How much can renewable energy save us?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wind And Solar Are Our Cheapest Electricity Sources — Now What Do We Do?
By Mike O’Boyle

For years, debates about how to reduce carbon emissions from electricity generation were framed as trade-offs: What is the cost premium we must pay for generating zero-carbon electricity compared to fossil fuels, and how can we minimize those costs?

Fortunately, the holidays came early this year for renewable energy in investment company Lazard’s annual report on the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for different electricity-generating technologies — renewables are now the cheapest available sources of electricity. This flips the question of clean versus cost on its head, and in 2017, we’ll be asking how much can we save by accelerating the renewable energy transition?

The story from Lazard’s 10th annual report is clear. Rapid technology cost reductions mean wind and solar are now the cheapest form of generation in many places around the country, without counting federal subsidies like tax credits.

What is levelized cost of energy?
Lazard uses the LCOE analysis to identify how much each unit of electricity (measured in megawatt-hours, or MWh) costs to generate over the lifetime of any power plant. LCOE represents every cost component — capital expenditure to build, operations & maintenance, and fuel costs to run — spread out over the total megawatt-hours generated during the power plant’s lifetime.

Because different plants have different operating characteristics and cost components, LCOE allows us to fairly compare different technologies. Think of it as finally being able to evenly compare apples to oranges.

How wind and solar are winning the day
According to Lazard, wind costs have fallen 66 percent since 2009, from $140/MWh to $47/MWh.

Large-scale solar’s cost declines have been even more dramatic, falling 85 percent since 2009 from more than $350/MWh to $55/MWh.

Compare this with the cheapest form of conventional fuel-fired generation today — natural gas-fired combined cycle power plants whose LCOE averages $63/MWh.

Wind And Solar Are Our Cheapest Electricity Sources — Now What Do We Do? – America’s Power Plan

Coal is dead. Natural gas will follow in a couple of decades. Wind and solar will continue to decline in price, and grid scale batteries will make them 24/7, and create a distributed grid far more robust than our present grid.

Cheap energy? Tax the shit out of it!!!

Gotta pay back all the wasted subsidies Obama spent.

we don't mind indulging the right wing fantasy of lower taxes for sustainable energy.

Cutting corporate taxes will only help "green" energy if it's profitable.
Cutting subsidies and mandates means it's mostly unprofitable.

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

what about tasking academia with finding Perfect Knowledge of sustainable energies; and simply providing that knowledge to the private sector?

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

Patents aren't welfare, obviously.

 

[danielpalos]

Wind And Solar Are Our Cheapest Electricity Sources — Now What Do We Do?
By Mike O’Boyle

For years, debates about how to reduce carbon emissions from electricity generation were framed as trade-offs: What is the cost premium we must pay for generating zero-carbon electricity compared to fossil fuels, and how can we minimize those costs?

Fortunately, the holidays came early this year for renewable energy in investment company Lazard’s annual report on the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for different electricity-generating technologies — renewables are now the cheapest available sources of electricity. This flips the question of clean versus cost on its head, and in 2017, we’ll be asking how much can we save by accelerating the renewable energy transition?

The story from Lazard’s 10th annual report is clear. Rapid technology cost reductions mean wind and solar are now the cheapest form of generation in many places around the country, without counting federal subsidies like tax credits.

What is levelized cost of energy?
Lazard uses the LCOE analysis to identify how much each unit of electricity (measured in megawatt-hours, or MWh) costs to generate over the lifetime of any power plant. LCOE represents every cost component — capital expenditure to build, operations & maintenance, and fuel costs to run — spread out over the total megawatt-hours generated during the power plant’s lifetime.

Because different plants have different operating characteristics and cost components, LCOE allows us to fairly compare different technologies. Think of it as finally being able to evenly compare apples to oranges.

How wind and solar are winning the day
According to Lazard, wind costs have fallen 66 percent since 2009, from $140/MWh to $47/MWh.

Large-scale solar’s cost declines have been even more dramatic, falling 85 percent since 2009 from more than $350/MWh to $55/MWh.

