China Auto Exports

[Hamloc]

Solar and wind LCOE (
Levelized Cost of Electricity) are generally low and continue to fall, with onshore wind often being the cheapest new power source, followed closely by utility-scale solar, with global averages in 2024-2025 often below $50/MWh for both, though costs vary by location, technology (onshore/offshore), and project specifics. Renewables now often undercut new fossil fuels significantly, driven by tech improvements, economies of scale, and policy, but factors like storage, grid integration, and financing costs influence overall competitiveness.


Key LCOE Figures

• Onshore Wind: Around $33-$34/MWh (USD 0.033-0.034/kWh).
• Solar PV (Utility-Scale): Around $44/MWh (USD 0.044/kWh).

Chuck2, that is for intermittent power, not for electricity available 24 hours a day 365 days a year.
I looked at a study put out by a Climate think tank called Ember. Talking about how solar panels and batteries can produce 24 hour a day electricity 365 days a year in sunny places like Las Vegas 97% of the time. They said to produce 1 kwh of electricity you would install 5 kwh of panels and 17 kwh of battery storage. Keep in mind that Las Vegas’s photovoltaic production potential is over 30% better than as an example southern Alberta. They were claiming a cost of production of $104 USD per megawatt. This seems quite optimistic. Look at the Travers solar field in Lomond. 465 mwh of installed panels. Under this scenario it would produce 93 mwh and would require the addition of 1581 mwh of battery storage, which would be the biggest electricity storage facility in Canada if built. And due to our lower photovoltaic production potential compared to Las Vegas it would only produce 93 mwh 24 hours a day 80% of the time.

[chuckChuck]

Canada currently has over 80% of our electricity from hydro and nuclear. Mostly hydro. Both are non emitting sources.

Natural gas can backup both solar and wind.

You can install a lot more renewables that are backed up by batteries, gas, hydro.

Its not one or the other its all of the above.

Solar and wind are the lowest cost new source of electricity in most of the world.

[shtferbrains]

Canada currently has over 80% of our electricity from hydro and nuclear. Mostly hydro. Both are non emitting sources.

Natural gas can backup both solar and wind.

You can install a lot more renewables that are backed up by batteries, gas, hydro.

Its not one or the other its all of the above.

Solar and wind are the lowest cost new source of electricity in most of the world.

Everything you say here Chuck has some truth.
Except the most of the world part.
If you adjusted that to say in ideal situations you would be more credible.

You use the fact Canada as a country has big advantages in hydro and Nuclear.
But that is not an advantage in all regions.
If you can set up a NGCC right beside a gas well like the had in Medicine Hat, that's an advantage few in the world have.
They also have the largest NH3 plant in Canada.
Was originally built with part ownership by the prairie pools and a US Coop, CF Industries.

"CF Industries executives have noted that because of Alberta's gas resources, their production costs are sometimes among the lowest in the world, occasionally describing the gas as effectively "free" in terms of its global competitive margin."

That's a regional advantage, similar to solar in California or Texas.

[chuckChuck]

Gas will continue to play an important role for a long time. But that doesn't mean you can't install more renewables to reduce gas consumption and emissions.

North Dakota and Texas both have lots of gas and more renewables? Why? Because renewables are lower cost.

[Hamloc]

Gas will continue to play an important role for a long time. But that doesn't mean you can't install more renewables to reduce gas consumption and emissions.

North Dakota and Texas both have lots of gas and more renewables? Why? Because renewables are lower cost.

“Because renewables are lower cost.”
But are they really? Instead of running power lines to one electrical generator, you have to run power lines to a solar field, a field of windmills and to a natural gas plant all to produce the same megawatt to satisfy demand. As I posted under “Sask Power Rates”, I have 2 separate power billing accounts, under my main one in November I used over 2300 kwh paying 15.12 cents a kwh all in of which 55% was transmission and distribution, on the second I used just over 940 kwh paying 24.33 cents a kwh all in of which 60% was transmission and distribution. This requiring 3 sources of generation to do the job of one does have additional costs, that simple.

