Latest update: March 30th 2011:
Cost of wind, nuclear and gas powered generation in the UK
The relative generation costs of the principal energy sources in the UK are a source of constant debate. There are numerous ways of approaching the issue. In the following feature, David Milborrow* sets out to compare generation costs from coal, gas, onshore and offshore wind and nuclear using realistic inputs for plant, fuel and operation and maintenance costs, both for now and for 2020. It suggests there is little to choose between gas, coal and onshore wind in either case.
This paper can be downloaded from here: http://tx1.fcomet.com/~claverto/cms/?dl_id=407
California Energy Commission reports give costs for power generation from different sources:
US generating costs in May 2008, from the California Energy Commission
David Millborrow’s ( an ex CEGB engineer Central Electricity Generating Board) ) paper on wind costs gives comparative costs ( This link takes you to the file library – look for…….. David Millborrows paper on wind costs » 157.1 KiB – 1,786 hits – 28 March 2009
It is claimed that inherently renewables are on a decreasing cost curve, while non-renewables are on an increasing cost curve.
AN EU ENERGY SECURITY AND SOLIDARITY ACTION PLAN –gives a detailed cost breakdown of many technologies.
for Power Generation, Heating and Transport –
A paper by Professor David Elliot give various cost comparisoin summaries. For space reasons the paper is in two sections, the cost data is tin the second link ( Relative costs of renewable energy and other power generation) and ( relative costs of power generation and other generation 2) in the Claverton Library, section Energy Data and Statistics
In general it can be seen that there is not a lot to choose between the cost of wind energy, and coal, gas or nuclear.s
PV and CSP are considerably more expensive however.
See also:
DECC / BERR equivalent at http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file32014.pdf
I wonder about the data supporting those figures. Since we can produce electricity for about $.06 kW with $50 per ton biomass fuel, it seems that others ought to be able to do the same or better.
Of course this figure includes capital, operating expenses, maintenance, labor, etc, etc.
Neal Van Milligen
cavm@aol.com
Thanks for a nice post. For an alternative energy fan like I am this is a great story.
Thanks for informative info. Hows the political/geographic could impact the base cost?
Nanosolar is now building 16.4% efficient PV’s at a cost of $0.97/watt for panels that will last >25 years. Given that most places in the US have 40%+ sunny days, mulitply by five (to include nighttime), do the math, and you get $.023/kwh. Two cents, not forty(!)
Sergei – remember that panel cost is only one part of the total cost. You’ve also got the inverter, cabling, installation and maintenance. The PV might be 15-25% of total system cost. Nevertheless, if Nanosolar are selling at below us$2 per watt peak, that is interesting.
That 16.4% is champion cell efficiency; panel efficiency is more like 11%.
Not sure what your “40% sunny days multiplied by 5” means: please can you translate that into either full-load-hours per year, or capacity factor?
25 year life for printed CIGS? Hmm, maybe. Sounds optimistic, but we’ll see.
Nanosolar have been good at talking the talk, while their competitors, most notably First Solar, have been out shipping hundreds of megawatts. I hope Nanosolar, Solyndra, and the other new thin-film kids on the block, do get up to mass production soon: more competition has to be good.
Dear Fellows and Friends
There is the true cost in loss of Carbon Credits by Gas and Oil
Finite Fossil Fuel use. The Cost also of relocating Island People
who have their ship coming in to their front door.
I am so tired of information like this which is bias and not including
the Global Climate Change science. Get real.
[…] when there is still an abundance of coal, nat gas, and oil available at much cheaper cost. Relative / comparative costs of wind energy, nuclear energy, hydro power, coal power, natural gas, g… That is not the case. […]
[…] Posted by Dragontalk Relative / comparative costs of wind energy, nuclear energy, hydro power, coal power, natural gas, g… That is not the case. NaturalGas.org That is also not the case. Scroll down to the graph of […]
With such different views,on Globe Warming, solar,wind,nuclear,carbon credits,transmition lines
Sierra Club,right or lelf, we should go down south to the desart in Mexico. Build nuclear power, that has no down sides. No CO2 and 60 years out of the box. Sell power to the southern states.
No Global Warming, no getting sued by the Seirra Club, no CARB or whatever requlations Do desaltation do and third party inspections.
For What half the dollar.
A comparable integrated cost of energy production would have long ago brought renewbales into direct competition with fossil fuels.
Renewables would, then, not require the massive subsidies that have been in place for more than 40 years.
Someone always touts a NEW CHEAP renewable, but no one has actually implemented one in spite of the application of BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars. The solution is always just around the corner; a perpetual five year plan.
Dear William Hayden Smith,
you are clearly deluded, or willfully ignorant or paid by Exxon et al or perhaps merely mad. Fossil oilreceives huge subsidies, $1 trillion per year. Please get your facts straight before betraying your ignorance, venality or deranged mental state.
