The Green Dream

[chuckChuck]

Your convoluted example is a pile of cricket shit!

The Forbes stories about Indiana, California on utility scale projects indicate that some renewables in some locations are already much cheaper than coal and gas. California is adding storage which is still cheaper.

Yes we still need backup and baseload from hydro and fossil fuels. How much renewables can we add to each system will depend on many factors.

Saskpower says 50% renewables by 2030. So end the bullshit that renewables can't be a significant part of the grid. You need to ask them what the cost impact is of adding renewables in Sakatchewan or elsewhere is. But if Indiana and California are examples it looks like it can be much lower cost for generation.

Farmers are receiving subsidized rates below residential rates in Saskatchewan even though the grid cost of delivering electricity is much higher to farmers than most residential customers. So farm customers are getting a very large subsidy in the current system. If you are so worried about unfair subsidies, bring that up and see how popular you are.

Grid cost may be rising for a variety of reasons, but suggesting renewables are driving all the increased costs is speculation at best and probably just anti-green power ranting from a climate change denier!

Fossil fuel production of electricity is also subsidized.

[blackpowder]

I'll be damned if, at 54, I'm buying a green banana let alone 5 digit rinky dink with +10 yr payback.
My highest cost month while blowing grain hardly covers total cost of money.
Why buy when you can rent.
In this case, principles and ideals are buffalo chips to me.

[bobofthenorth]

The big problem with so-called "green" energy that nobody talks about is its effect on spot pricing and utility profitability. Economic theory says that a firm will continue to sell product as long as the sale exceeds variable costs. The variable cost of solar or wind is negligible - virtually all of the cost is capital cost. So the spot market for electricity, when the "green" power is being produced, approaches zero. The system collapses without base capacity which comes from conventional sources - nuclear, coal, gas or hydro but there is no incentive to recapitalize those sources in an industry where the spot price routinely approaches zero. The industry is doomed. The only reason we have a stable grid is because the lifespan of the installations is so long but that lifespan is not infinite.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Chuck, if you think that example is convoluted, you should see the convolution Germany goes through with their neighbors trying to balance intermittent with demand. And the costs involved.

[sofa.king]

Ok chuck give me an example of farmers being subsidized.If you cant or won't, stop spreading your bs.

[grassfarmer]

Ok chuck give me an example of farmers being subsidized.If you cant or won't, stop spreading your bs.

He just did:

"Farmers are receiving subsidized rates below residential rates in Saskatchewan even though the grid cost of delivering electricity is much higher to farmers than most residential customers. So farm customers are getting a very large subsidy in the current system."

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Your convoluted example is a pile of cricket shit!


Grid cost may be rising for a variety of reasons, but suggesting renewables are driving all the increased costs is speculation at best and probably just anti-green power ranting from a climate change denier!

In fact, my convoluted example was my attempt to simplify what Germany is doing, almost exactly, into a language that you can understand, since we have established that you don't respond to posts containing technical and economic terms( or inconvenient questions).

You can prove me wrong, and prove that renewables are not driving all of the increased costs by simply providing a real life past or present example of a jurisdiction installing additional renewables, and their retail electricity costs not increasing greater than their neighbors who did not. But when the correlation between renewables and higher costs is perfect, the variety of reasons really comes down to one.

[TSIPP]

Grassey, a quick look at saskpower rates and farms pay about ten dollars a month more for basic monthly charge but pay about two cents less for a kilowatt. But farms generally use more power than the city folk so farms get a cheaper rate.

Bulk purchasing usually gets a better price, pretty common practice in retailer and wholesale pricing.

[macdon02]

Fwiw California imports a third of their electricity requirements. Not self sufficient. They're exporting the pollution and jobs. New regulation was put in place requiring every new build to have solar installed making new home prices at bare minimum $10k more expensive. If i had real money and lived there, I'd be running away to Arizona. Any comparison of Cali to Sk is irrelevant. They are living a dream...

[Guest]

Obviously different economics etc in oz. Don't know nearly as much as chuck on this but renewables displacing fossils big time.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/electricity-prices-across-the-grid-
fall-to-zero-as-renewables-reach-44-share-77635/

Read an article recently about the worlds largest solar project planned for the Northern Territories I think it was.
15000 hectares of solar panels to export power to Singapore.I'm sure af.5 will feel left out and post his usual cat fishing comments