Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Levelized Cost of Electric Generation
Wattsupwiththat.com ^ | 2/16/2014 | Willis Eschenbach

Posted on 02/16/2014 8:41:34 AM PST by rktman

In early 2013, the US Energy Information Agency (EIA) released their new figures for the “levelized cost” of new power plants. I just came across them, so I thought I’d pass them on. These are two years more recent than the same EIA cost estimates I discussed in 2011 here. Levelized cost is the average cost of power from a new generating plant over its entire lifetime of service. The use of levelized cost allows us to compare various energy sources on an even basis. Here are the levelized costs of power by fuel source, for plants with construction started now that would enter service in 2018:

(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: doe; ecoliars; eia; epa
More on (moron?) the cost of free energy and initiatives. (Hey, lets fry up some birds down in southern NV.)
1 posted on 02/16/2014 8:41:34 AM PST by rktman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rktman

This is very interesting.

However, I wonder if the liberals will consider any such review of power costs?? Or will they push ahead with their mantras of solar, wind, no fossil fuels, no nuclear etc.

Unfortunately liberals are in charge now, so we have to wonder what the liberals will allow to go forward. Obama’s EPA is supposed to push policies which will compel many coal fired power plants to close. How we will make up the gap in power generation being lost is unknown.


2 posted on 02/16/2014 8:45:31 AM PST by Dilbert San Diego (we')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

I’m surprised that wind, with its maintenance intensive rotating mechanical systems, is cheaper than a photovoltaic array.


3 posted on 02/16/2014 8:47:15 AM PST by null and void (<--- unwilling cattle-car passenger on the bullet train to serfdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
However, I wonder if the liberals will consider any such review of power costs??

The Globo-Marxists WANT higher power costs. They want to reduce our standard of living and increasing powers costs is one of the surest way of doing it. Flooding the nation with Third-worlders and exporting our jobs overseas are two others.

4 posted on 02/16/2014 9:04:28 AM PST by Count of Monte Fisto (The foundation of modern society is the denial of reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Count of Monte Fisto

Well, if the liberals don’t care if power costs go up, and actually want those costs to go up, there’s our answer. The liberals will NOT look at any such issues, such as cost per unit of power.

They worship at the altar of sun and wind and all that, regardless of cost. In fact, it sounds like they are happy that these other sources of power are more expensive for all of us.


5 posted on 02/16/2014 9:06:42 AM PST by Dilbert San Diego (we')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

The main thing that pops out to me is that the rates aren’t “skyrocketing” as they “necessarily” should be doing. (did I spell that right?)


6 posted on 02/16/2014 9:07:48 AM PST by rktman (Under my plan(scheme),unemployment will necessarily skyrocket! Despite the % dropping. Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rktman

From the article:
“...The power grid is a jealous bitch and there’s not an iota of storage...”
-
Some seem to fail to understand this very basic fact.


7 posted on 02/16/2014 9:23:17 AM PST by Repeal The 17th (We have met the enemy and he is us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

This is good data for the most part, thanks for posting it. Understanding the energy mix requires acquiring some basic knowledge, which most FReepers are reluctant to do, preferring instead to just repeat talking points or other nonsense. But this is a serious issue, because the only energy policy that makes sense is an “all the above” policy.

We need a mix of dispatchable and non-dispatchable generation sources, which means nuclear and combined-cycle natural gas in addition to those like coal that keep the lights on today.

Where the author loses credibility is where he starts blathering about dusting solar panels and wind turbine maintenance. He simply doesn’t know what he’s talking about and demeans the rest of his argument by delving into nonsensical speculation. He also fails to point out what I have said on just about every wind-related thread, that is, that utility-scale wind generation can operate on a cost-competitive basis without subsidies. The industry trade newspaper even carried a front-page story to the same effect last month. The technology is not all that different from that used to whisk people around the sky at 500 mph yet you don’t hear jet aircraft being described in the same pejorative terms.

But it really matters little what opinionated writes say about it - science and technology will advance at it’s own pace, given a free market in which to operate where the best solutions will succeed.


