The last month is among us..

[DeathAndTaxes]

$0.09/kWh is ridiculous in my mind. Not sustainable at all. Higher prices coming your way sooner or later (even inflation-adjusted).

Why is it not sustainable.   Wholesale rates (i.e. price paid by utilities to independent power producers) in the US tend to be about $0.05 per kWh.  Throw in another $0.03 for transmission & distribution and a penny for taxes and profit.  $0.09 is perfectly sustainable for large coal plants, nuclear plants, or hydro.  

Now if you want to generate power with high cost natural gas, or renewables well that changes things but given the right energy source everyone can profit and no reason electricity needs to cost more than $0.10 (inflation adjusted of course).

The only reason power is so expensive in CA if they shutdown 3 nuclear plants early (and the state had to pay multi-billion dollar penalties to the utilities to do that which simply gets ammortized over the next decade or so in higher prices).  They prohibit building new power plants, and get most of their energy from out of state providers thus paying long haul transmission markup and premium prices.

[molecular]

$0.09/kWh is ridiculous in my mind. Not sustainable at all. Higher prices coming your way sooner or later (even inflation-adjusted).

Why is it not sustainable.   Wholesale rates (i.e. price paid by utilities to independent power producers) in the US tend to be about $0.05 per kWh.  Throw in another $0.03 for transmission & distribution and a penny for taxes and profit.  $0.09 is perfectly sustainable for large coal plants, nuclear plants, or hydro.  

What I meant was: "not sustainable in the long run" due to the underlying natural resources being limited in supply.

[bels]

Well we've been at .09 /kWh since I've owned my house which is going on 8 years now.  We have a power plant using coal, a good co-op, and a solar farm in our county for power.  The co-op is actually putting in the solar power now to, as they claim, to keep the price from going up much past .09 / kWh since once the investment is done I don't think solar really costs anything in labor or other misc expenses to maintain.  But I'm not an electrical mastermind so maybe there is hidden costs in solar that I am not aware of.

[molecular]

Well we've been at .09 /kWh since I've owned my house which is going on 8 years now.  We have a power plant using coal, a good co-op, and a solar farm in our county for power.  The co-op is actually putting in the solar power now to, as they claim, to keep the price from going up much past .09 / kWh since once the investment is done I don't think solar really costs anything in labor or other misc expenses to maintain.  But I'm not an electrical mastermind so maybe there is hidden costs in solar that I am not aware of.

If you put photovoltaics on your roof in germany it'll take about 5 (roughly) years to pay off if you can sell the power at 0.35 $/kWh (!!!). The panels are expensive and the other stuff you need as well. There are sizeable costs, they're not hidden.

It might make more sense in CA or wherever there is more sun than in germany.

[420]

$0.09/kWh is ridiculous in my mind. Not sustainable at all. Higher prices coming your way sooner or later (even inflation-adjusted).

Why is it not sustainable.   Wholesale rates (i.e. price paid by utilities to independent power producers) in the US tend to be about $0.05 per kWh.  Throw in another $0.03 for transmission & distribution and a penny for taxes and profit.  $0.09 is perfectly sustainable for large coal plants, nuclear plants, or hydro.  

Now if you want to generate power with high cost natural gas, or renewables well that changes things but given the right energy source everyone can profit and no reason electricity needs to cost more than $0.10 (inflation adjusted of course).

The only reason power is so expensive in CA if they shutdown 3 nuclear plants early (and the state had to pay multi-billion dollar penalties to the utilities to do that which simply gets ammortized over the next decade or so in higher prices).  They prohibit building new power plants, and get most of their energy from out of state providers thus paying long haul transmission markup and premium prices.

coal not sustainable with Obama in that office

[AmDD]

$0.09/kWh is ridiculous in my mind. Not sustainable at all. Higher prices coming your way sooner or later (even inflation-adjusted).

Why is it not sustainable.   Wholesale rates (i.e. price paid by utilities to independent power producers) in the US tend to be about $0.05 per kWh.  Throw in another $0.03 for transmission & distribution and a penny for taxes and profit.  $0.09 is perfectly sustainable for large coal plants, nuclear plants, or hydro.  

What I meant was: "not sustainable in the long run" due to the underlying natural resources being limited in supply.

Im also in Maryland and used to pay $.09 but it actually dropped the last 2 months to $.07.

