The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
the benefit of adding additional low marginal cost volatile energy harvesting are their free-standing benefit, plus the portfolio benefit of reducing the variability of the combined power supply.
I'm not really arguing with you, just wondering if there may be some justification in legacy carbon based generators feeling used because they are expected to be available to provide base load at any time wind etc. doesn't, and yet much of their main "market" is being undermined and undercut by wind. Their capacity utilisation (and revenue) goes down, while their costs go down much less (just by their variable costs).
It comes down to whether or not legacy producers should also get paid for providing capacity, not just output, to compensate them for their fixed costs.
Of course many legacy plants paid back their investors a long time ago and should be happy for any business they can get provided it covers their fixed and variable costs. However if at some point in the future they become uneconomic and start closing wholesale, the entire entire generation portfolio may become unable to meet peak demand at valley production times even with a wider range of renewable options in place.
Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 21 20 comments
by Migeru - Jun 17 16 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 17 10 comments
by gmoke - Jun 13
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 11 25 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 2120 comments
by Migeru - Jun 1716 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1710 comments
by gmoke - Jun 13
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1125 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 54 comments
by gmoke - May 2923 comments