4 ms·

New Wind and Solar Power Is Cheaper Than Existing Coal

11 points by apsec112 7y ago

crmrc114 7y ago
Direct links to study data mentioned in the article: https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Coal-Cost-Crossover_Energy-Innovation_VCE_FINAL.pdf https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Coal... https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Coal-Cost-Crossover-National-Dataset.xlsx https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Coal...
- crmrc114 7y ago
  Looks like cost calculations were done with "NREL ATB low" https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2019/changes.html https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2019/changes.html Example for wind: "The Low cost case was updated to reflect recent bottom-up analysis regarding the potential of R&D to enable significant cost reductions." So basically we made a model based on vaporware. I am not sure how much I trust the idea that we can mine enough rare earth elements for PV cells to make it cheaper than coal. Not to mention the cost of energy storage needed for renewable sources. We all want green energy- but I really find it hard to believe the claims made in this report. At least right now.
wysinwyw 7y ago
It's instructive to compare this list comparing the carbon intensity of electricity generation by state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Intensity_of_Eletricity_by_State.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Intensity_of_Eletr... to this list of the cost of electricity by state: http://www.neo.ne.gov/programs/stats/inf/204.htm http://www.neo.ne.gov/programs/stats/inf/204.htm Objectively, electricity costs the most in states that have the lowest carbon intensity of generation, i.e. the highest share of wind and solar. The correlation is off the charts. Any analysis that says that wind and solar are cheaper than fossil fuels that doesn't address this simple, objective fact is a snow job. (The outliers are Washington and Oregon -- because those states use hydropower instead of solar or wind.)
- pacerwpg 7y ago
  The article was comparing coal costs vs Solar and Wind. Carbon output from fossil fuels suggests not only coal, but also oil and natural gas.
  - wysinwyw 7y ago
    Coal is much cheaper than oil and comparable to natural gas. https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/resource_use.php https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/resource_use....
    - woodandsteel 7y ago
      Oil is a very small part of electric generation. Natural gas has gotten a lot cheaper than coal, which is why so many coal plants are being shut down. More recently, renewable has started to get cheaper than natural gas.
- woodandsteel 7y ago
  You need to remember that wind and solar (and storage for them) have been getting cheaper at a regular rate. The current total costs include older renewable energy installations that were much more expensive than recently built ones, and future ones will be even more cost efficient.
woodandsteel 7y ago
This is why Trump's plan to save coal is going to be a total failure.

11 points by apsec112 7y ago

Direct links to study data mentioned in the article: https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Coal-Cost-Crossover_Energy-Innovation_VCE_FINAL.pdf https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Coal... https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Coal-Cost-Crossover-National-Dataset.xlsx https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Coal...

crmrc114 7y ago
Looks like cost calculations were done with "NREL ATB low" https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2019/changes.html https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2019/changes.html Example for wind: "The Low cost case was updated to reflect recent bottom-up analysis regarding the potential of R&D to enable significant cost reductions." So basically we made a model based on vaporware. I am not sure how much I trust the idea that we can mine enough rare earth elements for PV cells to make it cheaper than coal. Not to mention the cost of energy storage needed for renewable sources. We all want green energy- but I really find it hard to believe the claims made in this report. At least right now.

wysinwyw 7y ago

It's instructive to compare this list comparing the carbon intensity of electricity generation by state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Intensity_of_Eletricity_by_State.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Intensity_of_Eletr... to this list of the cost of electricity by state: http://www.neo.ne.gov/programs/stats/inf/204.htm http://www.neo.ne.gov/programs/stats/inf/204.htm Objectively, electricity costs the most in states that have the lowest carbon intensity of generation, i.e. the highest share of wind and solar. The correlation is off the charts. Any analysis that says that wind and solar are cheaper than fossil fuels that doesn't address this simple, objective fact is a snow job. (The outliers are Washington and Oregon -- because those states use hydropower instead of solar or wind.)

pacerwpg 7y ago
The article was comparing coal costs vs Solar and Wind. Carbon output from fossil fuels suggests not only coal, but also oil and natural gas.
- wysinwyw 7y ago
  Coal is much cheaper than oil and comparable to natural gas. https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/resource_use.php https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/resource_use....
  - woodandsteel 7y ago
    Oil is a very small part of electric generation. Natural gas has gotten a lot cheaper than coal, which is why so many coal plants are being shut down. More recently, renewable has started to get cheaper than natural gas.
woodandsteel 7y ago
You need to remember that wind and solar (and storage for them) have been getting cheaper at a regular rate. The current total costs include older renewable energy installations that were much more expensive than recently built ones, and future ones will be even more cost efficient.

woodandsteel 7y ago

This is why Trump's plan to save coal is going to be a total failure.