[bels]

$0.09/kWh is ridiculous in my mind. Not sustainable at all. Higher prices coming your way sooner or later (even inflation-adjusted).

Why is it not sustainable.   Wholesale rates (i.e. price paid by utilities to independent power producers) in the US tend to be about $0.05 per kWh.  Throw in another $0.03 for transmission & distribution and a penny for taxes and profit.  $0.09 is perfectly sustainable for large coal plants, nuclear plants, or hydro.  

Now if you want to generate power with high cost natural gas, or renewables well that changes things but given the right energy source everyone can profit and no reason electricity needs to cost more than $0.10 (inflation adjusted of course).

The only reason power is so expensive in CA if they shutdown 3 nuclear plants early (and the state had to pay multi-billion dollar penalties to the utilities to do that which simply gets ammortized over the next decade or so in higher prices).  They prohibit building new power plants, and get most of their energy from out of state providers thus paying long haul transmission markup and premium prices.

coal not sustainable with Obama in that office

Coal is not sustainable in the long term whoever is in the office since it is a fossil fuel and there is only so much of it.  With that being said the prices of coal produced energy have not gone up in the 4 years that Obama has been in office while many other things have become more expensive.  So I am not sure what you mean by your statement.

[420]

guess Obama failed then like usual

[bcpokey]

$0.09/kWh is ridiculous in my mind. Not sustainable at all. Higher prices coming your way sooner or later (even inflation-adjusted).

Why is it not sustainable.   Wholesale rates (i.e. price paid by utilities to independent power producers) in the US tend to be about $0.05 per kWh.  Throw in another $0.03 for transmission & distribution and a penny for taxes and profit.  $0.09 is perfectly sustainable for large coal plants, nuclear plants, or hydro.  

Now if you want to generate power with high cost natural gas, or renewables well that changes things but given the right energy source everyone can profit and no reason electricity needs to cost more than $0.10 (inflation adjusted of course).

The only reason power is so expensive in CA if they shutdown 3 nuclear plants early (and the state had to pay multi-billion dollar penalties to the utilities to do that which simply gets ammortized over the next decade or so in higher prices).  They prohibit building new power plants, and get most of their energy from out of state providers thus paying long haul transmission markup and premium prices.

coal not sustainable with Obama in that office

Good, coal is the dirtiest source of energy we have. To suggest that is the way we should go for our energy needs is to be frank, retarded.

[crazyates]

Good, coal is the dirtiest source of energy we have. To suggest that is the way we should go for our energy needs is to be frank, retarded.

Source? Link? I want facts, not opinions.

[farlack]

guess Obama failed then like usual

You do realize that the Republicans get the say in laws?...
I guess the (R) failed.. like usual.

[bels]

guess Obama failed then like usual

You do realize that the Republicans get the say in laws?...
I guess the (R) failed.. like usual.

[sarcasm]No they don't.  If they did we'd all be at least millionaires by now if not qajillionairs.[/sarcasm]

Seriously though this is the reason why our country is falling apart.  Instead of having two sides that can realize they are not always right and having the ability to listen for valid comments from the other side and then compromising to reach a solution that could actually satisfy most people in the county we are left now with a bunch of grown kids kicking sand in their sandboxes claiming they are the king of the world, not willing to budge one inch.  Maybe after we get through the complete collapse we are heading to people will be willing to work together again.

[420]

guess Obama failed then like usual

You do realize that the Republicans get the say in laws?...
I guess the (R) failed.. like usual.

[sarcasm]No they don't.  If they did we'd all be at least millionaires by now if not qajillionairs.[/sarcasm]

Seriously though this is the reason why our country is falling apart.  Instead of having two sides that can realize they are not always right and having the ability to listen for valid comments from the other side and then compromising to reach a solution that could actually satisfy most people in the county we are left now with a bunch of grown kids kicking sand in their sandboxes claiming they are the king of the world, not willing to budge one inch.  Maybe after we get through the complete collapse we are heading to people will be willing to work together again.

we need two countries. a socialist one and a capitalist one

at this moment we have neither but we have the highly inefficient in between bullcrap

[bcpokey]

Good, coal is the dirtiest source of energy we have. To suggest that is the way we should go for our energy needs is to be frank, retarded.

Source? Link? I want facts, not opinions.

