That free wind power is proving to be quite expensive

Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
Every place that ramps up solar and wind find their overall electricity costs and prices surge. PJ and Forkie consider this coincidental magic.



Did you bother to do some homework before making that statement? I'm thinking "no"...and neither did the opinion contributor in your article.

Electricity Rates per KWHR by State

The national average for electricity is $10.47 per KwHr. Below are the rates for the top 10 wind power states. Every single one (without exception) falls under the national average of electricity rates. Lucky for Boilerman I have far too much respect for my own integrity to say wind power is what makes these state's rates cheaper than (say) New York. Otherwise I might submit an article to the Forbes opinion page with my findings.

IOWA : $8.39
North Dakota : $8.92
South Dakota : $9.20
Oklahoma: : $7.69
Kansas : $10.01
Idaho : $8.00
Minnesota : $10.12
Colorado : $10.34
Oregon : $8.28
Wyoming : $7.47

Like I said before - I think it would be responsible to get a breakdown of the different types of electricity costs in each state to get an intelligent answer instead of adding 2 + 2 and getting 13. I looked and could not find such a breakdown on the internets. Maybe someone here can assist.





A Cautionary Note

If one's objective is to choose an electrical power source, and then present "data" to support one's choice, . . . DonDiego counsels one to, . . . well, actually DonDiego doesn't counsel one at all; just go ahead and jabber on.

But if one's objective is to understand the issue of costs in the selection of future power generation, DonDiego counsels one to consider the factors beyond a simple comparison of $-per-KWhr of installed generation. There are other considerations like cost-benefits of pollution reduction [i.e. coal vs nuclear] and costs-disadvantages of, f'rinstance, sources that can only provide power intermittently, like solar and wind.

Before one offers a definitive opinion DonDiego suggests one read these Institute for Energy Research offerings:
__Electric Generating Costs: A Primer
__Making Sense of Levelized Costs
[At least learn what "leveled costs" means and the difference between "dispatchable" and "non-dispatchable" power.]

After Googling combinations of the words "electricity/comparisons/coal/gas/nuclear/wind/hydro/geo-thermal" and the like, it looks to poor old DonDiego that:
i. hydroelectric and geothermal are the cheapest by far, . . . but geographically specific.
ii. solar generated electricity is still quite expensive and likely to remain so; photovoltaics are a lot cheaper than the mirror-farms
iii. nuclear plants are expensive but amortizing costs over time makes it competitive, and there's no air pollution.
iv. onshore-wind generated electricity costs are becoming comparable to gas, nuclear, coal; offshore-wind generated electricity is very expensive.
v. solar and wind are non-dispatchable power sources.

DonDiego recommends:
*Build nuclear-fission plants as necessary to provide electricity in the intermediate term.
*Develop nuclear-fusion plants with dispatch. [DonDiego recognizes this may never be possible.]
*Use all forms of efficient energy production as applicable to local conditions.
*Reduce pollutant emissions as practicably as possible. [DonDiego recognizes this i. may be expensive and ii. is unlikely, especially in "developing countries".]
*And, personally, DonDiego doesn't like the fact that wind turbines kill birds and spoil some lovely landscapes, . . . but mankind's been spoiling things for a long time anyway.

Umm, . . . OK then. The interested readers may resume their squabbling.
I had thought the main reason for wind being rather expensive is the transmission of said power they generate. Solar has a bit that as well.

Solar also has that 2 fold issue of heat loss and percentage of solar energy turned into electricity. We are currently at a maximum level of somewhere around 10% to 20% (labs have better numbers but not commercially available) which is no where near a viable energy producer. Solar cells have gotten better, but just not good enough to count on as a primary power generator. There is of course that issue of storing and production issues when the sky is overcast.

We can capture methane gas and some farms do by processing the waste from the livestock.

Or you can do your part by eating beans and farting in jars....
I thought you all knew that nothing is free!
Greed trumps all!
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now