Compare this with the cheapest form of conventional fuel-fired generation today — natural gas-fired combined cycle power plants whose LCOE averages $63/MWh.

Wind And Solar Are Our Cheapest Electricity Sources — Now What Do We Do? – America’s Power Plan

Coal is dead. Natural gas will follow in a couple of decades. Wind and solar will continue to decline in price, and grid scale batteries will make them 24/7, and create a distributed grid far more robust than our present grid.

Cheap energy? Tax the shit out of it!!!

Gotta pay back all the wasted subsidies Obama spent.

we don't mind indulging the right wing fantasy of lower taxes for sustainable energy.

Cutting corporate taxes will only help "green" energy if it's profitable.
Cutting subsidies and mandates means it's mostly unprofitable.

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

what about tasking academia with finding Perfect Knowledge of sustainable energies; and simply providing that knowledge to the private sector?

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

Patents aren't welfare, obviously.

Yes, it is a form of subsidy; you would call it welfare if it were for the poor.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Cheap energy? Tax the shit out of it!!!

Gotta pay back all the wasted subsidies Obama spent.

we don't mind indulging the right wing fantasy of lower taxes for sustainable energy.

Cutting corporate taxes will only help "green" energy if it's profitable.
Cutting subsidies and mandates means it's mostly unprofitable.

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

what about tasking academia with finding Perfect Knowledge of sustainable energies; and simply providing that knowledge to the private sector?

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

Patents aren't welfare, obviously.

Yes, it is a form of subsidy; you would call it welfare if it were for the poor.

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Nope. Obviously.

 

[danielpalos]

we don't mind indulging the right wing fantasy of lower taxes for sustainable energy.

Cutting corporate taxes will only help "green" energy if it's profitable.
Cutting subsidies and mandates means it's mostly unprofitable.

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

what about tasking academia with finding Perfect Knowledge of sustainable energies; and simply providing that knowledge to the private sector?

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

Patents aren't welfare, obviously.

Yes, it is a form of subsidy; you would call it welfare if it were for the poor.

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Nope. Obviously.

only in fantastical, right wing, special pleading.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

You subsidize what you want more of.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Cutting corporate taxes will only help "green" energy if it's profitable.
Cutting subsidies and mandates means it's mostly unprofitable.

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

what about tasking academia with finding Perfect Knowledge of sustainable energies; and simply providing that knowledge to the private sector?

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

Patents aren't welfare, obviously.

Yes, it is a form of subsidy; you would call it welfare if it were for the poor.

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Nope. Obviously.

only in fantastical, right wing, special pleading.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

You subsidize what you want more of.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

Yup. We want more progress.

You subsidize what you want more of.

Like your idea to pay everyone unemployment benefits? Yeah, that would be stupid.

 

[danielpalos]

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

what about tasking academia with finding Perfect Knowledge of sustainable energies; and simply providing that knowledge to the private sector?

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

Patents aren't welfare, obviously.

Yes, it is a form of subsidy; you would call it welfare if it were for the poor.

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Nope. Obviously.

only in fantastical, right wing, special pleading.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

You subsidize what you want more of.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

Yup. We want more progress.

You subsidize what you want more of.

Like your idea to pay everyone unemployment benefits? Yeah, that would be stupid.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation if they can earn a market friendly wage. only fools and horses, should have to work in our fine, First World economy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

are you claiming our patent laws are enough welfare for capitalists?

Patents aren't welfare, obviously.

Yes, it is a form of subsidy; you would call it welfare if it were for the poor.

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Nope. Obviously.

only in fantastical, right wing, special pleading.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

You subsidize what you want more of.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

Yup. We want more progress.

You subsidize what you want more of.

Like your idea to pay everyone unemployment benefits? Yeah, that would be stupid.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation if they can earn a market friendly wage. only fools and horses, should have to work in our fine, First World economy.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation

If you subsidize unemployment, you'll get more of it.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it is a form of subsidy; you would call it welfare if it were for the poor.

