This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
What Is The Real Price Of Obama's CO2 Plans?
Submitted by Euan Mearns via OilPrice.com,
On August 3rd President Obama made a speech* detailing his plans to decarbonize the US electrical power generation sector. While the legality of this move has been challenged in certain quarters, in this post I want to focus on the technical details and competence of the President and his advisors at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Let me begin by focusing on what the main target is:
to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030
*Note that the quotes throughout are lifted from the White House narrative to the speech rather than the speech itself.
So what does a 32% reduction in CO2 emissions mean in practical terms for US power generation and CO2 emissions? A good starting point is to look at the electricity generation mix and how it has changed since 2005 (Figure 1).
Figure 1 US electrical power generation 2005 to 2014 as published by DOE-EIA.
The key observations are as follows:
1) Electricity generation (i.e. electricity consumption) has been flat since 2005.
2) Fossil fuel based generation, coal + natural gas, has been flat to falling slowly
3) Coal fired generation has declined to be replaced by natural gas
4) Hydro and nuclear combined make up 26% and have been flat since 2005
5) Other renewables (wind, solar, biomass etc) have increased from 2 to 7% since 2005
Figures 2 and 3 show how the generation mix has evolved from 2005 to 2014:
Figure 2 Pie chart showing the percentage distribution of electricity generating sources in the USA in 2005. Data from DOE-EIA.
Figure 3 Pie chart showing the percentage distribution of electricity generating sources in the USA in 2014. Data from DOE-EIA.
Put simply, the key trend is substitution of coal by natural gas and other renewables. The CO2 intensity of coal is 2.13 pounds of CO2 per KWh and natural gas 1.21 pounds of CO2 per KWh (data from DOE-EIA). Hence the substitution of coal by natural gas reduces CO2 emissions quite significantly. DOE-EIA has already documented this achievement, which is founded on the fracking revolution and the ‘drill baby drill’ mantra (Figure 4).
Figure 4 The chart is from an EIA report titled Lower electricity-related CO2 emissions reflect lower carbon intensity and electricity use. Note that while the Y-axis has a zero on it, it is not zero scaled.
The DOE-EIA report (Figure 4) reiterates my key observations above but puts some hard numbers on them:
2005 electric power emissions = 2417 million tons (Mt)
2005-2013 lower demand = 402 Mt reduction (16.6% reduction)
2005-2013 substitution of coal with gas = 212 Mt reduction (8.8% reduction)
2005-2013 addition of low carbon sources i.e. other renewables = 150 Mt reduction (6.2% reduction)
Thus the reductions already achieved = 31.6%. Job already done?!
So what’s going on here? Have the EPA and President Obama set out to deliberately dupe the US and global populations with this deception? I don’t know, but this gaffe will come back to haunt them. Let me be charitable and assume that the savings from reduced demand growth are not included in the calculation to date. Then the CO2 reductions so far, amount to 15% over 8 years leaving 17% to be achieved over the remaining 15 year period to 2030. For one supposedly deeply concerned about the effect of CO2 on climate change this represents a totally underwhelming level of ambition.
But I’m not sure that the EPA and The President should be let off the hook so easily. The President’s plan includes future energy efficiency gains and one must surmise that past energy efficiency gains should also count. Note that nuclear power is also in the Green arsenal of what is effectively an anti-coal policy.
All low-carbon electricity generation technologies, including renewables, energy efficiency, natural gas, nuclear and carbon capture and storage, can play a role in state plans.
Impact on Total US Emissions
Figure 5 shows that in 2012, 81% of total US primary energy came from fossil fuels and that 40% of total energy was used in electric power generation. 67% of power generation is from FF (Figures 3 and 5), hence we are talking about 67% of 40% which = 27% of total US energy consumption that is targeted by this part of Obama’s energy plan.
Hence Obama wants to reduce 27% by a third (32%) and that equals an 8.6% reduction in emissions grossed up to the whole energy economy and all or half of that has already been achieved depending on how the numbers are sliced and diced. At best this plan reduces US total emissions by 4.3% by 2030, at worst by nothing at all. It’s not exactly the same as making a commitment to send a Man to the Moon, is it?
Figure 5 From the EIA Annual Energy Review (in this link click on “graph”).
Impact on US Economy and Population
From Obama’s speech*:
Due to these improvements, the Clean Power Plan will save the average American nearly $85 on their energy bill in 2030, and save consumers a total of $155 billion through 2020-2030, reducing (typo?) enough energy to power 30 million homes.
