Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
afew,

Thanks. However, that LCOE term does some funny things to the actual cost of Ngas sourced electricity, especially in present day terms.

A CCGT might get 60% thermal efficiency if the coolant is really cold all year round, and so is the air, and it is a brand new state of the art unit. In reality, an average of 50% is doing good (though co-gen obviously makes things better)..

A quickie estimation of the cost to make electricity from Ngas is:

Cost (cents/kw-hr) = Ngas Price ($/MBtu) * 0.3414/Efficiency + 1.5 (O&M, etc)

At $12/MBtu, the cost to make electricity would be 9.36 c/kw-hr, or E74.72/MWh at 50% efficiency; at 60% this drops to E64.22/MW-hr. But this is all in present dollars, and assumes close to zip for paying off the capital of the CCGT facility. It is nowhere near E30/MWh. But, that's where the LCOE term comes into play - it seems to punish wind and benefit Ngas using the LCOE approach.

Oh well, at least they did put some kind of price on CO2 pollution, but E15/tonne is certainly not E59.56/tonne. It sure beats what NY State uses which is $1.80/ton CO2 (RGGI), or E1.53/tonne CO2, which is almost in the "Why bother?" category

by nb41 on Thu Nov 1st, 2012 at 02:45:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

afew 4
JakeS 4

Display:

Occasional Series