0
rushmc

CO2 to ethanol

Recommended Posts

Quote

the largest owner of wind turbines it the US says none would be built if not for tax breaks . AKA subsidies.
Once they end he will not build anymore because they do not make economic sense without the tax benefits.



Levelized cost of US energy by source in 2020
Dollars per megawatt

Wind onshore 43-52
Wind offshore 170-270
Nat gas conventional 70-85
Nat gas advanced 68-81
Nat gas peaker 107-156
Hydro 69-107
Coal conventional 87-119
Coal with CCS 133-160
Nuclear 92-101
Solar PV 98-193
Solar CSP 174-382

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the largest owner of wind turbines it the US says none would be built if not for tax breaks . AKA subsidies.
Once they end he will not build anymore because they do not make economic sense without the tax benefits.



That's pretty much what the fact check article says. It tells how both sides are spinning and lying and lobbying.
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

Quote

the largest owner of wind turbines it the US says none would be built if not for tax breaks . AKA subsidies.
Once they end he will not build anymore because they do not make economic sense without the tax benefits.



Levelized cost of US energy by source in 2020
Dollars per megawatt

Wind onshore 43-52
Wind offshore 170-270
Nat gas conventional 70-85
Nat gas advanced 68-81
Nat gas peaker 107-156
Hydro 69-107
Coal conventional 87-119
Coal with CCS 133-160
Nuclear 92-101
Solar PV 98-193
Solar CSP 174-382



Nice try bill. But it doesn't take into account the cost of the spinning reserves that have to be behind win dbecause it does not generate 24/7. That's why I posted the ethanol link. If that becomes something that can be used then it changes things
"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
billvon

Quote

the largest owner of wind turbines it the US says none would be built if not for tax breaks . AKA subsidies.
Once they end he will not build anymore because they do not make economic sense without the tax benefits.



Levelized cost of US energy by source in 2020
Dollars per megawatt

Wind onshore 43-52
Wind offshore 170-270
Nat gas conventional 70-85
Nat gas advanced 68-81
Nat gas peaker 107-156
Hydro 69-107
Coal conventional 87-119
Coal with CCS 133-160
Nuclear 92-101
Solar PV 98-193
Solar CSP 174-382




Why 2020? Why not today? Or, where did you get those numbers from? I'd like to read about that.


Edit. Nevermind, I found this. Pretty sure it's the source.

https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/electricity_generation.cfm
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Nice try bill. But it doesn't take into account the cost of the spinning reserves
>that have to be behind win dbecause it does not generate 24/7.
Correct. That is the cost of constructing and operating the facility. Since wind is (for example) about half the cost of coal, wind operators can afford to sell power for much lower $/megawatt-hour, thus undercutting coal even with the additional utility costs for peakers.

(BTW wind no longer needs spinning reserves; technology has caught up.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[url]
gowlerk

***

Quote

the largest owner of wind turbines it the US says none would be built if not for tax breaks . AKA subsidies.
Once they end he will not build anymore because they do not make economic sense without the tax benefits.



Levelized cost of US energy by source in 2020
Dollars per megawatt

Wind onshore 43-52
Wind offshore 170-270
Nat gas conventional 70-85
Nat gas advanced 68-81
Nat gas peaker 107-156
Hydro 69-107
Coal conventional 87-119
Coal with CCS 133-160
Nuclear 92-101
Solar PV 98-193
Solar CSP 174-382




Why 2020? Why not today? Or, where did you get those numbers from? I'd like to read about that.

Why don't you ask him for his sources. Or do you think all the stuff he posts is pue as the wind driven snow? Because I sure as hell don't!
"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
billvon

>Nice try bill. But it doesn't take into account the cost of the spinning reserves
>that have to be behind win dbecause it does not generate 24/7.
Correct. That is the cost of constructing and operating the facility. Since wind is (for example) about half the cost of coal, wind operators can afford to sell power for much lower $/megawatt-hour, thus undercutting coal even with the additional utility costs for peakers.

(BTW wind no longer needs spinning reserves; technology has caught up.)



That is not true
"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
>Why 2020? Why not today?

Well, for one reason, there are no commercial CCS coal plants operating yet, so it has to be a projection.

>Or, where did you get those numbers from?