Paul Homewood recently published this chart (Figure 6) that shows the relationship between electricity prices and renewables penetration in Europe.
(Click to enlarge)
Figure 6 Chart from Paul Homewood Electricity Cost v Renewable Capacity. I have not yet had time to check the data that underlies this chart but have no reason to doubt them. It is further understood that renewables capacity excludes hydro.
[Note that the x-axis on this chart should read “Installed Renewables Capacity KW / capita” or some such and that the original version may have been produced by Willis Eschenbach at WUWT. HT Joe Public.]
It is plain to see that adding intermittent renewables to a grid increases the cost of electricity. Does the EPA not know this? In Europe this is in part down to consumer paid renewables subsidies. But it also reflects the substantial costs of maintaining grid integrity that include:
1. Maintaining, and paying for when not in use, 100% fossil fuel backup
2. Building power lines and inter-connectors everywhere
3. Expanding energy storage
4. Buying expensive balancing services from neighboring countries like Norway
Coal powered electricity is currently by far the cheapest and one of the most reliable forms of electricity generation known to Man. To suggest that replacing this with intermittent wind and solar or carbon capture generation will somehow reduce American’s electricity bills is either delusional or plain stupid. Or is the intention to deliberately deceive?
»
- 23361 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I am absolutely in love with this pedal-powered generator idea. I think we should put bankers and politicians on them first, they owe us a lot of damn money. I want a GS banker out my sliding glass door pedaling his ass off trying to run some unnessary appliance, I will of course be needing a cattle prod as well. Imagine how much money this country could save if we even just replaced pony motors with bankers.
Its 2015 and the Coal industry cannot hold back progress no matter how many idiots they happen to convince that it is an economical modern fuel ,unless you live in a third world sewer.There are times you have to force people to change for their own benefit because it is too easy to do nothing and follow the sane old stupid path to nowhere.
In Germany, 48% of their electricy is generated by coal, up from 43% 5 years ago. And most of the plants use lignite (brown coal) wihich is by far the dirtiest coal available. And they are building MORE coal powered generating plants right now.
this guy's math is shit. 66% (67??) of end user electricity from fossil fuels does not mean that 66% of the 40% of total energy used in electricity generation comes from fossil fuels, because renewables do not use heat engines and do not have thermal losses.
Anybody that debates whether or not renewable energy is a good thing is just, well, stupid. Coal, oil, natural gas and even nuclear are all terrible choices - hydro, solar, ocean and wind are th future of energy, the question is how long will we wait for the oil companies to transition? Because until they can make huge profits it won't happen - period. Capitalism is destroying the world, the worst possible system on a finite planet with finite resources - as I said, stupid. Obama is all about producing more wealth for the wealthy, he could give a shit about the poor - which are worse off now then before he became CEO of merika. Funny, this topic wasn't even touched on during the two debates of the retards - nor was wealth and income inquality, wars (and rumors of wars), etc. Amazing how they always agree on the bad ideas but fight diligently over the good ones (few as they are). Let's spend our energy debating Planned Parenthood, Gay Marriage and other non-critical items, meanwhile we continue to destroy the middle class and start wars everywhere we can....
What we need are more charts -:) Apparently the writers here think that charts describing a corrupt system somehow represent the truth because numbers don't lie, except when they do. Unemployment at 5.3% and remaining stable - sure it is - and inflation, well there isn't any. Everything is deflating - except food, college, healthcare, housing/rentals, autos and everything else we need to survive but conveniently these are not factored into the equation - wonder why?
Obama is a pinhead like Bush and all the rest, why blame him? He isn't calling the shots, he is nothing more than a puppet that is controlled by Walmart and GE and all the other huge corporations and oligarchs. We live in bananna republic and the people are too caught up in the Kardasians and Katelin (whatever?) or Donald being an asshole or the Bachelor or their Facebook page and how many likes they get on a picture post. We are so distratced as a nation that recovery is impossible, most people haven't a fucking clue what is really happening. Unfortunately these are the same people that will be begging for help when TSHTF - and the'll be blaming the poor, the immigrants and the other entities that have no defense instead of the rich MFers that actually caused this mess....
Go buy this book. The Automotive Handbook. By Bosch. Read it many times.
YMMV
OASI
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html#&a0=8
Hey Tyler's, thanks for posting an Euan mearns article
A power article about gas and coal without a discussion on dark/spark spreads.
Interesting that all these coal plants have announced retirements BEFORE the carbon decrees came down. I won't why that is.
