Renewable Energy Will Be Consistently Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels By 2020

[Thinker101]

it means end of states gas-stations : KSA, "Russia", all Gulf states , etc. how our world without states gas-stations will be look like?

Renewable Energy Will Be Consistently Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels By 2020,
The organisation – which has more than 150 member countries – says the cost of generating power from onshore wind has fallen by around 23% since 2010 while the cost of solar photovoltaic (PV) electricity has fallen by 73% in that time. With further price falls expected for these and other green energy options, IRENA says all renewable energy technologies should be competitive on price with fossil fuels by 2020.Globally, onshore wind schemes are now costing an average of $0.06 per kilowatt hour (kWh), although some schemes are coming in at $0.04 per KwH, while the cost of solar PV is down to $0.10 per KwH. In comparison, the cost of electricity generation based on fossil fuels typically falls in a range of $0.05 to $0.17 per KwH.

Renewable Energy Will Be Consistently Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels By 2020, Report Claims

Who is still holding their breath waiting for those Tesla electric cars to be delivered?

They are being delivered. Just not at the rate Tesla needs them to be. The closing down of the GM Factories just might be a Godsend for Tesla. They just might inherit a full function auto factory with trained workers which could put their production up where it needs to be on the cheap.

Yeah, only place Tesla seems to be expanding is in China.

 

[easyt65]

High efficiency vehicles that utilize renewable energy fuel.

*****CHUCKLE*****

Yeah, but snowflakes say Global Warming is caused by Cow and Horse tarts ... or did. Who knows what they are claiming causes it this week....I think the newest version is that all this cold, ice, and snow causes it.

 

[progressive hunter]

Here is the reality.

Efficiency is a key component of cost, but the alt-energy proponents love to ignore that factor. They are so in love the the concept of renewable energy that they are willing to overlook the science.

The most criminal example of ignoring efficiency is the federal mandate to put ethanol in our gas, which decreased mileage by at least 3% and as much as 10%. So, instead of getting 20 miles per gallon, you only get between 19.3 and 18. At $2.50 per gallon, it actually costs us as much as another $6.00 to get the same level of efficiency, and that's with 90% fossil fuel helping that weak-ass 10% corn fuel bogging down the engine.

We are at least 50 years away from technology that will make alternative energy as efficient as fossil fuels.

That's why pro-alt-energy people are using government to FORCE it on us. They know it will not be as efficient as fossil fuels and they have FAILED to convince enough people that (1) human activities are causing climate change, and (2) that the consequences of the human affect on climate are so dire that we must abandon fossil fuels completely and immediately (or give up our capitalist economy, which is the real goal).

Sorry, alt-energy lovers. Unless we have some dramatic advancements in energy technology, fossil fuels will be the main source of energy for the remainder of your lifetime.

just like with other new tech you have to put it in play to get the true advancements that are needed, cell phones would not be where they are if they didnt get the old expensive ones on the market

and ethanol is a cluster fck

Those technologies overtook others because they offered concrete advantages over what they replaced. When cars replaced horses it wasn't because of cars being subsidized by the government or horses being penalized, it was because even if a car was a greater initial investment, it's cost of operating was much less than a horses, and a car would last far longer.

not in the beginning...

 

[Lesh]

Cow and Horse tarts look so cute in those little dresses

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

just like with other new tech you have to put it in play to get the true advancements that are needed, cell phones would not be where they are if they didnt get the old expensive ones on the market

and ethanol is a cluster fck

The cell phone example is confusing the issues. Cell phones didn't replace another form of communication. They expanded on a pre-existing technology that made it more useful and convenient in ways it never was before. Cell phones made communication with any one possible at any time and just about anywhere. That's an expansion of technology's utility, not a replacement.

We're not talking about an expansion on the utility of a technology that has never been available. Alt-energy is an attempt to replace a technology, rather than expand on its utility. The only practical reason for doing so now (other than "save the planet") would be because it is more efficient to do so.

Efficiency is the issue. The example of the horse-drawn carriage vs. the automobile above is more in line with this discussion. Current alternative fuel sources reduce efficiency and increase the cost. That is NOT viable. It's like going back to the horse-drawn carriage for the sole purpose of NOT using an automobile. It makes ZERO sense.

.

 

[joaquinmiller]

How do you fly an airplane with solar energy?

Asking for a friend.

With a battery and a solar-powered charger.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Heavy moving equipment that utilizes renewable energy fuel.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[ColonelAngus]

The point is that we will need fossil fuels for many decades to come.

If you don't understand that ELECTRIC cars are actually fueled by mostly fossil fuels, I can't help you.

Now, we can go ALL ELECTRIC and ALL NUCLEAR.

We can't go ALL ELECTRIC and ALL SOLAR AND WIND. It wont work.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Billions in U.S. solar projects shelved after Trump panel tariff | Reuters

Trump Administration Unveils Its Plan to Relax Car Pollution Rules

The official policy of the Trump Admin is an enthusiastic blowjob for the oil industry.

Nothing to see. Move along.