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Nope. Obviously.

only in fantastical, right wing, special pleading.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

You subsidize what you want more of.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

Yup. We want more progress.

You subsidize what you want more of.

Like your idea to pay everyone unemployment benefits? Yeah, that would be stupid.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation if they can earn a market friendly wage. only fools and horses, should have to work in our fine, First World economy.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation

If you subsidize unemployment, you'll get more of it.

your point? this is economics.

we want more capital to circulate more consistently under our form of capitalism, even if it takes socialism to bailout capitalism, like usual.

no fishing or work ethic required. however, we should make fun of the poor for staying and complaining about being poor, on an at-will basis.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Nope. Obviously.

only in fantastical, right wing, special pleading.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

You subsidize what you want more of.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

Yup. We want more progress.

You subsidize what you want more of.

Like your idea to pay everyone unemployment benefits? Yeah, that would be stupid.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation if they can earn a market friendly wage. only fools and horses, should have to work in our fine, First World economy.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation

If you subsidize unemployment, you'll get more of it.

your point? this is economics.

we want more capital to circulate more consistently under our form of capitalism, even if it takes socialism to bailout capitalism, like usual.

no fishing or work ethic required. however, we should make fun of the poor for staying and complaining about being poor, on an at-will basis.

your point? this is economics.

Subsidies was your point.

we want more capital to circulate more consistently under our form of capitalism

No we don't. Handing cash to slackers for not working, just because they decided to not work, is not helpful.

even if it takes socialism to bailout capitalism, like usual.

I love how socialism bailed out capitalism in Venezuela.

we should make fun of the poor for staying and complaining about being poor, on an at-will basis.

No, but I'll just continue to make fun of ignorant liberals and their ignorant ideas.

 

[danielpalos]

only in fantastical, right wing, special pleading.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

You subsidize what you want more of.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

Yup. We want more progress.

You subsidize what you want more of.

Like your idea to pay everyone unemployment benefits? Yeah, that would be stupid.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation if they can earn a market friendly wage. only fools and horses, should have to work in our fine, First World economy.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation

If you subsidize unemployment, you'll get more of it.

your point? this is economics.

we want more capital to circulate more consistently under our form of capitalism, even if it takes socialism to bailout capitalism, like usual.

no fishing or work ethic required. however, we should make fun of the poor for staying and complaining about being poor, on an at-will basis.

your point? this is economics.

Subsidies was your point.

we want more capital to circulate more consistently under our form of capitalism

No we don't. Handing cash to slackers for not working, just because they decided to not work, is not helpful.

even if it takes socialism to bailout capitalism, like usual.

I love how socialism bailed out capitalism in Venezuela.

we should make fun of the poor for staying and complaining about being poor, on an at-will basis.

No, but I'll just continue to make fun of ignorant liberals and their ignorant ideas.

a subsidy is an economic concept.

Yes, we do. full employment of (capital) resources should be a benchmark Standard, not any form of moral of "badwill toward men".

lousy management. the US has the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World; our rich can get bailed out with means tested corporate welfare and still keep their multimillion dollar bonuses and the poor can still have steak and lobster on their EBT cards.

is it any wonder, no one takes the fantastical and morally subjective, right wing seriously about economics.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

Yup. We want more progress.

You subsidize what you want more of.

Like your idea to pay everyone unemployment benefits? Yeah, that would be stupid.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation if they can earn a market friendly wage. only fools and horses, should have to work in our fine, First World economy.

everyone doesn't want unemployment compensation

If you subsidize unemployment, you'll get more of it.

your point? this is economics.

we want more capital to circulate more consistently under our form of capitalism, even if it takes socialism to bailout capitalism, like usual.

no fishing or work ethic required. however, we should make fun of the poor for staying and complaining about being poor, on an at-will basis.

your point? this is economics.

Subsidies was your point.

we want more capital to circulate more consistently under our form of capitalism

No we don't. Handing cash to slackers for not working, just because they decided to not work, is not helpful.

even if it takes socialism to bailout capitalism, like usual.

