Reality is that most "green energy" isn't cheaper than fossil fuels.
I saw some dumb git on TV claiming it cost 1/9th as much as fossil fuels, and that's simply a lie. You can tell it's a lie because anywhere that moves to solar and wind from coal or natural gas sees their electrical rates rise substantially.
The two forms of green energy that actually are cheaper than fossil fuels are hydroelectric and geothermal. In areas with plentiful hydroelectric and geothermal, power costs drop significantly. No wonder everyone hates hydroelectric in particular and actively works against it.
The big issue is that you need to actually make the power you need. You can put a nameplate on a power plant, but people's homes aren't heated using nameplates, they're heated using energy. If a plant doesn't produce the power it says it will, then the actual power that's left costs a lot more because everyone wants to not die of cold in winter and they'll pay what they need for that kW-h.
I saw some dumb git on TV claiming it cost 1/9th as much as fossil fuels, and that's simply a lie. You can tell it's a lie because anywhere that moves to solar and wind from coal or natural gas sees their electrical rates rise substantially.
The two forms of green energy that actually are cheaper than fossil fuels are hydroelectric and geothermal. In areas with plentiful hydroelectric and geothermal, power costs drop significantly. No wonder everyone hates hydroelectric in particular and actively works against it.
The big issue is that you need to actually make the power you need. You can put a nameplate on a power plant, but people's homes aren't heated using nameplates, they're heated using energy. If a plant doesn't produce the power it says it will, then the actual power that's left costs a lot more because everyone wants to not die of cold in winter and they'll pay what they need for that kW-h.
- replies
- 0
- announces
- 0
- likes
- 0