[NukeNet] Wind cheaper than coal, nukes...

[Mike Ewall]

Thanks to Ted Nace on our "No New Coal Plants" email list for 
bringing this information to light.  I just added in the figures for 
nuclear power and other energy sources, so you can see that wind and 
most other energy sources are cheaper than nuclear power.

-----

On May 13 the California Energy Commission a new comparison of the 
costs of new generating capacity from various sources. Here are the 
results. Note that all these estimates include firming resource costs.

Busbar cost in cents per kilowatt-hour in 2008 dollars:

Biogas:  8.552
Wind:   8.910
Gas Combined Cycle:    9.382
Geothermal:           10.182
Hydroelectric:           10.527
Coal Supercritical:           10.554
Coal Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC):           11.481
Solar thermal:          12.653
Nuclear: 15.316
Biomass:           16.485
Coal IGCC with Carbon Capture & Storage (IGCC with CCS):           17.317

Busbar means the price of the power leaving the plant. All capital, 
fuel, and operating costs are taken into account in busbar costs.

The spreadsheet containing these costs can be found at:
http://www.ethree.com/cpuc_ghg_model.html

Select GHG Calculator v2b (ZIP 5.7 MB)

This gives you an Excel spreadsheet in compressed format which should 
automatically uncompress after you download it.

On this spreadsheet, look for the tab on the bottom of the page that 
says "Gen Cost"

This opens a spreadsheet. Now look for "All-in Levelized Busbar Cost 
California." The results are in $/MWh but that's easy to convert to 
cents per kwh. For example, $85.52 per MWh is the same as 8.552 centrs per kwh

---

Mike Ewall
Energy Justice Network
215-743-4884
catalyst at actionpa.org
http://www.energyjustice.net