Prediction: Coal has fallen. Nuclear is next then Oil.

[mspohr]

Good article.
Too bad they said that Tesla only made 90,000 vehicles last year. The number is 367,500 approximately. Tesla never sold 90k in 1 year. It was about 100k in 2017; 2016 was like 70k.
Why would you not fact check a number that you are using to make a point? - He was saying Tesla was overvalued - which is a very good point. But getting a number like that wrong ruins it and brings his entire article - full of numbers - into question.

From TFA
A few weeks ago, an electric car company, Tesla, overtook the world’s biggest private oil and gas firm, ExxonMobil in valuation. Everyone thinks the car company is wildly overvalued (it is, they only sold 367,500 cars vehicles last year) but then again, nobody seems to point out that the oil companies are wildly overvalued too.

Seems clear to me.

 

[mspohr]

Can Tesla justify a $300bn valuation?

Can Tesla justify a $300bn valuation?

Tesla delivered more than 90,000 cars to customers in the second quarter of 2020 – beating expectations despite the disruption caused by the coronavirus pandemic to production and the huge job losses in many of its main markets.

 

[mspohr]

 

[eevee-fan]

Tuscon Electric Power Makes Dramatic Pivot Toward Renewable Energy

 

[Dr. J]

Tuscon Electric Power Makes Dramatic Pivot Toward Renewable Energy

Two years ago they were (apparently) very wrong about the current cost of wind and solar.

For the last several decades, coal was the most economical resource. It was the lowest cost resource to supply energy for our customers, and it wasn’t really close. Coal just isn’t the most economical resource now, says Jeff Yockey, TEP’s resource planning director.​

But now they're certain that decisions now on solar and battery storage won't be cost competitive 15 years from now.

TEP says it analyzed that proposal and concluded it would require $300 million in investments but would reduce the utility’s cumulative emissions by only 2.4 million tons. By contrast, the Tucson Electric Power plan will avoid 70.2 million tons of carbon dioxide by 2035, Yockey says, adding the energy portfolio suggested by the Sierra Club was the most expensive of all the scenarios investigated.

“The difference is in the timing. We still have a fair amount of value in our coal plants, which we need to depreciate, which we do over time,” Yockey says. “Trying to replace the capacity that coal provides in the near term with storage and solar is very expensive, although those costs are declining.”​

 

[mspohr]

Two years ago they were (apparently) very wrong about the current cost of wind and solar.

For the last several decades, coal was the most economical resource. It was the lowest cost resource to supply energy for our customers, and it wasn’t really close. Coal just isn’t the most economical resource now, says Jeff Yockey, TEP’s resource planning director.​

But now they're certain that decisions now on solar and battery storage won't be cost competitive 15 years from now.

TEP says it analyzed that proposal and concluded it would require $300 million in investments but would reduce the utility’s cumulative emissions by only 2.4 million tons. By contrast, the Tucson Electric Power plan will avoid 70.2 million tons of carbon dioxide by 2035, Yockey says, adding the energy portfolio suggested by the Sierra Club was the most expensive of all the scenarios investigated.

“The difference is in the timing. We still have a fair amount of value in our coal plants, which we need to depreciate, which we do over time,” Yockey says. “Trying to replace the capacity that coal provides in the near term with storage and solar is very expensive, although those costs are declining.”​

They have to get you to pay off their stranded assets before they can even think about investing in cheaper renewables. Heads they win, tails you lose.

 

[mspohr]

Two years ago they were (apparently) very wrong about the current cost of wind and solar.

For the last several decades, coal was the most economical resource. It was the lowest cost resource to supply energy for our customers, and it wasn’t really close. Coal just isn’t the most economical resource now, says Jeff Yockey, TEP’s resource planning director.​

But now they're certain that decisions now on solar and battery storage won't be cost competitive 15 years from now.

TEP says it analyzed that proposal and concluded it would require $300 million in investments but would reduce the utility’s cumulative emissions by only 2.4 million tons. By contrast, the Tucson Electric Power plan will avoid 70.2 million tons of carbon dioxide by 2035, Yockey says, adding the energy portfolio suggested by the Sierra Club was the most expensive of all the scenarios investigated.

“The difference is in the timing. We still have a fair amount of value in our coal plants, which we need to depreciate, which we do over time,” Yockey says. “Trying to replace the capacity that coal provides in the near term with storage and solar is very expensive, although those costs are declining.”​

They probably didn't consider this...
Solar-plus-storage has a 99.8% capacity value in California
“The energy from solar can consistently charge a 4-hour storage device having the same installed capacity” prior to the hours of peak demand, says a new study. In Arizona and New Mexico the capacity value is 99%.

 

[mspohr]

New Emails Show How Energy Industry Moved Fast to Undo Curbs New Emails Show How Energy Industry Moved Fast to Undo Curbs

The messages, made public in a lawsuit, suggest the E.P.A. rescinded a requirement on methane at the behest of an executive just weeks after President Trump took office.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Great to see...

Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder arrested in $60M bribery case related to HB6 nuclear bailout

COLUMBUS, Ohio—Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder was arrested Tuesday morning ahead of an announcement about a $60 million federal racketeering case related to Ohio’s new nuclear bailout law, according to sources and media reports.

 

[eevee-fan]

Natural gas next, end of the year? Expected price increase will mean even better ROI for renewables.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Natural gas next, end of the year? Expected price increase will mean even better ROI for renewables.

I don't see that version of reality playing out in 2020 or 2021. Half the reason we have so much gas is that we're fracking the bejesus out of the US looking for oil. Contrary to popular belief, I don't think any of that's gonna stop any time soon.

Yes, independent investment in gas exploration and production is essentially done, but that doesn't mean the oil majors won't want to(or need to) scoop up all those gas "assets" and keep the oil&gas ball rolling. They're invested in oil fracking production in the US, gas is an unavoidable byproduct of everyday activity in fracking. You're gonna get gas, and it's gotta go somewhere.

Analysts seems to look at gas as it's own distinct market, in reality a lot of the supply side is almost involuntary. Demand ticking up a bit is not going to impact an industry desperately trying to flare off as much supply as legally possible(and sometimes far more).

 

[dgpcolorado]

I don't see that version of reality playing out in 2020 or 2021. Half the reason we have so much gas is that we're fracking the bejesus out of the US looking for oil. Contrary to popular belief, I don't think any of that's gonna stop any time soon.

Yes, independent investment in gas exploration and production is essentially done, but that doesn't mean the oil majors won't want to(or need to) scoop up all those gas "assets" and keep the oil&gas ball rolling. They're invested in oil fracking production in the US, gas is an unavoidable byproduct of everyday activity in fracking. You're gonna get gas, and it's gotta go somewhere.

Analysts seems to look at gas as it's own distinct market, in reality a lot of the supply side is almost involuntary. Demand ticking up a bit is not going to impact an industry desperately trying to flare off as much supply as legally possible(and sometimes far more).

Perhaps. In my area of the Rocky Mountains the wells produce gas and oil ("condensate") is the byproduct. Don't expect any more drilling around here for some time to come. With low oil prices, I wouldn't expect much oil drilling in relatively high cost fracking-type fields. Doesn't make much sense to drill new wells when the cost exceeds the revenue that selling the oil brings.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Electric Power Monthly!

July edition, for capacity changes and generation May 2020. In Electric Power Monthly time, the impact of the virus is being fully felt.

Coal capacity reduced in May 2020, by 1,294.1MW to at 224,525.1MW. Forecast capacity reductions continue. Last month, the 12 month net capacity change forecast was -6,755.4MW. This month the forecast decreased by 297.8MW to -5,759.1MW.

Coal's rolling 12 month share dropped another 0.50% to 20.44%, a drop of 5.85% from 12 months ago. Coal was 48.21% of generation in 2008. May 2020 generation was 46.5TWh compared to 71.9TWh in 2019, and rolling 12 month generation falling to 833.5TWh compared to 1,100.5TWh a year ago.

Nuclear capacity was unchanged in May 2020, so remained at 97,102.9MW. Planned capacity reductions were also unchanged at -1,619.3MW.

Nuclear generation was slightly down in May 2020 (64.3TWh v 67.1TWh), with rolling generation at 805.9TWh compared with 805.4TWh to May 2019.

Coal generation is normally 2nd lowest in May and it was the 2nd lowest recorded at 46.5TWh.

Rolling 12 month coal generation has fallen 267TWh in 12 months. The difference between coal and nuclear 12 month rolling generation is now only 27.7TWh. Nuclear generation has now exceeded coal generation for 6 months in a row. With continuing capacity reductions, the current trend has coal generation being lower than nuclear generation by July 2020.

That's because coal generation capacity factors are continuing to fall.

May capacity factors have normally been among the lowest for coal, and had declined from 47.9% in 2017 to 41.7% in 2019, but, May 2020 was 28.4%. While it was very likely affected by the virus lockdowns, nuclear generation didn't drop much (89.1% v 90.8%) and CCGT generation was only slightly down on 2019 (48.2% v 48.6%), the vast majority of the reduction seems attributable to the marginalization of coal generation in the face of cheap natural gas.

Coal:

Capacity (MW):

Period	Prior	Change	New	Change
Month	225,819.2	-1,294.1	224,525.1	-0.57%
YTD	229,241.4	-4,716.3	224,525.1	-2.06%
Rolling	236,095.5	-11,570.4	224,525.1	-4.90%
Plan +12mo	-6,755.4	-297.8	-5,759.1	.

