header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Electricity Update Pt 7

 (Read 4335 times)

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18367
  • Liked:
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18367
  • Liked:
Construction progress at Bangladesh plant
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2019, 06:51:37 PM »
Concrete works have been completed for the turbine hall foundation slab of Bangladesh's first nuclear power plant, Rooppur 1, Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom has announced. Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission (BAEC) says the first unit will be commissioned in 2023.

Rosatom today said the concrete slab structure, with 3813 tonnes of rebars and 24,285 cubic metres of concrete, was completed on 30 January following the completion the previous day of operations to stabilise the soil under the main and auxiliary buildings and structures of the Rooppur construction site. Over 1.2 million tonnes of cement was used to strengthen 4.5 million cubic metres of soil to meet design requirements for a load-carrying capacity.
Preparations have now begun at the site for the erection of the walls of the reactor building and auxiliary reactor compartment. The work has been carried out in cooperation with specialist European and Bangladeshi companies under the management of Rosatom subsidiary AtomStroyExport, and the construction works for the Rooppur nuclear power plant are on schedule, Rosatom said.
Bangladesh started construction of Rooppur 1 in November 2017, and construction of the second unit at the site, which is in Pabna district about 160 kilometres northwest of Dhaka, commenced in July 2018. The two VVER-1200 pressurised water reactors will have the capacity to generate 2400 megawatts of electricity.
Shawkat Akbar, project director of the nuclear power plant construction project and managing director of BAEC enterprise Nuclear Power Plant Company Bangladesh Limited, this week told participants at an International Atomic Energy Agency technical meeting that the project is "high" on the government's agenda.
"By 2040 we estimate that Bangladesh will need to generate about 78,000 megawatts of electricity in a high-demand scenario and about 69,000 in a low one, and nuclear power will play a significant role," Akbar said. "We are confident that the first unit will be commissioned in 2023 and the second in 2024."
Bangladesh, which has a population of 160 million, plans to produce 9% of its electricity from nuclear power and reduce its dependence on fossil fuels by the middle of the next decade.
 
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18367
  • Liked:
Concreting milestone at second Leningrad-II unit
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2019, 06:42:24 PM »
oncreting of the inner containment structure of the reactor building of unit 2 of the Leningrad Phase II nuclear power plant in northwest Russia has been completed, state nuclear corporation Rosatom announced yesterday.

In total, more than 180 cubic metres of concrete have been laid within the reactor building, with the thickness of the concrete layer ranging between 80cm and 120cm.
"Completion of the concreting of the internal structures of the reactor compartment will make it possible to complete the lining of the holding pool and carry out its hydraulic tests," said Alexey Mochalov, deputy head of the reactor department of Leningrad NPP-II. "In 2019, it is planned to complete the construction of the external structures of the reactor building - a double containment shell. After that, it will be possible to talk about the complete construction readiness of the reactor building of the second power unit."
Rosatom noted that the concrete used is itself another safety barrier due to its composition. It contains iron ore and cast iron reinforcing bars.
"We use very heavy concrete, which absorbs radiation well, protects nuclear power plant personnel, and can be operated for a long period under high radiation-thermal loads," said Pavel Ivanov, lead engineer of the construction control department at the plant. He noted that regular testing of samples confirms the high quality of the concrete during its production.
The existing Leningrad plant site in Sosnovy Bor has four RBMK-1000 units, while Leningrad-II will have four VVER-1200 units. Leningrad 1 was shut down for decommissioning on 21 December last year.
Construction on the first unit of Leningrad-II began with first concrete being poured in 2008 and work on the second unit followed in April 2010.
Leningrad-II unit 1 was brought to the minimum controllable power level on 6 February 2018, connected to the grid on 9 March and is expected to enter commercial operation shortly. It became the second VVER-1200 reactor to start up, following the launch in 2016 of Novovoronezh unit 6.
 
 Rosatom announced today that all four steam generators - each measuring 11 metres in length and weighing 7 tonnes - have now been put in place within the reactor building of Leningrad-II 2. Installation of steam lines that supply steam from the steam generators to the turbine will now begin and is expected to be completed by the end of the first quarter of 2019.

