Wind Electricity At Wholesale Gas Price

a reply to: surfer_soul



Yeeh man, total rip off . this time it`will get also dangerous to many, in winter cold time, i guess we wll read it in news when the freezing comes.

a reply to: Kenzo

All this green crap is a hoax, a scam and the profiteers are filling their pocket with peoples hard earned money and running away after.

Is a failure, remember US Obama scandal with all the billions that he gave to green initiatives, and all went bankrupted, we the tax payer did not get a darn penny back. They are looting us.

originally posted by: pheonix358
That invention has been around since the seventies. Anyone who works it out is silenced one way or the other.

Most people who know, keep silent.

It is also very easy.

P

Try the BBQ cooking pot to get hot water.

Been doing it for a few weeks now.

Old Weber Made in the States domed BBQ, collect up a little wood from the hegdegrows small twigs and brances will be fine, light it, put the pot of cold water on top, wait to boil, then use this heated for....................

Washing up (best do it in bulk, usually takes four pots of boiling water)

Tea and coffee making

Boiling up the potatoes and carrots, hopefully one has grown in their garden or allotment

Water bottles. Fill the bed with them, wear one during the day under your jumper or cuddle it on the sofa, keep warm

Washing your car or your houses windows

Keep the BBQ lit with free wood as much as possible and keep boiling the water

a reply to: marg6043

Yes, looting ....legalized looting, as politicians etc have allwed this all .

a reply to: pheonix358

Currently paying $AU 0.35 per Kilowatt.

They only pay me $AU 0.06 per Kilowatt for energy I send to the grid.

That's what i have been trying to explain to people for years now. The price you pay is a contract price, which is negotiated by the power company based on the maximum cost they have to pay to produce the power. The price they pay you is based on the lowest wholesale cost they can produce the power for.

It's a way to increase the availability of low-cost power to the grid without investing to do so. Sure, your little solar farm produces very little compared to the grid, but on the economies of scale, when millions of people are producing a little power each, it adds up to huge profits. It's the same reasoning that causes companies to go into canyptions over saving a tenth of a cent on the manufacturing cost of something that retails for hundreds of dollars. Multiply that tenth of a cent by enough units and that's a lot of money!

When fuel prices were low, the difference wasn't that much or that noticeable. When fuel prices skyrocketed... the cost to produce energy from completed wind turbines didn't rise, so neither did your selling rate.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Kenzo

Lake Erie shoreline, across from Amherstburg, Ont.: Over across other side of lake..I can see 10-15 Wind Generators facing south toward Cedar Point ,Ohio.

These have been there awhile.

Nuclear reactor (2 of them)...stand on the US shore here...while across..are the wind turbines.

If I could get both in a pic from a distance? It's a contradict ion in practices btwn both countries..

a reply to: mysterioustranger


The distance is about 70 miles between nuclear and wind turbines if i looked right , might be possible to get both picture , "maybe " ?


I dont like Wind turbines because the possible negative health effects, even thought not all people seems to notice anything, but some have , so this feels like another guinea pig experiment , like everything else these days, business comes first and any health concerns will be silenced as long possible....

a reply to: Kenzo

No sir...the distance from the US reactor and the turbines are less than 1 mile across the channel in Canada, Marysville.

In fact...next few days, I'm sure I can get both in a pic from a mile or so south.

a reply to: mysterioustranger


Ok i looked wrong, damn google I looked Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station and thought the wind turbines are 8 miles North from Cleveland , but it`s just google information


That`s very close then, very very close.

a reply to: Kenzo

Why wouldn't they sell it at that price? Thats the market price.

The market price is based on the wholesale gas price.

As the wholesale price of gas has gone crazy due to Mr Putin and his antics it now means that the price is far higher than it should be.

There's no more cost in producing non gas fuelled electricity but those producers are getting to charge the increased rate and make a massive prifit.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: Kenzo

Why wouldn't they sell it at that price? Thats the market price.

a reply to: Kenzo

Its not the Russia, or Russia doing this, the US pressured the EU, Europe into sanctions agaisnt Russia now this is the results of this.

This is the result of what the EU did.

The EU did this to themselves not the Russians.

things are still very bad but not getting worse and they are beginning to get better. End of energy fear porn

When it comes to the Energy things are going to get worse.
They just dont want to admit and will never admit publicly that the sanctions are to be blamed.

a reply to: Kenzo

In some Euporean Countries there are times where there is no wind, making wind Electricity, solar Electricity completely useless.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

Don't know about other countries, but in the USA, market price is not a true market price. Market price is defined as the price point that provides maximum income for the producer in a marketplace where the purchase of the product is optional and where competition is possible. Neither of those requirements satisfy electrical power distribution. Electricity is a necessity for a home to be considered "habitable" and the logistics of operating more than one grid, each operated by a separate distributor, is simply not practical.

So we have a situation where the product is a requirement for habitation and only one supplier can exist. Under that scenario, "market price" would be based on whatever the power company could possibly get for its power... $10/kWh, $100/kWh, $1000/kWh... whatever. Because of that, electrical distributors are regulated by the government to restrict their pricing to their costs, plus a reasonable profit. If costs go up, the power companies can ask for (and generally receive) permission to raise their prices.

Remember that in order to reduce prices, the power company has to ask for and receive permission to lower their prices. That just doesn't happen unless enough people start complaining to get a government agency to actually do something... and that takes a LOT of people!

