Here on the East Coast, interest in OffShore Wind is ramping up. Here on Prius Chat we used to say Offshore Wind was very expensive ..it has to be 25-30 mikes offshore here, and hurriane resistant. The environmentalist are saying it is cheaper than natural gas generation, and natural gas is cheap here. What gives? Also what turbine sze is expected these days? 5-10MW I think what the enviromentalists are saying is, the compnies proposing to build the NY and NJ sites on Federal lands are offering decent electrtic costs.
Don't know the cost, but part of the decrease is that more servicing companies are entering the segment. Many are the ones that serviced off shore oil platforms.
are gas prices artificially cheap, or are all the costs included? and is fracking as environmentally significant as windmills?
Historically what killed nat gas vs. coal was business assumption of high future nat gas costs, while coal was assumed to be held at low cost by long term contracts. But right now the enviros are saying off shore costs 2 cents KWhr vs. today's 8-cents typical wholesale. I think they are going by the proposed financial deal for NYC off shore wind farm.
Once you get through the first hundred million spent over 10 years on the legal dealings with the NIMBYs who don’t want to look at them or the landing sites for the distribution system, it probably starts looking cheaper and easier.
Bisco got me to thinking again. There are many maps of onshore and offshore wind energy. Have not seen such for out-of-synch winds. Meaning which areas are windy when others are not? This would seem to be worth knowing as spinners cannot simply be put everywhere.
Oh, we made plenty of power from ours*, and our neighbors had them too. But over the years they’ve all come down, the last one just a few weeks ago. Mostly noise & maintenance issues, though one neighbor did have a minor fire relating to a runaway unit. That put the scare on. *relative to demand: it’s an offgrid vacation cottage that was planned and built for extremely meager energy needs.
From https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2018/Jan/IRENA_2017_Power_Costs_2018.pdf Short answer is that offshore wind is generally more expensive than others, but not outrageously so. Also, there seem to be quite a few articles quite bullish on offshore wind: https://www.windpoweroffshore.com/article/1525362/europes-offshore-wind-costs-falling-steeply Offshore Wind Prices Have Fallen 75% Since 2014 – Here's How To De-Risk Projects Even Further | Utility Dive It does appear that companies are starting to achieve economies of scale/cost reductions in offshore wind.
From https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2018/Jan/IRENA_2017_Power_Costs_2018.pdf Short answer is that offshore wind is generally more expensive than others, but not outrageously so. Also, there seem to be quite a few articles quite bullish on offshore wind: https://www.windpoweroffshore.com/article/1525362/europes-offshore-wind-costs-falling-steeply Offshore Wind Prices Have Fallen 75% Since 2014 – Here's How To De-Risk Projects Even Further | Utility Dive
Couple of things about the Virgiinia siutation: (1) Although *possibly* there could be competitive deal out there, we are stuck with Dominion power who our state elected offiials allow to take a good profit margin, and of course the deal is, we (the rate payers) pay all construction cost plus profit margin, and we pay for electrons and profit margin on that. nobody is happy with that cost implication (2) Because the state has port and shipping industry, there is enormous politcal pressure to pursue offshore wind, because there is a hope thiis could create a lot of jobs for that area
Battery, offshore wind costs plummeting, report says - HoustonChronicle.com Forget conspiracies, like texas virginia power is simply too cheap for off shore wind to make sense. If you think dominion is bad look at PG&E which has been causing forest fires. The electricity cost and management is much worse in the north east. Its the higher cost of other electricity that makes it make more sense there and Denmark/Germany etc. They are predicting in about a decade it will be economically viable in texas and that's when its likely good for your state as well. Offshore projects are expensive but a lot less than they used to be. What would make sense today is much less expensive on shore wind from West Virginia coming in to power more of your grid. The trick is building the infrastructure to the potential wind farms. In texas that was easy because the grid was just in our state. For virginia and west virginia there is a lot of politics and lots of states to deal with.
I drive by the WV/MD/PA Appalacian wind farms on the way home to Pittsburgh. Virginia is not too interested in grabbing a piece of that pie, but the cloud companies want it, so we see. The Bloomberg costs are interesting, but presumably with cheap nat gas here there is better nat gas. Nobody here aware of expense of off-shore wind, the message to the public is that renewables cost far less than fossil fiels and getter cheaper. Doesn't it seem like Uncle Sam should subsidize off shore wind, even if subsidies go away for on-shore?
Found some decent cost info for recent off-shore wind price quotes off EastCoast. ENERGY TRANSITIONS: The future of offshore wind may depend on Bernhardt -- Wednesday, August 7, 2019 -- www.eenews.net "...The importance of the credit is evident in Vineyard Wind's pricing. Its contract with Massachusetts calls for selling an initial 400 MW of electricity for $74 per megawatt-hour and a second 400 MW for $65 per MWh. New Jersey's contract with Ørsted A/S is projected to go online in 2024 and has a projected cost of $98.10 per MWh (Climatewire, July 22)...." So they are saying $98/MWhr without the wind subsidy. However, I still do not have a grasp on what that includes, whereas the power line out to 25-miles is another major expense. Also I would like to better understand a fair/unbiased cost comparison to base case of a new natural gas plant on shore.