   
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18367
  • Liked:
If Solar Panels Are So Clean, Why Do They Produce So Much Toxic Waste?
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2019, 04:21:24 PM »
The last few years have seen growing concern over what happens to solar panels at the end of their life. Consider the following statements:

Were these statements made by the right-wing Heritage Foundation? Koch-funded global warming deniers? The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal?
None of the above. Rather, the quotes come from a senior Chinese solarofficial, a 40-year veteran of the U.S. solar industry, and research scientists with the German Stuttgart Institute for Photovoltaics.



With few environmental journalists willing to report on much of anything other than the good news about renewables, it’s been left to environmental scientists and solar industry leaders to raise the alarm.
“I’ve been working in solar since 1976 and that’s part of my guilt,” the veteran solar developer told Solar Power World last year. “I’ve been involved with millions of solar panels going into the field, and now they’re getting old.”

(OCDDawg and or HK in 10, 9. ...)
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18367
  • Liked:
IMSR materials to be tested at Petten
« Reply #4 on: February 16, 2019, 07:41:06 PM »
NRG is to carry out testing of materials, including graphite, for key components of Terrestrial Energy's Integral Molten Salt Reactor (IMSR) power plant in the High-Flux Reactor at Petten in the Netherlands under a contract announced on 5 February.

The agreement will see NRG provide expert technical services to support Terrestrial Energy’s "in-core" materials testing and the development of its generation IV plant. NRG's services include technical advice on test design and preparation, high-flux irradiation of test specimens, and in-process and post-irradiation examinations and evaluations of the test materials.
"NRG has decades of experience with the controlled irradiation and examination of fuel and materials for innovative Generation-IV reactors," NRG CEO Huub Cuijpers said. "Innovative Generation-IV reactors have truly transformative potential and Terrestrial Energy’s IMSR molten salt reactor is a promising design."
Simon Irish, CEO of Terrestrial Energy, described NRG's testing capability at Petten as world-class. "With the benefit of the high-flux facility and NRG's clear expertise, we anticipate time-efficient materials testing and qualification that will advance IMSR engineering and regulatory activities," he said.
Molten salt reactors use fuel dissolved in a molten fluoride or chloride salt which functions as both the reactor's fuel and its coolant. This means that such a reactor could not suffer from a loss of coolant leading to a meltdown. Terrestrial's IMSR integrates the primary reactor components, including primary heat exchangers, to a secondary clean salt circuit, in a sealed and replaceable core vessel. It is designed as a modular reactor for factory fabrication, and could be used for electricity production and industrial process heat generation.
Terrestrial Energy in 2017 completed the first phase of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's pre-licensing vendor review of the IMSR, and the company is planning to submit either an application for design certification or for a construction permit for the IMSR-400 by late 2019 to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The company and Canadian Nuclear Laboratories are considering the feasibility of siting a commercial plant at Chalk River.
The company has also signed collaborative agreements to advance the design with US Oak Ridge National Laboratory and with the Dalton Nuclear Institute in the UK, and in 2017 entered into a contract with the University of New Brunswick for validation and verification work for the IMSR. It has applied for a US loan guarantee of up to USD1200 million to support financing of a project to licence, construct and commission the first US IMSR, a 190 MWe commercial facility. An agreement was signed with Energy Northwest in March 2018 for the first US IMSR to be built at a site on the Idaho National Laboratory.
In March 2018, Terrestrial Energy signed a technical services agreement with the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) in Karlsruhe, Germany. Under that contract, JRC will perform confirmatory studies of the fuel and primary coolant salt mixture for the IMSR.
   
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18367
  • Liked:
SMR proposals progress through Canadian process
« Reply #5 on: February 21, 2019, 03:40:02 PM »
Two further respondents - StarCore Nuclear and Terrestrial Energy - have advanced to the second stage of Canadian Nuclear Laboratories' (CNL's) process to site a small modular reactor (SMR) demonstration unit at one of its managed campuses.