I love how socialism bailed out capitalism in Venezuela.

we should make fun of the poor for staying and complaining about being poor, on an at-will basis.

No, but I'll just continue to make fun of ignorant liberals and their ignorant ideas.

a subsidy is an economic concept.

Yes, we do. full employment of (capital) resources should be a benchmark Standard, not any form of moral of "badwill toward men".

lousy management. the US has the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World; our rich can get bailed out with means tested corporate welfare and still keep their multimillion dollar bonuses and the poor can still have steak and lobster on their EBT cards.

is it any wonder, no one takes the fantastical and morally subjective, right wing seriously about economics.

a subsidy is an economic concept.

A patent is not a subsidy, handing unemployment checks to people who quit, is a subsidy for quitting.

full employment of (capital) resources should be a benchmark Standard

Employing resources toward increased production is good.
Employing resources toward unproductive slackers is bad.

lousy management.

Socialism is lousy economics.

 

[danielpalos]

both are a form of subsidy. our Founding Fathers even explained the rationale for that subsidy.

capital has to circulate, not your personal and subjective, value of morals.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value. thus, no real work ethic required. it is merely a convenience, for the sake of taxation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

both are a form of subsidy. our Founding Fathers even explained the rationale for that subsidy.

capital has to circulate, not your personal and subjective, value of morals.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value. thus, no real work ethic required. it is merely a convenience, for the sake of taxation.

both are a form of subsidy

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

How does a patent equal government money handed to the patent holder?
How does a patent keep the price of a commodity or service low or competitive?

capital has to circulate

If you want to have capital that you can circulate, you should earn it.

not your personal and subjective, value of morals

I'm not against idiotically subsidizing unemployment because it's immoral,
I'm against it because it's bad economics.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value.

OMG. You're a moron.

 

[danielpalos]

both are a form of subsidy. our Founding Fathers even explained the rationale for that subsidy.

capital has to circulate, not your personal and subjective, value of morals.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value. thus, no real work ethic required. it is merely a convenience, for the sake of taxation.

both are a form of subsidy

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

How does a patent equal government money handed to the patent holder?
How does a patent keep the price of a commodity or service low or competitive?

capital has to circulate

If you want to have capital that you can circulate, you should earn it.

not your personal and subjective, value of morals

I'm not against idiotically subsidizing unemployment because it's immoral,
I'm against it because it's bad economics.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value.

OMG. You're a moron.

The socialism of the law.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

patents may or may not be cost competitive; but, a legal monopoly ensures capital can be generated.

the subjective value of morals has no bearing on the science of economics. full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about, since we can never compete with merely, cheap labor.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles. how is that bad for any private sector?

fiat money can be printed at an official Mint, almost as if by magic. its use, is as a medium of exchange.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

both are a form of subsidy. our Founding Fathers even explained the rationale for that subsidy.

capital has to circulate, not your personal and subjective, value of morals.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value. thus, no real work ethic required. it is merely a convenience, for the sake of taxation.

both are a form of subsidy

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

How does a patent equal government money handed to the patent holder?
How does a patent keep the price of a commodity or service low or competitive?

capital has to circulate

If you want to have capital that you can circulate, you should earn it.

not your personal and subjective, value of morals

I'm not against idiotically subsidizing unemployment because it's immoral,
I'm against it because it's bad economics.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value.

OMG. You're a moron.

The socialism of the law.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

patents may or may not be cost competitive; but, a legal monopoly ensures capital can be generated.

the subjective value of morals has no bearing on the science of economics. full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about, since we can never compete with merely, cheap labor.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles. how is that bad for any private sector?

fiat money can be printed at an official Mint, almost as if by magic. its use, is as a medium of exchange.

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

A legal monopoly doesn't keep prices low.

full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about,

Thanks for admitting that your stupid idea to subsidize unemployment is not what a first world economy should be about.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles.

Subsidizing non-productivity will not help eliminate business cycles.

