NuScale cancels first-of-a-kind nuclear project as costs surge

[chuckChuck]

Combined cycle is definitely the way to go as they are much more efficient.

Moving from dirty coal to combined cycle gas shows Alberta is committed to reducing emissions to get to net zero by 2050!

Progress!

Now they just have to accept that renewables are also going to play a big role in getting to net zero. Build and run the renewables as much as possible and use gas as a backup.

[shtferbrains]

[QUOTE=chuckChuck;n789885Now they just have to accept that renewables are also going to play a big role in getting to net zero. Build and run the renewables as much as possible and use gas as a backup.[/QUOTE]

Combined Cycle plants achieve low cost by running continuously.
When they are required to stay spinning on standby it significantly increases their COP.
Not cheap in that situation.

The solution seems to be a 2 price system that bids reliable supply in at a much higher price to compensate for the loss of efficiency.

Already works that way in more mature and higher priced markets like California.
The most favorable place in the world for Renewable Energy and running today with solar and wind use topped out at under 30% of yearly supply.

[chuckChuck]

In a free market the lowest priced option should prevail. Which in many cases is new wind and solar.

How you compensate backup options is up to regulators to decide.

And if the private or public sector runs renewables and other sources they can maximize returns based on cost of operation over the long term.

[Hamloc]

In a free market the lowest priced option should prevail. Which in many cases is new wind and solar.

How you compensate backup options is up to regulators to decide.

And if the private or public sector runs renewables and other sources they can maximize returns based on cost of operation over the long term.

Here is the problem with your theory. There is no doubt for an electric grid to be reliable for every megawatt of renewable energy you add there must be an off setting generator added of dispatchable power like hydro or natural gas or nuclear. The more hours in the day that you produce renewable energy the less hours in a day you can produce and sell power from let’s say a natural gas generator. Therefore for that plant to be viable it must sell its electricity at a higher price and because in a year it will sell less electricity it becomes difficult to justify the investment. Therefore the push for renewables increases electricity cost and makes the grid less reliable.

[Hamloc]

In a free market the lowest priced option should prevail. Which in many cases is new wind and solar.

How you compensate backup options is up to regulators to decide.

And if the private or public sector runs renewables and other sources they can maximize returns based on cost of operation over the long term.

One other question Chuck2, would you consider Saskatchewan a free market for electricity? Isn’t SaskPower a crown corporation? Why is a lefty like you preaching about the free market?

[chuckChuck]

No Sask Power is a crown corporation with regulated rates which is currently and in the past produced lower cost electricity than Alberta's deregulated market subject to companies that purposely reduce supplies to increase prices.

What Alberta illustrates is that the free market supports renewables because they add low cost supply which is a good thing if the benefits are passed onto consumers.

Danny Smith is talking about reregulating the Alberta electricity market, another example of big government from "the small government UCP". Oh the irony!

Sask Power is also building renewable capacity but on a much smaller scale.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

No Sask Power... produced lower cost electricity than Alberta's
Sask Power is also building renewable capacity but on a much smaller scale.

It appears that you have found yet another example of solar and wind causing more expensive electricity.

Remember all those times I've asked you to provide an example of lower cost solar and wind, and you have never yet found even one?

[chuckChuck]

Alberta's recent run up in electricity prices, the highest in Canada, was based on utilities witholding supply. Several expert economists have documented this and even the Premier started talking about reregulating because of high prices.

Price regulation is why Saskatchewan's prices are lower. Wind and solar are the lowest cost sources of new generation and increase supply which helps lower prices in Alberta. Ask Blake Shafer at the U of C about all this.

[Hamloc]

No Sask Power is a crown corporation with regulated rates which is currently and in the past produced lower cost electricity than Alberta's deregulated market subject to companies that purposely reduce supplies to increase prices.

What Alberta illustrates is that the free market supports renewables because they add low cost supply which is a good thing if the benefits are passed onto consumers.

Danny Smith is talking about reregulating the Alberta electricity market, another example of big government from "the small government UCP". Oh the irony!

Sask Power is also building renewable capacity but on a much smaller scale.

Chuck2 I think your totally misrepresenting reality. Alberta with roughly 12% of Canada’s population was installing roughly 90% of new solar and wind capacity. If renewables are the cheapest source of new generation why aren’t the other 9 provinces with government owned government regulated electricity generation systems installing all the new solar and wind capacity? Why was it in Alberta? I would argue it is because they can make a better return on their investment. In the other nine provinces government would be footing the bill. But still curious why aren’t provincial government owned and regulated utilities installing more wind and solar?!?!

[shtferbrains]

He's back with his morning proclamation.

Major Windbag