Maybe it's because it's cheaper to run a gas plant?
Maybe most of the US coal fleet was built prior to 1960 and has a heat rate that never gets called on the stack?
Maybe it's the 40-70 years of cleanup costs staring the US coal plants in the face. Not that that would start showing up in ARC line items on companies like NRG or FE.
GONNA' HAVE to diagree with you!
We are living on a crowded planet. 7.3 billion people. EVERY major choice we make this Century is gonna' be a tough choice. There are NO EASY ones any more.
Yes, we can stay with coal-fired electricity generation. The climate scientists are telling us - this will lock-in a 2-degree C rise in temperatures on our planet. And to be honest, the real rise is likely to be 3-4 degrees C by the end of the Century. YES, all the ice will melt (glaciers, icecaps). But the real deal - there will be a LOT of disruption to food supplies. Major disruption. And that means food that is more expensive. So HOW do you plan to feed 7.3 billion people now - not to mention 9 billion people in the year 2060 - if the climate and the food supply are messed up?
WE NEED SUSTAINABLE Technology.
We've got No Choice.
Great, go all renewable.
Who's going to PAY for it?
A society with all renewable energy means electricity costs 5 to 10 times what they are right now. If you have a $100/month power bill, are YOU willing to pay $500 to $1000 a month?
ALL your goods and services will ALSO increase (double) becasue of the substantial energy component in everything we do, buy and eat.
How much of your high standard of living are YOU willing to give up? Half of your existing disposable income?
Fuel-less energy solutions are available for $0.03/kw-h.
So, you are saying we to no choice but to SUBSTANTIALLY DECREASE our economic standard of living.
How much of your exisitng standard of living are YOU willing to give up? An extra couple thousand dollars a month? Because that's what it will take.
Absolutely not. Fuel-less energy solutions are available for $0.03/kw-h.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taGWlhe6wso
Please educate yourself.
Agreed. The intention is to deliberately deceive.
We been scammed six ways from sunday on all aspects of energy. Same shit different day.
Yes we could do much better on all aspects. But NO it aint gonna happen in bizzaroland!
As far as the politcal angle? They will simply just keep yanking our collective chains. With feel good BS that is allready known to not get where we need to go.
Use of coal is not optional. Just stop right there with the dogma. Now how we use it is a much better question to ask.
The retard homo in the WH and his band of marxist murderers are deiberately starving us for energy. He thinks like a third world dumbass. God help us.
Research it for youself. Weigh arguments. Its pretty much an open and shut case for renewables. Obama is not really pushing for renewables. He's only rehashing what's there.
Professor Chris Williams, Pace University, in the Department of Chemistry and Physical Science, and climate activist:
Well, Obama spoke about having time and flexibility, the two things that we don't have. And I would say that this just, his plan just ratifies what's already happening in the U.S. economy. So it's neither groundbreaking nor historic, because the percentage declines in emissions from the power sector already on-track to happen as a result of wider changes to do with the low cost of natural gas and the retirement of old coal plants. And the fact that you're giving states with dirtier energy more and more time to change and flexibility around that question, including counting nuclear power towards your clean power credits, I think illustrates that this is neither groundbreaking nor anywhere near the kind of thing, action, we need to avert dangerous climate change.
Your not a Libertarian if you don't support energy independence, and I don't mean reliance on big oil.
Just a small sampling of info for anyone serious about energy efficiency and libertarian values:
Earthship: self-contained homes
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/11/earthship_biotecture_renegade_new_mexico_architects
Garbage Warrior (Earthship documentary)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnkv_qj1xUc
REMEMBER THE MILITARY DEVELOPED THE INTERNET
USA Today: "Air Force embraces solar power"
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/2007-04-17-air-force-solar-power_N.htm
(the obstacle here is that solar subsidies "competes" with with heavily subsidized oil)
US Air Force to Quadruple Their On-Base Solar Power in Four Years
http://inhabitat.com/us-air-force-to-quadruple-their-on-base-solar-power-in-four-years/
AFA solar array saves taxpayers $802,000 in first year (its a start)
http://www.usafa.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123317364
ON A CLOUDY DAY
Brits Develop Solar Panels for Cloudy Day
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10701064/British-scientists-develop-solar-panels-which-work-better-on-a-cloudy-day.html
Do solar panels work in cloudy weather? (one can store energy and share it if networked)
http://www.solarpowerrocks.com/solar-basics/how-do-solar-panels-work-in-cloudy-weather/
Solar in Ireland
https://www.electricireland.ie/residential/help/efficiency/solar-panels-...
