Solar power shutting down coal plants faster than expected

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Solar power forecast to shut down coal plants faster than expected

Solar power, once so costly it made economic sense only in spaceships, is becoming cheap enough that it will push coal and even natural-gas plants out of business faster than previously forecast.

That's the conclusion of a Bloomberg New Energy Finance outlook for how fuel and electricity markets will evolve by 2040. The research group estimated solar already rivals the cost of new coal power plants in Germany and the U.S. and by 2021 will do so in quick-growing markets such as China and India.

The scenario suggests green energy is taking root more quickly than most experts anticipate. It would mean that global carbon dioxide pollution from fossil fuels may decline after 2026, a contrast with the International Energy Agency's central forecast, which sees emissions rising steadily for decades to come. "Costs of new energy technologies are falling in a way that it's more a matter of when than if," said Seb Henbest, a researcher at BNEF in London and lead author of the report.

The report also found that through 2040:

• China and India represent the biggest markets for new power generation, drawing $4 trillion, or about 39 percent all investment in the industry.

• The cost of offshore wind farms, until recently the most expensive mainstream renewable technology, will slide 71 percent, making turbines based at sea another competitive form of generation.

• At least $239 billion will be invested in lithium-ion batteries, making energy storage devices a practical way to keep homes and power grids supplied efficiently and spreading the use of electric cars.

• Natural gas will reap $804 billion, bringing 16 percent more generation capacity and making the fuel central to balancing a grid that's increasingly dependent on power flowing from intermittent sources, like wind and solar.

BNEF's conclusions about renewables and their impact on fossil fuels are most dramatic. Electricity from photovoltaic panels costs almost a quarter of what it did in 2009 and is likely to fall another 66 percent by 2040. Onshore wind, which has dropped 30 percent in price in the past eight years, will fall another 47 percent by the end of BNEF's forecast horizon.

Solar power forecast to shut down coal plants faster than expected - Chicago Tribune
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
distHillary is going to win the selection again today, and there will be no more snow.
:)
Wouldn't it be wise to learn how to get today's news correct first, before prognosticating?
 

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,262
113
Olympus Mons
Once more, dumbass shows he believes ideology trumps science.

Elemental lithium is flammable and very reactive. In nature, lithium occurs in compounded forms such as lithium carbonate requiring chemical processing to be made usable.
Lithium is typically found in salt flats in areas where water is scarce. The extraction and refining process of lithium uses large amounts of water. Therefore, on top of water contamination as a result of its use, depletion or transportation costs are issues to be dealt with. Depletion results in less available water for local populations, flora and fauna.
Toxic chemicals are used for leaching purposes, chemicals requiring waste treatment. There are widespread concerns of improper handling and spills, like in other mining operations around the world.
The recovery rate of lithium ion batteries, even in first world countries, is in the single digit percent range. Most batteries end up in landfill.
In a 2013 report, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) points out that nickel and cobalt, both also used in the production of lithium ion batteries, represent significant additional environmental risks.

As well, a study titled “Science for Environment Policy” published by the European Union concludes that lithium ion batteries have the largest impact on metal depletion, suggesting that recycling is complicated. Lithium ion batteries are also, together with nickel-metal-hydride batteries, the most energy consuming technologies using the equivalent of 1.6kg of oil per kg of battery produced. They also ranked the worst in greenhouse gas emissions with up to 12.5kg of CO2 equivalent emitted per kg of battery.
Never mind the fact that about 95% of the world's lithium supply is found in countries with less than ideal to almost non-existent environmental laws and regulations.

Having said all that, there are certainly locations where solar power would be a viable power source. India, the American south-west, Australia and pretty much any other tropic or sub-tropic country or region that has a high solar irradiance. For countries like Canada, Russia, most of Europe etc, solar is a waste of time, money and resources.

And once again because this concept seems to go right over the majority of the useful idiots' heads, wind and solar provide ZERO base-load generation. Simply put, you cannot run an industrialized or other modern economy with them. You need fossil fuels to do the heavy lifting, period. Unless you have lots of natural hydroelectric capacity and/or you're not afraid of the nuclear bogey man.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
I need a design that will run an igloo wired for 240V, anything on the shelf as this might be a rush job.

If not is there one that will lift 1 ton 20 ft once every 20 days. It is in the bottom of a steep gully in northern Alberta, anything on the shelf or do I need to live in a blimp? The thunderstorms are, ummm, different, . . . . especially the first time.

you're not afraid of the nuclear bogey man.
Why would any sane person be afraid of that technology?? Move along, nothing to see her citizen.
[youtube]ZCzSfFavnRo[/youtube]
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
I want them back. I don't knows hows ya done it but I want my pills back. Bad things happen when I miss a few doses.

Alberta should keep the coal ones running and use the energy to phase in what will be the alternative. Taking a mountain apart from the top down would use gravity and almost no end when the Rockies are the source.
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
https://www.ecowatch.com/carbon-capture-climeworks-fertilizer-2428036864.html

Sorry to burst you're idiot bubble mentalflake. Capitalism has already found a solution to carbon.

A revolutionary plant that can suck carbon dioxide right from the air was unveiled on top of a waste recovery facility near Zurich on Wednesday.


Swiss company ClimeWorks is capturing CO2 from the air with the world's first commercial carbon removal technology. Its Direct Air Capture plant is capable of removing 900 tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere a year.

Fire up those carbon plants, We are on our way to needing more carbon in the atmosphere.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Once more, dumbass shows he believes ideology trumps science.

The recovery rate of lithium ion batteries, even in first world countries, is in the single digit percent range. Most batteries end up in landfill.

And once again because this concept seems to go right over the majority of the useful idiots' heads, wind and solar provide ZERO base-load generation. Simply put, you cannot run an industrialized or other modern economy with them. You need fossil fuels to do the heavy lifting, period. Unless you have lots of natural hydroelectric capacity and/or you're not afraid of the nuclear bogey man.

The Electric Vehicle Battery “Can And Should Be Recycled”


https://cleantechnica.com/2015/07/23/electric-vehicle-battery-can-recycled/

As with any other recyclable item it is just a matter of wanting to do it. Most nations don't recycle plastic either, but that does not mean they can't.

As for storing green energy there are so many approaches to this problem that is really is a non-issue. And fossil fuel fired power plants are not perfect anyway. In order to supply energy at peak periods they have to be kept constantly "on the boil," which is certainly a complete waste of energy.
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
The Stream Protection Rule, and “a wave of environmental regulations” like it, according to a spokesperson for the American Public Power Association, have long been the source of Republican anger toward Obama-era energy policy, which conservatives contend is the reason 40,000 coal miners have lost their jobs, 11,000 in Kentucky alone, since 2011.

That was the year the EPA announced a stricter air standard that had the effect of forcing coal-fired power plants to shift to natural gas at a time when the price of gas had fallen to historic lows.

“This tragedy in central Appalachia is a direct result of government action,” said former governor of Kentucky, Paul Patton, a Democrat, and currently the chancellor of the University of Pikeville in Pike County, which has lost 80 percent of its coal jobs over the past five years. “I can tell you that we’re paying the price for it.”
The Obama Idea to Save Coal Country - POLITICO Magazine

I don't support killtrumpism, just impeachment. ;)

well, you won't get one making stuff up

The coal people don't hate trump. Thats why they helped vote him in.
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/wv-coal-miner-on-why-he-voted-for-trump-896833603809
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,422
9,577
113
Washington DC
I have no idea what you're on, but pass me some.

Sure thing. . .