Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [wa-liberals] Unsubsidized renewables cheaper than fossil fuels in Australia

Expand Messages
  • Carol Davidek-Waller
    Because Peabody Coal (the largest producer on the planet) Goldman Sachs (port facilities investors: they put up 10%, taxpayers pay for the rest and the cost of
    Message 1 of 2 , Feb 11, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Because Peabody Coal (the largest producer on the planet) Goldman Sachs (port facilities investors: they put up 10%, taxpayers pay for the rest and the cost of environmental degradation and health effects) and Warren Buffet (heavily invested in GS and owner of the Bulington Northern who will profit from more traffiic and public money to replace their aged rail beds that the cause of frequent derailments) say so.
      That coal belongs needs to stay in the ground unless we want to end up a dark line on rock outcrop.
      Carol  
       

      To:
      From: fomalhaut2003@...
      Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 05:02:13 -0800
      Subject: [wa-liberals] Unsubsidized renewables cheaper than fossil fuels in Australia

       
      And we want to send dirty coal to China because why?
       
       
      A new analysis from research firm Bloomberg New Energy Finance has concluded that electricity from unsubsidised renewable energy is already cheaper than electricity from new-build coal and gas-fired power stations in Australia.
       
      The modeling from the BNEF team in Sydney found that new wind farms could supply electricity at a cost of $80/MWh –compared with $143/MWh for new build coal, and $116/MWh for new build gas-fired generation.
      These figures include the cost of carbon emissions, but BNEF said even without a carbon price, wind energy remained 14 per cent cheaper than new coal and 18 per cent cheaper than new gas.
       
      “The perception that fossil fuels are cheap and renewables are expensive is now out of date”, said Michael Liebreich, chief executive of Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
       
      “The fact that wind power is now cheaper than coal and gas in a country with some of the world’s best fossil fuel resources shows that clean energy is a game changer which promises to turn the economics of power systems on its head,” he said.
       
      But before people, such as the conservative parties, reach for the smelling salts and wonder why renewables need support mechanisms such as the renewable energy target, BNEF said this was because new build renewables had to compete with existing plant, and the large-scale RET was essential to enable the construction of new wind and solar farms.
       
      The study also found that Australia’s largest banks and found that lenders are unlikely to finance new coal without a substantial risk premium due to the reputational damage of emissions-intensive investments – if they are to finance coal at all.
       
      It also said new gas-fired generation is expensive as the massive expansion of Australia’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) export market forces local prices upwards. The carbon price adds further costs to new coal- and gas-fired plant and is forecast to increase substantially over the lifetime of a new facility.
       
      BNEF’s analysts also conclude that by 2020, large-scale solar PV will also be cheaper than coal and gas, when carbon prices are factored in.
       
      In fact, it could be sooner than that, as we reported yesterday, companies such as Ratch Australia, which owns coal, gas and wind projects, said the cost of new build solar PV was already around $120-$150/MWh and falling. So much so that it is considering replacing its ageing coal-fired Collinsville power station with solar PV. The solar thermal industry predicts their technologies to fall to $120/MWh by 2020 at the latest.


    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.