RENEWABLE COSTS & WHO IS AGAINST RENEWABLES?
Utilities wage Campaign against Rooftop Solar
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/utilities-sensing-threat-put-squeeze-on-booming-solar-roof-industry/2015/03/07/2d916f88-c1c9-11e4-ad5c-3b8ce89f1b89_story.html
Texas group's phony anti-solar campaign
http://grist.org/climate-energy/texas-lobbying-group-busted-for-phony-anti-solar-campaign/
Whing about how solar threatens utility monopolies
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/03/02/solar-power-lobbyists-seek-subvert-florida-tea-party
ALL of those argument IGNORE COSTS and the SUBSTANTIAL DECREASE in economic standard of living that goes with them.
You want to go a substantail percentage renewable energy? Are YOU willing to pay an EXTRA couple thousand dollars a MONTH to achieve that? Because THAT'S what it will cost, not just for your own power, but for ALL the goods, services, food and housing you need to survive.
The cost of energy affects EVERYTHING, because everytiing has a substantail energy input, so it's not just your power bill.
Clearly you have not read any of the above.
How stupid do you have to be to not know on the face of it that cost of extraction, war to get oil companies good deals, and being forced to rely on centralized middlemen is not cost efficient. Not to mention destroying the only planet we have.
You don't need any of that with renewables.
With libertarians like you who needs liberals and conservatives?
You are just aiding big business and their tools in Washington
I thought this was about coal. Oil is a different topic. Please try to focus.
I didn't say anything specific about coal. Same difference anyway.
Coal extraction is just as bad and costly.
Explain please.
I'll try to make this simple ABC
coal mining destroy Earth.
Big biz control coal mining.
Coal energy is controlled centrally.
Solar has potential to put power in individuals hands
Ordinary people can't afford solar. Not even close. And that assumes you don't have air conditioning.
If you want to power A/C off a solar system, then solar will easily cost 6 figures and well into 6 figures for everything.
Fuel-less systems are available for $0.03/kw-h.
Cheaper than coal.
http://rosch-innovations.de/
All of those arguments still apply to renewables. Whiff!
YOU have your head up your azz when it comes to the REAL costs of using renewable energy. You completely ignore reality.
Germany is currently 25% renewable energy and they pay 35 to 40 cents per kWh for electricty. Their rates are set to increase by 50% over the next decade. What do YOU pay right now? 10 cents?
Now, take your power bill and multiply it by 4, every month. PLUS, take your cost of goods you buy and services you use, and increase them by 50%. Becasue THAT'S just the BEGINNING of what renewable energy costs.
You want to go 50% to 60% renewable energy? Expect to pay 5 to 10 times the cost of power you pay now, and DOUBLE the cost for all goods, services, food and shelter.
THAT is the reality. It's happening in Germany TODAY.
What the government wants to charge its costumers is a political thing. It'd be interesting to know who's controlling those charges. That's not an argument against renewables. You think big oil, big business and big gov want a successful example of independent renewables for all to see? Germany is a big stage.
Isn't that what happens when you put policy in the hands of liberal and conservative shills?
If you read any of the above you might learn that renewables save money. Utilities and oil companies are trying to increase rates independent of energy performance, which are in fact much more cost efficient.
In New Mexico, Mikes Reynolds has been pioneering Earthships, self-contained homes. His energy costs are negligible. The obstacles? The utilities and state government. They've stripped him of his architecture license. The refuse permits, etc.
Don't be ignorant and look it up. The reality is in. It doesn't cost nearly as much as dirty fuels.
Get you head out of big biz AZZ.
It DOES cost as much as I've posted. And MORE.
I do off grid design and it's horrendously expensive, unless of course you want to live a very basic existence. EVERY system I've done has included a fossil fuel generator.
A typical solar system with near grid supply (high capacity supply) for a decent sized house is on the order of $100,000 to $150,000 by the time you install the huge solar arrays, batteries, inverters, diesel or propane generator, auto switching and controls. And those systems still have propane heat, solar assisted propane hot water, and propane stove and ovens.
And that's not even a top end system.
You're not cutting edge. There are people doing it better and smarter than you. You don't need fossil fuels.
And you are completely full of shit READ AND WATCH THE ABOVE STUFF unless you are big biz troll.
I wouldn't go to you for off the grid design. You and the German shills are way too expensive.
