monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Renewables are winning the economics battle against new coal and gas, stunning study shows
By 2030, wind and solar will "undercut existing coal and gas almost everywhere."
JOE ROMM
JUN 18, 2019, 1:47 PM

A new study reveals just how stunningly rapid the clean energy transition is.

Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) reported on Tuesday that renewables are now the cheapest form of new electricity generation across two thirds of the world — cheaper than both new coal and new natural gas power.

Yet just five years ago, renewables were the cheapest source of new power in only 1% of the world, explains BNEF in its New Energy Outlook 2019.

Equally remarkable, BNEF projects that by 2030, wind and solar will “undercut existing coal and gas almost everywhere.”

In other words, within a decade it will be cheaper to build and operate new renewable power plants than it will be to just keep operating existing fossil fuel plants — even in the United States.

Wind turbines spin behind a field of solar panels in August 2008 near Bitterfeld, Germany. CREDIT: Sean Gallup/Getty Images.
New analysis of solar and wind should put the natural gas industry on notice
The reason for this transformation is the remarkable drop in both solar and wind power prices this decade: Since 2010, wind power has dropped 49% in cost and solar plummeted 85%.

BNEF projects prices will continue to fall for the next decade and beyond, with the cost of solar panels and wind power dropping by another third by 2030. Overall, by 2050, the cost of solar electricity is expected to drop 63% compared to today, and the cost of wind will likely drop 48%.

Because of these ongoing price drops, the world is projected to invest a whopping $4.2 trillion in solar power generation in the next three decades. The result is that solar will jump from a mere 2% of global power generation today to a remarkable 22% in 2050.

Over the same three decades, global investment in wind power will likely hit $5.3 trillion, and wind is expected to rise from 5% of global electricity today to 26% in 2050.

The result is that we are shifting from a world today where two thirds of power generation is from fossil fuels to one three decades from now where two thirds is zero carbon. As BNEF puts it, we are “ending the era of fossil fuel dominance in the power sector.”

US solar market sees strongest Q1 ever, industry boosts forecast as costs fall despite Trump tariffs
Phil Dzikiy

- Jun. 18th 2019 2:45 pm ET

The US installed 2.7 gigawatts of solar photovoltaics in the first quarter of 2019, marking the country’s strongest installation numbers ever in a first quarter as the industry’s predicted solar rebound is indeed taking place, and looks to continue.

The latest quarterly US Solar Market Insight Report from the Solar Energy Industries Association and Wood Mackenzie Power & Renewables reveals the bright trends. The 2.7 GW of solar installed in Q1 2019 is a 10% increase from Q1 2018.

Wood Mackenzie forecasts 25% growth in 2019 compared to 2018, with more than 13 GW of installations expected by year’s end — a rather sizable jump from the 14% growth in installations predicted earlier this year. Total installed U.S. PV capacity is expected to more than double over the next five years.

A deeper look at the numbers by market segment shows utility-scale installations are doing the brunt of the work, with 1.6 GW of utility PV capacity coming online in Q1 2019, making up 61% of quarterly capacity additions. In utility solar, 46% growth over 2018 is expected this year.

Florida’s solar development is the biggest reason for the jump, as that state alone boosted its five-year outlook from 6 GW to 9 GW, thanks to increased solar procurement from the likes of Florida Power & Light and Duke Energy.

Utility PV is also becoming more competitive with wind, as solar “begins to fall below the cost of wind on a levelized cost of energy (LCOE) basis in many traditional wind states” by the mid-2020s.

Residential solar was up 6% from Q1 2018 with 603 MW installed in Q1 2019. The report acknowledges challenges in expanding the market geographically beyond already-strong home solar states, but still sees growth continuing:

From 2019-2021, residential growth will range from 5%-20% due to both emerging markets with strong resource fundamentals like Florida and Texas, and markets where recent policy developments have increased our near-term forecasts. Maryland’s recent renewable portfolio standard increase, the removal of South Carolina’s net metering cap, and new incentive programs such as Illinois’ Adjustable Block Program will provide significant upside and growth to our residential forecasts over the next few years. Meanwhile, California’s new home solar mandate will also help to offset market penetration challenges beginning in 2020.

Non-residential installations are still down — an 18% drop from Q1 2018 — with the report attributing this to “state-level policy reforms and interconnection delays that continue to limit development opportunities.” But even so, the industry expects to see some of that offset through community solar mandates and recent policy developments in some states.

