Renewable Revolution

CleanTechnica
Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.



March 28th, 2019 by Joshua S Hill

The Levelized Cost of Electricity of lithium-ion batteries and offshore wind have plummeted in the last year, according to new figures from research company Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

The Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCoE) measures the all-in expensive of producing a megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity from a new project, and accounts for the costs of development, construction and equipment, financing, feedstock, operation, and maintenance. It is a helpful, if not entirely comprehensive, measure of the energy wars being played out between old fossil fuel generation sources like coal and gas and new renewable technologies like wind and solar, supported by other energy technologies like batteries.

Bloomberg New Energy Finance’s (BNEF) regular LCoE reports are, thus, a handy guide for determining the pace of the war and the lay of the land, especially as we move more fully into a new year. And this latest report is big news for supporters of renewable energy technologies, as BNEF shows that the LCoE of lithium-ion batteries and offshore wind have fallen dramatically in the past year. Specifically, the benchmark LCoE for lithium-ion batteries dropped 35% to $187/MWh while offshore the benchmark LCoE for offshore wind fell by 24% to just below $100/MWh.


Onshore wind and solar PV have both also seen their prices fall, though at less dramatic yearly declines, with benchmarks of $50/MWh and $57/MWh respectively (for projects starting construction in early 2019), yearly drops of 10% and 18%.

“Looking back over this decade, there have been staggering improvements in the cost-competitiveness of these low-carbon options, thanks to technology innovation, economies of scale, stiff price competition and manufacturing experience,” said Elena Giannakopoulou, head of energy economics at BNEF. “Our analysis shows that the LCOE per megawatt-hour for onshore wind, solar PV and offshore wind have fallen by 49%, 84% and 56% respectively since 2010. That for lithium-ion battery storage has dropped by 76% since 2012, based on recent project costs and historical battery pack prices.”

So, while it was good news across the board for renewable energy technologies, the highlight was the dramatic price decline for lithium-ion batteries which, when co-located with solar or wind projects, are starting to compete — in many markets, and without subsidy — with coal- and gas-fired generation projects for the provision of “dispatchable power” (power which can be delivered whenever and as necessary).

“Solar PV and onshore wind have won the race to be the cheapest sources of new ‘bulk generation’ in most countries, but the encroachment of clean technologies is now going well beyond that, threatening the balancing role that gas-fired plant operators, in particular, have been hoping to play,” explained Tifenn Brandily, energy economics analyst at BNEF.

It’s also heartening to see the continual decline in offshore wind costs, and what was once seen as an expensive generation technology is benefiting from the same economies of scale which have supported the solar and onshore wind industries, with benchmark LCoE falling to below $100/MWh as compared to $220/MWh just five years ago.


“The low prices promised by offshore wind tenders throughout Europe are now materializing, with several high-profile projects reaching financial close in recent months,” said Giannakopoulou. “Its cost decline in the last six months is the sharpest we have seen for any technology.”

https://cleantechnica.com/2019/03/28/battery-offshore-wind-costs-plummet-threaten-oil-gas/

CleanTechnica
Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.


June 13th, 2019

SNIPPET:

Contrary to what the anti-EV alligators would have you believe, plug-in vehicles produce lower emissions than dinosaur-burners over their full life cycles. That advantage is steadily growing as more and more electricity generation comes from renewable sources. A recent report from the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) found that costs for renewable energy technologies fell to a record low last year, and that cost reductions are poised to continue into the next decade.

In many parts of the world, renewable power is already the cheapest source of electricity. IRENA says that over 75% of wind and solar PV projects due to be commissioned next year will produce power at lower prices than the cheapest fossil fuel options, without government subsidies.

Full article:




Agelbert COMMENT: YES! The death knell of the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn from lack of gasoline (and diesel) sales is music to my ears.

Don't forget that MANY homes are no longer heating with kerosene or heating oil because of Renewable Energy based electric heat. The 'electricity is less efficient for heat' crowd ALWAYS neglects to mention hydrocarbon pollution in their MORONIC energy math.

Ignore the planet killer IDIOTS who don't want you to use electric heat. OR, just tell them that destroying the biosphere by burning hydrocarbons is REALLY inefficient!

CleanTechnica
Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.



June 22nd, 2019 by Robert Dee


What’s the ROI (return on investment) for filling a gas car? None, zero! You pay from the moment you sign on the dotted line — engine repairs, routine maintenance, gas, gas, and gas. Did I mention gas? Automakers love you, auto dealers love you, repair shops love you, and the fossil fuel industry loves you. Why not? You’re constantly at their doors with your wallet open.

Many studies showing the cost of owning an electric vehicle (EV) as opposed to a fossil fuel vehicle (FFV) are distorted and biased toward FFVs, as we’ve simply been programmed to think from a FFV perspective. This is by design, just like the skillful manipulation that has people pulling up to the pump without thinking about what’s going on and how devastating it is to them and the environment. The technological advantages and power of EVs when combined with renewables should not be underestimated or overlooked when we compare different propulsion systems.

