Calling Armchair Solar Experts

[bgmb]

Capital cost to construct per KWH?

% of hours out of the year Panels will produce KWHs


Cut the bullshit this should be simple math.

Gas can currently generate at 5-7 cents per KWH

[oneoff]

By "gas" do you mean "natural gas"?

[Hamloc]

Did some armchair googling, price on solar panels range from .84 cents to 1.09$ a watt. Also found information that solar panels make up 35% of the cost of a commercial ground mount installation. So for simple math using a 10 MW installation at .85 cents a watt I came up with a total cost of 24 million. Using the best information I can find and it seems to agree with Chuck2 previous info. This array should produce 1400000 kwh per month on average in southern Saskatchewan. Now if we amortize 24 million over 25 years at 4% interest our total cost to finance is 37872000 dollars or 126240 a month. The 1.4 million kwh at 11 cents a kwh earns 154000 dollars a month for a profit of 27760 per month, or 333120 dollars per year, a return of 1.39% on investment. Now there is no maintenance or repair in this scenario and one would assume that the builder would build in inflation into the price payed for electricity. At the 5-7 cents a kwh obviously this project wouldn't fly. I have looked at what Ontario pays for solar power in 2016 for new projects if memory serves me for a project of this size they pay 20 cents a kilowatt. If I could get a 25 year contract at 20 cents a kwh the yearly profit would rise to 1845120 dollars or a 7.7% roi, now it is a reasonable moneymaker.

[oneoff]

SaskPower was selected to build and operate a new 350 megawatt combined cycle natural gas power generation facility in Swift Current with an October 2019 in-service date.

Crown Investments Corporation (CIC) led an open, transparent and fair evaluation process to determine best value for ratepayers. This process was monitored by an external fairness monitor.

“As Minister, I would like to thank CIC for leading the evaluation process, as well as the Independent Power Producers for submitting very competitive proposals,” Crown Investments Minister Don McMorris said. “This project will benefit Saskatchewan people with reliable power for years to come.”

The evaluation process examined Independent Power Producer (IPP) proposals, and compared the highest ranked IPP against the SaskPower proposal. A fairness monitor was engaged to oversee the process and ensure evaluation criteria were followed.

“SaskPower is pleased to have been selected to build and operate a new natural gas-fired power station in Swift Current,” SaskPower President Mike Marsh said. “This new plant will provide reliable, baseload power to the Saskatchewan grid and support the continued integration of additional renewables.”

A detailed value for money report will be prepared and publicly released within the next 120 days.


Maybe this is the way it works for big projects like the 10 Mw solar PV.. The recent Swift Current generating station award is handled by the Crown Investment Corp who choose from competitive bids from Independent Power Producers with Sask Power free to enter the contest. In Swift Current case above...Sask Power won and in 120 days from awarding; a detailed money report is made available to the public.. That will answer all your questions once the "Estevan" solar Pv is awarded.

[oneoff]

Under flare gas program (100Kw to 1 MW) payment is about 51.xx dollars /Mwh or 5.1 cents a Kwh as original contributor said in opening question.

[ajl]

Wholesale power in Alberta before the closure of our coal fired generating stations is now around 0.02 per Kwh. There is no solar project anywhere on the planet that can generate for that. Go coal go.

[bgmb]

By "gas" do you mean "natural gas"?

Yes I do

[bgmb]

Wholesale power in Alberta before the closure of our coal fired generating stations is now around 0.02 per Kwh. There is no solar project anywhere on the planet that can generate for that. Go coal go.

Lol yeah natural gas is actually the expensive green energy. Solar is ****ing fairy dust case closed. Maybe power your cabin 200 miles from the electrical grid with it.

[oneoff]

I see the local Coop has a shiny poster that insinuates that the propane pump has "green" fuel.

Nice to see that some fossil fuels are actually advertised as being "green" ...just as the poster on the wall clearly says.

Natural gas is equally as "green" so why not call it for what it really is. They make "green" dye and it should be extremely easy to have "green" marked diesel at least and a little change to "clear" gas regulations would provide "green" gasoline as well.

Probably could enforce a copyright on Coop "green" propane advertising so why not extend it to their other fossil fuel products.