After decades of being flogged and kicked in the nuts, shouldn't the producer of the most viable and efficient source of energy get a little head? They're sharing the rewards with us at the pump.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Regardless of the figures, your own article supports the claim that it's worth it even in an overcast area. You can keep chewing on this bone all you want but I choose not to play your silly assed games. Solar Power is here to stay and it works everywhere except 9 months of the year in the Artic. So go play in the street. I don't have time to play, little johnny.

There is no question that solar power is a great source of home energy. It just takes...what....15 years of no electric bills to make up for the cost of installing the system?

Efficiency is this issue.

 

[joaquinmiller]

Billions in U.S. solar projects shelved after Trump panel tariff | Reuters

Trump Administration Unveils Its Plan to Relax Car Pollution Rules

The official policy of the Trump Admin is an enthusiastic blowjob for the oil industry.

Nothing to see. Move along.

After decades of being flogged and kicked in the nuts, shouldn't the producer of the most viable and efficient source of energy get a little head? They're sharing the rewards with us at the pump.

I worked in the bidness for over 20 years. No one kicks the oil and gas bidness in the nuts, and there was no shortage of head.

 

[Weatherman2020]

it means end of states gas-stations : KSA, "Russia", all Gulf states , etc. how our world without states gas-stations will be look like?

Renewable Energy Will Be Consistently Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels By 2020,
The organisation – which has more than 150 member countries – says the cost of generating power from onshore wind has fallen by around 23% since 2010 while the cost of solar photovoltaic (PV) electricity has fallen by 73% in that time. With further price falls expected for these and other green energy options, IRENA says all renewable energy technologies should be competitive on price with fossil fuels by 2020.Globally, onshore wind schemes are now costing an average of $0.06 per kilowatt hour (kWh), although some schemes are coming in at $0.04 per KwH, while the cost of solar PV is down to $0.10 per KwH. In comparison, the cost of electricity generation based on fossil fuels typically falls in a range of $0.05 to $0.17 per KwH.

Renewable Energy Will Be Consistently Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels By 2020, Report Claims

One more for the long list of “Leftist Predictions that Never Occured”

 

[progressive hunter]

removing taxs would be fine except for the fact there would be no roads to drive on, as for regs it depends on which ones you want removed, I'm not ok with removing disposal regs since the cheapest way to dispose of toxic materials in to dump them outback

I was only responding to your comment that letting the free market decide fuel costs would cause it to skyrocket. They put costs controls and subsidies in place BECAUSE it is such a heavily taxed and regulated industry. It's likely a wash.

the truth is we wont know for sure unless it happens

what we do know for sure is today solar and wind are a viable tech that is still in its infancy and can be used now in certain context

I do not think the big solar and wind farms are an option, it has to be done at a more local/personal level and let the people pay for it not the government/corporations

just like with other new tech you have to put it in play to get the true advancements that are needed, cell phones would not be where they are if they didnt get the old expensive ones on the market

and ethanol is a cluster fck

The cell phone example is confusing the issues. Cell phones didn't replace another form of communication. They expanded on a pre-existing technology that made it more useful and convenient in ways it never was before. Cell phones made communication with any one possible at any time and just about anywhere. That's an expansion of technology's utility, not a replacement.

We're not talking about an expansion on the utility of a technology that has never been available. Alt-energy is an attempt to replace a technology, rather than expand on its utility. The only practical reason for doing so now (other than "save the planet") would be because it is more efficient to do so.

Efficiency is the issue. The example of the horse-drawn carriage vs. the automobile above is more in line with this discussion. Current alternative fuel sources reduce efficiency and increase the cost. That is NOT viable. It's like going back to the horse-drawn carriage for the sole purpose of NOT using an automobile. It makes ZERO sense.

.

my point about cell phones was about how tech develops from its infancy, today solar is far better than it was just 5 yrs ago...what will it be like in another 5-10 yrs??

maybe there will be a panel the size of a dinner plate that can power a whole house??

it could happen

we will never know if you keep telling the people trying to go fuck themselves

 

[basquebromance]

if you want affordable electric bills think about moving to renewable energy.

 

[basquebromance]

Texas is #1 in renewable energy. a great American state!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

my point about cell phones was about how tech develops from its infancy, today solar is far better than it was just 5 yrs ago...what will it be like in another 5-10 yrs??

maybe there will be a panel the size of a dinner plate that can power a whole house??

it could happen

we will never know if you keep telling the people trying to go fuck themselves

I am not telling people trying to go fuck themselves. I am their biggest cheerleader, but I am not going to blow sunshine up asses when the facts don't support it.

You can expect solar to pass fossil about 1800 days after the day solar is is so much more efficient than fossil that it is worth the cost to convert all infrastructure from fossil to solar. By my quick and likely inaccurate calculations, based on the developments in solar over the past 10 years, that could be sometime after 2080, but will most likely never happen because I don't think solar will ever be even close to the efficiency of fossil.

 

[progressive hunter]

my point about cell phones was about how tech develops from its infancy, today solar is far better than it was just 5 yrs ago...what will it be like in another 5-10 yrs??

maybe there will be a panel the size of a dinner plate that can power a whole house??

it could happen

we will never know if you keep telling the people trying to go fuck themselves

I am not telling people trying to go fuck themselves. I am their biggest cheerleader, but I am not going to blow sunshine up asses when the facts don't support it.