 

[danielpalos]

both are a form of subsidy. our Founding Fathers even explained the rationale for that subsidy.

capital has to circulate, not your personal and subjective, value of morals.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value. thus, no real work ethic required. it is merely a convenience, for the sake of taxation.

both are a form of subsidy

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

How does a patent equal government money handed to the patent holder?
How does a patent keep the price of a commodity or service low or competitive?

capital has to circulate

If you want to have capital that you can circulate, you should earn it.

not your personal and subjective, value of morals

I'm not against idiotically subsidizing unemployment because it's immoral,
I'm against it because it's bad economics.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value.

OMG. You're a moron.

The socialism of the law.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

patents may or may not be cost competitive; but, a legal monopoly ensures capital can be generated.

the subjective value of morals has no bearing on the science of economics. full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about, since we can never compete with merely, cheap labor.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles. how is that bad for any private sector?

fiat money can be printed at an official Mint, almost as if by magic. its use, is as a medium of exchange.

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

A legal monopoly doesn't keep prices low.

full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about,

Thanks for admitting that your stupid idea to subsidize unemployment is not what a first world economy should be about.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles.

Subsidizing non-productivity will not help eliminate business cycles.

Nobody said they did. the rationale for that public sector income transfer and subsidy, is included in our Constitution.

Yes, it is. And, it is why no one takes the right wing seriously about economics. Moving the goal posts is a function of Government.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

both are a form of subsidy. our Founding Fathers even explained the rationale for that subsidy.

capital has to circulate, not your personal and subjective, value of morals.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value. thus, no real work ethic required. it is merely a convenience, for the sake of taxation.

both are a form of subsidy

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

How does a patent equal government money handed to the patent holder?
How does a patent keep the price of a commodity or service low or competitive?

capital has to circulate

If you want to have capital that you can circulate, you should earn it.

not your personal and subjective, value of morals

I'm not against idiotically subsidizing unemployment because it's immoral,
I'm against it because it's bad economics.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value.

OMG. You're a moron.

The socialism of the law.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

patents may or may not be cost competitive; but, a legal monopoly ensures capital can be generated.

the subjective value of morals has no bearing on the science of economics. full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about, since we can never compete with merely, cheap labor.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles. how is that bad for any private sector?

fiat money can be printed at an official Mint, almost as if by magic. its use, is as a medium of exchange.

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

A legal monopoly doesn't keep prices low.

full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about,

Thanks for admitting that your stupid idea to subsidize unemployment is not what a first world economy should be about.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles.

Subsidizing non-productivity will not help eliminate business cycles.

Nobody said they did. the rationale for that public sector income transfer and subsidy, is included in our Constitution.

Yes, it is. And, it is why no one takes the right wing seriously about economics. Moving the goal posts is a function of Government.

Nobody said they did.

Great, so we agree a patent is not a subsidy.

Yes, it is.

Prove it.

 

[yiostheoy]

Wind And Solar Are Our Cheapest Electricity Sources — Now What Do We Do?
By Mike O’Boyle

For years, debates about how to reduce carbon emissions from electricity generation were framed as trade-offs: What is the cost premium we must pay for generating zero-carbon electricity compared to fossil fuels, and how can we minimize those costs?

Fortunately, the holidays came early this year for renewable energy in investment company Lazard’s annual report on the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for different electricity-generating technologies — renewables are now the cheapest available sources of electricity. This flips the question of clean versus cost on its head, and in 2017, we’ll be asking how much can we save by accelerating the renewable energy transition?

The story from Lazard’s 10th annual report is clear. Rapid technology cost reductions mean wind and solar are now the cheapest form of generation in many places around the country, without counting federal subsidies like tax credits.

What is levelized cost of energy?
Lazard uses the LCOE analysis to identify how much each unit of electricity (measured in megawatt-hours, or MWh) costs to generate over the lifetime of any power plant. LCOE represents every cost component — capital expenditure to build, operations & maintenance, and fuel costs to run — spread out over the total megawatt-hours generated during the power plant’s lifetime.

Because different plants have different operating characteristics and cost components, LCOE allows us to fairly compare different technologies. Think of it as finally being able to evenly compare apples to oranges.

