Posted on 10/05/2014 6:40:13 PM PDT by ckilmer
Tell us about your car.
Sorry about that. I should have capitalized the word NEW electrical supply.
........................
August 21, 2014 |
WASHINGTON, D.C. — According to the latest “Energy Infrastructure Update” report from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s Office of Energy Projects, all new U.S. electrical generating capacity put into service in July came from renewable energy sources: 379 megawatts (MW) of wind, 21 MW of solar, and 5 MW of hydropower.
For the first seven months of 2014, renewables have accounted for more than half (53.8 percent) of the 4,758 MW of new U.S. electrical capacity that has come on line with solar (25.8 percent) and wind (25.1 percent) each accounting for more than a quarter of the total. In addition, biomass provided 1.8 percent, geothermal 0.7 percent, and hydropower 0.4 percent.
As for the balance, natural gas accounted for 45.9 percent while a small fraction (0.3 percent) came from oil and “other” combined. There has been no new electrical generating capacity from either coal or nuclear thus far in 2014.
I totally agree that coal and natural gas are cheaper than wind and solar. But according to reports solar is already competitive with coal in arizona — maybe even without subsidies. (I’d have to check on that.)
Whatever, likely if the pubbies get the white house in 2016 they’ll chop out the subsidies for wind and solar. However, given the way prices for wind and solar continue to fall—hey in another 10 years they’ll reach price parity with coal and natural gas —all over the USA.
Maybe.
I do agree with you that until battery storage gets much much better/cheaper neither wind or solar are suitable for baseload electrical supply. My favorite for baseload is thorium lftr msr reactors.
In fact, the pubbies need to develop a grand technological vision as the dems have done. (In fact, they have set up the climate change narrative so that the change over to electric cars will redound to their favor.)
The grand republican vision would include msr reactors that produce electricity at 1/4 or less the cost of current cheapest coal/natural gas and desalination at 1/5 the cost of current cheapest desalination.
Desalinized water and msr reactors that cheap would enable the USA to turn the deserts green not just in the USA but around the world.
that’s actually the intermediary step to terraforming mars.
I totally agree that coal and natural gas are cheaper than wind and solar. But according to reports solar is already competitive with coal in arizona — maybe even without subsidies. (I’d have to check on that.)
Whatever, likely if the pubbies get the white house in 2016 they’ll chop out the subsidies for wind and solar. However, given the way prices for wind and solar continue to fall—hey in another 10 years they’ll reach price parity with coal and natural gas —all over the USA.
Maybe.
I do agree with you that until battery storage gets much much better/cheaper neither wind or solar are suitable for baseload electrical supply. My favorite for baseload is thorium lftr msr reactors.
In fact, the pubbies need to develop a grand technological vision as the dems have done. (In fact, they have set up the climate change narrative so that the change over to electric cars will redound to their favor.)
The grand republican vision would include msr reactors that produce electricity at 1/4 or less the cost of current cheapest coal/natural gas and desalination at 1/5 the cost of current cheapest desalination.
Desalinized water and msr reactors that cheap would enable the USA to turn the deserts green not just in the USA but around the world.
that’s actually the intermediary step to terraforming mars.
You are talking a minuscule bit of electricity.
You have not answered the FUNDAMENTAL question at all. Apparently you believe in unicorns and magic
What do you believe is the FUNDAMENTAL question.
It is the one you REFUSE to answer....where is all of the EXTRA electricity to run these monsters going to come from??? And please do not resort to the ridiculous wind power and solar.....those are non functional and use more energy than they produce
where is all of the EXTRA electricity to run these monsters going to come from??? And please do not resort to the ridiculous wind power and solar.....those are non functional and use more energy than they produce
............
where is all the energy going to come from to run all the new cars on the road.
beats me. I can tell you that demand for oil currently is flat to down while the production of oil and natural gas is skyrocketing. If you don’t believe that more than 50% of new electrical power production comes from solar and wind —even after reading the articles that say as much and even granting that these power sources currently cost more than coal and natural gas...then what the hey I’m not going to argue with you on that. All I know is what I read.
imho in 15 or 20 years the 4th generation portable nuclear power plants are going to come on stream in large volumes and much cheaper prices than current cheapest coal. But at this point this is pretty speculative. US regulation agencies are killers.
