Wind Energy Has Officially Become Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels

>Industry leaders have estimated that the cost of producing energy using wind farms has dropped to around $100 per megawatt hour, making the energy source as cost effective as coal and nuclear energy.

futurism.com/wind-energy-has-officially-become-cheaper-than-fossil-fuels/

Other urls found in this thread:

express.co.uk/news/uk/806222/Winter-fuel-allowance-Tory-manifesto-pensioners-social-care-crisis
youtube.com/watch?v=MbIe0iUtelQ
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

nuclear is the future. small reactors can be produced, they are much more manageable and safer. even old big nuclear power plants caused less deaths and illnesses than coal

>inb4 Sup Forums drops in to scream about "muh clean coal"

*with heavy government subsidies

>wind more effective than nuclear now
>"lol nucular be teh future nao lmao"
Ummmm no? Try again, sweetie! ;p

You say that as if it was a bad thing.

>Something being mass produced and subsidized is cheaper than something regulated tighter than a nun's cooch and out of mass production
woooow

Sweden moved their entire country to nuclear power in less than a decade cheaply and safely.

Usual crazy lies from ecunuts

WInd energy is utter shit, possibly worse than solar

>we should mass produce un-regulated nuclear power plants to compete with wind power
Are you actually this fucking stupid. I see where tripfags get their reputation from.

>I won't believe the science due to my political beliefs
That's why nobody takes the right seriously: it quickly gets obvious you're not defending any truths, but the big corporations' economical interests.

Depends heavily on the area.
But it has great potential, just like Solar.

Still, there are literally no disadvantages to wind power in the long or short term.

You know big corp does wind turbines and solar cells, right?

yea but they're good corporations that have the interest of humanity at heart.

>Still, there are literally no disadvantages to wind power in the long or short term.
There's plenty of disadvantages, from fires to area issues, along with energy storage costs and the somewhat unpredictable nature of wind
jewposingasgoodgoy.png

>>I won't believe the science due to my political beliefs
What science?
These (((NGOs))) and lobbies just shill their BS and make up numbers.

Wind energy IS shit and can't even compete with massive subsidies.

This is a fact.

If solar or w.e was cheap and actually efficient I'd be happy to power my entire trailer for little to no cost.

But sadly it ain't.

Reminder that all this green acconomie BS only exists thanks to Global Warming scare psyop.

So right off the bat you know it's utter crap and terrible in the long run.

Wow, fossil fuel industry IDF out in full force this afternoon!

Too bad you can't store or transport the energy

...

>Gen-4 nuclear power doesn't exist
Wew lad, it's like you want poor people to freeze to death in their living rooms.

I give OP another 2 weeks or so after posting this.

He was a brave man... F

>sweetie
I always see you posting. Please make a goddamn trip so i can filter you. I dont ever want to see the word sweetie on the site

Nuclear isn't just regulated like a ''nun's cooch'' as the tripfag put it, it's also underfunded in every sense of the word.
It's underfunded as a university branch/study/science.
It's underfunded as a business
It's fearmongered in media
It's not been tought to public and left as an unknown

wtf I love renewables now

It's not really cheaper than nuclear if it needs to be heavily subsidizes.

...

>responding to a post containing "sweetie"

>and yet, tories still won the election
WTF IS WRONG WITH THE BLOODY VOTERS!

Now post a video of a nuclear plant going wrong.

I don't see how this is relevant in any way. Are you implying that well funded nuclear power will suddenly not need to be regulated?

No, offshore wind farms no longer need subsidies.
That's the point.

Labour is more PRO green agenda than Tories you realize that correct?

The only ones against the bs were UKIP (RIP)

Who the fuck cares? Wind cannot serve as a base load (read: 100% always ready reliable) power supply. So either it's stuck helping out a little bit during peak hours (when the wind is actually blowing), or it's backed up by natural gas generators on hot standby (read: burning fuel) making the price more expensive than just using the natural gas in the first damn place.

And that's where wind works at all. Also where no one gives a shit about slaughtering local bird populations.

The solar/wind crowd just can't seem to grasp this fundamental concept. One of the key differences between wealthy first world countries and 3rd world shit holes is the availability of cheap, abundant, always on, always available electricity. Without that you can't have refrigeration for food and medicine, you can't have modern healthcare, businesses can't reliably operate and deliver goods, you can't shitpost on the Internet while watching anime at 2am, etc, etc.

