[The Electrician]

Combined, the two plants cost $150 million less than the windfarm and generate at least 3 times more electricity.

Goes to show what a crappy idea windmills are. Even in supposedly "ideal" locations.

Did your "analysis" include operating and maintenance costs, or only construction costs? Is there a "break-even" point sometime down the road, or does it show that one approach is always more expensive than the other?

[Willie Green]

Did your "analysis" include operating and maintenance costs, or only construction costs?

I was just making a quick comparison of the construction costs.
Since windmills don't have to pay for fuel, they'd have an operating advantage in that respect. But I believe maintenance costs would be higher, simply because equivalent generating capacity would require significantly more generators spread out over a wider area. Large, centralized generating facilities are much easier to maintain.

[biblewonk]

Did your "analysis" include operating and maintenance costs, or only construction costs? Is there a "break-even" point sometime down the road, or does it show that one approach is always more expensive than the other?

His "analsys" left out the fact that natural gas alone costs as much as the wholesale price of wind power. Offshore wind plants are expected to be producing power at 3 cents per kwhr in 5 or so years. The price of the powerplant is not important, it is the price of the electricity that we care about.

[1Old Pro]

Did your "analysis" include operating and maintenance costs, or only construction costs? Is there a "break-even" point sometime down the road, or does it show that one approach is always more expensive than the other?

My questions as well.