Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
10. K/R, but some may be misled by the numbers.
Mon Feb 4, 2013, 01:49 PM
Feb 2013

I read the one comment at the pv magazine site which questions the coal price (12.8c/kWh) and had to go checking.

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa_08_04.html

The EIA lumps all fossil fuel together, existing NG and coal plants, and the total cost is about 3.5 cents/kWh.

I think the operative term that explains the high cost quoted in the article is "new" (coal-fired power stations).

The build-out cost, maintenance operation and fuel cost for a new "cleaner" coal plant, all taken together, may be as high as 12.8 cents/kWh, or even higher.

In any event, I'm a big proponent of solar.

In Texas. postulater Feb 2013 #1
Germany is the cloudiest country in Europe, and they use solar extensively librechik Feb 2013 #12
Thanks for reminding me of that. postulater Feb 2013 #23
How efficient are these solar cells at night, with just moonlight. Agnosticsherbet Feb 2013 #2
Let's see.... bobalew Feb 2013 #3
storage tech invented in the '80s was praised by energy sec Bill Richardson in the 90's green for victory Feb 2013 #4
Yes, this is a good technology. They are building similar plants all across the southwest, one just Agnosticsherbet Feb 2013 #7
Concentrating solar wouldn't work in Alaska, but then you know that. NYC_SKP Feb 2013 #11
Be nice. I'm pretty sure they DON'T teach those things kestrel91316 Feb 2013 #27
Storage schemes: Pumped hydro, compressed air, hydrogen generation. NYC_SKP Feb 2013 #5
Hydro, Wind, Tidal, Fuel-cells, Efficiency, Biomass, and Batteries in our cars can complete the grahamhgreen Feb 2013 #6
read up on the systems--the sun doesn't have to shine for solar to work librechik Feb 2013 #13
Moreover, we generally need less power at night, so a combination of BlueStreak Feb 2013 #17
That is what batteries are for. robinlynne Feb 2013 #24
Is it cheaper to operate a coal plant in China? NoOneMan Feb 2013 #8
Maybe they will decide think Feb 2013 #9
Either that or they'll decide such air could solve the population problem. HereSince1628 Feb 2013 #14
I wonder if that smog has any energy content BlueStreak Feb 2013 #19
In the above pic it looks thick enough to haul in buckets...would that be buckets of nitric acid? HereSince1628 Feb 2013 #22
That is fucking horrifying. AtheistCrusader Feb 2013 #18
K/R, but some may be misled by the numbers. NYC_SKP Feb 2013 #10
Yeah, but just one solar spill can create a major nice day. Scuba Feb 2013 #15
How long will the thin film panels remain at say, 95% effective. amandabeech Feb 2013 #16
A lot longer than a ton of coal remains 95% effective, I think! grahamhgreen Feb 2013 #25
I am so sick of the foot dragging on renewable energy. SunSeeker Feb 2013 #20
Beware! Look at this link. Oh, the horror: freshwest Feb 2013 #21
Solar's great!!! rightsideout Feb 2013 #26
That is awesome! grahamhgreen Feb 2013 #29
Hey! Hold on just a minute. If it is cleaner than "clean coal", why isnt it called "clean solar"?? rhett o rick Feb 2013 #28
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Thin-Film Solar Power To ...»Reply #10