>>wind more effective than nuclear now
>>"lol nucular be teh future nao lmao"
>Ummmm no? Try again, sweetie! ;p
Nice to be condescending when you have zero fucking clue about the electrical grid. If you don't understand what "base load power" is, you need to keep your mouth shut when it comes to national energy policy.

>The median cost of generating energy from offshore wind generation declined approximately 22%, but remains substantially more expensive than onshore wind facilities, especially in the U.S.

Literally from the sources of the so called "article" you linked moses

>wind-fags can't even build a glorified fidget spinner without it bursting into flames
>meanwhile, scientists are harnessing fusion, the power of the sun, without setting anything on fire

HOW WILL WIND EVER RECOVER?

>what is natural capital?

>liberal opposition of nuclear power
>dude chernobyl corporations LMAO

>advocators of nuclear power
>dude efficiency LMAO

>Wind cannot serve as a base load (read: 100% always ready reliable) power supply.

It can once you link up wind farms over a large area.
Because the wind is always blowing somewhere.

Specifically: if you build offshore wind farms along the North Sea from northern France to Poland and link them all up they will generate a very nice steady amount of power as weather systems move from west to east.

Before we do that, post a video of a wind turbine producing a terawatt-hour.

Tories are pro-freezing old people to death, you realize that?
express.co.uk/news/uk/806222/Winter-fuel-allowance-Tory-manifesto-pensioners-social-care-crisis

PS: most former UKIP voters swung Labour this election. Stay mad.

And then transmission losses fuck you sideways.

It's literally the voluntary thirdworldization of the West.
You couple insane kWh and regulations with global free trade and you=mexico in 30 years or so (China was admitted to WTO in 2001)

Are you the same guy that was arguing for a geosynchronous array of microwave emitters to do that?

I didn't link any articles.

All I know is the next offshore wind farm my country plans to build will be done without subsidies.
It's a pretty big story.

>Specifically: if you build offshore wind farms along the North Sea from northern France to Poland and link them all up they will generate a very nice steady amount of power as weather systems move from west to east.
And you will plunder the wages of every man and woman, force them to subsist on potatoes and rice, force them to wear duvets indoors, just to do what 10 nuclear power stations could.

You worthless commie scum.

>most former UKIP voters swung Labour this election. Stay mad.
Hey buddy I'm more than happy to see ur island literally and figuratively raped to death by Achmed&friends

Stay mad

>doesn't know the meaning of "means-tested"

The best way for people to afford energy, is if it's cheap.

If the greens had their way, no hike in the fuel allowance would compensate for soaring prices.

did you see that on the telly? Or read it on major newspapers?

Then it obviously must be true 100%, just like everything else they report on.

Possible workarounds using some large scale "powerbank" solutions that store the excess, unused power for later use might work, but no guarantees obviously, and the cost of implementing these power banks are probably still too high to be realizable right now.

It's called graphene batteries sweetie.

Western Europe is already connected into one big power grid (see pic).
And we already get hydro power from Norway, so distance isn't a big issue either.

Only real obstacle is working together.

wow

What part of a wind turbine can even catch fire? Are the turbines oil cooled or something?

I always thought they were almost 100% metal.

Wind is cheaper than nuclear power.

Nuclear power requires government subsidies, if not for daily operation then surely for the cleanup job at the end of a plant's lifetime.
Wind doesn't.

>Fires
The wind isn't on fire
>Area issues
There are only boats out on the ocean, and hermits on mountain tops.
>Energy storage costs
There are transportation & storage costs of everything (trains and floating roof tanks aren't free), not sure how it is specific or unique to wind
>Unpredictable nature of wind
Do you even read NREL or just Fox News?

but muh coal

If you don't have an argument then just don't post retard.

It's almost as if workers don't want their money taken from them and wasted on bloody windmills

Probably the motor winding insulation.

>It can once you link up wind farms over a large area.
No, it cannot. The farm would be prohibitively massive. We could not afford it, to say nothing of land use and bird deaths. One city like Los Angeles or New York would need a state sized farm to meet their power needs reliably. And even THAT could fail under certain weather conditions.