The report also notes that pricing fell in all market segments in Q1 2019, with prices now at historic lows across the board despite the Trump administration’s tariffs. Bifacial solar panels were recently granted an exemption from those tariffs, opening up a new avenue for utility-scale solar.

Solar Industry
✔
@SEIA
#Solar costs have fallen more than 70% over the last decade, leading to new market expansion and *millions* of installed systems! #SolarIsNow
9:44 AM - Jun 18, 2019

Adding to the good vibes, the US hit a milestone of 2 million solar installations in this year’s first quarter.

Rump has verifiedly lied, exaggerated hyperbolically, invented "facts" and made up statistics any times more than any other president in American history. Youtend to post a mistruth every time you post something, but even so Trump has you far beaten. Nonetheless, you're lying too.

You and Trump are more like two peas in a pod. I'm more like an avocado.

every single one of your claims I'm a liar was a lie,

For someone with a self-alleged massive intellect, you come up with the dumbest rationalizations for your erroneous uber-right-wing zealotry I've ever seen.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48685584<br />

Every time I called you a liar, you were either lying about me or spewing outrageous name-calling against me. Quite often it was both at once.

Come back and try talking to me again when you can act civilly.

Just to be clear, I'm not putting you on ignore or anything similarly dramatic, but your personal attacks against me are beyond the pale and I'm just not interested in playing.

The environmental movement will rescue the coal industry themselves. They think that if they make fracked natural gas impossible and nuclear power impossible, then the American people will just learn to accept socialist-style rolling blackouts when renewable power can't meet the demand.

But what will really happen is, power companies will go back to burning coal to produce energy when that is the only remaining way to make up the shortfall in what renewable power can generate.

Trump says "coal is back," but use of the rock at a 41-year low
BY AIMEE PICCHI

JUNE 11, 2019 / 10:55 AM / MONEYWATCH

U.S. coal consumption last year dropped to its lowest level since 1978, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

Demand for other energy sources, particularly natural gas, is taking market share from coal.

The Trump administration is investing millions in bolstering the coal industry despite shifts away from coal, including renewable energy.
President Donald Trump likes to tout coal, calling it "indestructible" and proclaiming that "coal is back." Around the U.S., use of the fossil fuel shows a different trend: Coal consumption is at its lowest level in more than 40 years.

That's according to the latest data from the U.S. Department of Energy, which on Monday said coal usage fell to 687 million short tons, its lowest since 1978. Production also fell to its second-lowest level since 1978, the agency said.

Most of that coal is used to produce electric power. Despite the decline in both production and demand, the Trump administration is investing in the coal industry, with the Energy Department on Monday pledging $39 million for research into improving the efficiency of coal plants.

"The Trump administration remains committed to ensuring a coal-fueled power plant fleet that provides stable energy to the power grid," said Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy Steven Winberg in a statement.

Bloomberg's coal pledge

Despite the Trump administration's efforts, coal consumption and production were higher during the Obama administration. The reason: Competing energy sources, especially natural gas, are now taking market share away from coal. The costs of wind and solar energy have also dropped sharply, with a growing number of states and cities embracing renewable energy due to concerns about climate change.

Slumping demand for coal hasn't been lost on some Trump administration critics. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg earlier this month pledged $500 million toward an effort to close all remaining domestic coal plants by 2030. His goal is to put the U.S. on a path toward 100% clean energy. Bloomberg noted that 51 coal-fired plants have closed since the 2016 presidential election.

"Despite all the bluster from the White House, as a matter of fact, since Trump got elected the rate of closure has gone up," Bloomberg said.

Despite the shrinking U.S. coal industry, coal remains the main driver of carbon emissions, which rose to a new high last year, according to the International Energy Association.

Vanishing coal jobs

West Virginia governor Jim Justice, himself a coal mine owner, criticized Bloomberg's initiative as "short-sighted" and "nonsensical."

"The U.S. continues to make dramatic reductions in carbon output and the vast majority of the greenhouse gas generation is coming from abroad, chiefly in the Pacific Rim countries," he said this week in a statement. "West Virginia is an 'all-in' energy state. We mine coal, produce natural gas and we have a growing renewable portfolio."



Despite such political boosterism, coal sector employment around the U.S. has been decreasing for decades, a victim of shifting demand for new energy sources as well automation and more efficient mining practices. Since 1950, the number of mining jobs around the country has tumbled 88 percent. In West Virginia today, about 14,000 people work in West Virginia's mines, CBS News recently reported in a look at the state's coal industry.

