Fuzzers t1_jd9c0w7 wrote
Reply to comment by altmorty in IPCC chart says Solar PV and Wind Turbines are best way to achieve Deep, Rapid, and Low Cost emission cuts before 2030. by DisasterousGiraffe
Look I'm all in favor of getting rid of coal, but if you're going to replace it with anything due to cost increases, its going to be natural gas not solar/wind + storage.
The EIA LCOE 2022 report pins the LCOE of a combined cycle natural gas plant at $39.94, Wind at $40.23, Solar at $33.83, and battery storage at a whopping $128.55.
There is not a chance in hell a coal operator is going to look at those economics and convert to a solar/wind + battery storage setup vs. natural gas, especially with the ability to reuse the supercritical boiler for the steam turbine.
I mentioned nuclear as a base loads because moving forward, if the development of SMR's go well there is a possibility they could become economical for base load applications in the future. At the current time, best base solution is hydro if its available and if not natural gas.
DisasterousGiraffe OP t1_jd9elij wrote
Not sure what reason is for the apparent contradiction, but the planned additions to US electricity generation seem to be mostly solar.
Fuzzers t1_jd9jfab wrote
and that's a good thing! But as I said originally, base load electricity generation for renewables requires storage, of which in the EIA data is 17%. So 17% of all new possible base load generation is battery storage, and 14% is natural gas.
Right now, 39% of all electricity generation in the states is through natural gas, and I can guarantee they won't be replacing those plants with solar/wind+battery storage anytime soon, because its not economically feasible to do so.
Since 2011, 121 coal fired plants have converted to natural gas, because that's the most economical and logical thing to do. A replacement to solar/wind + battery storage would be more capitally intensive and have a longer payback period.
grundar t1_jdl5z0t wrote
> The EIA LCOE 2022
EIA's projections have changed substantially since 2022.
Compare their projections to 2050 from 2022 (p.15) and 2023 (p.10) (reference case):
- Solar: up 50% (1,200-1,800TWh)
- Wind: up 50% (700-1,100TWh)
- Gas: down 40% (1,800-1,200TWh)
- Coal: down 40% (500-300TWh)
EIA projections for renewable energy have been consistently revised way up, year after year:
- 2018 AEO: 1,600TWh renewables, 3,100TWh gas+coal
- 2020 AEO: 2,100TWh renewables, 2,700TWh gas+coal
- 2022 AEO: 2,300TWh renewables, 2,300TWh gas+coal
- 2023 AEO: ~3,300TWh renewables, 1,500TWh gas+coal
5 years ago, the EIA was projecting fossil fuels would out-generate renewables 2:1 in 2050; now, that ratio is reversed in their projections. How likely is it they've finally caught up with changes in power generation and won't revise that again?
For reference, wind+solar+battery are 140% of net new capacity over the last 5 years, and are a similar fraction of net new kWh generated. New gas is indeed being added, but coal is being retired even faster, so net fossil capacity in the US has been declining for a decade.
altmorty t1_jd9gg67 wrote
Are you kidding me? During a time of record high gas prices, you complain about the only alternative not becoming cheaper faster?
Storage will get cheaper and cheaper. LCOE are the unsubsidised costs. Governments can subsidise them for now, which will help them get cheaper still. The more we invest now, the faster this will happen. This is standard practise for all energy sources. No one complains when fossil fuels are heavily subsidised in so many different ways.
$1 billion invested in a storage system will lead to less gas for decades. $1 billion dumped into gas is temporary. Just look how none of those fracking investments saved us from record high gas prices!
You really do sound like a fossil fuel shill.
Fuzzers t1_jd9k2yf wrote
>You really do sound like a fossil fuel shill.
And you sound like you don't understand basic economics. What a shame. Let me know when they start replacing coal plants with solar/wind + battery storage instead of natural gas, and then we can relook at this discussion.
Also, FYI, those LCOE numbers were with tax credits applied.
SandAndAlum t1_jd9mgcn wrote
Hey, just letting you know they're replacing coal plants with solar and wind like you asked.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments