Sentences with phrase «expensive than wind»

A US Senate report notes, «Comparisons of wind, solar, nuclear, natural gas and coal sources of power coming on line by 2015 show that solar power will be 173 % more expensive per unit of energy delivered than traditional coal power, 140 % more than nuclear power and natural gas and 92 % more expensive than wind power.

«Comparisons of wind, solar, nuclear, natural gas and coal sources of power coming on line by 2015 show that solar power will be 173 % more expensive per unit of energy delivered than traditional coal power, 140 % more than nuclear power and natural gas and 92 % more expensive than wind power.

hamy on the 6th may, Shell is very unlikely to invest in water turbines (wave / tidal) as they are still early prototypes and far more expensive than Wind, Dberr calc's put them at 4 - 6 times more expensive than offshore wind!.

He says that renewable energy is too expensive, but he is strongly supportive of nuclear power that is demonstrably more expensive than wind power.

Nuclear has passed its day, if it ever had a day; it is more expensive than wind power, there are significant dangers, the long - lasting waste is an unresolved problem, it is not renewable and it is inflexible.

These options are certainly to be supported, but while solar - thermal is somewhat more expensive than wind power, geothermal in Australia is yet to be proven to be viable at all.

The region can expand its use of wood and agricultural waste as a power source, but new bioenergy plants are generally more expensive than wind power.

However — even including the cost of carbon capture and storage — the U.S. Energy Information Administration's 2012 Annual Energy Outlook predicts that five years from now gas - fired power will be less expensive than wind, and about half the cost of state - of - the - art solar power.

Not exact matches

In coastal markets with an attractive wave climate, we are less expensive than diesel and can often out - compete other renewables — including solar and wind — on price.

Offshore wind energy, traditionally more expensive than onshore, is not too far from being competitive with traditional sources of energy.

Solar and wind are both very heavily subsidized and more expensive than oil and gas.

Wind power provides the pressure necessary to suck the well's saltwater through a series of filters and membranes laced with copper and silver ions to kill off any potential pathogens, rather than the more expensive chemical compounds used in reverse - osmosis plants.

Currently, nuclear and wind energy (as well as clean coal) are between 25 and 75 percent more expensive than old - fashioned coal at current prices (not including all the hidden health and environmental costs of coal), and so it will take a stiff charge on coal to induce rapid replacement of obsolete plants.

«Producing electricity with wind offshore is more expensive than onshore, just due to the complexity of it,» Madsen explained.

Although solar thermal collectors are better than photovoltaic panels or wind turbines at generating reliable power around the clock, solar thermal power is also expensive; at present energy costs, it would require government subsidies to compete with coal and natural gas, which can generate electricity much more cheaply.

Add them all up, and you wind up with a Web that nickel - and - dimes you, a Web that's far more expensive than it is now.

And what makes everything worse is that there is a cornucopia of product options for us to choose from... expensive creams, terrifying needle injections, weird spiky face roller things... By the time you've finally found the right products, you've spent WAY too much money, probably questioned your judgement a few times, and before you know it, your beauty routine takes longer to complete than it takes to watch Gone With The Wind.

It also looks more expensive, inside and out, than anything in its class, although excessive wind and road noise reminds you it's not a luxury sedan.

Although more expensive than passive drains, active drains may decrease the likelihood of an ascending wound infection developing through the drain.

On the other hand, Minecraft: Education Edition could wind up being less expensive than its predecessor.

1) That «clean» coal technology is currently far more expensive than existing renewable energy alternatives — solar and wind.

New nuclear power is about the most expensive form of new power generation, more than wind, gas, or solar.

In the Maryland suburbs of Washington DC, I buy 100 % wind - generated electricity through PEPCO Energy Services, and it is only slightly more expensive than PEPCO's «standard service» which is about 57 % coal, 35 % nuclear, 5 % natural gas, and 1 % oil.

For another, although wind and nuclear are both more expensive than coal, they aren't all that expensive.

Offshore wind has been shattering cost reduction goals recently, but due to the complications of developing wind energy in harsh offshore conditions, it's still significantly more expensive than onshore wind.

-- Wind energy is still more expensive than gas or coal generated electricity.

The 2016 version of Stacy and Taylor's report similarly claimed ``... electricity from new wind and solar power is 2.5 to 5 times more expensive than electricity from existing coal and nuclear power.»

``... electricity from new wind and solar power is 2.5 to 5 times more expensive than electricity from existing coal and nuclear power.»

«Our study shows that on average, electricity from new wind resources is nearly four times more expensive than from existing nuclear and nearly three times more expensive than from existing coal,» according to a summary of Stacy and Taylor's 2015 report found on IER's website.

And if you factor in coal's devastating public - health costs, it's already much more expensive than solar or wind.

Successive studies have shown that CCS is generally more expensive than old hydro and on - shore wind but generally competitive with utility - scale solar PV, geothermal, and new hydro while being lower in cost than small - scale PV, off - shore wind, nuclear, and the many other nascent technologies — especially when the real cost of filling - in for intermittency is included.

An IER study shows that the levelized cost [vii] of new wind capacity is 2.7 times more expensive than the levelized cost of existing coal - fired capacity and the levelized cost of new solar photovoltaic capacity is 3.5 times as expensive as the levelized cost of existing coal - fired capacity.

So, when we talk about «more expensive energy» like wind and solar, what we are actually saying is that far more energy is consumed in making that energy to the supplier than for fossil fuels.

But offshore wind power is so expensive that it will receive at least three times the traded cost of regular electricity in subsidies — more than even solar power, which was never at an advantage in the U.K.. For minimal CO2 reduction, the U.K. economy will pay dearly.

Finishing the reactors would be more expensive than building new gas - fired power plants, but averaged over the 60 - year service life, the costs will be right in line with renewables, about $ 60 to $ 80 per MWh — except nuclear produces reliably, where wind energy is fundamentally unreliable and chaotic.

If the lifetime of a wind turbine is 15 years rather than 25, that presumably means that the electricity it generates is going to be much, much more expensive.

The authors contend the world's economies are heavily dependent on fossil fuels because such fuels are and will continue to be safer, less expensive, more reliable, and of vastly greater supply than alternative fuels such as wind and solar.

Earlier this week, Matt Ridley argued that the case for wind power had been torpedoed, and now another UK study demonstrates (yet again) that wind power is highly expensive, inefficient (and ugly), claiming that wind power is ten times more expensive than using gas - fired power stations to achieve the same emissions reductions:

The level of angst in rural communities from disruption to their lives through intrusive noise and wind industry resistance to long - held community concerns has driven more than one expensive court proceedings.

So the issues are very much broader than the trillions of taxpayer and ratepayer dollars which the states are being forced to devote to the misguided effort to tear down fossil fuel plants and replace them with much more expensive and much less reliable wind and solar plants which will have no measurable impact on climate or anything else other than the profits of the solar / wind industries.

One reason that wind energy has lagged so far behind is the perception is that wind farms are more expensive to build and operate than coal fired power plants - a notion that Jacobson and Masters dispute.

Britain's wind farms are wearing out far more rapidly than previously thought, making them more expensive as a result, according to an authoritative new study.

Remember that the gas - fired back - up will run inefficiently, intermittently, as it responds to the vagaries of the wind, and that the gas - fired units will therefore be more expensive to run, and emit more CO2, than they need to be.

Given that health and environmental costs of coal are another two to 4.3 cents per kilowatt hour, wind energy is unequivocally less expensive than is coal energy.»

By comparison, the contract for the wind - generated electricity started at 24.4 cents per kwh and includes a guaranteed 3.5 % price increase bringing the wind - generated electricity to 47 cents per kwh in twenty years — making the wind - generated electricity roughly 4 - 8 times more expensive than the natural gas - fueled electricity.

That is the subject of the short but pointed letter that UC Berkeley's Severin Borenstein sent to CEC Commissioner Robert Weisenmiller, arguing that «residential rooftop solar is a much more expensive way to move towards renewable energy than larger solar and wind installations.»

But construction and maintenance offshore is more expensive than onshore, so onshore wind energy is generally much cheaper still.

Adding carbon and capture technology to new coal plants makes electricity from coal more expensive than energy from solar thermal and wind power, even when «firming costs» are included for alternatives (see table).

Wind energy is now as or less expensive than all other sources of new electricity generation and supplies approximately six per cent of Canada's electricity demand with enough power to meet the needs of over three million homes.

Second, although the final cost per kWh of energy is not given, we can see that whereas in the GIV storage case we build 16GW solar, 90GW offshore wind, 124GW inland wind = 230GW peak, with centralized storage we build 50, 129, 61 = 240GW peak and probably need the expensive offshore wind as a more reliable (less intermittent) source than onshore wind.