The Green Dream

[Oliver88]

One would think the bird lovers would be all over this to get those propellers band.

If a bird dies near a tailings pond at Fort McMurray there would be an inquiry and CBC would have it on their national broadcast for a week.

If a windmill chops up a few thousand birds and breaks their necks it's okay with the Suzuki Foundation apparently?

[grassfarmer]

If these types of renewal energy sources are truly least cost and more reliable than other forms of energy sources then they will be readily adopted by the masses on their own merit. That is common sense and a natural progression.....

It's already happening in Indiana - see my link above.

[chuckChuck]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2019/07/02/mike-pences-indiana-chooses-renewables-over-gas-as-it-retires-coal-early/?fbclid=IwAR3S9I6fI1EiS-Cmob3PWXcCbvxeynzpHDhy5-pxV-0FAWUdKJIJMNIFjw4#6500778d43b4

In Conservative Indiana, Utility Chooses Renewables Over Gas As It Retires Coal Early
Jeff McMahon

Los Angeles just announced the largest and cheapest solar+storage project in the world, but that's the golden land of dreamers and subsidies. About 1,800 miles to the right, conservative Indiana—with no renewable-portfolio standard—is making similar choices.

Renewables are so cheap, said Mike Hooper, the senior vice president of the Northern Indiana Service Company (NIPSCO), that the utility can close its coal plants early and return $4 billion to its customers over the next 30 years.

"It ends up being a really big number, somewhere in the neighborhood of $4 billion for our customers, and clearly a lot of that comes from the fact that there’s hundreds of millions of dollars in fuel every year from a marginal standpoint that you're not spending, that the customer gets the advantage of through the check they write us every month."

NIPSCO, which delivers power to the northern third of Indiana, issued a request for proposals in 2018 to transform its energy system away from coal. The company had issued a similar RFP in 2016, but the results it got this time were markedly different.

"We kind of made an assumption that as the results came back it would be very much similar to 2016, particularly where we sit in the world, that natural-gas generation would be the most cost-effective option," Hooper said. "And as we ran this RFP and got our results back, we were surprised to see that wind—especially early wind in service in 2020 and 2021—and then solar, on a levelized-cost-of-energy-basis, were significantly less expensive than new gas-fired generation."


Empowered by the low price of renewables, NIPSCO decided to double the number of coal plants it will retire in 2023—four instead of two—and to retire its Michigan City plant ahead of schedule in 2028, getting the utility out of coal in ten years.

NIPSCO could theoretically abandon coal in five years, saving even more money, Hooper added, but it needs time to develop transmission and ensure a reliable transition.

"It gets us out of coal in ten years, and it’s really driven by economics," Hooper said last week in a webinar hosted by Advanced Energy Economy.

"Particularly a state like Indiana, it’s a fairly conservative state, but also Indiana is a state that has a reputation for being open for business and letting economics do a lot of the decision making. You’re looking at a state that has no renewable portfolio standard, but actually has a fairly high penetration of renewables—particularly wind and solar is increasing—because of the economics of it, and letting that determine the outcome versus it being heavily driven by policy or other activities."

Read More: New Solar + Battery Price Crushes Fossil Fuels, Buries Nuclear

Correction: This story originally stated that NIPSCO was closing 12 coal units in Michigan City. It is closing one, which it refers to as Unit 12.

[chuckChuck]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2019/07/01/new-solar--battery-price-crushes-fossil-fuels-buries-nuclear/#1a587a365971

New Solar + Battery Price Crushes Fossil Fuels, Buries Nuclear
Jeff McMahon

BARREN RIDGE, CA - APRIL 4: The new project will join the current large Barren Ridge solar panel array in Kern County, California. (Photo by George Rose/Getty Images)Getty Images

Los Angeles Power and Water officials have struck a deal on the largest and cheapest solar + battery-storage project in the world, at prices that leave fossil fuels in the dust and may relegate nuclear power to the dustbin.

Later this month the LA Board of Water and Power Commissioners is expected to approve a 25-year contract that will serve 7 percent of the city's electricity demand at 1.997¢/kwh for solar energy and 1.3¢ for power from batteries.

"This is the lowest solar-photovoltaic price in the United States," said James Barner, the agency's manager for strategic initiatives, "and it is the largest and lowest-cost solar and high-capacity battery-storage project in the U.S. and we believe in the world today. So this is, I believe, truly revolutionary in the industry."

It's half the estimated cost of power from a new natural gas plant.

.............

[blackpowder]

I think Jazz should be fined for starting this thread.

[jazz]

I think Jazz should be fined for starting this thread.

Chuck has no fn idea what he is talking about.

To provide solar power for a single server farm for facebook so we can post sht would take almost 5000 ac of land.

You would think an actual farmer would be concerned about more land being used up. A natural gas generation plant would take up about a city block. Renewables will NEVER EVER be able to handle our electric load. They have to be backed up by FF because they are unreliable. So there is actually another cost that is left out of the calculation conveniently.

[blackpowder]

We all know he's full of it.
It was a light jab for waking him up.
There is no rebuttal that will change a thing.

[mustardman]

Farmers that don’t believe in Solar Power ...TOO Funny !!

What do grow? Mushrooms??

[Braveheart]

On news.rebate for farmers to install.
Only 8 to 10 yrs to recoup costs..

And, around here, the Assessment branch reassesses your property if you install solar and the resulting higher taxes negate any benefit. In the end you're negative.

[grassfarmer]

Most?? care to back that up with some statistical evidence?

Bump. I'm still waiting Jazz.