Source to what? That coal is a ludicrously dirty fuel source? About 1 second on google will yield more results than you can reasonably shake a stick at, but ok...


CDIAC Report -- http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis_mon/stateemis/emis_state.html (Brief summary:

These energy consumption data were multiplied by their respective carbon dioxide emission factors, which are called carbon content coefficients by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These factors quantify the mass of oxidized carbon per unit of energy released from a fuel. In the U.S.A., they are typically expressed in units of teragrams of carbon (Tg-C = 1012 grams of carbon) per quadrillion British thermal units (quadrillion Btu = 1015 Btu, or "quad"), and are highest for coal and lowest for natural gas

More Info:
National Resource Defense Council http://www.nrdc.org/energy/coalnotclean.asp
Union of Concerned Scientists http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02c.html emissions information (CO2, SO2, Smog contributants, Mercury, Arsenic, Cadmium)
Scientific American Article http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste Residents near coal plants are exposed to more radioactive emission than those by nuclear plants.
Peer review papers on health impacts of coal mining http://crmw.net/resources/health-impacts.php
MIT interdisciplinary study on future of coal http://web.mit.edu/coal/ Study finds coal impossible to use going forward to meet increasing energy demands due to dirty nature without CCS technology.
Whitepaper analyzing CCS http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/proceedings/01/carbon_seq/p4.pdf (Highlight, energy losses of ~25%, plus other costs for sequestration makes this unattractive at best, though it does reduce emissions substantially).

etc.

In the future feel free to do your own googling. There is no bone of contention as to the effects of coal, so this is not a point that needs to be argued and sourced, and was mostly a waste of time.

What to be done in place of coal, that is the meat for a real discussion.

[420]

carbon dioxide is not a waste, humans exhale it and plants use it and they produce oxygen

[bels]

guess Obama failed then like usual

You do realize that the Republicans get the say in laws?...
I guess the (R) failed.. like usual.

[sarcasm]No they don't.  If they did we'd all be at least millionaires by now if not qajillionairs.[/sarcasm]

Seriously though this is the reason why our country is falling apart.  Instead of having two sides that can realize they are not always right and having the ability to listen for valid comments from the other side and then compromising to reach a solution that could actually satisfy most people in the county we are left now with a bunch of grown kids kicking sand in their sandboxes claiming they are the king of the world, not willing to budge one inch.  Maybe after we get through the complete collapse we are heading to people will be willing to work together again.

we need two countries. a socialist one and a capitalist one

at this moment we have neither but we have the highly inefficient in between bullcrap

I don't think we really have a socialist country and a capitalist one.  We have one that cares about people and one that doesn't.  I haven't seen or heard anyone that is actually purposing socialism that is active in federal government (I know there are fringe groups in the US that do actually want socialism).  If people believe that we do, they may not be completely familiar with socialism.

Government programs that help people do not necessarily equate to socialism.  How those programs run would determine whether they are socialist or they are just designed to keep people from being completely down and out.  Programs to help people from being completely down and out actually benefit the capitalist notion because it enables a group of people that didn't have any money to be able to pump money back into the economy, to private businesses.

Now with that said, I do believe the US needs to reform many of their "entitlement programs" to ensure that people who are just to lazy to fill the 3 million empty jobs (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-25/companies-say-3-million-unfilled-positions-in-skill-crisis-jobs.html) won't just sit and home and collect money for nothing.

But yeah, labeling everything as socialism is easier than actually addressing the issue with reform that is needed while addressing the fact that in a capitalist country there is a legitimate need to help those who are down on their luck so that they can still help fuel the economy instead of doing things like resorting to crime, begging or worse suicide.

[molecular]

we need two countries. a socialist one and a capitalist one

now, THAT is a good idea.

Let's make the capitalist country stateless while we're at it.

[molecular]

carbon dioxide is not a waste, humans exhale it

what kind of a definition is that, dude?

[420]

carbon dioxide is not a waste, humans exhale it

what kind of a definition is that, dude?

fixed

yup, capitalist would be best as stateless

[bcpokey]

carbon dioxide is not a waste, humans exhale it

what kind of a definition is that, dude?

fixed

yup, capitalist would be best as stateless

Unless your veins run filled with chlorophyll, I'm not sure that I understand how you are advocating for more carbon dioxide. Humans need something to breathe in, in order to exhale.