• Wind $46 MWh
  • Solar $45 MWh
  • Coal $74 MWh
  • Natgas $81 MWh
It's not close and nobody knows where the bottom is. My own solar setup w/ battery was quoted at paying for itself in 7 years. I did it in just over 3. That's not at scale, but consider it works differently than that, because my home is no longer drawing energy from the grid, and is actually sending its excess energy into the grid. On top of this I'm self-sufficient.
Where is nuclear on this list?
Also, do these prices take into account government subsidies on renewables?
reply
I'd love to see the price of each form of energy compared once you take all the subsidies out. Oil, gas, and coal are also massively subsidized and have been for decades.
reply
Oil and gas and coal is also under invested due to the political climate over the last 20 years+more. So even if they aren't significantly hampered with tax, ban and regulation, the industries aren't performing optimally and the supply chain is kind of breaking down for them which drives up cost.
reply
These people pull numbers out of their ass. They are tech illiterates who don't know the basics of electricity or why solar is absolute trash due to phase shift, among other things.
Be compassionate though, these people are simply mentally ill zombies that have been taken over by fiat. They do not have cognitive agency like you or I.
reply
I use solar panels and batteries. Trash was being reliant on a centralized grid to grant me electricity privileges with a monthly KYC bill that varied wildly based on the behavior of rich men north of Richmond. Now they send me a check. The setup paid for itself in just over 3 years, not the 7 years I was quoted. Decentralized energy. Decentralized money. Now I just need some decentralized food production and mesh network for internet access.
reply
Yeah, I am trying to find any objective data on any electricity generation but all the established sources are biased and bought by lobbyists and interest groups.
reply
deleted by author
reply
deleted by author
reply
Intermittent and unreliable power sources requiring massive government subsidies paired with expensive and environmentally devastating energy storage systems are the cheapest form of energy per kWh, brought to you by Pfizer
reply
Why do you think bitcoin hashpower keeps setting global records even when the BTC price has collapsed 70% from its peak?
reply
Oh maybe I misunderstood. If you are saying that solar and wind are the cheapest per kWh from a bitcoin miners perspective, that is probably true.
But in that case, it's only because of malinvestment as a result of subsidies and cost benefit analyses that obscure the trade-offs being made in terms of reliability and other factors. I do agree that this trend is likely to continue in the short-medium term.
But I would just argue that this malinvestment is the fiat trend, not fossil fuels.
reply
I'd suggest looking over the storied history of fossil fuel subsidies @anon, then consider its many wars requiring its own subsidy set, add up all its ecological disasters from spills, explosions, contaminations, smog, and leaks, then check out the global geographical footprint of it wells, mines and fields, then take inventory of the infrastructure needed to support it from tankers, refineries, pipelines, platforms, and consider everything that goes into manually getting gasoline to your gas station. This is to say nothing of the small group controlling most of it all. Standard Oil was once BP, Amoco, Exxon, and Chevron, before the anti-trust case. They also controlled all the logistics infrastructure. Anti-trust never happened in the Middle-East, in Russia, and elsewhere. Bitcoin and green energy are coming for these dinosaurs.
reply
Because of the reasons you listed :) they fund their growth with debt thinking btc will go up forever. It's the same reason microstrategy bought btc with debt. They think btc will go up forever and they can't lose.
reply