Earthship: self-contained homes
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/11/earthship_biotecture_renegade_new_mexico_architects
Garbage Warrior (Earthship documentary)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnkv_qj1xUc
Run outta intellegent things to say? Personal attacks are not really a good way to go around here. Whiff!
got nothing more huh?
It's good to learn things. Keep it up.
If Jayne only knew what I do. Jayne, read this.
http://dailybail.com/home/john-kerry-comes-out-swinging-on-climate-chang...
This shit goes back to Enron and the Trans Caspian pipeline. I will not say more.
Everybody knows coal is bad, nuclear can be worst. You spend time everyday keeping your home clean don't you. Well earth is your home also and must be taken care of too. Some of us like fishing and hunting and enjoying the natural beauty of this planet.
Being off grid or even producing your own power at home is awesome. If I can save even one dollar a month and not give it to the cocksucking power companys I say Sweeeetttt!
Has anyone here seen an open pit coal mine?
It can literally make you weep.
My god, renewables may not have quite the reliability or ROI as coal mines, but when I think of how far we could be down that path with the trilions we've spent sending bombs to mideast hellholes...
Downvote me. And when they want to put an open pit mine on your favorite patch of woods, smile and say, "Yes, please."
Have you seen a 2,000 acre solar farm? It makes you cry that all farmland has been taken out of production for decades.
How about the destruction of prime senic views by hundreds of 600 foot tall windmills? Typically they are located on the highest hills and near shores of lakes. I've seen hundreds of beautiful communtities destroyed by windmills.
You must agree about the horrors of mining and extraction. And I agree with you about 2000 acre solar farms.
We don't need to follow the big business model. You don't need giant solar or wind farms.
Check out the link to Earthships below.
Lets put energy in the hands of the people not big business and the government
I agree with Jayne a bit. Some renewables are beneficial if used properly. Politicizing the issue and supersizing by hedge funds ruined a cottage industry once again. Most of the ownership of large renewable companies are involved in both the oil and renewabe sectors.
Then comes the darker side. Drug running, human trafficking, arms dealing and "bringing Democracy" at excessive electric rates overseas and here too.
And go back to that open pit 30 years later. It's all landscaped and treed again. Back to nature and you can have your nature walk again.
We don't have the luxury of waiting so long. Too much is being destroyed now.
Get off the internet.
You're wasting electricity.
Turn off the TV.
30 years and all will be well, just like before.Good luck. http://ohvec.org/galleries/mountaintop_removal/007/
Here's an open pit coal mine.
http://www.chuitnacoalproject.com/denalimineenvironment.html
I'm not weeping.
Have you ever seen a nickel or lithium open pit mine?
Have you seen the destruction around the nickel smelter in Sudburry, Ontario.
All in the name of rechargable batteries.
http://www.appliedeco.com/landfill.cfm
before:
http://www.appliedeco.com/images/1996%20flambeau%20aerialWeb.jpg
after:
http://www.appliedeco.com/images/2005%20flambeau%20aerialWeb.jpg
Yeah, I've worked at an above ground coal mine and that is complete bullshit. Back in the day any mining done was a disaster, not so much for coal anymore. If you come on site and a drop of oil is leaking out of your truck they will go into a full on panic. Coal has to abide by the clean water act where fracked NG doesn't, every puddle of water on site has to be drinkable and proven to be so constantly. If one puddle fails the shit will hit the fan.
Being that the mine I worked at had the power generating plant across the street how do you figure that they were able to keep every pond potable if there was large quantities of particulates or toxins being spewed out of the stacks next door? An incredible amount of money has spent on scrubbers to insure that particulates are at an absolute minimum and it works. It was working before the new regulations. The particular company I worked for was told by the EPA that they expected them to shutter the operation after the new regulations were put in place, they were furious that they managed to abide by the environmental laws and survive and they admitted as much.
All of the topsoil has to be set aside then they dig down further and every piece of dirt and rock has to be put in it's perspective piles to be put back into the earth in their original locations. Topsoil is the most treasured resource at any coal mine, not coal. Once all of the reclaimation dirt is put back very specific types of plants have to be grown to insure that the water filters through the soil properly and root systems of very fast growing plants provide necessary structure for the soil and additional plants which will often grow back within months. This particular mine was loaded with game, fish and birds, it was more reminiscent of a sactuary than a mine.
The government will be all over your ass through this entire process. If mistakes are made it could be over for the coal company because they are competing against other energy products that do not have to abide by the same environmental laws, gosh I wonder why?
