It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
1–10 of 125 posts
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#2"[Wind and solar are] even close to being competitive with the marginal costs of running the coal and nuclear plants we already have."
Is that still true without incentives, green grants, rebates, and tax credits? Because without all of that and with mountains of red tape nuclear still produces energy at the lowest cost, and without emitting any CO2.
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#3"[Wind and solar are] even close to being competitive with the marginal costs of running the coal and nuclear plants we already have." Is that still true without incentives, green grants, rebates, and tax credits? Because without all of that and with mountains of red tape nuclear still produces energy at the lowest cost, and without emitting any CO2.
Yes, the dream team would be a combination of renewable and nuclear.
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#4My experience with utility solar is it’s getting competitive but not reliably so yet: https://twitter.com/ctdonath/status/1184138472988315648?s=20
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#5"[Wind and solar are] even close to being competitive with the marginal costs of running the coal and nuclear plants we already have." Is that still true without incentives, green grants, rebates, and tax credits? Because without all of that and with mountains of red tape nuclear still produces energy at the lowest cost, and without emitting any CO2.
Are you sure about that? You should look at the fortunes of the engineering groups McDermott, CB&I, and Shaw and how the cost overruns associated with the Westinghouse contributed to so much trouble for those EPC companies and Toshiba. Nuclear has two big problems: difficulty with costs of constructing new plants and currently completely externalized storage of spent fuel. The latter is poorly defined and understood, even though some people would like to give the appearance otherwise.
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#6Oh, can I not wait to ditch Ontario's Power for my own Renewables. The costs are reaching extremes now. We have some of the most expensive power in the world.
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#7"[Wind and solar are] even close to being competitive with the marginal costs of running the coal and nuclear plants we already have." Is that still true without incentives, green grants, rebates, and tax credits? Because without all of that and with mountains of red tape nuclear still produces energy at the lowest cost, and without emitting any CO2.
Is nuclear completely without subsidies?
Also some of the red tape, for nuclear, is there for a reason.
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#8Oh, can I not wait to ditch Ontario's Power for my own Renewables. The costs are reaching extremes now. We have some of the most expensive power in the world.
Looks like Ontario's electricity cost is because of government interference, primarily overbuilding of renewables with fixed revenue contracts:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/why-does-elect...
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#9"[Wind and solar are] even close to being competitive with the marginal costs of running the coal and nuclear plants we already have." Is that still true without incentives, green grants, rebates, and tax credits? Because without all of that and with mountains of red tape nuclear still produces energy at the lowest cost, and without emitting any CO2.
Is nuclear completely without subsidies? Also some of the red tape, for nuclear, is there for a reason.
All of the externalities of nuclear power are subsidized.
Re: It can make more sense to build new renewable capacity than run old coal plants
#10"[Wind and solar are] even close to being competitive with the marginal costs of running the coal and nuclear plants we already have." Is that still true without incentives, green grants, rebates, and tax credits? Because without all of that and with mountains of red tape nuclear still produces energy at the lowest cost, and without emitting any CO2.
Yes, the dream team would be a combination of renewable and nuclear.
No it wouldn't, because nuclear isn't reactive enough to produce energy to match the extreme afternoon demand curves when solar capacity drops and demand jumps.
To account for those rapid jumps in non-renewable demand, you need an energy source that can ramp up really fast on short notice, like hydrocarbon fire.