Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

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

Posted by Soulskill on from the time-to-work-on-scale dept.

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.

15 of 421 comments (clear)

  1. Show us the data by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Show us the data by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Show us the data by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Show us the data by Layzej · · Score: 4, Informative
      It looks like that's exactly what they've done:

      "The BNEF report analyzes thousands of data points culled from individual deals and projects around the world to estimate the actual costs associated with each type of energy, excluding subsidies. "

      "takes into account not just the cost of generating a marginal MWh of electricity, but also the upfront capital and development expense, the cost of equity and debt finance, and operating and maintenance fees." - http://about.bnef.com/press-re...

    4. Re: Show us the data by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 5, Funny

      He said evaluate, not valuate. Big difference that 'e' makes.

      God dammit. Sticking an 'e' on something to pretend it's something new is just internet marketing!

      ;-)

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    5. Re:Show us the data by tbf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The hard evidence, the data is in the stocks of the big four (EnBW, E.ON, RWE, Vattenfall) being in free fall for years now, while them desperately searching buyers for their outdated, in deficit fossil plants. Recently they even tried moving them into bad-bank-style shell corps.

    6. Re:Show us the data by catchblue22 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    7. Re:Show us the data by gurps_npc · · Score: 5, Insightful
      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.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  2. Time to drop the prices? by SpinyManiac · · Score: 4, Funny

    So my electricity bill's going to go down now? No, I didn't think so either.

    It's a pity wind and solar aren't reliable in the UK. Maybe we could install the turbines in parliament and make use of a ready supply of hot air. We could install solar panels too, the MPs all think the sun shines out of their arses.

    --
    It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
    1. Re:Time to drop the prices? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. From TFA by willworkforbeer · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Fine Article also has an interesting graphic relating "Capacity Factor", which is "the percentage of a power plant's maximum potential that's actually achieved over time."

    Notably, in the last 12 months, wind's capacity factor has risen from 32% to 37%. Even more interns of percentage gains, solar's capacity factor has risen from 16 to 20% in that same time frame.

    --
    Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
  4. Re:Congratulations by N1AK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  5. Re:still blowing smoke by Moof123 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Fossils have a plethora of subsidies, some more obvious than others.

    You don't need a big military presence in the middle east, or even the threat of one to keep the wind blowing. Oil does. We end up having to maintain alliances, troops, and share military firepower with awful countries like Saudia Arabia, Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, and many more. These relationships are deeply corrosive to the image we try to portray to ourselves as "freedom loving Americans". Double think becomes necessary at an early age. Good luck estimating a price tag for a corroded soul.

  6. Re:Not the total cost! by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

    The cost of wind in the U.S. (about $0.14-$0.19 / kWh last I checked)

    I should clarify that that's retail pricing. Wholesale (production) pricing figures I've seen for wind put it at about $0.07-$0.11 / kWh. Slightly higher than natural gas and nuclear but falling rapidly. Coal is around $0.05, hydro the cheapest at $0.02-$0.04.

  7. Re:Decentralized power by smaddox · · Score: 4, Informative

    Even though I know that a solar panel will never make the energy back that was used to produce it...

    That hasn't been true for a long time.