[bigbob]

I know it is popular to bash wind energy on FR, however having done my own research I hold a contrarian view. The production tax credit has been effective in jump-starting utility scale wind to a point where it is almost cost-competitive. Today, wind energy costs about 7.5 cents per kWh vs. around 4.5 cents for coal or nuclear power, and receive 2¢/kWh in PTC subsidy, and 0.5¢/kWh in accelerated depreciation which narrows the gap to around 1 cent per kWh. If the PTC is not extended there is no question this will result in job losses through the industry, including the very sizable wind supply chain that has been one of the few growth industries in the past 5-10 years in the US. However we will see if the market decides that wind is worth paying the extra price for, and if the ratepayers are willing to ante up the difference.

Incidentally, wind is far cheaper (more than 5 cents per kWh than electricity generated by burning our domestically produced natural gas in a gas turbine. However this makes sense because GTs produce the most valuable power needed to supply peak demands when the price of electricity is the highest.

[G Larry]

Really?

Please help us understand why there are more than 14,000 windmills now abandoned in place, across the U.S.?

[JPG]

Your numbers may be correct but ‘green energy’ has earned a reputation as an expensive big government solution in search of a problem. The AGW eco-freaks have brought the house down on their own heads and conservatives want to turn off the $ spigot and let them pound sand.

[DJ MacWoW]

Click The Pic To Donate

Support Activist Free Republic

[cicero2k]

Incidentally, wind is far cheaper (more than 5 cents per kWh than electricity generated by burning our domestically produced natural gas in a gas turbine. However this makes sense because GTs produce the most valuable power needed to supply peak demands when the price of electricity is the highest.

$0.125 per KWH? Not so fast.

Much nat gas is burned in combined cycle plants, with 50% conversion to electricity. Many coal plants are lucky to hit 35% conversion.

Nat gas is down to $2.50 per million BTUs, implying a fuel cost of 2.56 cents per KWH at the buss bar at 40% efficiency. Throw in two cents capital and O&M and you have equivalent to coal / nuke cost.

Nat gas plants can operate 90% of the time, spreading out O&M and capital costs.

Wind capacity factor: 25%. This adds hidden capital and O&M to the cost down the line.

When wind flows, other plants on the grid have to shut down; increasing thier cost basis as you don't furlough mechanics and operators during periods waiting for the wind to stop again.

This cost has to be added into the overall picture.

[hadaclueonce]

Don’t worry the PTC subsidy will be extended. GE wants it and will happen.

[USS Alaska]

Today, wind energy costs about 7.5 cents per kWh vs. around 4.5 cents for coal or nuclear power, and receive 2¢/kWh in PTC subsidy, and 0.5¢/kWh in accelerated depreciation which narrows the gap to around 1 cent per kWh.

I dispute your cost numbers, but even if they were accurate, by your own admission, it is 67% more expensive to provide a kilo watt hour using wind compared to nuke and coal {which you have lumped together to raise the cost of coal provided electricity}.

After subsidies from the tax payers the fake gap is now 13% higher.

These lost jobs should be lost, they are not really producing anything of value, they are as productive as a federal bureaucrat.

If tax payer money is required to support a "private" company, then that company should go bust.