Admin
We only have two days until the end of the summit. The more people join this campaign, the more powerful our call will be — send the email below to friends and family, and post this link on your Facebook wall.
http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_rio_save_the_planet/?tta
With hope,
The Avaaz team
——–
Dear friends,
Over a million people have called on world leaders to end fossil fuel subsidies at the Rio Earth Summit — a no-brainer policy that could take one trillion tax dollars from Big Oil and reinvest it in green energy. But they’ve failed to deliver — even with the backing of the EU, the US and most G20 countries! The talks end in 48 hours. Now is our chance to save them and the planet’s future.
Brazil’s President Dilma is hosting the summit and has the power to reopen discussions and demand a timeline for ending polluter payouts, but she is considering walking away with the weak language presented by a team of bureaucrats. We can stop her in her tracks.
Dilma has 2 days to emerge as a global climate hero. Sign this urgent petition now and forward to everyone — at 500,000 signers, Avaaz will deliver it straight to Dilma’s hands and run an urgent, hard-hitting ad in the Financial Times:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_rio_save_the_planet/?tta
In the last 2 weeks, we’ve already made huge strides towards an end to fossil fuel subsidies. Together, we’ve:
*Unfurled giant trillion dollar bills with our friends 350 on beaches in Rio and in Los Cabos that garnered the attention of major media across the globe and delivered a 1 million strong call to end harmful polluter subsidies.
*Delivered a petition with over 750,000 signers directly to UK Prime Minister Cameron and the Mexican chair of the G20 summit.
*Massively impacted the vote in a UN poll — making fossil fuel subsidies the top priority for the Earth Summit. We won with over 66% of the vote!
*Flooded the Mexican and New Zealand environment ministers with messages calling on them to push for an end to polluter payouts.
* And our team on the ground in Rio and Los Cabos has tirelessly lobbied politicians — attending dozens of meetings with high level officials from key countries.
The stage is set and Dilma has the perfect solution to turn the talks around: a clear and timely end to fossil fuel subsidies. We only have 48 hours for this final push to action — click below to sign:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_rio_save_the_planet/?tta
The movement to end fossil fuel subsidies is at a tipping point. Over 1 million of us signed petitions calling for action, from Rio and Delhi to London and Sydney. As we enter the 11th hour of the Rio Earth Summit, let’s continue to push until we win!
With hope,
Iain, Antonia, Jamie, Emma, Ricken, Diego, Pedro and the rest of the Avaaz team
MORE INFORMATION:
UN environment haggle runs into problems ahead of summit (France 24):
http://www.france24.com/en/20120618-un-environment-haggle-runs-problems-ahead-summit
Rio+20: anger and dismay at weakened draft agreement (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jun/19/rio-20-weakened-draft-agreement
#EndingFossilFuelSubsidies in Pictures, Video & Tweets: Why Rio+20 Needs to Act (Huffington Post)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jake-schmidt/endingfossilfuelsubsidies_b_1607288.html
G20 Fossil Fuel Protest Video (Reuters):
http://in.reuters.com/video/2012/06/19/g20-fossil-fuel-protest?videoId=236062951&videoChannel=117460
Activists hail success of Twitterstorm (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jun/18/twitter-storm-fossil-fuel-subsidies?newsfeed=true
Update on #EndFossilFuelSubsidies Proposals at Rio+20 (350.org Blog)
http://www.350.org/en/about/blogs/update-endfossilfuelsubsidies-proposals-rio20
Negotiations text “an epic failure” (Greenpeace)
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/press/releases/Greenpeace-comment-on-state-of-Rio20-negotiations-text-for-adoption/
Latest text of the Rio+20 conference
http://avaazpress.s3.amazonaws.com/295The%20Future%20We%20Want%2019%20June%202.45am.doc
William, you are clearly deluded. The simple fact is that conventional power gets enormous subsidies, and on a true comparative cost basis wind power, on shore is certainly cheaper than nuclear or gas.
[…] Relative / comparative costs of wind energy, nuclear … – Relative costs of wind energy, nuclear energy, hydro power, coal power, natural gas, geothermal energy, and biomass… […]
[…] Relative / comparative costs of wind energy, nuclear … – Relative costs of wind energy, nuclear energy, hydro power, coal power, natural gas, geothermal energy, and biomass… […]
last time i checked the cost of producing 1million btu from various resources.
coal:one tone of powder mountain coal $9 witch is about 18 million btu or $.50 per 1million btu.
http://www.eia.gov/coal/markets/
natural gas: on the wholesale market sell for $3.5 per decatherm witch is 1 million btu
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_dcu_nus_m.htm
oil: oil would take about 8 us gallons per 1million btu
electricity: to produce 1million btu from electricity that uses cheap fossils fule you need about 289 kwh per 1million btu witch comes to about $33.5
* kwh is 1000 watts used for 1h hour
*btu is British thermal unit