Maybe 10 cents per watt, but certainly not per kWh
Maybe 10 cents per watt, but certainly not per kWh
.............
You got me on the metrics. However, it makes intuitive sense that if you can harness both the thermal and the photovoltaic spectrum of light, you should be able to double the output of power from a given unit of light. And therefor cut in half the cost per unit of light.
We’ll see as to whether IBM can actually do what they say they can do and whether the they’ll be able to do so a price point on par with coal.
I’m not getting it. I’m paying .11 cents per KwH for the first X KwH, then I am charged .13 cents per KwH. That’s residential service. Business service is always cheaper and typically 1/2 to 3/4 of residential service.
What don’t you believe about KwH?
It's 0.10/kWh, which, in Germany, is price-competitive.
An IBM news release (http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/40912.wss) said that it is "levelized cost of energy, which includes the cost spread out over the total lifespan, so you have cost / (power * lifespan) which would give $/kWh rather than the usual cost/power.
Explain your objection.
"Electricity" delivered to the customer is metered and sold in units of energy (kWh), not power (W). "Electricity" cost in West Virginia (for example) is around $0.09/kWh, and is generated primarily by burning coal.