Capacity Factor (MW):

Value	Prior	Change	New	Change
Month Capacity	236,202.8	-11,677.7	224,525.1	-4.94%
Month Factor	41.7%	-13.3%	28.4%	-31.89%
Rolling 12mo Factor	52.3%	-10.6%	41.7%	-20.31%

Generation (GWh):

Year	Month	YTD	Rolling	Month %	YTD%	Rolling
2019	71,883	391,519	1,100,473	21.66%	23.99%	26.29%
2020	46,488	258,891	833,521	15.11%	16.63%	20.44%
Difference	-25,395	-132,628	-266,952	-6.55%	-7.36%	-5.85%

Nuclear:

Capacity (MW):

Period	Prior	Change	New	Change
Month	97,102.9	0.0	97,102.9	0.00%
YTD	98,070.2	-967.3	97,102.9	-0.99%
Rolling	98,873.0	-1,770.1	97,102.9	-1.79%
Plan +12mo	-1,619.3	0.0	-1,619.3	.

Capacity Factor (MW):

Value	Prior	Change	New	Change
Month Capacity	98,908.9	-1,806.0	97,102.9	-1.83%
Month Factor	90.8%	-1.7%	89.1%	-1.87%
Rolling 12mo Factor	92.4%	0.9%	93.3%	1.01%

Generation (GWh):

Year	Month	YTD	Rolling	Month %	YTD%	Rolling
2019	67,124	331,200	805,359	20.22%	20.30%	19.24%
2020	64,338	327,660	805,869	20.91%	21.05%	19.76%
Difference	-2,786	-3,540	510	0.69%	0.75%	0.52%

 

[mspohr]

One Way to Retire Coal Plants: Buy Out the Owner

There’s money to be made buying out municipal utilities’ coal plant obligations and replacing them with solar, according to a new analysis.

Under Energy Innovation's model, a financier would buy out a utility’s investor obligations in an existing coal plant and pay for the plant’s decommissioning plus the costs of new solar generation (environmental remediation costs generally stay with the utility). The financier wins by securing returns associated with a long-term supply contract, while the utility gets to reduce its costs. When packaged together in a single process, Energy Innovation and Vibrant Clean Energy say that as much as 22.5 gigawatts of municipal- and co-op-owned coal could be retired in favor of more economic new solar in 2025.

 

[SageBrush]

Under Energy Innovation's model

I have a better idea: Let them go bankrupt. I'm not going to willingly pay for their years of stupid, anti-community decisions

 

[miimura]

I have a better idea: Let them go bankrupt. I'm not going to willingly pay for their years of stupid, anti-community decisions

If they have good long term contracts, they may not go bankrupt as fast as you would like. On the surface, the scheme describe above makes a lot of sense. There is a lot of value in those existing power purchase contracts.

 

[mspohr]

More coal power generation closed than opened around the world this year, research finds

More coal power generation closed than opened around the world this year, research finds

The size of the global coal power fleet fell for the first time on record over the first six months of the year, with more generation capacity shutting than starting operation.

Shearer said India had “radically reduced” the amount of coal it planned to build as the fuel struggled to compete with new solar and wind: “They don’t have anyone to sell the power to because there are cheaper alternatives.”

“No one is saying it is going to happen in the next five years, but the trajectory is clear,” he said. “How can you compete with [solar and wind] that has zero marginal cost of supply? They are going to lose. I have zero doubt about it.”

 

[dgpcolorado]

A column about some of the utility bailout scandals in recent years, with Ohio as a particularly egregious example:

Opinion column: When Utility Money Talks

The monopoly gas and power companies are lucrative enterprises by their nature, and their rates are generally under direct government control. Using money to influence politicians and regulators is nothing new. But there is reason to be especially alert to it now, because these companies too often are standing in the way of the switch to clean energy that the country so desperately needs.

Why was the power company seeking bailouts in the first place? Across the country, nuclear and coal plants are at risk of closure because they cannot compete with natural-gas plants and wind and solar farms.

Makes me glad my electricity is supplied by a member-owned co-op, although they are subject to the whims of the somewhat notorious Tri-State.

 

[SageBrush]

somewhat notorious Tri-State

Yeah ... somewhat

 

[S'toon]

More coal power generation closed than opened around the world this year, research finds

More coal power generation closed than opened around the world this year, research finds

The size of the global coal power fleet fell for the first time on record over the first six months of the year, with more generation capacity shutting than starting operation.

Shearer said India had “radically reduced” the amount of coal it planned to build as the fuel struggled to compete with new solar and wind: “They don’t have anyone to sell the power to because there are cheaper alternatives.”

“No one is saying it is going to happen in the next five years, but the trajectory is clear,” he said. “How can you compete with [solar and wind] that has zero marginal cost of supply? They are going to lose. I have zero doubt about it.”

But for some reason the Alberta government has an idea that the demand for coal is growing, and therefore implemented a plan of closing provincial parks and converting them to mountaintop removal coal mines.