Last April, CNL invited SMR project proponents to evaluate the construction and operation of a demonstration SMR project at a site it manages. CNL said the invitation represented the launch of its SMR review process, including the pre-qualification stage, which allows CNL to evaluate the "technical and business merits of proposed designs, assess the financial viability of the projects, and review the necessary national security and integrity requirements". The invitation will remain open, CNL said, with rounds of intake periods expected to occur semi-annually.
The invitation followed CNL's request for expressions of interest in SMRs, launched in June 2017, which resulted in responses from 80 organisations around the world, including 19 expressions of interest in siting a prototype or demonstration reactor at a CNL-managed site. CNL aims to have a new SMR constructed on its Chalk River site by 2026.
In an update to the invitation process on 15 February, CNL said StarCore Nuclear and Terrestrial Energy had completed the prequalification stage and been invited to enter the due diligence stage.
"In these stages, CNL will evaluate with increased rigour, the technical and business merits of the proposed designs, assess the financial viability of the projects, and review the necessary national security and integrity requirements," CNL said.
StarCore has proposed a 14 MWe high-temperature gas reactor while Terrestrial has put forward its 195 MWe Integral Molten Salt Reactor (IMSR).
"The completion of stage one of the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories siting invitation is another important step on our path to market our revolutionary Generation-IV Advanced SMR," said Terrestrial Energy CEO Simon Irish. "Our affordable IMSR power plant will produce heat and power that is emission-free and cost competitive with fossil fuels. We appreciate CNL's stage one assessment of our IMSR siting proposal and look forward to working closely with CNL's expert staff during stage two."
Global First Power (GFP) with its partners Ontario Power Generation and Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation has already progressed through the second stage of the invitation process, and has been invited to participate in the third stage. This stage involves preliminary, non-exclusive discussions regarding land arrangements, project risk management, and contractual terms. The GFP team is proposing a 5 MWe high-temperature gas reactor.
CNL noted, "These negotiations are not an indication of project approval, and the proposal and proponent must satisfy further stringent evaluation."
The fourth and final stage, project execution, will include construction, testing and commissioning, operation and ultimately decommissioning of the SMR unit.
"It is important to note that all projects are subject to regulatory processes and requirements. The licensing process is entirely independent of CNL's invitation and evaluation stages," CNL said.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is conducting pre-licensing vendor design reviews - an optional service to assess a nuclear power plant design based on a vendor's reactor technology - for ten small reactors with capacities in the range of 3-300 MWe.
     
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 28778
  • Liked:

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18367
  • Liked:
Re: Electricity Update Pt 7
« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2019, 12:20:11 PM »
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18367
  • Liked:
Studying the cost of decarbonisation
« Reply #8 on: February 27, 2019, 04:04:49 PM »
Since 2012, the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD-NEA) has produced very useful reports on the cost of electricity generation with the aim of finding the most efficient and least expensive ways of decarbonising the energy system. The Paris-based organisation recently presented the conclusions of its latest report, The Costs of Decarbonisation - System Costs with High Shares of Nuclear and Renewables, which was published on 25 January. Philippe Costes, senior adviser at World Nuclear Association, here presents his review of the document.

In its 2015 report, Projected Costs of Generating Electricity, the OECD-NEA gave evidence on two key points. First that, in spite of recent high-cost projects - first-of-a-kind in western countries - most new nuclear power plants presented a Levelised Cost Of Electricity (LCOE) comparable with any other generation source, including most Variable Renewable Energy (VRE). LCOE gathers all costs, including Capex and Opex, right up to the connection of a new plant to the grid. Second, the LCOE for VRE did not take into consideration the system costs that the community would be required to pay - grid enhancements to accommodate production far from consumption; balancing due to the low predictability of VRE; and frequency control and electricity backup/storage. The higher the share of VRE in a system, the higher the system cost is.
Aimed at policymakers, the new report presents the main considerations when assessing choices that would effectively achieve deep decarbonisation - lower than 50gCO2/kWh - of the future electricity system. These are:

Pedagogical approach

 The study compares different systems that achieve the same 50gCO2/kWh, which is more or less the agreed target by 2050 to reach the 2-degree climate change scenario. It considers a 'greenfield' approach - defining from scratch the whole system that is able to generate 540 GWh in a year, in order to avoid too many assumptions or disruptions coming from existing technologies or system.