You can start from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source
Slightly newer numbers here:
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>That is not true

What isn't true? That we need spinning reserves? Battery based systems are now being used to replace spinning reserves. Here's one case study:

========
CASE STUDY 1:
ALASKA, U.S., ISLAND/OFF-GRID FREQUENCY RESPONSE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Xtreme Power, acquired by Younicos, delivered a 3 MW/750 kWh advanced lead-acid solution to the utility KEA.
This was to integrate additional wind power into an island system in Alaska. The KEA system has a peak load
of about 27 MW and baseload of around 11 MW; 4.5 MW of wind power capacity had already been integrated
into the system and an additional 4.5 MW was soon to be added. In addition to the installed wind capacity, the
utility’s existing power capacity consisted of 23 MW hydropower and 33 MW diesel generation. Studies showed
that existing power assets would not be able to provide sufficient frequency response to help compensate for the
additional 4.5 MW of wind to come on stream.
One conventional option for KEA was to bring additional diesel generation on stream as spinning reserve. This
would require curtailing wind generation and adding fossil fuel consumption. This would mean higher electricity
costs, less integration of the renewable wind resource and more pollution from additional diesel fuel generation.
Instead, the advanced lead-acid battery solution was introduced.
==========

http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA_Battery_Storage_case_studies_2015.pdf

Another similar installation uses an NEC GSS (grid storage system) in Hawaii to deal with wind ramp rate. See attached (slide 33.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

>Why 2020? Why not today?

Well, for one reason, there are no commercial CCS coal plants operating yet, so it has to be a projection.

>Or, where did you get those numbers from?

You can start from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source
Slightly newer numbers here:
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/



It is more like a wag! Tell me Bill, when nearly none of the state of Iowa's wind turbines were spinning last month due to no wind where do you think the electricity came from? I don't think it came from a chicken's ass
"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
billvon

>That is not true

What isn't true? That we need spinning reserves? Battery based systems are now being used to replace spinning reserves. Here's one case study:

========
CASE STUDY 1:
ALASKA, U.S., ISLAND/OFF-GRID FREQUENCY RESPONSE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Xtreme Power, acquired by Younicos, delivered a 3 MW/750 kWh advanced lead-acid solution to the utility KEA.
This was to integrate additional wind power into an island system in Alaska. The KEA system has a peak load
of about 27 MW and baseload of around 11 MW; 4.5 MW of wind power capacity had already been integrated
into the system and an additional 4.5 MW was soon to be added. In addition to the installed wind capacity, the
utility’s existing power capacity consisted of 23 MW hydropower and 33 MW diesel generation. Studies showed
that existing power assets would not be able to provide sufficient frequency response to help compensate for the
additional 4.5 MW of wind to come on stream.
One conventional option for KEA was to bring additional diesel generation on stream as spinning reserve. This
would require curtailing wind generation and adding fossil fuel consumption. This would mean higher electricity
costs, less integration of the renewable wind resource and more pollution from additional diesel fuel generation.
Instead, the advanced lead-acid battery solution was introduced.
==========

http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA_Battery_Storage_case_studies_2015.pdf

Another similar installation uses an NEC GSS (grid storage system) in Hawaii to deal with wind ramp rate. See attached (slide 33.)



Also, did you read about the massive power outage they had in Australia last month?
"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

Tell me Bill, when nearly none of the state of Iowa's wind turbines were spinning last month due to no wind where do you think the electricity came from?


Probably same place that the electricity came from after this:
================
Massive Fire Forces DTE Energy’s St. Clair Power Plant Offline

08/12/2016

A massive fire broke out at DTE Energy’s St. Clair Power Plant in the early evening on August 11.

Firefighters reportedly received the call for assistance at around 6:30 p.m. and fought the blaze well into the following morning.

Video taken during the incident shows flames in several spots on the north end of the plant’s roof, extending well to the south. There is smoke coming out of vents throughout the entire length of the facility, which has six operational units with a total capacity of 1,547 MW.

The plant invoked emergency procedures and shut down all units onsite by 7:01 p.m. DTE Energy said employees were evacuated safely and that there were no known injuries at the plant.
Quote

I don't think it came from a chicken's ass


You'd know more about chicken's asses than I would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rushmc

*********>The problems of the US don't come from a lack of food. Why are we subsidizing it?

Farmers vote.



You should hear the wind lobby adds here in Iowa right now!

Read about their efforts here

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/wind-spin/


the largest owner of wind turbines it the US says none would be built if not for tax breaks . AKA subsidies.
Once they end he will not build anymore because they do not make economic sense without the tax benefits.

So wind joins coal, oil and nuclear in being subsidized by taxpayers (a group, incidentally, that doesn't include Trump).

www.taxpayer.net/library/article/coal-a-long-history-of-subsidies
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


So wind joins coal, oil and nuclear in being subsidized by taxpayers (a group, incidentally, that doesn't include Trump).

http://www.taxpayer.net/...history-of-subsidies



Not that special interest and politics won't get in the way but I'm all for government subsidy of various energy types, even ones that are currently dirty, as long as there's adequate environmental oversight. We're a huge country and the more micro-generation, energy diversity, and research we have, the better we'll be in the long run. If, for whatever reason one form of energy tanks, we'll need to ramp up production in another sector. Even if one form of energy isn't viable now it may be viable in some era in which oil, gas, etc becomes more expensive. We can't wait until that point to develop the technology and infrastructure.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

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