• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Frogs

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Blaithin, you are so pragmatic and analytical. Two people living together for economic reasons or to care for each other is a good idea and why anyone would question it or assume anything is beyond me. Like the Beetles Say - “Come on people, just love each other.”

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by TSIPP View Post
      Sask power does know what the costs are for producing electricity but they don’t have credible evidence that solar and wind is cheaper, when they say a new solar facility will out last a new natural gas power station they have lost all credibility.
      So now you say Sask Power knows the costs for producing electricity, but they don't know what the lifetime of their generation sources are? Huh?

      How do you calculate the lifetime costs if you don't know the lifespan?

      Keep changing your lame, ineffective and contradictory argument Tsipper.

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post

        So now you say Sask Power knows the costs for producing electricity, but they don't know what the lifetime of their generation sources are? Huh?

        How do you calculate the lifetime costs if you don't know the lifespan?

        Keep changing your lame, ineffective and contradictory argument Tsipper.
        As do you when windmills are pulling up in landfills at 1/2 their lifespan

        Comment


          #34
          Correct me if I’m wrong but is there even a wind farm currently capable of producing its “maximum production”? All the ones I live near typically run around 1/2-3/4 of what their production is lauded to be.

          So given a lower production, due to inefficiencies, a windmill would have to have a lifespan up to 2 times longer than its presumed life to even produce what the books were balanced for.

          It’s hard to know what the cost of the renewable power is when you add up construction fees and upkeep fees and then the production is averaging 1/2 expected. Technology has changed in the last 15 years, or maybe now their math is just using the worst results possible so they’re covering their ass.

          How do you calculate a lifetime production before something is functioning?

          You run theoretical equations and pick the one that sounds the best so people who read it fall for the fake numbers and argue against the reality ones when they show up.

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by Blaithin View Post
            Correct me if I’m wrong but is there even a wind farm currently capable of producing its “maximum production”? All the ones I live near typically run around 1/2-3/4 of what their production is lauded to be.

            So given a lower production, due to inefficiencies, a windmill would have to have a lifespan up to 2 times longer than its presumed life to even produce what the books were balanced for.

            It’s hard to know what the cost of the renewable power is when you add up construction fees and upkeep fees and then the production is averaging 1/2 expected. Technology has changed in the last 15 years, or maybe now their math is just using the worst results possible so they’re covering their ass.

            How do you calculate a lifetime production before something is functioning?

            You run theoretical equations and pick the one that sounds the best so people who read it fall for the fake numbers and argue against the reality ones when they show up.
            You have just described chucks entire argument.
            You missed the part about ignoring any real world evidence which clearly contradicts the fantasy models. Then calling anyone who offers the real world evidence a flat Earther.

            Comment


              #36
              Wind is about 40% of capacity rating depending on location. Solar in the US is around 25% in Southern California but will be below 20% in much of Southern Canada.

              Coal and gas plants are only about 85% of their capacity rating because they have to shut down for maintenance over their life time.

              So you can calculate how much electricity will be produced and how much the costs are over their lifetime.

              Sask Power has done it and so does Lazard, its called the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE)

              And Sask Power has said wind and solar are the lowest cost generation sources. Based on their actual costs and production.

              From Sask Power:
              "Don’t Wind And Solar Projects Have Short Lifespans?

              Reality: The average lifespan of newer wind turbines is more than 30 years. For a solar facility, it’s also about 25 to 30 years. With good maintenance, that can be even longer!

              Background: For a comparison, the average lifespan for a natural gas power station is also 25 to 30 years.

              Aren’t They More Expensive?
              Reality: When it comes to cost over their entire lifespan, the average cost of large-scale solar and wind generation is a lot less than other power sources."

              ?
              Last edited by chuckChuck; Sep 17, 2024, 07:31.

              Comment


                #37
                If you repeat it often enough, if you say it loud enough... Chuck will believe it is true.

                Comment


                  #38
                  So A5 your only lame, often repeated argument is that Sask Power is wrong and doesn't know their cost of electricity from their generation sources? LOL

                  And you keep coming up empty handed when asked to prove Sask Power wrong!

                  Get your tail between your legs and keep running A5!


                  Last edited by chuckChuck; Sep 17, 2024, 07:47.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Capacity rating? The renewables don’t come close to capacity rating.

                    Comment


                      #40
                      You can prove that Sask powers speculative projections are potentially true by finding a region where the addition of wind and solar didn't result in much more expensive electricity to the consumers.
                      You tried Texas, but as we now know, it made it 20% more expensive for their consumers compared to their next door neighbors who stuck with fossil fuels.

                      Comment

                      • Reply to this Thread
                      • Return to Topic List
                      Working...