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.
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 gmoke - May 16
by gmoke - Apr 22 5 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 23 3 comments
by gmoke - Apr 30
by Oui - May 1713 comments
by Oui - May 15
by Oui - May 1512 comments
by Oui - May 14
by Oui - May 136 comments
by gmoke - May 13
by Oui - May 1321 comments
by Oui - May 12
by Oui - May 119 comments
by Oui - May 11
by Oui - May 109 comments
by Oui - May 10
by Oui - May 921 comments
by Oui - May 9
by Oui - May 84 comments
by Oui - May 73 comments
by Oui - May 7
by Oui - May 63 comments