Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.
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,

What ticks off the baseload coal burners is not that they don't get to provide baseload. Because they do. It is that other people get to provide baseload as well.

A newly built coal-burner has similar economics to a wind farm - high up-front costs, low(ish) variable costs (if you exclude the subsidy-by-dead-Chinese-coal-miner). Which means that insistence on marginal pricing locks out new coal almost as effectively as it locks out new wind.

... but fully amortised coal has an equity cushion to survive higher volatility. Which means it gets to benefit from the higher average prices (due to the lock-out of capital intensive low average cost producers). If you repair the market structure to allow wind farms in, you undercut that particular source of rent for old, fully amortised coal-burners.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Jun 28th, 2011 at 05:11:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Top Diaries

I'm done with the EU

by tyronen - Jul 13

The Greece Blame Game

by Frank Schnittger - Jul 20

The democractic insolvency

by rz - Jul 16

Scape goating Greece

by Frank Schnittger - Jul 13

In which I defend Wolfgang Schäuble

by rz - Jul 15

Occasional Series