The base case scenario comprises some hydropower, nuclear and some gas. It is the least expensive in LCOE, grid and system costs; it does not have any VRE (their LCOE remains higher than that of nuclear to achieve a given generation in MWh) or VRE dedicated storage, and it has a robust grid and sets a reference for the system costs; it has a carbon price constraint of USD35/tonne CO2 that eliminates any coal generation.
This scenario has some similarities with the French system, which still delivers the cheapest electricity to final consumers - all subsidies and taxes included.
Four scenarios explore an increasing share of VRE in the generation mix - respectively, 10%, 30%, 50% and 75% - and look at the generating capacity needed along with their LCOE plus all additional system costs compared to the base case scenario. In addition to the system costs that were presented in the 2015 report, the new study emphasises the role of the 'profile' or 'utilisation' cost, which reflects the cost of providing residual load when VRE's share increases. The more VRE there is in the system, the more expensive the residual load is.
Not surprisingly, when increasing the share of VRE in generated electricity, the required capacity grows to more than three times the base case. Nuclear decreases significantly and gas capacity more than doubles. The decrease in nuclear is due to the high ramping up/down requirements that VRE imposes on the system. Nuclear can accommodate this but, above a certain level it impacts the load factor to such an extent that nuclear becomes uneconomic. Battery storage has a very limited role to play in any of the study's scenarios. Storage cost is affordable for frequency control or a short-term equilibrium, but in no case can battery storage play a role in medium- to long-term storage because of its cost within the timeframe of the study. Therefore, the balance of electricity when there is no VRE and not enough nuclear has to come from gas.
The cost of electricity - LCOE plus system costs - increases from USD65/MWh in the base case to USD130/MWh when 75% is from VRE. In addition to the LCOE, system costs increase almost exponentially with the share of VRE - rising from a low of USD8/MWh in the 10% VRE scenario to USD50/MWh in the 75% scenario. Grid, balancing and connection costs account for a third and profile costs for two-thirds. Most of the profile costs come from the de-optimisation of the system due to the variability of VRE - because of the correlation in production hours of renewables - which is seen in large existing systems. The more VRE there is deployed, the more expensive the residual load will be and, with a share of VRE higher than 50%, overcapacity when all VRE types are generated leads to more and more curtailment of VRE sources.
The study notes the high volatility of electricity prices in the market. Existing markets are mainly based on the merit order of the marginal cost of generating electricity, but VRE has a marginal cost of zero. This means that when the share of VRE grows to the level of demand capacity, VRE can occasionally meet all the demand and lead to a price of electricity on the market of USD0/MWh along with curtailment of some VRE. From 10% VRE to 75% VRE, the number of hours at a price of USD0/MWh grows from a few hours to almost 4000 per year. In compensation, the number of hours where prices are above USD100/MWh increases. This leads to high volatility in electricity prices and huge price unpredictability.
The report makes five main recommendations:

My view

 Carbon pricing To set a carbon price seems obvious. The study shows that USD35/tonne COis deemed to be sufficient to eradicate coal from all its scenarios, and not so far from the USD20 that has been achieved in some countries. The sooner this is achieved the better since we all agree that there is an urgent need to decarbonise the energy system.

System costs. Ideally, policies should be developed to make sure that system costs are well analysed and allocated to the source that generates them. In the UK, Dr Dieter Helm proposed the concept of Firm Equivalent Power whereby any VRE source should guarantee its output with some storage it would be responsible for. Practically, in any given system, this would be very difficult to implement.
Benefits from a short-term competitive market. One may question the adequacy of most existing electricity markets: merit order could have been justified in the past when all sources had comparable LCOEs and were fully exposed to the market. With lots of VRE achieving profitability thanks to subsidies, tax credits or power purchase agreements, electricity markets produce prices at zero and are no longer relevant with an increasing share of VRE.
Encouraging new investment in low-carbon technologies. In a market where each and every form of electricity generation is treated according to its own merits - without any subsidies or priority rights - there will be a need for new and clear regulations. With a high share of VRE, existing markets will be very volatile and will present high risks for any long-term investments and their financing. How can policies be designed to attract investment in nuclear power and in non-subsidised VRE?
Capacity, flexibility and infrastructure. There is clear evidence that - apart from hydropower - nuclear, as the only low-carbon dispatchable technology, is essential along with some VRE to achieve a decarbonised electricity system. The cost-effectiveness for the community leads to a balanced system where the value of nuclear and the value of VRE are not both destroyed by having too much VRE. Rather than developing policies with targets for the share of VRE - which will require, in addition, capacity, flexibility and grid infrastructure - would it not be preferable to first set targets in the carbon content and then identify the most cost-efficient electricity system?
When considering the facts about types of technology, their costs including system costs, managing public acceptance of the different technologies and assessing the potential for higher electricity prices, policymakers could create the conditions and market rules for the appropriate pathway.
There are matters that are outside the scope of the NEA study, but which are important for policymakers. One is that, to accommodate a high share of VRE, the system must develop not only transmission and distribution grids, but also incorporate new technologies that do not yet exist to accommodate the fluctuations VRE generation entails. Those costs may have been taken into account in the study, but what about the risks associated with those future technologies? And what about the reliability of such a system and its resilience?
The study did not look at material resources needed in any scenario, but that is a theme to be considered. In essence, VRE has in most areas a limited load factor: to achieve the same generation in GWh, VRE needs three times more capacity than any dispatchable source and would require lots of capacity in storage with, again, a limited load factor. Is this the most efficient way of using the resources the planet can offer?
Another theme for consideration is the acceptability of a given scenario. While existing nuclear energy generation is generally well-accepted, new nuclear may be a challenge; but what about a comparably large deployment of VRE and its footprint? What about the acceptability and feasibility of the distribution/connection requirements?
The NEA's Jan-Horst Keppler said during the webinar given for the study: "An ideal and most cost-effective system should comprise one-third VRE, one-third nuclear power and the remainder hydropower when available, gas with CCS when affordable and flexibility in demand."
My conclusions