>Specifically: if you build offshore wind farms along the North Sea from northern France to Poland and link them all up they will generate a very nice steady amount of power as weather systems move from west to east.
And be blown the fuck out with the first major storm. Stop jacking off to "green energy" porn and think about the problem rationally for once. Can a suburban home owner put enough wind mills on their tiny plot of land to power their home? Not even close. Now take a look at the size of a major city on a map. Triple that land area for enough power for suburban homes. Now triple it again for reliability. Oops! We forgot skyscrapers, condos, industry, civil infrastructure (lights; water pumps), etc, etc. So increase your land mass by...I don't know...50x for good measure.

Now multiply that figure by all the major cities in the U.S.

It ain't gonna happen and the taxpayer shouldn't be funding enviro porn for greenies to jerk it to. Nuclear is the future.

West Virginia on suicide watch.

...

Wind and solar mainly have a problem with energy storage not energy production. The best energy storage we have is basically utilizing hydro-electric. Pump water into a lake during peak hours and then let water out during off hours. It's a nice simple solution but probably not environmentally friendly and not really feasible for a lot of places.

>Wind is cheaper than nuclear power
No it's not.

>Nuclear power requires government subsidies
Not everywhere.

>if not for daily operation then surely for the cleanup job at the end of a plant's lifetime
Gen-4 nuclear fission technology exists, plants are just huge concrete containers, they can be used for hundreds of years.

By the way, the vast majority of the cost of decommissioning a nuclear site is simply recycling concrete.

>Can a suburban home owner put enough wind mills on their tiny plot of land to power their home? Not even close.
That's because cities are generally not build into particularly windy areas, and even if they were, there are lots of other buildings blocking the wind.

Yes, actually. Not "unregulated" but a lot less insane than now. Current regulation is written for the admittedly risky plants designed in the 60s. Modern 4th gen plants and newer need less restrictions.

All this green energy is expensive as fuck. Look at California or Germany. Who cares if we can do it or not, I don't want to triple my power bill every month. Coal, and gas will be needed for many decades to come.

Who wants to live next to one of these, just look at the moving shadows.

youtube.com/watch?v=MbIe0iUtelQ

>>I always thought they were almost 100% metal.
>metal doesn't need oil for lubrication
>electrical components can't burn
>metal can't grind, break, even burn
TRUST ME GUYZ WE NEED WIND POWER!

You know what would not fail in a storm like pic related? A nuclear power plant.

This. Fuck republitards and their evil corporate masters.
OUR corporate masters are the good guys. I know this because OUR corporate media said so.

Muh dead birds. Turbines are devestating to the local wildlife. Solar too.

People say there is no such thing as perpetual energy, but for all intents and purposes, the sun and weather, as a result, are basically perpetual as they will keep happening like clockwork for the next million years.

Yeah, all were doing is trading PG&E or Exxon for Tesla or some other shit.

Just reduce your power consumption by 2/3.
Muh luxury become a non argument when the welfare of the entire planet is at stake.

Sadly this is the way of the future.

Sustainable negative growth will be imposed at at local and governmental level throughout the world in the next 10-20 years.

Air conditioning is a basic human right. A few years ago, 15,000 French died because they believe air conditioning is bad for you. If you believe in global warming, you must accept air conditioning as a necessity.

Hydro electric, nuclear fission, and solar is where it's at and where it will be at as far as fossil fuel alternatives go. Two of them can provide great base load near water and away from it respectively while another is fantastic for small time, personal use.

Wind takes up too much land and does not have enough resistance to the environment as the others do. Plus when a turbine breaks, fixing it is a pain in the ass.

I'm not talking about a 3rd world shithole like America.
You lack the technology to build offshore wind farms.

But we're already building those farms in the North Sea as we speak.
And with every new farm they become spectacularly cheaper, to the point where they no longer require subsidies now.

I just hope for you Trump will keep sucking that Saudi dick - you need it.
Maybe grand the Saudi's the right to do a couple more 9-11's?

So will nuclear power, which is more effective than wind, solar and tidal.

