3 ms·
In terms of financial efficiency renewable and nuclear are completely different to fossil fuels. With a gas power station their is a point at which the fuel is
by 7952 11y ago
In terms of financial efficiency renewable and nuclear are completely different to fossil fuels.
With a gas power station their is a point at which the fuel is too expensive to compete and the plant is turned off.
With renewable energy the cost is in capital expenditure rather than fuel. It makes sense to run the generator as much as possible, regardless of how little money it makes. In a market dominated by fossil fuels the effective price is therefore always slightly less than the cheapest fossil fuel available. It becomes more valuable as oil or coal prices rise and less valuable as they drop.
Of course that is a ridiculous situation to be in. The only real reason to ever promote renewable energy/ or nuclear is because it is a better product with less negative impact. It is perfectly reasonable that this would cost more than fossil fuel. The only way for a private company to pay off the debt is to charge more than market rates for the energy produced.
- frgewut 11y agoAnd just to add - there are a lot of areas where renewables are already way cheaper or conventional generation just is not appropriate- like solar for replacing diesel generators, offshore wind near large coastal cities(try building a large nuclear plant near NY), there are also a lot of remote places where grid is expensive to maintain etc, etc Also PV is the simplest, least maintenance power generation source if you need <few KW.