Tom Adams and Ross McKitrick have a column in the Financial Post which promotes their study being released tomorrow by the Fraser Institute.
This promises to be a report I’ll appreciate, having noted many times the systemic costs of growing intermittent renewables (very recently here)
How green energy is fleecing Ontario electricity consumers
Green industry advocates, including the consulting firm Power Advisory and advocacy group Environmental Defense, have added up the direct payments to new renewable generators, and concluded that since those costs are relatively small, the impact of renewables on the total cost of power is likewise small.
However, such analyses ignore the indirect costs that arise from the way renewables interact with the rest of the power system. Adding renewable generating capacity triggers changes throughout the system that multiply costs for consumers through a mechanism called the Global Adjustment. Our new study, released Wednesday by the Fraser Institute, quantifies the impacts of different types of new generators on the Global Adjustment. The analysis pinpoints what causes the raw deal for consumers.
…Our analysis unpacking the costs of different types of generation shows that the consumer impact of new renewables substantially exceeds the direct payments to those generators by as much as 3 to 1. And renewables are a big part of the problem: Wind and solar systems provided less than 4% of Ontario’s power in 2013 but accounted for 20% of the commodity cost paid by Ontarians.
The entire article can be read, and commented on, at the Financial Post
Strange moment in history of the word “standard”
Feeling unable to pass climate legislation through the legislative bodies of the country he was elected President of, Barack Obama turned to the country’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set regulations on the emissions of carbon dioxide.
The New York Times reported early in July that a lobby group produced much of the complex legislation, and because it’s an anti-nuclear lobby group, Rod Adams of Atomic Insights was noting by the end of the summer that the complex regulation appeared to reward states for replacing nuclear with natural gas.
The other day I read a tweet attributing the following graph to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF):
Curious, I hopped over to the U.S. Energy Information Administration and grabbed a couple of data tables from the most recent Electric Power Annual page.
I’ve calculated the CO2 intensity per kWh (CIPK – g/kWh) for each state as per 2012 CO2 emissions and generation figures from the EIA data (in this spreadsheet), and produced the same type of chart, with the lowest CPIK states indicated in blue (as honest people assuming an honest President might think the states the EPA figures can increase emissions intensity currently have low emissions intensity), medium in grey, and the highest CPIK states in orange.
The graphs should allow people to draw their own conclusions, but here’s a few of the things that struck me:Read More »
The rebound effect – or Jevon’s paradox – is probably a fringe interest, which is unfortunate in that few will appreciate just how asinine Time magazine senior national correspondent Michael Grunwald’s tweet is.
Read More »
This was first posted within a longer post on Cold Air Currents
In Canada, the focus on expanding industrial wind seems to be swinging to Alberta, although they are still swinging in Toronto too.
CBC news somewhat foolishly headlined an article built on a Lazard’s report, Solar, wind cost-competitive for peak energy, study finds:
As a source of peak energy — that is, power at times when there is the greatest demand on the electrical grid — photovoltaics are more flexible and cost-competitive than conventional technologies, Bilicic said
Bilicic apparently isn’t from around here, where Ontario returned to a winter peak in 2014 (early evenings), and Alberta always has had a winter peak – which I assume is also early evening. Solar is completely useless for those winter peaks, but certainly useful for summer peaks, and Bilicic has a point on solar for summer peaking jurisdictions.
Wind is demonstrably not reliable for summer peaks in Ontario, or Alberta. So it isn’t so much that it is not “cost-competitive for peak energy”, as that it’s not eligible for the competition.Read More »