Your statistic is meaningless. Claiming that this is somehow the answer to our energy crunch where we have rolling black outs and heating shortages ishows a lack of understanding. The physics of it won’t allow it.
You are postulating replacing all cars with these inefficient beasts. I ask you where the electricity will come from and you cite a silly article. I show how much of the overall production of energy your beloved green stuff produces and you give more meaningless statistics. You don’t address the overall inefficiency of those sources. Since we are killing coal and nuclear and only private lands are being used for new oil and gas your fifty percent of new is not useful.
I your last comment is laughable. When was the most recent nuke plant built?
How many Mw do your wonderful new plants produce? How many cities do they run? These are small scale, few hundred Megas output.... Your theories are about as valid as those who want ethanol in part or in whole
All right.
You have convinced me that you do not believe that electric cars can happen.
Further you have convinced me that you believe that electric cars will never happen.
Finally, you have convinced me that if you do see electric cars on the road, you’ll consider them to be either a fantasy or an affront.
This is all good. No worries.
I do think that the pubbies will likely slash subsidies to solar and wind if they get the white house in 2016. But any fall off in new electrical supplies that causes will be made up for by natural gas — as is currently happening in California. The drought there has cut hydro production in half. The extra electricity is being generated by natural gas sources.
Similarly there is a great danger that the turbines for the hoover dam will be shut off because of falling water levels. This will shut off electricity to large sections of the southwest. However, some of the new large solar farms coming on stream are expected to take up some of the slack. How much I don’t know.
I’m not a greenie. I think its a shame what the greens are doing to the coal industry. And what they would do to oil and natural gas if they could.
That said, I think its a great blessing to have as many sources of energy as possible for the same reason that it best to have many sources of income. You don’t know when one will go bust.
Oh quit being so snarky....the article you posted claims things that Tesla wants you to believe....
Never nonce did I say that electric cars won’t or don’t exist. What I have said consistently is that they will not REPLACE all cars currently on the road
And of course your so called green energy patter is pointless. Solar is falling into disfavor due to the problems the surrounding environment is suffering from bug fields. Wind power is fine for a small scale and has never been a full time solution. Bio mass is so inefficient it isn’t even funny
The so called nuclear solution you hope for hasn’t happened and at least in the US will never be allowed to be built.
I find it interesting when asked to name a NEW major power plant that uses nuclear you fall into silliness.
So many want to get rid of coal (just ask them) and that is a huge portion of our current energy useage. Replacing that source of energy is the current big challenge.
Just because Elon has sold you and the folks in some of the investment community a bill of goods doesn’t mean that it will happen
Never nonce did I say that electric cars won’t or don’t exist. What I have said consistently is that they will not REPLACE all cars currently on the road
....................
Oh well this is easy. I don’t think that electric cars will replace ALL cars on the road either. Neither do I want that to happen. Rather what I want is for the two systems to go head to head in a competitive race that drives efficiencies up and costs down—and eventually kills the price of oil. It doesn’t take but a small bite out of demand to deflate oil prices as events are proving now.
Coal and natural gas in equivalent btus are currently priced at about $35@ barrel. That’s where I want oil prices to go. That’s where I think they’ll go in 10-15 years.
Of course another technology that will skim off demand for oil in the next decade is conversion over to natural gas trains trucks and buses plus large commercial buildings in the northeast.
Feel free to disagree.
So food and soda and lattes purchased with EBT cards are free?
Medical services under Obamacare are free?
Housing projects and Obamaphones and cash for clunkers and two years of unemployment compensation is free?
How about "free" medical care for illegals? Is that kind of like a medical recharge for criminals instead of cars?
Sheesh, man. All this free stuff is exactly why we are $20 trillion in the hole.
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.