This great information! I do have one big caution however on waste methane. Since the CO2 that would result from burning waste methane is persistent in the atmosphere for centuries longer than free methane itself, even though methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas, the resulting C02 will actually generate more global warming than that which would result from just releasing the methane directly into the air. So, we should not promote directly burning waste methane. Instead, we should capture waste methane, split it into hydrogen, and then either burn the hydrogen in fuel cells and/or pipe the hydrogen to communities for heating and cooking. cheers Eric Brooks posted by: rfreeh <rfreeh123@sbcglobal.net> The following assume private investors own the facilities.
*Natural Gas Baseload:* depends heavily on the ever changing cost of natural gas. For 24 hour baseload power from an existing power plant this is roughly 6.5 to 7 cents/kwh. (The state contracts that were signed during the energy crisis, and are still in effect, are for 7.3 cents/kwh; at the time this seemed outrageous--today it doesn't look so bad.) The price to build brand new natural gas plants has gone up significantly, so natural gas fueled power going forward may range 7 to 8 cents/kwh. (It was 3 cents only a few years ago--how's that for sticker shock) This does not account for increasing future natural gas prices or potential carbon assessments.
*Natural Gas Peaking:* can range from 10 cent/kwh to over 50 cent/kwh.
*Wind:* costs 7 to 9 cents/kwh, but is eligible for a 2 cent/kwh federal tax credit. For this reason actual wind contracts were until recently selling for as low as 5.5 to 6 cents/kwh.
*Solar Thermal:* Mid scale (under 100 mw) central power generation using the heat of the sun (not for your roof) would be 25 cents/kwh (or higher if not placed in a desert region), but the federal government has a generous tax credit of 30%, bringing the cost closer to 16 to 18 cents/kwh. Building to larger scale would reduce the cost signficantly, as will development of the technology and market. It is very close to cost competitive with natural gas.
*Photovoltaic:* so called "solar panels" of the type that go on rooftops or anywhere else you want, on average ranges from 25 to 40 cent/kwh in locations with clear access to the sky and plenty of sunlight (most of California would count for the latter). The lower range would be for larger scale systems, while the higher range applies to smaller residential systems. Commercial developers can bring the cost down significantly due to 30% federal tax credits, as can the $3 billion in state rebates currently being offered in California. Photovoltaics serve the peak energy needs, and thus also fall broadly within the range of peak natural gas generation. How to measure this precisely is hotly disputed between advocates and critics.
If CCAs finance renewable facilities with bonds then the cost usually drops significantly. Photovoltaics is an exception, but this can partly be offset by bulk purchasing, economy of scale, and the ability to influence site choice and design.
Another factor is that natural gas generation is highly volatile in price, while renewables tend to be relatively fixed in cost once they are installed. That is not to say there is no risk from renewables, but inherent and potentially violent price volatility is not one of them. Mitigating fuel price volatility carries a real economic cost in the form of a hedge (market insurance) premium. So this is not merely theoretical.
The California Energy Commission came out with a draft report for cost of all types of electric generation; and it clearly shows that a number of renewables (for example, geothermal, wind, solar thermal, waste methane) can be cost competitive with natural gas if they are publicly financed. Local Power has also demonstrated this in a report we did for the Environmental Health Coalition.
Hope I did not overload you with information here.
Robert F.