>That's because cities are generally not build into particularly windy areas, and even if they were, there are lots of other buildings blocking the wind.
They can't do it any where you tard. I used to live in a rural area. When the state started subsidizing wind mills several people put them up. These were people with acres of land. The most any wind mill ever did was reduce their electrical bill a bit. You can't run an entire household on a windmill.

This gets to the heart of one of my problems with humanity: a bunch of fucking "math class is tough" Barbies offering their opinions on shit. You have clearly NEVER gathered the numbers and crunched them yourself. If you had, you wouldn't peddle this shit. Some CEO pays some media outlet to push wind hoping for a government subsidy so he can become rich off the taxpayer. That's all this shit ever is. That's because it's mathematically impossible to be what you dream it is.

But you dream it any way. And the rest of us have to pay for your fantasy.

>If you believe in global warming, you must accept air conditioning as a necessity.

But AC contributes to global warming.
You're willing to trade a few 10k dead old people for the future of 7bn of us?

Think again sweetie.

Somebody didn't read the article.

>We should all live like africans
>White people need to stop reproducing
>We should import africans to compensate
Why is Germany obsessed with becoming Africa? They're going full GERMAN EFFICIENCY ™ on turning themselves into Germbabwe

>Just reduce your power consumption by 2/3.
No. Fuck you. Your theories about the end of the world are as ignorant as your theories about electricity because you are mathematically illiterate. I will not suffer to satisfy your fucking superstitions any more than I will suffer because a dot Indian thinks I should worship a cow.

>Maybe grand the Saudi's the right to do a couple more 9-11's?

>be me
>15yo europoor
>believe 9/11 is an inside job
>believe everything else the (((media))) tells me is however 100% true

wew lad

>the welfare of the entire planet is at stake
No it isn't.

>Sustainable negative growth will be imposed at at local and governmental level throughout the world in the next 10-20 years
Japan has had sustainable negative growth for 2 years, and the governments of the world immediately leapt to try and flood Japan with shitskin muslims.

The powers that be want NOTHING but a clamorous, poor, dependent, in-fighting population.

Stop posting in the internet, that consumes electricity.

>Wind takes up too much land

Which is why you build them at sea or on farm land.

Do you heat your house by surrounding it with open firepits?

Wind makes people feel good and it creates a lot of jobs.
It is far easier to automate most jobs on a nuclear plant than replace the manufacturing, building and maintenance of wind turbines.
Storms like what you showed are rare enough that you can work around the problem.

9/11 was an inside job of the Saudi government, yes.

They did it to show the Americans who their real master is.

>you must accept air conditioning as a necessity.
Nobody has AC here because it doesn't get hot enough.

LNG is much cheaper than nuclear now because of the U.S. shale gas boom.

I offset that by only taking 1 shower per week, as water is also a nonrenewable resource if you wasn't aware.

>creates a lot of jobs
It's soviet-tier make-work bullshit.

I don't want the energy sector to create jobs, I want the energy sector to produce plentiful energy.

>Wind takes up too much land
They usually build them on farm land where nothing is going on in the first place. Certainly America doesn't have that problem where they take up too much space.

>water is also a nonrenewable resource
Do... do you take shower in a fusion reactor or something?

>((((meme brackets))))
>cant read
Perfect fit.

I don't know about Germany, but California suffered from neoliberal deregulation. Watch Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room.

Not for you then?

>>Wind is cheaper than nuclear power
>No it's not.

Read the article dummy.

>>You lack the technology to build offshore wind farms.
>global technology leader
>"hurr durr you can't build magic wind farms like our magic wind farms"
You are a God damn idiot. Mathematically illiterate. Ignorant about electrical production. Too stupid to even think about what will happen to those windmills during a bad storm.

>But we're already building those farms in the North Sea as we speak.
>And with every new farm they become spectacularly cheaper, to the point where they no longer require subsidies now.
Enjoy your blackouts.

>I just hope for you Trump will keep sucking that Saudi dick - you need it.
>"hurr durr america needs saudis for energy production"
We don't use oil for electrical. We haven't for many years. Oil is used for transportation. Most of our oil comes from our hemisphere. Middle eastern oil is far more important to Europe than to North America. And if push came to shove, the U.S. could provide its own oil. Prices would go up, but we have the infrastructure in place right now with the advances in fracking over the last decade.