[chuckChuck]

If you have on farm or roof top solar you don't need any more power lines Hamloc.

There are additional costs to multiple generation sources. But most of the distribution system costs you refer to are to serve every customer across your province.

But at least you admitted you paid 24.33 cents per kwh on some of your electricity.

That's much higher than Saskatchewan and most of Canada.

Why 2 prices?

[Hamloc]

If you have on farm or roof top solar you don't need any more power lines Hamloc.

There are additional costs to multiple generation sources. But most of the distribution system costs you refer to are to serve every customer across your province.

But at least you admitted you paid 24.33 cents per kwh on some of your electricity.

That's much higher than Saskatchewan and most of Canada.

Why 2 prices?

The reason for two prices the lower priced power I locked in the contract price on generation a year earlier at 3 cents a kwh less. The second site wasn’t my responsibility until a couple years ago. The generation contracts are higher than they used to be. Why I don’t know. 2 things have changed in that time, more solar and wind and a higher industrial carbon tax. Must be the reason.

As for higher transportation and distribution on the second site. Transmission and distribution is based on your transformer size and power consumption. There is a base level cost which then goes up as consumption increases but not as quickly. So more consumption actually lowers transmission and distribution per kWh.

[chuckChuck]

"The reason for two prices the lower priced power I locked in the contract price on generation a year earlier at 3 cents a kwh less. The second site wasn’t my responsibility until a couple years ago."

The generation contracts are higher than they used to be.

"Why I don’t know."

You should have stopped there Hamloc because you admitted you don't know!

Well at least you admitted you pay more than regulated prices under Sask Powers and Moe's socialist Saskatchewan!

[Hamloc]

"The reason for two prices the lower priced power I locked in the contract price on generation a year earlier at 3 cents a kwh less. The second site wasn’t my responsibility until a couple years ago."

The generation contracts are higher than they used to be.

"Why I don’t know."

You should have stopped there Hamloc because you admitted you don't know!

Well at least you admitted you pay more than regulated prices under Sask Powers and Moe's socialist Saskatchewan!

Chuck2, I see 24% of your electricity generation capacity in Saskatchewan is coal fired. Forced early closure by Rachel Notley(NDP) of our coal fired generation stations in Alberta certainly has contributed to our higher cost of electricity.

But certainly surprising that you brag up your government owned and run coal fired electricity generation. Good on you.

[chuckChuck]

I posted long ago the problem with Alberta's high priced largely deregulated electricity market and it was economic withholding.

It got so bad even Danny Smith and the UCP have made changes to the regulations to stop companies from screwing customers!

Blake Shaffer, a University of Calgary economist who specializes in electricity markets, says the price surge since 2020 has largely come due to a lack of competition in the generating market.

Because a small number of companies control a large amount of the generating capacity, they are able to exert their market power through a practice known as economic withholding ([url]https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-electricity-economic-withholding-1.6946797[/url]), which effectively pushes up the wholesale price of electricity.

Shaffer says companies were more able to exert their market power ([url]https://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/EEP_Power_Prices_april.pdf[/url]) after Alberta's 20-year power purchasing agreements — which had been introduced in the 1990s as a way to counter the lack of competition at that time

---

"Economic withholding in Alberta's deregulated power market allows big generators to hold back supply, creating artificial scarcity and higher wholesale prices, a practice the government is addressing with new rules like Market Power Mitigation (SCDs) to curb extreme price spikes and protect consumers, though debates continue about market impact and investment incentives. These changes aim to balance generator profitability with affordability, leading to lower pool prices in 2024 compared to 2023, but the market remains volatile and under review.


What is Economic Withholding?

• Definition: A practice where large electricity producers offer less power to the grid than they have available, strategically holding back supply to drive up wholesale (pool) prices.
• Goal: To increase profits, as generators sell a smaller quantity at a much higher price.

Why it Matters in Alberta

• High Prices: This practice contributed to record-high wholesale prices in recent years, impacting consumer bills.
• Market Power: It's a way for dominant players to exercise market power in the deregulated system, benefiting corporations while costing consumers.