Meanwhile Fukushima continues to spew, NG flares spew radioactive particulates and H2S, you have flatbed trucks running around with NORM socks falling off the back in the Bakken, biodiesel's EROEI is a damn joke. Coal was targeted for destruction for a reason and it sure as hell wasn't the environment.
The easy way to solve this is for those who insist on rainbow power be forced to use it and nothing else. If it is so great greenies then you show us how wonderful it is! Nobody forced any of the current energy technologies on them but they damn sure are going to force theirs on us. Let their lights go out first.
I wanted to reply earlier, but my laptop battery was running low and I didnt feel like going outside to pedal my home generator to recharge my litium ion battery mined from the Black Hills of South Dakota so I plugged into my dirty coal powered receptacle.
Forgive me.
you could plug it into a clean energy source.
But that's pie in the sky!!
The easiest way to solve this is to torpedo the welfare state.
"Britain’s government on Wednesday moved to rein in the spiraling costs of renewable power subsidies which it said threatened to push up household bills." “We can’t have a situation where industry has a blank cheque and that cheque is paid for by people’s bills,” Energy and Climate Change Secretary Amber Rudd said on BBC radio."
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/07/22/uk-britain-renewables-subsidies...
"At the very moment President Obama has decided to shutter America’s coal industry in favor of much more expensive and less efficient “renewable energy,” coal use is surging across the globe. A new study by the prestigious National Academy of Sciences detects an unmistakable “coal renaissance” under way that shows this mineral of fossilized carbon has again become “the most important source of energy-related emissions on the global scale.”
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-brain-trust/080615-765456-world...
"Every time we see Germany’s eco-energy transition, dubbed the energiewende, in the news lately, someone’s upset about it. The plan is a raft of different energy policies that can be boiled down to the following plan: phase out nuclear energy while boosting wind and solar by guaranteeing producers long-term, above-market rates called feed-in tariffs. It was a plan that from the outset reflected all the unexamined beliefs central to the modern green movement, and it’s been plagued by problems at every step.
Der Spiegel criticized the energiewende‘s “aggressive and reckless expansion of wind and solar power,” rightly pointing out that German consumers are shouldering the costs of those feed-in tariffs in the form of sky-high electricity bills. Those power bills have encouraged some of Germany’s heavy industry to look abroad for a better environment in which to do business. The Financial Times observed that by shuttering its nuclear reactors, Berlin was increasing its consumption of much dirtier coal and making it “ever more reliant on imports of Russian natural gas.
If this were some computer simulation it might be worth celebrating—creating an energy policy that so consistently fails to satisfy the concerns of such a wide variety of stakeholders is truly remarkable. But this isn’t a virtual strategy, and it’s hurting real businesses and real households. The energiewende does manage to do some good by serving as a cautionary tale to the rest of the world: this is what happens when you let starry-eyed greens take the reins."
http://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/06/30/germanys-energiewende-fi...
Could it be that big biz and big gov don't want successful renewables.
Costs are political. Why would it costs more for renewables when they require less extraction, utilities and big biz to control.
But that's what happens when energy policy is in the hands of idiot conservative and liberal big biz shills.
Lets go down the independent libertarian route.
It's very simple why costs are less for fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels are a STORE of energy.
Renewables have to CREATE energy, and then that energy has to be STORED. It's expensive and very inefficient to create energy from wind/solar, and EXTREMELY expensive to try and store it. Have you ever seen an electricity mine? Or a hydrogen mine?
What's direct sunlight? chop liver?
The provides way more 7000 times the amount of energy need to run society. You can store energy. There is something called net-metering which allows electricty to be networked throughtout a community driving down costs.
Learn about Earthships. You can run your home with little outside energy input.
Fossil fuels need to be extracted, solar is right in your face. Fossil fuels rely on big biz and their oil wars to bring you cheaper prices. That's expensive stuff.
A well built home and/or community is far more self-sufficient.
Explain net metering please.
Net metering, or net energy metering, is an electricity policy which allows utility customers to offset some or all of their energy use with self produced renewable energy. Net metering works by utilizing a meter that is able to spin and record energy flow in both directions. The meter spins forward when a customer is drawing power from the utility grid (i.e., using more energy than they are producing) and spins backward when energy is being sent back to the grid. At the end of a given month, the customer is billed only for the net energy used.
So net metering is not a form of storage. Whiff!
