How’s That Wind Power Working Out for You?

[elektra]

TRANSLATION: I don't want to talk about all the referenced numbers your posted that show I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about

This is an interesting and rather lengthy document from a conservative think-tank arguing in August of 2020 that the real costs and benefits of offshore wind energy will be much poorer than anticipated. I'm no economist but I noted a number of points in their arguments that should be noted. The article seems to make a real attempt to imply that the Block Island wind farm is representative of costs for offshore wind farms and they clearly succeeded in convincing you of that falsehood. The Block Farm numbers, which started high and, by contract, get higher, are the only numbers mentioned for several pages worth of text. You stated $470/MWh but that will only be paid should the farm last the full 30 years the contract anticipates. Currently power cost slightly over $240, which is also absurdly high. Additionally, the very low values given for fossil fuel produced on shore of $30 to $37/MWh is the wholesale price. Once you finally get to them, we find that, at least as the Manhattan Institute reports it, that offshore power will cost $70-$80/MWh with a single outlier at $160. That is, the examples in this article actually cost LESS than the numbers I posted in post #132 above. Some of these prices are fixed and some rise 2-4% annually. These are common pricing strategies in any business model to compensate for the constantly rising cost of replacement.

The article makes a somewhat half-hearted attempt to pump up "local pushback", claiming people are still concerned about the health effects of windmills' noise and that farmers are not happy at losing arable land (for a $4k-$8k annual lease). State programs requiring utilities to move to renewable, non-emitting technologies are portrayed as heavy handed government over reach ignoring the will of the people. No evidence of any sort is provided to support these claims.


This will be the cost for one facility after another 23 years and will almost undoubtedly be the most expensive electricity on the planet. I find it very unlikely this price will ever be paid. I think the Block Island facility, in the face of loads of far less expensive competition, will either be renegotiated or abandoned.

That was your position before you had taken up a single iota of actual information.

No matter what anyone's position is this is what we have.

Politicians dictating the price of electricity that utlities will pay because renewabkes are very expensive. Utilities would never pay the extreme price, and by law the utilities were never ever allowed to sell electricity at such a high price.

Utlities were also never ordered by politicians that they had to buy power from specific electricity producers.

Utilities, which had monopolies were regulated by rules, regulations, and laws, preventing them from raising rates to exorbitant levels. This is because they, by the nature of the business, have monopolies.

Courts have broke the law allowing renewables to be forced onto the unsuspecting public.

Rebewables make big fat corporations and wall st much richer. While politicians get massive campaign donations and speaking fees for selling out the public.

 

[Crick]

No matter what anyone's position is this is what we have.

Is this supposed to convince us that what's coming down the pike here are irrefutable, objective facts? Cause... you know... I'm a little dubious.

Politicians dictating the price of electricity that utlities[sic] will pay because renewabkes[sic] are very expensive. Utilities would never pay the extreme price, and by law the utilities were never ever allowed to sell electricity at such a high price.

Politicians do not dictate the price of electricity. Prices are negotiated between government, electrical distribution utilities and, oftentimes these days, third party industrial concerns with power generating assets. The price of power generated by several different renewable technologies have attained competitive if not superior costs per kWh to fossil fuel. And utilities have always been allowed to adjust their prices in response to changes in the price of fuel, the cost of adding capacity or responding to natural disasters.

Utlities[sic] were also never ordered by politicians that they had to buy power from specific electricity producers.

I suspect there have been such stipulations used in the past but that governments should mandate renewable, non-emitting energy sources should be no surprise. How did you think it was going to happen? As I've pointed out to several AGW denying posters before, the fact that you put no value whatsoever on a technology's ability to produce power without emitting GHGs, while I do, is going to prevent the two of us from ever agreeing on what should be taking place regarding energy production and transportation now and into the future.

Utilities, which had monopolies were regulated by rules, regulations, and laws, preventing them from raising rates to exorbitant levels. This is because they, by the nature of the business, have monopolies.

Unfortunately for you, monopolies are anathema to a capitalist society and they haven't held up well in the face of two factors: public ownership of transmission lines and the development of decentralized energy producing technology.

Courts have broke[sic] the law allowing renewables to be forced onto the unsuspecting public.

And what law would that be?

And it's likely that the only member of the public that didn't 'suspect' things like this were going to happen is you.

Rebewables[sic] make big fat corporations and wall st much richer.

How do they do that? Someone has to lay out the capital required to replace the entire nation's fossil fuel energy infrastructure and because the cost of production is higher, the profit margins have to be smaller. If this were such a big money-making strategy why has it taken twenty years to make it happen? Because businesses that raise their prices beyond what their customers can pay do not last long.

While politicians get massive campaign donations and speaking fees for selling out the public.

Speaking fees? I hope you know how much of a stretch that resembles. As for massive campaign donations, stand down for ten seconds and think about the history of campaign donations from the fossil fuel industries and utilities. If you think politicians are getting more money from the renewables sector, you need a reality check.

 

[jc456]

One does not have to know the exact Temperature in 100 years to know it's warming/AGW warming.

then how do you know?

 

[jc456]

Is this supposed to convince us that what's coming down the pike here are irrefutable

what's your crystal ball telling you?

 

[Crick]

then how do you know?

Jesus man, learn to fucking read.

 

[jc456]

This will be the cost for one facility after another 23 years and will almost undoubtedly be the most expensive electricity on the planet. I find it very unlikely this price will ever be paid. I think the Block Island facility, in the face of loads of far less expensive competition, will either be renegotiated or abandoned.

that's really some crystal ball you got there bubba.

How many lotteries have you won?

 

[jc456]

Jesus man, learn to fucking read.

read what?

 

[Crick]

read what?

The word "exact".

 

[Crick]

that's really some crystal ball you got there bubba.

It's not a crystal ball you fucking idiot. Those are the terms of the contract.

 

[jc456]

The word "exact".

I'm not sure elektra ever used the word exact. maybe you should read.

 

[jc456]

It's not a crystal ball you fucking idiot. Those are the terms of the contract.

you signed a contract with mother nature? how did you do that?

 

[Crick]

I'm not sure elektra ever used the word exact. maybe you should read.

abu afak said:
One does not have to know the exact Temperature in 100 years to know it's warming/AGW warming.

 

[jc456]

abu afak said:
One does not have to know the exact Temperature in 100 years to know it's warming/AGW warming.

again, elektra didn't ask for the 'exact' temperature. You assumed they did.

 

[Crick]

again, elektra didn't ask for the 'exact' temperature. You assumed they did.

I responded to your post asking "Then how do you know?" which was your response to Abu AFAK's statement about exact temperatures. So do fuck off. Choosing to start talking with you again was a mistake.

 

[jc456]

I responded to your post asking "Then how do you know?" which was your response to Abu AFAK's statement about exact temperatures. So do fuck off. Choosing to start talking with you again was a mistake.

So no temperature readings from 100 years ago? So fking funny

 

[Crick]

So no temperature readings from 100 years ago? So fking funny

TROLL

 

[jc456]

TROLL

When you can’t back your claim

 

[Crick]

When you can’t back your claim

TROLL

 

[jc456]

TROLL

Scared

 

[Crick]

Scared

TROLL