You can expect solar to pass fossil about 1800 days after the day solar is is so much more efficient than fossil that it is worth the cost to convert all infrastructure from fossil to solar. By my quick and likely inaccurate calculations, based on the developments in solar over the past 10 years, that could be sometime after 2080, but will most likely never happen because I don't think solar will ever be even close to the efficiency of fossil.

I would love to see how you came to that,,,were unicorns involved??

 

[martybegan]

Here is the reality.

Efficiency is a key component of cost, but the alt-energy proponents love to ignore that factor. They are so in love the the concept of renewable energy that they are willing to overlook the science.

The most criminal example of ignoring efficiency is the federal mandate to put ethanol in our gas, which decreased mileage by at least 3% and as much as 10%. So, instead of getting 20 miles per gallon, you only get between 19.3 and 18. At $2.50 per gallon, it actually costs us as much as another $6.00 to get the same level of efficiency, and that's with 90% fossil fuel helping that weak-ass 10% corn fuel bogging down the engine.

We are at least 50 years away from technology that will make alternative energy as efficient as fossil fuels.

That's why pro-alt-energy people are using government to FORCE it on us. They know it will not be as efficient as fossil fuels and they have FAILED to convince enough people that (1) human activities are causing climate change, and (2) that the consequences of the human affect on climate are so dire that we must abandon fossil fuels completely and immediately (or give up our capitalist economy, which is the real goal).

Sorry, alt-energy lovers. Unless we have some dramatic advancements in energy technology, fossil fuels will be the main source of energy for the remainder of your lifetime.

just like with other new tech you have to put it in play to get the true advancements that are needed, cell phones would not be where they are if they didnt get the old expensive ones on the market

and ethanol is a cluster fck

Those technologies overtook others because they offered concrete advantages over what they replaced. When cars replaced horses it wasn't because of cars being subsidized by the government or horses being penalized, it was because even if a car was a greater initial investment, it's cost of operating was much less than a horses, and a car would last far longer.

not in the beginning...

In the beginning they were toys for the rich, however as they developed they were able to be made for less and less money, and once they were able to be more cost effective than a horse, they took over with no government interference, either in support of cars, or against horses.

 

[progressive hunter]

my point about cell phones was about how tech develops from its infancy, today solar is far better than it was just 5 yrs ago...what will it be like in another 5-10 yrs??

maybe there will be a panel the size of a dinner plate that can power a whole house??

it could happen

we will never know if you keep telling the people trying to go fuck themselves

I am not telling people trying to go fuck themselves. I am their biggest cheerleader, but I am not going to blow sunshine up asses when the facts don't support it.

You can expect solar to pass fossil about 1800 days after the day solar is is so much more efficient than fossil that it is worth the cost to convert all infrastructure from fossil to solar. By my quick and likely inaccurate calculations, based on the developments in solar over the past 10 years, that could be sometime after 2080, but will most likely never happen because I don't think solar will ever be even close to the efficiency of fossil.

I would love to see how you came to that,,,were unicorns involved??

not to mention there are already 10's of thousands of cases proving it to be as if not more efficient than fossils...

its all about context not feelings

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I would love to see how you came to that,,,were unicorns involved??

No unicorns. I have never seen one.

Have you seen one?

Have you seen a for real, live unicorn?


I used a few fairies and a Cornish pixie.



I estimated that it will take about 5 years to convert infrastructure once the cost of solar conversion is lower than the cost of continuing to use fossil. That's based on what I have seen in other industries. I have a friend who owns a business that converts government and private-sector offices and business facilities from florescent and halogen lighting to high-efficiency LEDs. The biggest bottle neck is inventory. The capacity of manufacturing and distributing ballasts and bulbs has apparently maxed out. Just that one type of conversion will take at least 5 years. Imagine phasing out all gas stations and fossil power plants while manufacturing components and building the replacements. 5 years seems optimistic.

Where I admittedly did a sloppy job on the numbers (as I confessed in the post above) is the increased efficiency of solar over the past 10 years as a projection going forward, mainly because it was nothing but estimates and guesses. The real point is that we will probably never have enough space and efficiency from solar to make it a viable replacement to fossil.

None of this even addresses the availability of immediate, potential energy from fossil fuels.

No other source of energy can be so easily stored and converted, except maybe hydrogen cells (which I think is probably the most compelling alternative right now). This is relevant mainly in the transportation sector. A gallon of gas has a huge amount of potential energy immediately available for quick consumption, and it only takes a short period of time to go from the ground to the gas tank. Solar could produce potential energy in the form of stored electricity, but, at least for the foreseeable future, storing electricity is much more costly and inefficient than storing gasoline, and it takes solar a whole lot more resources and time to compile the same amount potential energy as that available in a gallon of gasoline.

Right now, other than some limited applications of solar, wind/wave, geothermal, and nuclear, changing to alternative energy makes no sense compared to the availability and efficiency of fossil.