Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does • Hacker News Board

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#11

Post by chjohasbrouck » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:26 AM UTC

maxharris wrote: post #7

The article uses euphemisms and double-talk: As more countries and states enact market systems that put a price on carbon emissions, clean energy technologies will actually become cheaper than fossil fuel technologies Translated into plain English: As more governments raise the price of fossil fuels through increased taxation, solar and wind may cost less than fossil fuels. What does the author have to gain by obfusc…

Pollution has a cost associated with it. Is regulation that makes the polluter liable for those costs a pro-human thing to do? Isn't that more equitable?

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#12

Post by toomuchtodo » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:27 AM UTC

maxharris wrote: post #7

The article uses euphemisms and double-talk: As more countries and states enact market systems that put a price on carbon emissions, clean energy technologies will actually become cheaper than fossil fuel technologies Translated into plain English: As more governments raise the price of fossil fuels through increased taxation, solar and wind may cost less than fossil fuels. What does the author have to gain by obfusc…

If that part bothers you, ignore it. Solar and wind are already cheaper without any subsidies. It should bother you though, but I've learned to not bother wasting my time with people about why. It doesn't matter at this point, now that fossil fuels have lost the lead.

"Wind power is now the cheapest electricity to produce in both Germany and the U.K., even without government subsidies, according to a new analysis by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF). It's the first time that threshold has been crossed by a G7 economy."

I didn't paste the rest in here, its long, but you should read it. Its even better in the US.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-06/solar-wind...

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#13

Post by sbuttgereit » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:30 AM UTC

maxharris wrote: post #7

The article uses euphemisms and double-talk: As more countries and states enact market systems that put a price on carbon emissions, clean energy technologies will actually become cheaper than fossil fuel technologies Translated into plain English: As more governments raise the price of fossil fuels through increased taxation, solar and wind may cost less than fossil fuels. What does the author have to gain by obfusc…

Hear, hear!

I once read a study from a major state university, commissioned by the state government, that argued that it was more economic to recycle plastic bottles than to landfill them.

BUT... when you dug into the details of the report (something the journalists and general public were unlikely to do), you found the calculations didn't correct for taxation (landfills) and subsidies (recyclers) as regulatory distortion. The report simply treated them as natural economic components; itemized, yes, but not removed from the conclusion.

When I saw that I have to admit I became rather more cynical about the intersection of politics and academics. It just wasn't right.

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#14

Post by maxharris » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:30 AM UTC

harigov wrote: post #9

maxharris wrote: post #7

The article uses euphemisms and double-talk: As more countries and states enact market systems that put a price on carbon emissions, clean energy technologies will actually become cheaper than fossil fuel technologies Translated into plain English: As more governments raise the price of fossil fuels through increased taxation, solar and wind may cost less than fossil fuels. What does the author have to gain by obfusc…

I don't think what the author mentioned and what you implied are one and the same. From author's perspective, when you look at the actual price of fuel including the carbon emissions that they are causing, which cause expenses in other ways like health/environment, clean energy technologies are actually getting cheaper than fossil fuel technologies.

During the 20th century, deaths due to temperature extremes dropped by over 70% (mostly due to the advent of air-conditioning): http://www.econ.yale.edu/~js2755/Climate_Adaptation_BCDGS.pd...

I also found these statistics helpful: http://www.moralcaseforfossilfuels.com/data/

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#15

Post by trhway » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:34 AM UTC

maxharris wrote: post #7

The article uses euphemisms and double-talk: As more countries and states enact market systems that put a price on carbon emissions, clean energy technologies will actually become cheaper than fossil fuel technologies Translated into plain English: As more governments raise the price of fossil fuels through increased taxation, solar and wind may cost less than fossil fuels. What does the author have to gain by obfusc…

>Translated into plain English:

>As more governments raise the price of fossil fuels through increased taxation, solar and wind may cost less than fossil fuels.

well, as it stands currently the whole society pays the tax for the fossil fuels use - that tax is the expenses and damages caused by the environment damage and climate change, oil wars, backward countries and people having huge political power due to being rich from oil, etc... It is only fair to shift at least some of the tax burden to the actual producers and consumers of the fossil fuels.

