It seems that any honest person would put down the electricity price rises to causes
other than renewables.
If conventional energy production is more than five or twelve times
greater than renewable energy production, then in fact renewable energy enjoys a greater level of subsidy than conventional energy.
For the lower values, the average yearly investments are smaller
than the renewable power sector investments reported for 2009.
Rather, the criticism has to be that tar - sand oil is
worse than renewable energy sources that we ought to be developing, like solar, wind and geothermal.
It is like «blowing against a high wind» to try to explain that dense energy sources which are reliable and affordable are far better for
humanity than renewables.
Failure to do that amounts to a massive public subsidy to fossil fuels, which is why they appear to be (but actually are not) «cheaper»
than renewable energy.
The average U.S. price of coal and natural gas power is still
cheaper than renewables at $ 65 a megawatt - hour, compared with wind at $ 80 and photovoltaic solar — generating electricity from sunlight — at $ 107.
Level premiums are usually
higher than renewable premiums in the first few years of the policy, but lower in later years.
In contrast to today's research, this study said nuclear and fossil - fired power stations had much better EROIs
than renewable sources.
Level premiums are usually higher
than renewable premiums in the first few years of the policy, but lower in later years.
Across these MDBs, there were fewer natural gas power generation
projects than renewables projects, and natural gas power - generation had a lower overall associated volume of finance compared to the total for all renewables.
In fact, cheap gas displaces, on average, more than twice as much
coal than renewables have in ERCOT.
Replacing old boilers and insulating roofs, while less attractive in PR
terms than renewables, can also offer big savings.
Direct air capture and small - scale biochar pyrolyzers fit this assembly - line model better, but there is no reason to expect these technologies to come down cost curves more
quickly than their renewable complementors.
That was largely what sold me, along with the realisation that nuclear power was actually less unsafe and less environmentally unfriendly
even than renewables.
Fossil fuels — coal, oil, and natural gas — do substantially more
harm than renewable energy sources by most measures, including air and water pollution, damage to public health, wildlife and habitat loss, water use, land use, and global warming emissions.
These plants emit 15 times more carbon
dioxide than renewable energy systems and twice as much CO2 as gas - fired power plants.
-- renewables have smaller carbon impacts than nukes, while beyond that point, nukes have smaller
impacts than renewables.
I deliberately do not argue directly for the interests of the modern coal industry and I consistently champion the development of gas reserves, which is a far bigger threat to the coal - mining
industry than renewable energy can ever be.
The credits under the ZEC program, they say, are little
different than renewable energy credits widely accepted as a part of state RPS programs.
It also contends that natural gas exploration has a lower impact on the
land than renewables, as «Wind and solar plants, by contrast, require enormous amounts of land.»
This means that total consumption of fossil fuel energies grew more than 3 times faster (9.6 GWh to 3 GWh)
than renewables did between 1980 and 2012.
Wave energy is alluring because, due to water's density, waves and tides can easily generate more
electricity than renewables such as wind and solar power.
New nuclear plants are more expensive and take longer to
build than renewable energy sources like wind or solar.
Within a few sentences, Roberts claimed that nuclear is more
subsidized than renewables; that unreliable sources of energy like solar and wind are more reliable than nuclear; and that nuclear isn't really clean energy.
In your new book, Urbanism in the Age of Climate Change, you argue that «urbanism is the foundation for a low carbon future,» and the most cost effective solution to climate change, even more
so than renewable energy.
Because policymakers still regard coal as more
affordable than renewables, Southeast Asia's industrialisation continues to consume large amounts of it.