Wind Power Now Cheapest Energy In UK and Germany; No Subsidies Needed

Socguy writes: Bloomberg reports wind power has now crossed the threshold to become the cheapest source of energy in both the UK and Germany. This is notable because it's the first time this has occurred in a G7 country. In the U.S., wind and solar are still massively overshadowed by the power generated from fossil fuel plants, but the percentage is creeping up. It's gotten to the point where it's starting to affect the lifetime profitability of new plants.

Comments

Show us the data

[RogueWarrior65]

Yeah, yeah, call me a skeptic but I want to see the costs associated with actual power generation as opposed to the line items for punitive regulation.

Re:Show us the data

[AmiMoJo]

It's almost impossible to compare because figures for the externalized costs of coal and gas are very hard to calculate. It's difficult to evaluate the value of health and a human life, or how much damage can be attributed to energy production and not other things.

In any case, as wind gets cheaper its capacity factor is rocketing up too.

Re:Show us the data

[drinkypoo]

It's difficult to evaluate the value of health and a human life

Ask any health insurance company. I guarantee you they have set dollar values for each. They know precisely what it costs them when you die.

Re:Show us the data

[catchblue22]

Yeah unless the wind stops blowing then waddya gonna do then huh? HUH?

When the wind stops you use a natural gas power plant. Duh. DUH!

The point is to reduce the amounts of fossil fuels used to generate electricity. If you still need it sometimes, who cares. You have still reduced the amount of fossil fuels used.

Batteries are becoming cheaper and more reliable. In the end, we will likely store large amounts of power in battery banks when the wind blows and the sun shines. This will further reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. Maybe we still need fossil fuels in the future, but our consumption of them will be reduced by 80%. It won't be the end of the world. Except if your entire fortune is based in the fossil fuel business.

Re:Show us the data

[gurps_npc]

So does the TSA, the FDA, and many other government agencies.

The problem is that the set dollar values DIFFER .And not by small amounts. Most insurance companies value human life at about $50,000 per year with younger people having more years left, while older people having less. Basically, 70 grand parents = 1 baby. The NHTSA uses a value of around $550,000 - if it costs much more than that, they don't require a safety device, less it becomes a law. The EPA says a human life is worth $9 million. Economists tend to value it at just $1 million, while the USA anti-terrorism services estimates they spend $180 million per life saved.

So your 'solution' is not helpful - you just end up arguing about whose numbers to use.

Re:Congratulations

[N1AK]

You've managed to make traditional energy sources more expensive than wind. Impressive.

And you've managed to make junk food (HF Corn Syrup) cheaper than fresh food; at market interference goes we've still got a lot to learn to be half as retarded as that.

Re:Time to drop the prices?

[AmiMoJo]

UK power is expensive for a variety of reasons. We pay a ridiculous amount for nuclear, and don't make good use of our excellent wind resources. The big energy suppliers do the minimum possible to meet their legal obligations, in an attempt to force the government to pay them to build new capacity with tax money and bill increases.