>What is the impact on people when their energy costs are raised?

what are you talking about? 100w solar panel costs less than $100, double that for installation and wires&converter. So $200 loan at 6% for 20 years is $1.5/month or $0.05/day. In CA the panel will produce 1kwh/day. I.e. $0.05/kwh. And no more kissing of Saudi princes' lower backs :)

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#16

Post by yongjik » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:38 AM UTC

maxharris wrote: post #7

The article uses euphemisms and double-talk: As more countries and states enact market systems that put a price on carbon emissions, clean energy technologies will actually become cheaper than fossil fuel technologies Translated into plain English: As more governments raise the price of fossil fuels through increased taxation, solar and wind may cost less than fossil fuels. What does the author have to gain by obfusc…

> What is the impact on people when their energy costs are raised?

Less than the impact on people when the land they own doesn't stay land.

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#17

Post by AngrySkillzz » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:49 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #8

1. This is excellent. It means we're well on our way to sustainable energy generation. Wind and solar are only going to get cheaper. Even without subsidies, there is no reason to ever build another coal or oil fired generation facility. Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries. 2. Nuclear is dead. Very dead. Thor…

There are also alternative storage solutions, like flywheel and pumped water storage. I don't know where those stand at the moment, but I imagine that a they are at least competitive with batteries, seeing as current batteries have fairly low storage capacity and need to be replaced regularly.

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#18

Post by timv » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:50 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #8

1. This is excellent. It means we're well on our way to sustainable energy generation. Wind and solar are only going to get cheaper. Even without subsidies, there is no reason to ever build another coal or oil fired generation facility. Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries. 2. Nuclear is dead. Very dead. Thor…

> Did I cover everything? Anything missing?

There's interesting issues to consider with respect to scale + locality in generation/storage.

My father-in-law's partner has a property in a rural area. Their property runs on 100% solar. The surrounding area has no local (large scale) power generation. During a recent storm the whole town was knocked off the grid. The property with solar kept working (after the storm, not during) while town was without power for days.

It's pretty rare to invest in small scale, local fossil fuel power generation. Small communities have to rely on the grid. But small scale renewable is feasible. There are cost benefits to larger systems, but those benefits need to be weighed up against the risk mitigation of having local systems.

The opposite side to that is that often the best places to run renewable generation is in remote areas and cities may be dependent on larger scale grids. (not that too many people want a fossil fuel plant operating in their city)

I expect that storage system (utility scale batteries) will shift the proposition again. Maybe your rural community doesn't its own generation, just the ability to store enough power to survive a grid failure for a few days.

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#19

Post by toomuchtodo » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:53 AM UTC

AngrySkillzz wrote: post #17

toomuchtodo wrote: post #8

1. This is excellent. It means we're well on our way to sustainable energy generation. Wind and solar are only going to get cheaper. Even without subsidies, there is no reason to ever build another coal or oil fired generation facility. Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries. 2. Nuclear is dead. Very dead. Thor…

There are also alternative storage solutions, like flywheel and pumped water storage. I don't know where those stand at the moment, but I imagine that a they are at least competitive with batteries, seeing as current batteries have fairly low storage capacity and need to be replaced regularly.

I excluded flywheels and pumped storage as they're rarely cost effective except in a few edge cases. Cargo containers full of batteries can be trucked or sent by ship anywhere necessary, and I expect them to get cheap very fast.

Re: Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does

#20

Post by maxharris » Fri, Oct 09, 2015, 2:55 AM UTC

yongjik wrote: post #16

maxharris wrote: post #7

The article uses euphemisms and double-talk: As more countries and states enact market systems that put a price on carbon emissions, clean energy technologies will actually become cheaper than fossil fuel technologies Translated into plain English: As more governments raise the price of fossil fuels through increased taxation, solar and wind may cost less than fossil fuels. What does the author have to gain by obfusc…

> What is the impact on people when their energy costs are raised? Less than the impact on people when the land they own doesn't stay land.

I live in Ballard, a neighborhood of Seattle, which is right on the ocean. If and as sea levels rise, every single person here would be better off running away from their homes, abandoning everything they own and starting from scratch somewhere inland.

For each of us, even this would be better than abandoning industrial civilization, which is the thing that gives us hospitals, abundant food, clothing, shelter, clean/hot/cold water, and everything else needed for a good human life.