What energy Costs

Jccarlton · Post by **Jccarlton** » Sat May 08, 2010 4:43 pm

Levelized costs of new generating:
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.o ... hnologies/

I'm not sure I agree with the over 30% capacity factor for wind. In any case this is pretty damning for renewables

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat May 08, 2010 8:20 pm

I am not quite sure I understand that correctly, but it seems like hydro comes away pretty badly in terms of cost. It is actually among the cheapest energy sources in my country. So I am a little confused.

olivier · Post by **olivier** » Sun May 09, 2010 8:14 am

So am I. Hydro need mountains and streams. You have them or not.
In my life I have seen so many economic studies demonstrating everything and its opposite. I do not trust any unless I am given every detail of the calculation so I have a chance to guess what they chose to conceal and whose pawns they are.

Jccarlton · Post by **Jccarlton** » Sun May 09, 2010 2:14 pm

Skipjack wrote:I am not quite sure I understand that correctly, but it seems like hydro comes away pretty badly in terms of cost. It is actually among the cheapest energy sources in my country. So I am a little confused.

If you look the hydro costs most of it's the initial capital costs, ie the dam and buying the watered land. Once the dam is built real cost for hydro are mostly transmission costs. The initial cost for hydro are very expensive especially if you have to pay market rates for interest, which is why hydro plants are by and large constructed by public power.

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Mon May 10, 2010 1:14 am

Jccarlton wrote: which is why hydro plants are by and large constructed by public power.

And when it is, the capital cost of the system is usually hidden in general taxation. If the users had to pay back that cost at true market rates via their utility bill, folks might see things in a different light.

jmc · Post by **jmc** » Mon May 10, 2010 3:42 pm

There doesn't seem to be that much between them even wind seems to be only 50% over and a above the chepest energy source (which is not enough to disastrously break the economy)

Nuclear and geothermal seem to come out way ahead.

Maybe the cost of Hydro is the cost for building new projects, I believe in the past alot of the land used to build hydro electric dams was acquired by forced purchases, maybe purchasing land from the local farmers simply costs more these days. You can see the capital costs are over 85% of total costs.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:28 am

There doesn't seem to be that much between them even wind seems to be only 50% over and a above the chepest energy source (which is not enough to disastrously break the economy)

Does that count the 100% backup required?