🚀 go-pugleaf

"Peter Webb" <webbfamily@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:47baf303$0$4471$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "hot frog" <short@tension.span> wrote in message
> news:47bac924$0$8437$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> > "Peter Webb" <webbfamily@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:47b99665$0$22095$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> >>
> >> Buying "green power" would have no effect on the installed base of
> >> renewables unless the additional consumer costs matched the additional
> > cost
> >> of making green power - which is about 4 or 5 times as much as we pay
for
> >> coal power now in NSW.
> >
> > I find all of this very hard to believe. For a start, wind power
> > generation
> > costs were already down to 7.5-9 c/kWh in 2004, and falling at 4% per
> > year,
> > compared to at least 3.5 c/kWh for coal power.
> > [
> >
http://www.bioenergyaustralia.org/reports/Clean_Energy_Future_Report.pdf ]
> > And wind power is not the cheapest green power by any means.
> >
>
> In your, and bioenergyaustralia's dreams.

Numerous other sources agree, e.g. "The current price of wind power is 7.5
cents per kilowatt hour (c/kwh)."
[ http://www.futureenergy.org/infowindblmy.html ]
Google '"wind power" Australia generation costs ' .

Also, "Industry sources in 2004 said that 4 c/kWh wholesale was needed to
justify investment in black coal plant." [ http://www.uic.com.au/nip37.htm ]

So, windpower only costs an extra 3.5 c/kWh.

> > Secondly, why would retailers buy the more expensive renewable energy in
> > excess of their MRET, unless they had to honour their commitment to
> > greenpower customers.
>
> Because the generators don't charge a premium price - they can't. In the
> middle of the day electricity may wholesale for 4 cents an hour. If you
are
> a solar plant, or a wind plant, you have to sell at  that wholesale price.
> Distributors wouldn't buy it otherwise - or at least not for those above
> their MRET needs.

In the middle of the day, electricity may occasionally wholesale for well
over 400 c/kWh.

That said, it wouldn't surprise me if wind farms sold electricity for
4 c/kWh when that is the going rate. It costs them very little to actually
generate the power. Their upfront capital costs are much greater than their
operating costs, so they would lose less by selling.

> > This is a more complete quote from
> > http://www.greenpower.gov.au/what-accreditation-means.aspx :
> >
> > "
> > Accreditation also means that GreenPower retailers' sales and purchases
> > are
> > audited on an annual basis to ensure you get what you pay for. Retailers
> > are
> > audited to check they haven't counted their GreenPower purchases towards
> > their mandatory requirements to purchase renewable energy under
Mandatory
> > Renewable Energy Target (MRET). This means you pay only once for
renewable
> > energy.
> >
> > From a customer's perspective, the GreenPower label demonstrates at a
> > glance
> > that they are supporting renewable energy that is best for the
environment
> > and the renewable energy purchased will decrease greenhouse pollution.
> > "
> >
> > Note "the renewable energy purchased will decrease greenhouse
pollution."
> >
>
> Interesting. It doesn't say "your purchase of this electricity will
decrease
> greenhouse gas pollution". The renewable energy you "purchased" would have
> decreased greenhouse gas emissions even if you hadn't "purchased" it,
> because when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing renewable plants
are
> selling that amount of extra power at 4 cents per kWh to the distributors,
> and would be anyway.

Very interesting. The full quote above, from a government website, is
clearly designed to reassure customers that their GreenPower purchases
really make a difference, but I can see that the wording does not strictly
contradict what you are saying.

The electricity account says "you have directly reduced carbon dioxide
emissions by XXXkg" but I guess that also leaves open the possibility that
it would have been done anyway.

I'll have to look into this.