You can never drive a gas car for the cost of driving an EV. You will always be tethered to the pump, but you will always have the option of paying very little to nothing for the energy to drive an EV. An unfair comparison? When we list the benefits of driving both cars, automakers are quick to point out how fast a gas car can be refilled, so if that’s a benefit of gas cars then surely being able to charge an EV from your own power is a benefit of electric cars. Combining EVs and renewables forms a bond that gas cars can not compete with and as technology improves, as it has done and will keep on doing, this will only get better. As charging rates continue to go up, the line between filling a gas car and charging an EV will vanish, and we are already starting to seeing this.


I’ve written at length about the crippling pollution and cost of the ICE (internal combustion engine):

Full article:

https://cleantechnica.com/2019/06/22/electric-vehicles-renewables-the-changing-world-dynamic/

CleanTechnica
Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.

July 12th, 2019 by Steve Hanley

SNIPPET:

70% of Africans do not have access to a conventional electrical grid, which is why distributed renewable energy from solar panels and wind turbines is the perfect way to connect them to the modern world. But that hasn’t stopped 🦕😈🦖 traditional energy companies from trying to drag Africa into the 21st century with 19th century technology if there’s a buck to be made.

China is moving aggressively to slash carbon emissions at home, but it is only too happy to export them to other nations. It is offering to build coal-fired generating plants throughout southeast Asia, India, Pakistan, and Africa just as long as they are built by Chinese companies.

A court in Kenya has recently nixed a plan to build that country’s first coal facility — a 981 MW station backed by a Chinese-led consortium — after environmental activists sued Amu Power and the Kenyan National Environment Management Authority claiming they failed to carry out a rigorous environmental assessment and to inform local people of potential impacts, according to a report by The Guardian. They argued that the plant would have adverse effects on local fishermen and farmland. The court agreed.

Full article:
 

David Zarembka • 9 hours ago • edited
Another point is that the coal plant was supposed to sell its electricity for 7 cents per KWh, but an independent analysis indicated the cost would be closer to 70 cents per KWh. The government was also required to guarantee that the electricity would be bought by the power company and, if not, the company/government would be required to pay 85% of the cost of the undelivered power. This was a terrible deal no matter how you look at it. At the moment Kenya has an excess of electric power capacity and solar farms and more geothermal are coming on line. 👍👍👍

Steve Hanley > David Zarembka • 9 hours ago
Thank you for that local input, David. Sounds like the project developers were going to get a gold mine while Kenyans go the shaft.

David Zarembka > Steve Hanley • 8 hours ago
You are correct. But the Kenyan elite would have cashed in also.

Agelbert COMMENT: The Chinese seem to have a NIMBY problem. Someone should remind them that pollution cause and Catastrophic climate Change effect is unavoidable within a single planetary biosphere like ours.


It's real hard to grow crops on the 🌙 moon.

Quote from: AGelbert on September 02, 2019, 06:17:17 pm

This screenshot is quite good. We have known everything we needed to know for some years, and have just not cared. Somewhere in my reading today I came across the assertion that in order to make a difference, people in the developed world will have to live on one sixth of their current income/standard of living.

If you listen carefully, you can hear the collective "fat chance" from the wealthy, and
"You first" from the rest of us.

True that about the sentient termites (i.e. the ethically bankrupt = wealthy).

Please do not include me in the rest of us. I have publicly advocated for living with the power cut off from my house for 12 hours a day (not "you first", but all of us, including businesses, at once) in summer (AND winter) for well over a decade, for the purpose of reducing polluting energy use. Yeah, I have not actually hit the main power panel switch 12 hours a day (see: ALL of us together). I haven't turned it off at all. Still, my use is WAY BELOW what the average American wastrel considers "necessary". On top of that. Green Mountain Power is moving fast to 100% renewable energy. 

I have been frugal to a fault for at least 20 years. Though my "life style" may be considered too far above that of a slave in Africa to be "sustainable" by the hairsplitters (and hydrocarbon hellspawn out there, of course), I am 100% certain that if everyone on this planet had not bought any clothing, including shoes, for the last 12 years, gone without a water heater for the last four years (4 gallon "showers" - once a week or less frequent, period ), gone without a microwave oven for the last two years, driven less than 2000 miles a year for the last 13 years, despite saving 30% of my small pension a year, stayed OUT of the stock market in general (and hydrocarbon corporation stocks in particular), the biosphere would have a fighting chance AND the mammon worshippers would be a lot less popular and planet killing "prosperous" than they are now. I am not part of the Age of Stupid.

I learned of a bit of good news today. We take what we can. Reality is slowly (perhaps too slowly, but it's better than nothing), overcoming 🐵 Wall Street Hydrocarbon Hellspawn worship.



The article has some "supply and demand" BULLSHIT happy talk about "the abundance of fossil fuels out there now," as if this was a temporary thing. It's NOT. For proof of that, just look at a hydrocarbon stock I warned the fossil fueler MKing to drop about four years ago. I told him it was going to tank and WHY it was going to tank.

He laughed it off. I hope he kept lots of SLB (Schlumberger) stock in his portfolio.

SLB was around $86 a share when I issued the warning. It's been all downhill since then. This year the hill turned into a cliff.