[rellimpank]

--one that thankfully didn't go near here in Nevada failed mostly because it couldn't find a buyer for juice (some years in the future) for over 30 cents a kwh--another one just across the Commiefornia border didn't go either-

-must not have enough political pull but about the last news before stopping its permitting process was an application for a thirty mile natural gas pipeline--natural gas needed to keep the fluids warm at night--

[gotribe]

Summary from a recent Credit Suisse report on renewables, the 66 page report is an interesting read. I doubt legislators are going to do away with the tax credits anytime soon, and with utilization rates going up and panel costs going down, there seems to be some real momentum behind solar now, as well as wind. That said, obama policy seems to have thrown money hand over fist at the equipment makers through loan guarantees; tax credit to users is an incentive closer to the market demand and therefore a better spend IMHO. ■ Renewables will meet most of US demand growth. We estimate that ~85% of future demand growth for power through 2025 (including the impact of coal plant retirements) could be met by renewable generation with compliance to the existing 30 mandatory and 8 voluntary RPS programs. From this we would see over 100 GW of new renewable capacity additions with wind and solar market share more than doubling from 2012 to 2025. ■ Renewables are cost competitive to even cheap against conventional generation. The clearing price for new wind and solar continues to fall with improvements in utilization and falling capital costs. For wind we are seeing utilization rates 15-20 percentage points higher than 2007 vintage turbines, regularly supporting PPA pricing at or below $30/MWh that effectively 'creates' long-term equivalent natural gas at <$3/MMBtu. Lower capital costs for solar have dropped PPA pricing to $65 - 80/MWh from well over $100/MWh, making solar competitive with newbuild gas peaking generation. ■ More pressure on power markets and earnings risk for generators. Using our bottom-up model we see ~$1-2/MWh or 5% price risk or basically capping the power market recovery in the deregulated markets relative to a scenario without significant renewables growth, creating earnings risk for competitive generators with FE and EXC as the Integrateds most at risk with 5-7% EPS exposure in the out years. ■ Further mutes the rate of natural gas demand growth from power. We estimate renewables slowing the rate of natural gas demand growth from power generation to <0.5 bcf/d through 2020 versus our prior estimate of 1.0-1.2 bcf/d even when taking into account planned coal plant shutdowns and assumed nuclear plant retirements. Looking out through 2020 we estimate cumulative demand for natural gas with RPS compliance will be 5-6bcf/d lower vs a steady state outlook, or the equivalent of half of all expected LNG exports from the US.

[grundle]

When a big liberal city in a blue state starts running on solar power, without any nuclear, fossil fuels, or hydro, only then will I believe that it’s a legitimate form of electricity.

[nascarnation]

Green energy is a big part of the Chicago mob crony capitalism onslaught.

[MrB]

One way it could work is as a heat source to extract hydrocarbons from organic materials
that could then be refined into gasoline.

But even this is not really near as efficient as pulling the oil/natgas out of the ground and using it.

[jazusamo]

Ping!

[WayneLusvardi]

While I agree with the thrust of this article, it is not helpful to a debate about green power costs. The reason is that peak hour power may reach 22 cents per kilowatt hour whereby solar could compete as to price (for a few hours).

In Hawaii, the cost of conventional power is already like 45 cents per kilowatt hour, so 22 cents would be a saving. The problem in Hawaii is that all those rooftop solar systems are re-selling power back into the grid and the grid can not handle it because it is too unpredictable.

Just comparing prices (which I have also done) is like a flat earth comparison to a round world of energy prices.

There is also the problem of air pollution. California has 9 smog trap basins; Texas has none. Solar doesn’t make much sense in Texas because (except maybe in Dallas or Houston during the summer) because there are no smog traps. The solution to pollution is dilution.

[familyop]

No tax credits here (no fat income from government allowing me to sit on my rear end while others install) and no grid power within several miles. Thanks for driving down the prices of components, so that I can add to the system for less. ;-)