8 posted on 02/16/2014 9:32:32 AM PST by bigbob (The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Read it again, it’s not. He says it’s 30% higher. All generating systems have a baseline O&M cost to perform preventive maintenance and oversee the power conversion electronics that interface all forms of generation to the grid. Utility-scale wind turbines have become more reliable with each generation of technology, thanks to advanced materials, improved designs, and now the incorporation of predictive maintenace and prognostics that will detect potential failures even before they occur.

Think of comparing a 1950s automobile with last years models and you’ll get an appreciation for why modern turbines have only 1/3 the maintenance cost of those installed just 15 years ago.


9 posted on 02/16/2014 9:41:52 AM PST by bigbob (The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

LOL! Free market would be good. Hard to make energy prices skyrocket with a free market. Not like there isn’t already a monopoly on electricity wherever you live. It ain’t like cell phones. Of course with those there are connection and reliability issues as well.


10 posted on 02/16/2014 9:42:27 AM PST by rktman (Under my plan(scheme),unemployment will necessarily skyrocket! Despite the % dropping. Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

Thanks! I missed that.


11 posted on 02/16/2014 9:45:34 AM PST by null and void (<--- unwilling cattle-car passenger on the bullet train to serfdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Kind of a side issue about energy monopolies but in Michigan competition is capped at 10% to outside electricity providers. This leaves us with CMS and DTE which are in a "competitive partnership" which means they don't do any competing.

My state representative (Mike Shirkey) is pushing to raise the cap to 25% and the screeching is getting unbearable and ridiculous.

In this ad they claim that Texas is some kind of energy disaster area.

Citizens for Energizing Michigan's Economy,
12 posted on 02/16/2014 9:51:47 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Production Tax Credit.

Keep that Wind Generation Lobby money flowing.


13 posted on 02/16/2014 9:52:28 AM PST by hadaclueonce (Because Brawndo's got electrolytes. Because Ethanol has Big Corn Lobby)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

Think of comparing a 1950s automobile with last years models and you’ll get an appreciation for why modern turbines have only 1/3 the maintenance cost of those installed just 15 years ago.


That may be true, but now look at it from higher ground. But what if we had spent all the money on improving and building more coal or nuclear generation? Don’t get distracted by the shiney windmills.


14 posted on 02/16/2014 10:00:51 AM PST by PeterPrinciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PeterPrinciple
But what if we had spent all the money on improving and building more coal or nuclear generation?

Yup. I'd like to repower some of the existing dams in my neck of the woods with newer more efficient generator technology. Instead the same bunch of pinwheel worshippers want to tear out all the dams so "the rivers can run free man".
15 posted on 02/16/2014 10:15:47 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

“Think of comparing a 1950s automobile with last years models and you’ll get an appreciation for why modern turbines have only 1/3 the maintenance cost of those installed just 15 years ago.”

But are the ones they installed 15 years ago paid for yet?


16 posted on 02/16/2014 11:15:03 AM PST by PLMerite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

“He also fails to point out what I have said on just about every wind-related thread, that is, that utility-scale wind generation can operate on a cost-competitive basis without subsidies.”

It cannot, because the output for a wind field can at any given moment drop to *zero*. Therefore, steam turbines must be kept running 24/7 to prevent blackouts. So they must be indirectly subsidized by having to build and operate an equal capacity of generation to take up the slack at a moment’s notice

They’re a Boone-doggle. And people are starting to catch on.


17 posted on 02/16/2014 12:51:15 PM PST by CowboyJay (Cruz'-ing in 2016!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rktman
It ain’t like cell phones. Of course with those there are connection and reliability issues as well.
 

One thing that I think is sad is that we now have an entire generation that has no idea what actual high-quality voice service is like. The reliability and quality issues we face today would never have passed muster with the old Ma Bell.

18 posted on 02/17/2014 6:03:27 AM PST by zeugma (Is it evil of me to teach my bird to say "here kitty, kitty"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

LOL! BEechwood 45789. They would be shocked to actually have a “party line”. Not the same kind of “party line” they would have in mind. And “long distance” calls? Almost never heard of when I was a kid. Dang. I must be getting old-er.


19 posted on 02/17/2014 6:37:58 AM PST by rktman (Under my plan(scheme),unemployment will necessarily skyrocket! Despite the % dropping. Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson