Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

2015's Electricity Retirements: 80 Percent Coal Plants (arstechnica.com)

Posted by timothy on from the how-will-we-fill-the-stockings? dept.

AmiMoJo writes: In the US, electricity demand is growing very slowly, which means that capacity additions don't have to exceed retirements by much in order to keep the grid functioning. Tracking the comings and goings from the electric grid can help provide a picture of the country's changing energy mix. The Energy Information Administration, which provides data on the US' electric grid, says 18GW of capacity were retired this past year, more than 80 percent of it coal-fired. More than 27GW of utility-scale projects will replace that this year. Note that much of the new generating hardware is wind and solar, but the plants being replaced often had low capacity factors due to their age and high pollutant output.

7 of 244 comments (clear)

  1. And my monthy electric bill... by colin_faber · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Has never been higher. Additionally because my state (Colorado) has decided to replace the coal plants with natural gas, increasing the price to heat my home as well.

    1. Re:And my monthy electric bill... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It looks like the price has gone down in real terms, accounting for inflation: http://www.statista.com/statis...

      Colorado is cheaper than average, especially for gas and considering how little renewable energy it has: http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=...

      --
      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:And my monthy electric bill... by amorsen · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hydro isn't really interesting from a price comparison point of view. Most of the easy places to make hydro power are already tapped, so marginal cost for making a new hydro plant is very high -- if not directly in construction costs, then in damage to the local environment. The cost of power produced in an existing hydro plant is practically zero, but that is true for wind as well, and almost true for nuclear.

      For new builds, wind and natural gas tend to fight it out for cheapest power, depending on where you build. Solar and coal win certain areas, as long as we ignore pollution for coal. Unless you happen to be in Northern Norway, where they can still expand hydro -- but no one wants the power there and conservation is hindering power line construction.

      Note that dirt cheap natural gas is mostly a North American thing. The rest of the world does not have that.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    3. Re:And my monthy electric bill... by CaptainLard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Fair enough. Total install cost for a 7800W array in 2014 was $19k and I got back around $6k total in tax credits. Xcel lets you bank electricity with no expiration so what extra I produce in the summer carries over to Jan and Feb. The first year I lived in the house my total electricity bill was around $1100 so my break even point is around 11 years assuming rates don't go up (which they have already). I'm planning on an electric car in the next few years which cuts down the payback period even more. The panels are guaranteed to retain 80% capacity at 20 years and will likely output substantial power for at least 40. Throw in a few replacement panels and an inverter or two over that time and I'm still looking at 30-40 years of electricity for the cost of about 10 from the grid.

      That said, I just saw that Xcel has proposed a grid use charge for new solar installs that will change the math somewhat. But when it goes into effect in 2 years, prices for solar will likely have fallen enough to still make sense in most cases. Cheap, effective whole house batteries that will get you through a week of rain aren't far behind.

      I should stop there but....the nice thing about the tax benefits I received is that many more people can now benefit from them since they helped drive down the cost of solar by a huge amount in just a few years. One of the reasons so many solar companies went out of business is because if they held any inventory, it was pretty much unsaleable because next month's panels were better and cheaper. I know talking about such things is a can of worms but in my opinion, this is exactly what the gov is supposed to do: solve the chicken and egg problem by incentivize promising new tech resulting in new markets for average consumers. And now I'll hand it over to ./ for all the free market backlash.

    4. Re:And my monthy electric bill... by mspohr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      States with higher percentage of renewables (wind and solar) have lower electric costs. Nevada electric prices have been dropping so much that Warren Buffet's owned Nevada Energy had been sabotaging solar by bribing the governor and the state's PUC. Seven of the largest casinos in Las Vegas are threatening to leave NV Energy and rely on much cheaper solar and wind energy. The PUC wants to charge them $127 million to leave.
      Texas now offers free electricity at nights because they have excess wind power.
      Colorado is good to get rid of coal but stupid to not install wind and solar.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    5. Re:And my monthy electric bill... by mspohr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My experience with solar in the mountains of California is this:
      - 4kw system
      - generated $1256 worth of electricity last year (76% of my use)
      - ROI of 7.3 % (I borrowed money at 2.2% to pay for the system so this is a good return)
      - I'll be installing another 2kw this year
      - this year it should give me a better ROI since the power company is raising rates by 7%

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  2. Critical mass by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I wonder when the fossil/nuclear/hydro vs wind/solar ratio will tip us over into regular Brownouts. Wind and solar are not the future, unless you want to have to turn on your less efficient plants every night. Nah, the real future is in nuclear, hydro, and limited fossil fuels (mostly natural gas). Solar will go away after the Federal subsidies end, and wind is more expensive than either alternative anyway.