis SunRun, Vivint, SunEdison, First Solar and SunPower posted record revenues and year-over-year growth but cumulatively posted a net loss. More alarming is that growth, in some cases, corresponds with deepening losses and debt, moving some of the largest solar companies further from profitability altogether."

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/09/wall-street-s-loud-and-clear-message-to-us-solar-companies-it-s-the-profitability-stupid.html

Amazon.com until recently barely ever turned a profit. Clearly e-commerce is bogus.

[brenthutch 383]

And how many billions in tax payer subsidies did Amazon get?

Yeah that's what I thought.

[Stumpy 256]

brenthutch

And how many billions in tax payer subsidies did Amazon get?

Yeah that's what I thought.

You should probably rethink that.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[Phil1111 908]

That is a "game changing" cost of production rate. Especially so when European rates are around 28 cents delivered to the consumer. Naturally Europe is not as sunny as Dubai and transmission costs have to be included in that rate.

World electrical rates:https://www.ovoenergy.com/guides/energy-guides/average-electricity-prices-kwh.html

billvon

================
New Record Set for World’s Cheapest Solar
Lorraine Chow
May 4, 2016

The price of solar power dipped to another record low on May 1 when five international companies bid as little as 2.99 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) to develop the latest phase of work at Dubai’s enormous Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum solar park, which will be one of Earth’s largest solar plants when complete.

At less than 3 cents per kWh, that’s 15 percent lower than the previous record-low bid of 3.5 cents per kWh from Italy’s Enel Green Power for a solar project in Mexico, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

The latest bid is also nearly 50 percent cheaper than last year’s winning bid of 5.84 cents per kWh for developing the 200-megawatt second phase of the same solar park, which already broke records then, The National pointed out.

“This not only marks the lowest cost ever for solar power, but also easily beats all available fossil-fuel options in Dubai on cost,” explained Dr. Moritz Borgmann, a partner at of the cleantech advisory group Apricum.

Case in point: Borgmann pointed that the state utility, Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA), gave its planned 1,200-megawatt coal-fired Hassyan power station a much higher tariff of 4.501 cents per kWh.

Meanwhile, the power produced from natural gas—the United Arab Emirates’s main source of power—costs 7 cents per kWh on average.

http://ecowatch.com/2016/05/04/worlds-cheapest-solar/
====================
New Record Set for World's Cheapest Solar, Now Undercutting Coal
Anna Hirtenstein

May 3, 2016 — 12:20 PM EDT

2.99 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour is 15% lower than old record
Cheaper than new coal-fired electricity in the Gulf emirate

Solar power set another record-low price as renewable energy developers working in the United Arab Emirates shrugged off financial turmoil in the industry to promise projects costs that undercut even coal-fired generators.

Developers bid as little as 2.99 cents a kilowatt-hour to develop 800 megawatts of solar-power projects for the Dubai Electricity & Water Authority, the utility for the Persian Gulf emirate, announced on Sunday. That’s 15 percent lower than the previous record set in Mexico last month, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

The lowest priced solar power has plunged almost 50 percent in the past year. Saudi Arabia’s Acwa Power International set a record in January 2015 by offering to build a portion of the same Dubai solar park for power priced at 5.85 cents per kilowatt-hour. Records were subsequently set in Peru and Mexico before Dubai reclaimed its mantel as purveyor of the world’s cheapest solar power.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-03/solar-developers-undercut-coal-with-another-record-set-in-dubai
=========================

[PhreeZone 14]

Locally I know Amazon was granted a massive abatement for one of the three projects they are running in town:

This is at one of three builds they are running concurrently:

Quote

At a meeting on Wednesday, the New Albany City Council approved a 15-year, 100 percent property tax abatement for 68 acres in the International Beauty Park to the east of Beech Road. According to city documents, the initial phase of the project is for a data center that will be 150,000 square feet and cost $300 million to construct and equip.

Quote

The Ohio Tax Credit Authority approved $81 million in tax incentives at a public meeting in August to lure Amazon, which has said it will invest $1.1 billion and create 120 jobs with an average salary of $80,000.

AWS has similar data centers in Northern VA, NorCal, Oregon and are looking at another one in Vegas area right now. Add in the new airline they just created and are getting massive tax breaks for and the large number of warehouses they have outside most major cities they receive hundreds of millions of incentives on a yearly basis.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[billvon 2,384]

>That is a "game changing" cost of production rate.

Partly. To really take advantage of this rate you'd have to go to a more flexible TOU pricing structure or even true real-time pricing. You could then see dramatic decreases in the cost of power during the hours when the sun is shining (which are pretty closely tied to peak demand times.) The change in rate structure would also allow utilities to start managing demand better so the need for peakers/transitional generation is reduced.

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>That is a "game changing" cost of production rate.

Partly. To really take advantage of this rate you'd have to go to a more flexible TOU pricing structure or even true real-time pricing. You could then see dramatic decreases in the cost of power during the hours when the sun is shining (which are pretty closely tied to peak demand times.) The change in rate structure would also allow utilities to start managing demand better so the need for peakers/transitional generation is reduced.

Again
This pricing structure does not take into account the duplicate generation needed when it will not work.
Again
Batteries may change this soon but that is not here yet.

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

[billvon 2,384]

>This pricing structure does not take into account the duplicate generation needed when it will not work.

It does indeed. People like to save money, as do companies. By pricing power in a free market, people use more when it is cheap and less when it is expensive - like most other commodities. And by enabling them to buy it when it is a few cents a kwhr, they get more power for less money.

>Batteries may change this soon but that is not here yet.

Don't need batteries for this to significantly reduce the price of power.

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>

Don't need batteries for this to significantly reduce the price of power.

Sorry
Not true

New grid infrastructure pricing is coming soon as well.

Oh are the greenies gonna scream.

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

[billvon 2,384]

>Sorry Not true

Can you expand on why you think a free market will fail in this case?

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>Sorry Not true

Can you expand on why you think a free market will fail in this case?

The free market can not overcome the fact that double generation must be built when one considers solar or wind.

Neither work 100% of the time. Therefore, for every meg of solar you need a meg of gas, oil, coal or nuke generation.

Second, for solar to work at the level you drool over, the grid MUST be built up. Right now, those costs fall fully on the electricity provider with no costs to solar (there is cost to wind on larger scales and the same for solar) but at the distributed level those generating solar or wind power see no cost to maintain the grid

THAT is going to change.

The above is also the reason I mentioned batteries. If batteries become commercially viable some of what I posted above with change.

So, the free market will not fail.
But solar will not lower the cost like you say it will.

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

[billvon 2,384]

>The free market can not overcome the fact that double generation must be built when one considers
>solar or wind.

That is only the case if a free market does not alter people's consumption habits. There are numerous examples that demonstrate that, in fact, changing prices do change people's consumption.

>Neither work 100% of the time. Therefore, for every meg of solar you need a meg of gas, oil, coal or
>nuke generation.

Nukes don't work 100% of the time either. Does that mean that therefore you must build two nuclear plants to reap the benefits of having one?

>But solar will not lower the cost like you say it will.

It will certainly lower the cost for people who are willing to buy power when it is cheap.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

That is only the case if a free market does not alter people's consumption habits. There are numerous examples that demonstrate that, in fact, changing prices do change people's consumption.

This is what it is all about to you.

It has nothing to do with so called man made climate change.

It is about you and yours forcing your ideals on the rest of us.


But
In the end
It is not going to work as you envision. Too many details you are choosing to ignore (and I have spelled them out)

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