How wind and solar are winning the day
According to Lazard, wind costs have fallen 66 percent since 2009, from $140/MWh to $47/MWh.

Large-scale solar’s cost declines have been even more dramatic, falling 85 percent since 2009 from more than $350/MWh to $55/MWh.

Compare this with the cheapest form of conventional fuel-fired generation today — natural gas-fired combined cycle power plants whose LCOE averages $63/MWh.

Wind And Solar Are Our Cheapest Electricity Sources — Now What Do We Do? – America’s Power Plan

Coal is dead. Natural gas will follow in a couple of decades. Wind and solar will continue to decline in price, and grid scale batteries will make them 24/7, and create a distributed grid far more robust than our present grid.

Hydroelectric is the only true renewable energy.

The Sun renews it by evaporating seawater and causing storms that rain in the mountains.

 

[danielpalos]

both are a form of subsidy. our Founding Fathers even explained the rationale for that subsidy.

capital has to circulate, not your personal and subjective, value of morals.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value. thus, no real work ethic required. it is merely a convenience, for the sake of taxation.

both are a form of subsidy

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

How does a patent equal government money handed to the patent holder?
How does a patent keep the price of a commodity or service low or competitive?

capital has to circulate

If you want to have capital that you can circulate, you should earn it.

not your personal and subjective, value of morals

I'm not against idiotically subsidizing unemployment because it's immoral,
I'm against it because it's bad economics.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value.

OMG. You're a moron.

The socialism of the law.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

patents may or may not be cost competitive; but, a legal monopoly ensures capital can be generated.

the subjective value of morals has no bearing on the science of economics. full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about, since we can never compete with merely, cheap labor.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles. how is that bad for any private sector?

fiat money can be printed at an official Mint, almost as if by magic. its use, is as a medium of exchange.

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

A legal monopoly doesn't keep prices low.

full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about,

Thanks for admitting that your stupid idea to subsidize unemployment is not what a first world economy should be about.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles.

Subsidizing non-productivity will not help eliminate business cycles.

Nobody said they did. the rationale for that public sector income transfer and subsidy, is included in our Constitution.

Yes, it is. And, it is why no one takes the right wing seriously about economics. Moving the goal posts is a function of Government.

Nobody said they did.

Great, so we agree a patent is not a subsidy.

Yes, it is.

Prove it.

The rationale for that public sector income transfer and subsidy, is included in our Constitution.

And,

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures:

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

both are a form of subsidy

Subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

How does a patent equal government money handed to the patent holder?
How does a patent keep the price of a commodity or service low or competitive?

capital has to circulate

If you want to have capital that you can circulate, you should earn it.

not your personal and subjective, value of morals

I'm not against idiotically subsidizing unemployment because it's immoral,
I'm against it because it's bad economics.

we are discussing fiat money. it has no real value.

OMG. You're a moron.

The socialism of the law.

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

patents may or may not be cost competitive; but, a legal monopoly ensures capital can be generated.

the subjective value of morals has no bearing on the science of economics. full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about, since we can never compete with merely, cheap labor.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles. how is that bad for any private sector?

fiat money can be printed at an official Mint, almost as if by magic. its use, is as a medium of exchange.

A legal monopoly is a form of subsidy since it may be used to generate capital.

A legal monopoly doesn't keep prices low.

full employment of resources is what a first world economy should always be about,

Thanks for admitting that your stupid idea to subsidize unemployment is not what a first world economy should be about.

ensuring money circulates in our private sector can help eliminate business cycles.

Subsidizing non-productivity will not help eliminate business cycles.

Nobody said they did. the rationale for that public sector income transfer and subsidy, is included in our Constitution.

Yes, it is. And, it is why no one takes the right wing seriously about economics. Moving the goal posts is a function of Government.

Nobody said they did.

Great, so we agree a patent is not a subsidy.

Yes, it is.

Prove it.

The rationale for that public sector income transfer and subsidy, is included in our Constitution.

And,

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures:

What transfer and subsidy are you talking about? Be specific.