[chuckChuck]

http://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_generation.pdf
USA Average Levilized cots of energy (LCOE) for plants coming on stream in 2022 in USA in 2015 $/Mwh. No subsidies included.

Coal with CCS - $139.5
Natural Gas Conventional Combined cycle - $58.1
Natural Gas Advanced Combined cycle -$57.2
Natural Gas CC with CCS -$84.8
Natural Gas Conventional Combustion Turbine - $110.8
Natural Gas Advanced Combustion Turbine - $94.7

Advanced Nuclear - $102.8
Geothermal -$45
Biomass -$96.1

Wind - $64.5
Wind Offshore - $158.1
Solar PV - $84.7
Solar Thermal -$235.9
Hydroelectric -$67.8
Reply With Quote
Reply With Quote

[chuckChuck]

You can take any of the LCOE numbers per Mwh and divide by 1000 and you will get the price in kwh.

Oneoff please check my math!! LOL

That makes the cost of generating solar pv at .0847 (8.47 cents) per kwh and coal with CCS at .1395 (13.95 cents) per kwh.

This is for new projects coming on stream in 2022 in the USA and will be an average. Individual projects will have their own numbers and circumstances.

Interestingly wind is .0645 per kwh.

And we still need natural gas, coal, hydro for base load. I am not forgetting this. But depending on winds ability to fill the daytime demand it makes sense to see why Saskpower is making a big commitment to wind.

[jcv]

In looking at the link you list there is alot of assumptions. Most notably the tax credits to the wind and solar pv which are listed at the bottom of the table.

"Changes in cost from 2022 to 2040 reflect a number of different factors, sometimes working in different
directions. Technology improvement tends to reduce LCOE through lower capital costs or improved
performance (as measured by heat rate for fossil-fired plants or capacity factor for renewable plants).
For fossil-fired plants, changing fuel prices also factor into the change in LCOE. For renewable resources
such as wind, hydro, or geothermal, the availability of high quality resources may also be a factor. As
the best, least-cost resources are exploited, development will be forced into less favorable areas,
potentially resulting in higher development costs, higher costs to access transmission, or access to
lower-performing resources. Changes in the value of generation are a function of load growth.
However, renewables such as wind and solar that may show strong daily or seasonal generation
patterns may see significant reductions in the value of their generation as these specific generation "

There is a lot more in this paper than the figures you listed.

[burnt]

In looking at the link you list there is alot of assumptions. Most notably the tax credits to the wind and solar pv which are listed at the bottom of the table.

"Changes in cost from 2022 to 2040 reflect a number of different factors, sometimes working in different
directions. Technology improvement tends to reduce LCOE through lower capital costs or improved
performance (as measured by heat rate for fossil-fired plants or capacity factor for renewable plants).
For fossil-fired plants, changing fuel prices also factor into the change in LCOE. For renewable resources
such as wind, hydro, or geothermal, the availability of high quality resources may also be a factor. As
the best, least-cost resources are exploited, development will be forced into less favorable areas,
potentially resulting in higher development costs, higher costs to access transmission, or access to
lower-performing resources. Changes in the value of generation are a function of load growth.
However, renewables such as wind and solar that may show strong daily or seasonal generation
patterns may see significant reductions in the value of their generation as these specific generation "

There is a lot more in this paper than the figures you listed.

WHAT? Are you suggesting that transparent and "levelized costs" only apply to the fossil fuel sources of energy?

Ahahaha!! Whodda thought?

[chuckChuck]

JCV you are right there is a lot more to LCOE analysis. It is only a tool to compare costs and this LCOE is averaged over the USA and is only for new and not existing.

Each project in each province or state will have its own unique numbers so LCOE is only a guideline on new.

What we really need is actual costs from existing and added capacity that Saskpower has or is proposing. Including Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

I am sure there are several experts or a full department at Saskpower whose job it is too figure this all out.

It is an interesting way to pass the long winter with some discussion on this topic, but realistically we are all amateurs at this working without much knowledge or experience.

I am interested in grid tied solar systems for Saskatchewan so this helps some to understand the pros and the cons.

[oneoff]

Don't sell yourself or anyone short. I've never known any professor or person entitled to put some extra alphabetic characters behind their names that didn't pull on their pants one leg at a time.