Jayne, I was instrumental (with 2 others), in getting net energy metering passed (which was adopted by many states shortly thereafter). The idea at the time was to negate a tax problem associated with Grid Interconnected systems. The rule as adopted was to eliminate that problem (brought up by Enron) by eliminating payments to those who had inter-connected system and were payed AVOIDED COST RATES ( ie. they sold to you for 12 cents a kWh and paid ypu 1.3 cents for the same). by the utility (see stranded costs). This method avoided both the stranded costs issue and allowed an annualized billing structure that allowed excess production to be rolled over to the next month vs. usage due to variability of the resource. After a year was up any excess was eliminated and you start over. That is where system design and resource availabilty come into play and negate a useless tax issue, had Enron been successful, would have totally flattened small scale renewable use.
Anywho, you might wonder now why all these up and coming solar outfits install free. It's because the owners do NOT get tax credits and RECS, the installers do. AND we pay for it. The FSA on steroids. Try buying a system yourself and see how much it'll cost you. Oh and add batteries (and generators) for backup, most will not not allow it in their contracts.
"Renewables" are expensive. That's what Europe is finding out. Solar energy depends on continous direct sun. If it's too cloudy, it upsets the balance of the grid. Windmills count on constant blowing wind, if the wind doesn't blow, it upsets the grid, this mean during sun and wind shortages, people pay for higher prices for energy. Newables are actually subsidized by "big government" to "big business". Asinine comment.
Subsidies renewables is paltry compared to big oil and coal. Why do you think you pay so little for gas? Or did you think you pay a lot for it? Do you think it grows on trees? How much do you think it costs for oil wars to give oil companies a great deal?
You just don't know what you are talking about. Utilities in cohoots with gov is trying to drive renewable prices up.
It's all over the internet. If you don't know, you don't want to know. You know nothing about how this stuff works.
Please educate yourself and stop calling people who know better than you asinine.
Really what subsidies does coal recieve? Care to point out what subsidies they get? Post a link, or name a tax rule that gives special subsidies to coal industry. If you can't, then really your original comment is asinine.
First of all, are you confining your claim to the U.S.? Coal gets huge subsidies, for example, in Australia.
But even in the U.S., there are serious subsidies in the form of tax exemptions:
Examples of new or proposed coal-fired power plants that are funded in part by tax-exempt debt include the following:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Federal_coal_subsidies
The U.S. Energy Information Administration had a complete breakdown of energy subsidies for 2013 in pdf form (link below), and coal was listed as having $1b (as in billion) worth.
http://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/subsidy/pdf/subsidy.pdf
Source:
http://rosch-innovations.de/
Affordable (~$0.03/kW-h power production price), renewable utility plant system, capable of 100% continuous capacity output; includes back-up; 9-12-month build time, depending on size.
Third party-tested (German TUV), patented (PCT), 100% guaranteed.
Entertaining regional licenses; selling plants from 5 MW up.
Source:
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/store/Rosch/KPP/
http://pesn.com/2015/07/21/9602638_GAIA-plans-continuous-delivery_of_5-kW-power-plants/
You keep posting this same crap over and over. It's a FRAUD.
It DOESN'T WORK. They have not delived a SINGLE UNIT.
Have proof?
No the burdon of proof goes to the ones making unrealistic claims.
What you read on the internet isn't truth. At best its spin. MSM lies, lies, damned lies. Lies crafted as statistics, with no correlating evidence. Even math textbooks are loaded with propaganda. You have to collect your own data and crunch your own numbers, or you're just a stupid pompous parrot. Its really not that hard.
Try looking forward rather than backwards. Your assertions that solar is expensive is "old news". The cost has fallen a lot, but newer technologies are becoming available which will make coal, nuclear, solar, and wind obsolete.
Rosch is a multi-billion dollar corporation with an excellent reputation. Their product has been throughly verified. If you attempt to sue them for fraud, you will loose. Just try.
Affordable (~$0.03/kW-h power production price), renewable utility plant system, capable of 100% continuous capacity output; includes back-up; 9-12-month build time, depending on size.
Third party-tested (German TUV), patented (PCT), 100% guaranteed.
Entertaining regional licenses; selling plants from 5 MW up.
http://rosch-innovations.de/
"Rosch is a multi-billion dollar corporation"
Hahahahahahhaha They are a shoestring startup. They haven't delivered ONE SINGLE UNIT.
Their "invention" also violates Gay-Lussac's law, as well as laws of thermodynamics. Educate yourself, I already have a comprehensive technical education and decades of experience.
I have innovated for the past 30 years, and have international patents that are being USED. These guys are a brilliantly marketed fraud. Why should I sue them? They've never given their system to a 3rd party for independent testing.
