2 ms·

...because coal has become extremely unpopular and been replaced almost entirely with natural gas. Not so much renewables beating good ol coal, as coal tumbling

...because coal has become extremely unpopular and been replaced almost entirely with natural gas. Not so much renewables beating good ol coal, as coal tumbling to last place. Taking its place at the bottom, along with (all) renewables.

philipkglass 6y ago
It's not just a gas/coal swap. Electricity generated from coal and gas combined fell in 2020, largely due to economic dislocations from the pandemic: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php Even after the pandemic it's expected that renewable electricity will grow significantly while fossil generated electricity declines. The electricity generated from coal and gas together is expected to be 157.23 terawatt hours less in 2022 than 2019. Electricity generated from non-hydro renewables (wind and solar) in 2022 is expected to be 211.45 TWh more than in 2019.
perl4ever 6y ago
Still, for years I've been reading that almost all new power generation capacity is renewable.
- JoeAltmaier 6y ago
  I think because they're incremental. A plant that burns something costs billions. Another solar panel or wind tower can be built on a whim.
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    That's not my impression based on eia.gov. Natural gas and petroleum power generators are on the order of $700-800/kW to build, apparently. The majority of them are small, from a fraction of a MW to 2 or 3 MW. Seems like they must be on the order of a few millions to build or less, unless they are very different from the average. https://www.eia.gov/electricity/generatorcosts/ https://www.eia.gov/electricity/generatorcosts/
    - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
      Could be. One of the top 10 biggest generation plants in the world is natural gas. And smaller plants have an issue - they're nearly net zero return (profit). So not a lot of investment reasons to build them. Solar is net negative, so there's that against it too. We've screwed up the market with subsidies and laws, so its hard to tell what the right answer is.

philipkglass 6y ago

It's not just a gas/coal swap. Electricity generated from coal and gas combined fell in 2020, largely due to economic dislocations from the pandemic: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php Even after the pandemic it's expected that renewable electricity will grow significantly while fossil generated electricity declines. The electricity generated from coal and gas together is expected to be 157.23 terawatt hours less in 2022 than 2019. Electricity generated from non-hydro renewables (wind and solar) in 2022 is expected to be 211.45 TWh more than in 2019.

perl4ever 6y ago

Still, for years I've been reading that almost all new power generation capacity is renewable.

JoeAltmaier 6y ago
I think because they're incremental. A plant that burns something costs billions. Another solar panel or wind tower can be built on a whim.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  That's not my impression based on eia.gov. Natural gas and petroleum power generators are on the order of $700-800/kW to build, apparently. The majority of them are small, from a fraction of a MW to 2 or 3 MW. Seems like they must be on the order of a few millions to build or less, unless they are very different from the average. https://www.eia.gov/electricity/generatorcosts/ https://www.eia.gov/electricity/generatorcosts/
  - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
    Could be. One of the top 10 biggest generation plants in the world is natural gas. And smaller plants have an issue - they're nearly net zero return (profit). So not a lot of investment reasons to build them. Solar is net negative, so there's that against it too. We've screwed up the market with subsidies and laws, so its hard to tell what the right answer is.