 Nuclear power will play a key role in future decarbonised systems. While it reliably provides large amounts of dispatchable, low-carbon energy, it faces questions around social acceptance in a few OECD countries. Nevertheless, this study shows how nuclear power still remains the economically optimal choice to satisfy stringent carbon constraints despite the economic challenges for some new generation reactors. Nuclear power's cost advantage lies not in its plant-level costs, though competitive. Instead, it resides in its overall benefits to the electricity system. The plant-level costs of VRE have fallen quite impressively, but its overall costs to the system are not accounted for as its output is clustered during a limited number of high-level hours. All these factors will come into play in the ultimate choices each country makes.

 
             
Philippe Costes is senior adviser at World Nuclear Association.
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

HK_Vol

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 16987
  • Liked:
Re: Electricity Update Pt 7
« Reply #9 on: February 27, 2019, 10:32:57 PM »
Capacity retired and added in 2019 and 2020 (megawatts):

Capacity Retired:20192020Total
Coal3,9871,6985,685
Natural Gas2,0662,8994,965
Nuclear1,4822,5143,996
Total7,6967,14314,839
Capacity Added:20192020Total
Wind11,2938,95220,245
Natural Gas8,01015,39023,400
Solar4,8936,56111,454
Total24,73931,59256,331

Capacity Retired:20192020Total
Coal51.8%23.8%38.3%
Natural Gas26.8%40.6%33.5%
Nuclear19.3%35.2%26.9%
Total97.9%99.6%98.7%
Capacity Added:20192020Total
Wind45.6%28.3%35.9%
Natural Gas32.4%48.7%41.5%
Solar19.8%20.8%20.3%
Total97.8%97.8%97.8%





HK_Vol

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 16987
  • Liked:
Re: Electricity Update Pt 7
« Reply #10 on: February 27, 2019, 10:36:08 PM »
On a net basis (natty has both retirements and additions), the percentages for 2019 & 2020:

Wind              48.8%
Natural Gas    44.4%
Solar             27.6%


HK_Vol

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 16987
  • Liked:
Re: Electricity Update Pt 7
« Reply #11 on: February 27, 2019, 10:44:20 PM »
Retirements for 2021 & 2022:

Total Retirements:  10,539 mw
Nuclear:   46.4%
Coal:        31.2%
Natty:       19.4%

4,890 mw of nuclear is pulled off-line in 2021 and 2022.
But 2,200 of new nuclear (Vogtle) is supposed to be added at the end of 2021 - but I'm betting it isn't on schedule and will be added later than that.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2019, 10:50:40 PM by HK_Vol »

IMAVOL

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 4714
  • Liked:

HK_Vol

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 16987
  • Liked:
Re: Electricity Update Pt 7
« Reply #13 on: February 28, 2019, 08:31:05 AM »
If people made dumb uneconomic decisions, that is their problem.

But that in aggregate, over 50% of all new capex expenditures (every year since 2014 and through 2020) by utilities are in solar and wind tells me that that is the cheapest, most efficient, acquisition of new power capacity.  Unless you think that all these senior executive at the utilities are stupid.


 

Associate Links/Search