My best is these guys will disappear within 2 years, and you will never hear of their "invention" again and there will NEVER be a successful operational plant. If someone is gullible enough to buy one, good luck to them.
You need to be aware that humanity is at an inflection point. Old rules are obsolete. Those who cling to the old ways will be unprepared for the transformation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lyXi1efbYrk#t=3945
The intention was a handicap, Americans need restraint, without CO2 caps our robot factories bury the competiion's slave factories and robot factories, we have more cheap energy than everybody.
Earthship: self-contained homes
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/11/earthship_biotecture_renegade_new_mexico_architects
Garbage Warrior (Earthship documentary)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnkv_qj1xUc
REMEMBER THE MILITARY DEVELOPED THE INTERNET
USA Today: "Air Force embraces solar power"
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/2007-04-17-air-force-solar-power_N.htm
(the obstacle here is that solar subsidies "competes" with with heavily subsidized oil)
US Air Force to Quadruple Their On-Base Solar Power in Four Years
http://inhabitat.com/us-air-force-to-quadruple-their-on-base-solar-power-in-four-years/
AFA solar array saves taxpayers $802,000 in first year (its a start)
http://www.usafa.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123317364
High costs of renewables is political not technological.
Until you address these issues in a serious manner without ignorant stupid comments you got nothing.
Case closed.
Anyone that declares "case closed" based on a couple random news stories, is themselves closed minded and ignorant.
So called clean power doesn't exist. Those precious windmills and solar panels pollute a shit ton I'm their manufacture.
Very convincing. Nice sell job.
Solyndra went tit's up because the VC's wouldn't reinvest over China competition. We purchased a 750 million dollar facility, all the vendors got fucked. I was lucky.
From DOE Loan Guarantee to Bankruptcy to FBI ...
Don't forget Obama visits.
Google Range Resources for a similar fiaso with Bush...
Google 'Flakmeister'.
https://twitter.com/flakmeister
These cunts need another Obama stimulus package, they died in 2010. Fuck them.
LEED | U.S. Green Building Council
Don't fall for climate change bullshit, more taxpayer handouts needed. I attended one of these shitshows at McCormick Place in Chicago.
Never forget watching Eaton Corporation selling AC vs DC electric paystations.
I shouted out, "why not invest in automotive tow companies to drag the car to recharge. You don't have infrastructure built to compete with petroleum stations."
A loud roar of laughing ensues within audience. After the audience became quiet, I stated, "who is your primary target customer to build this environmental PC taxpayer bundled program?" Again, audience bursts into laughter.
I said nothing more, Eaton salesman carried on with his presentation.
Very simple to understand...This is a way to extort money from companies using the legal system. This allows for never ending lawsuits and litigation for the Law firms who fund the Politicians which are mostly Lawyers themselves...This is also about money laundering, think Solyndra, Solar panel companies, electric battery co, etc.. These companies go out of business shortly after getting millions upon milions of tax payer dollars...This is a way to funnel money to mostly democrat politicians without technically breaking the law..This is mega corruption on full display.....
Obama is a fraud. He headed a day early out of DC dodge.
A time to weep....
That so many clueless fucks could congregate in one place for such a stunning circle jerk of nonsense....
See what you did?
Have you no shame?
The conclusion from Figure 6 is total bullshit. Shit, everything in Denmark and Germany is three times as expensive as Hungary. There is more solar in Germany than Hungary because other forms of energy are so expensive and therefore renewables on a comparative basis are much more atttactive.
Was the author two dumb to see this or is he himself being misleading?
My money is on the latter...
People see what their ideology tells them to see when you do not have deep knowledge...
With Hillary's soon to be failed run, are you insisting that Al Gore is about to throw his hat in ring (along with Biden) after he got a massage from you know who in France? Sloppy seconds comes to mind.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3144397/Monica-Lewinsky-barred-A...
Guess what, Bill was there too... among a few others.
http://www.publicitas.com/home/media-news-events/events/cannes-lions-2015/
GO CECIL!
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-22/republicans-investigate-nasa-ov...
I hear that massachusetts will de-criminalize Heroin. Way to go! /s
http://www.wcvb.com/health/heroin-would-be-decriminalized-under-beacon-h...
The Disclosure Project recently submitted a proposal to congress to fund development of Stan Meyer water based energy.
Senator Gravel states at 1:20:02 that it is illegal to refuse to disclose technology that frees humanity (from the debt & energy cabal).
Greer states that we have a moral obligation to oppose the criminal national security deep state.
Source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lyXi1efbYrk#t=3945