The dropping price of coal has also has driven eight U.S. coal companies into bankruptcy since 2015, including the three largest—Peabody Energy, Arch Coal and Cloud Peak Energy.

RENEWABLE ENERGY CAPACITY SURPASSES COAL, GAP EXPECTED TO WIDEN
By Brendan LaChance on June 18, 2019


CASPER, Wyo. — Installed renewable energy capacity has surpassed coal as a source of power in the United States, and that gap is set to widen.

As a source of energy, coal has a “total available installed generating capacity” of 257.48 GW (GigaWatts), which translates to 21.88% of overall capacity.

That compares with about 257.53 GW of installed generating capacity from renewable sources.


That is according to a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Energy Infrastructure Update for April 2019.





Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Renewable sources of energy mentioned in the report include installed capacities of 100.44 GW of water power, 98.62 GW of wind, 38.54 GW of solar, 16.10 GW of biomass and 3.83 GW of geothermal steam.

The report also shows that proposed new additions and retirements of energy generation is likely to see renewables continue to outpace coal.



Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
While an additional 867 MW (MegaWatts) of coal generation is expected to be added by May 2022, 13,276 MW of coal power is set to retire in the same time frame.

Over that time span, the report says that an additional 101,395 MW of installed wind capacity is expected to be added along with 84,673 MW of solar.

The U.S. could see another 15,112 MW of water power, 913 MW of geothermal steam and 626 MW of biomass.

With the exception of geothermal steam, these renewable energy sources are expected to see some retirements totaling 915 MW.

If these projections prove to be accurate, coal will see a net loss of 12,409 MW of installed generation by May 2022. That would compare with a net addition of 201,804 MW of installed renewable capacity.

While coal is on the decline, natural gas continues to be America’s main source of installed generation capacity.

The 531.08 GW of installed natural gas capacity accounted for 44.44% of total installed capacity in the April report.

An additional 61,018 GW of natural gas could be added by May 2022, while 10,171 MW are expected to be retired by that time.

Trump is leaving infrastructure details to lawmakers. That has stymied them before
‘Few Republicans will go down this road,’ expert says of WH proposal in budget plan
Posted Mar 12, 2019 4:08 PM
John T. Bennett
@BennettJohnT

President Donald Trump delivers a speech on June 7, 2017 in Cincinnati, Ohio about transportation and infrastructure projects. Despite it being a major 2016 campaign promise, he has been unable to get anything on the topic moving on Capitol Hill. (Bill Pugliano/Getty Images)

Donald Trump has talked about the “necessity” of a massive infrastructure overhaul since he became a presidential candidate in 2015, but his latest budget plan offers Congress the kind of vague proposal that has left them confused and stymied before.

The administration is asking lawmakers for $200 billion as an initial payment toward the president’s goal — up to $1.5 trillion from $1 trillion — for a sweeping project to upgrade the country’s roads, airports, bridges, tunnels, seaports and broadband networks. But senior officials say they won’t lay out a plan for which projects in which states Trump would like to see receive any of those dollars.

“We will provide less specifics this year than we have in the past, in part because we really do want to work with Congress on this,” a senior administration official told reporters. “We are open to how they [would] construct a package that the president could sign.”

Acting Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought said administration officials are “totally ready and willing to talk with Congress about how to ensure that there’s additional dollars in the Federal [Highway] Trust Fund, and to put forward additional $200 billion in new investment.”

[2020 Trump budget reflects 2020 Trump re-election themes]

The administration’s $200 billion fiscal 2020 request is needed, Vought said, “to make sure that it’s not just a surface transportation bill — that when we need money for broadband or other infrastructure, that is also something that we can pursue.”

Trump campaigned on a $1 trillion infrastructure overhaul, again labeling it a top agenda item for 2019 last month during his first State of the Union address.

“Both parties should be able to unite for a great rebuilding of America's crumbling infrastructure,” he said during his State of the Union address on Feb. 5. “I know that the Congress is eager to pass an infrastructure bill, and I am eager to work with you on legislation to deliver new and important infrastructure investment, including investments in the cutting edge industries of the future. This is not an option. This is a necessity.”

Kent Smetters, an economics professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, said at first glance the fiscal 2020 plan “looks like a repeat” of a plan the White House sent lawmakers last year based on turning $200 billion in federal funds into $1.5 trillion with an infusion of state and private-sector funds. “My initial read is not much has changed,” he said, adding an analysis of the White House’s 2019 plan appears still accurate.

