SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Eric who wrote (1576188)12/10/2025 12:49:42 PM
From: bjzimmy4 Recommendations

Recommended By
D.Austin
longz
miraje
Tenchusatsu

  Read Replies (1) of 1583147
 
You must have missed this. In doing so I will assume you agree with the rest of the article:

When solar or wind electricity is introduced, it is supplementary to the existing electric infrastructure. Solar or wind cannot replace existing generating plants because solar and wind are intermittent sources of electricity. The existing grid generating plants must be retained so they can supply electricity when solar or wind fails. In order to compare the cost of solar and wind with the traditional fossil fuels, we need only to compare expenditure when the traditional plants are powering the grid with the expenditure when solar or wind is engaged.

When solar or wind is working backup, coal and gas plants are idling. Every megawatt-hour of electricity not produced by a coal or gas plant reduces the cost of fuel by about $20. Every megawatt-hour of electricity produced by a solar plant costs about $150, mostly amortization of the original cost of the plant. The cost for wind is similar. A spreadsheet showing a detailed calculation of the cost of solar energy can be downloaded here.

An investment advisory company, Lazard, produces periodic analyses of the cost of various forms of energy. Lazard uses the measure levelized cost of energy(LCOE) to compare the cost of fossil fuel electricity with solar or wind electricity. Nearly every apologist for wind or solar uses LCOE.

LCOE estimates the cost of electricity from a new generating plant to have two major components:

  1. the amortization of the construction cost assigned to each megawatt-hour of electricity produced and
  2. the ongoing expenses, such as the cost of fuel and maintenance.
When wind or solar is added to an existing electric grid, the major cost saving is reduced fuel consumption in existing generating plants when solar or wind is working. The amortization of the cost of an existing coal or gas generating plant is not affected. The existing plant was already built, and the construction cost cannot be changed retroactively. The only saving from the addition of renewable energy is a reduction in fuel consumption of about $20 per megawatt-hour for coal or natural gas.

Renewable portfolio laws are not the only subsidy. There are extensive additional federal subsidies for wind and solar.

The promoters of renewable energy were able to get renewable mandates adopted by systematically lying about the benefits and cost of renewable energy while exaggerating the dangers of coal and natural gas generation. If the mandates were removed, the solar and wind industries would collapse.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News