If anyone wants to wade through the legaleeze, it is the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, H.R.4018 in the 95th Congressm 1977-1978. The section relating to home power production is codified in 16 USC § 824a–3 - Cogeneration and small power production. Remember when reading that anyone who owns a grid-tie system is considered a "small power production facility."

The gist is this: All electrical power distributors are considered "natural monopolies" and required by law to produce power for cost plus a reasonable profit. They cannot refuse to sell power to anyone based on any metric except payment. They cannot refuse to purchase power from anyone, and they cannot pay less for that power than they would have paid otherwise. Sounds good, right?

Here's the problem... older meters were unable to determine when the power sold back was produced. Electrical power from a power plant is sold not just based on how many kWh is produced, but also based on when it is produced. Power produced during the wee morning hours in springtime weather costs much, much less than power produced during the daytime in 100-degree or sub-freezing temperatures. It's not a minor price fluctuation, either... off-peak production can be as low as 10% or less of peak production. The power plants have special meters that calculate and log all of this information, and that equipment is so expensive as to be completely unavailable to the general public. It can cost millions of dollars... a drop in the bucket when talking about a billion-dollar production, but nowhere near possible for the average homeowner.

So, when someone sells power back to the utility company, that utility company is required to buy it at their normal rate... but without proof of when it was produced, they use the lowest rate. Some smaller utilities actually just use net metering (that's where you simply get charged for however many kWh you wind up using after subtracting what you produced), but larger utilities? Nope, they pay their lowest rates and you pay that contract price for what you use.

Modern smart meters have the ability to log when power is produced... but they are under sole control of the utility. They simply do not log the exact times. They do, however, log how much power goes in as opposed to how much power goes out. It's nice to have complete control over the monitoring equipment.

The big change came when so many people were producing power from their homes that it was starting to affect the utilities' bottom line. That's when the push for "green energy" came about. A power company could build power generation stations that, once built, cost almost nothing to produce power. The cost of building these facilities was covered by government subsidies, so there was no major initial cost to be depreciated. Thus, utilities could now cite that extremely low power generation to justify even lower buy-back pricing.

At the same time, those green energy plants are about as unreliable as they could possibly be. They require standard backups to produce power on demand. Thus, the contract rates are set based on the most expensive costs. As fuel costs have skyrocketed, the price differential between power produced and power sold back is becoming huge.

All because the tax money we all paid in went to subsidize those green projects, not to increase power... it all happened so utilities did not have to pay as much for power produced by individuals. We paid big bucks to ensure that we would get paid less.

Anyone get that? We paid big bucks so we could be paid less for power we produce! And we get no real boost in available energy or decrease in power costs due to that trade-off.

That's the problem.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Kenzo

Since we are talking? There's another Nuke React south a couple-25-30 miles down/Ohio shore. At times you can see across both of them.

And everyday...those Ontario turbines keep spinning on the opposite shore. Kinda contradiction: we have 2 plants across from each other...while Canada has gone wind in some spots.

Thinking here: Google Earth should show in the same Western Lake Erie Shoreline north is Detroit, reactor in Monroe, Reactor in Turkey Point Ohio...and the Ont. turbines along their South Shore. Cya!!

a reply to: Kenzo


She was in Finance, though I dont know as what.

Liz was also an Accountant with Cable & Wireless.

Then she went into politics.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Darn, great post! That was very informative. I appreciate the time you took to explain this to me. Now I understand the problem.

The power companies should have a law that regulates that they sell their power cheaper when they are purchasing it cheaper instead of leaving it up to the power company to be honest and do what it should do or wait for the hurt to be so bad that it affects thousands of people severely financially and they complain of hardship.

Thanks again for your informative post.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

The way it works now, there is absolutely no tie between what the power company charges and what it pays. The two prices are negotiated completely separately.

What they pay is really completely up to them. The law says they have to pay an amount commensurate to what they would otherwise pay, but that is only questioned when someone files a lawsuit. Most people producing power at home don't have any clue as to how the power distribution operates, so such lawsuits are about as common as purple hens' teeth. In the rare event someone does file a lawsuit, all the power company has to show is recent proof that they paid that low cost for power, and the case is thrown out; the utility is technically in compliance with the law. The laws do not state when the utility paid for power as long as it is recent.

What they charge is tightly regulated, and they have to go before a government board to get a price increase approved. During that board hearing, the only thing they have to show is that at peak power times their cost is enough to justify a price increase. The board members know the utility executives, because they work together. Precious few common folks attend those hearings (precious few even know when they happen), so it's the executive's word against no one. The board members don't expect the utility companies to ever sell power for a loss, so the only thing anyone cares about is the maximum price.

In short, the industry is too complex to allow for a simple solution, and no one wants to get into those complexities. They just wanna get money back on their power bill.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

the uk is looking at delinking electric from gas as a good start point as the current situation allows putin to dictate green. oil, nuclear under umbrella gas pricing.. its a totaly self inflicted injury..

order-order.com...
extract..

The new reforms will reportedly prioritise decoupling electricity prices from wholesale gas prices, and incentivising the private sector to build capacity.

a reply to: nickyw

Yes, it is self-inflicted, and we've been busily opening that wound up with a dull rusty pocketknife since 2006.

The ironic part? The push for "green energy" has focused so much on wind and solar that other technologies are still lagging way behind where they would be had we simply looked at power as a necessity that we can hopefully improve on. Now we're seeing the fruits of that 16 years of self-cutting.

Cleaning the wound so it can heal is often the most painful part of treatment.

TheRedneck