“Based on past evidence, much of the new federal aid would lead to state and local governments increasing total infrastructure investment by less than the value of the aid itself,” according to that Wharton analysis. “We estimate that total new infrastructure investment would increase between $20 billion to $230 billion, including the $200 billion federal investment. There will be little to no impact on the economy.”

In its last report on the subject, the American Society of Civil Engineers gave the United States a D+ score, writing that “deteriorating infrastructure is impeding our ability to compete in the thriving global economy, and improvements are necessary to ensure our country is built for the future.”

The $200 billion request and its lack of proposals for how to spend it is getting a chilly reception on Capitol Hill, and former officials doubt there is much chance the administration’s new approach will work.

“Nothing will happen with this approach, which has been tried already. The bottleneck is funding, and unless the administration takes the lead, few Republicans will go down this road,” said William Galston, a former Clinton White House aide now with the Brookings Institution.

“If the administration endorsed the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s gas tax proposal, Congress would have a place to start,” he added. “Right now, they’re stuck — and likely to remain so.”

Trump has been scant with details for lawmakers before: He and GOP lawmakers struggled to get on the same page when they — unsuccessfully — tried to repeal and replace the 2010 health care law.

He sent lawmakers an immigration overhaul plan that lacked the votes to pass, but never was clear about what kind of compromise version he might sign.

And during the recent 35-day government shutdown, even senior GOP leaders publicly said they did not fully understand what the president would sign to end it.

White House aides on Tuesday did not discount the notion that vague demands and proposals from the president have caused bipartisan confusion before. But they said there is agreement within the administration that this is the best approach at this time.

With Democrats now controlling the House committees that would be a part of negotiations about an infrastructure overhaul bill, White House officials must determine just what could pass those panels — and then a final vote on the floor.

“The president wants Congress to come together and craft a bipartisan infrastructure package that rebuilds crumbling infrastructure, invests in the projects and industries of tomorrow, and promotes permitting efficiency. The president looks forward to working with members of Congress in the weeks ahead to come to a solution for the American people,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Judd Deere said in an email.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell used his floor remarks Tuesday as the chamber came into session to tout the budget request for its “important goals like the continued rebuilding of our military, keeping up the fight against opioid abuse, and addressing the ongoing security and humanitarian crisis at our southern border.” He did not mention the infrastructure plan.

A key House Democratic chairman also raised concerns about the details-free infrastructure plan, saying it “falls short” of what’s needed. He also raised questions about whether the White House is poised to negotiate in a manner that can lead to an actual deal.

“I think the significance of it is as we enter into negotiations on spending levels for 2020 and 2021, we are so far apart on our priorities that it makes — we have to wonder whether the White House is going to be a serious negotiator. That’s disturbing,” House Budget Chairman John Yarmuth of Kentucky said during a meeting with reporters.

The White House did blast out a fact sheet during the Feb. 5 State of the Union address about Trump’s desire for a bill. But it, too, was vague, listing no specific priority projects, relying on statements like “repairing and building new infrastructure will reduce traffic congestion” and “mastering new technologies such as 5G wireless, advanced manufacturing, quantum computing, artificial intelligence [and] rural broadband.”

Still, Wharton’s Smetters said infrastructure is the one unattained Trump campaign promise that always has a glimmer of hope.

“If anything can have bipartisan support, it’s infrastructure,” he said. “Just look at the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates, most of whom have an infrastructure plan. Now, the parties will disagree on approaches and numbers — but at least, unlike on something like health care, they’re in the same ballpark.”

What happens to natural gas when the environmental movement succeeds in outlawing fracking?

Renewables take its place.

What happens if renewables alone can't generate enough to meet the needs of the American people?

We cut off the power to all Republicans.

No. If fracking is outlawed and nuclear is blocked and if renewables can't make enough power to meet the demand, what happens is we start burning coal again.

Ok.

Still think my idea is better though.

You place a lot of "if's" in this. Like every great achievement, there are start up costs. Did the telephone industry just miraculously spread in one year? No, it took time and look now, almost every one has a cell phone. That technology had high costs and skepticism.

Same thing here. Don't be so afraid of the future that it cripples progress.

This is relevant because certain a2k Trumpheads here are not doubling down on American nationalism but really treasonously defending Putin and Russia.
Four to Face Murder Charges in Downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17

Is it treason now to merely tell the truth?