Comments - Filibustering the $1 trillion-plus Covid-19 bill hoping to include tax credits for solar and wind energy - Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine2024-03-29T07:26:24Zhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=4401701%3ABlogPost%3A184169&xn_auth=noThe proven oil reserves in Ve…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-03-27:4401701:Comment:1840782020-03-27T15:44:09.358ZWillem Posthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/WillemPost942
<p><span>The proven</span> <b>oil reserves in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela" title="Venezuela">Venezuela</a></b> <span>are recognized as the</span> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves" title="List of countries by proven oil reserves">largest in the world</a><span>, totaling 300 billion barrels (4.8</span><span>×</span><span>10</span><sup>10</sup><span> m</span><sup>3</sup><span>) as of 1 January 2014.…</span></p>
<p><span>The proven</span> <b>oil reserves in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela" title="Venezuela">Venezuela</a></b> <span>are recognized as the</span> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves" title="List of countries by proven oil reserves">largest in the world</a><span>, totaling 300 billion barrels (4.8</span><span>×</span><span>10</span><sup>10</sup><span> m</span><sup>3</sup><span>) as of 1 January 2014.</span><sup id="cite_ref-1" class="reference"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Venezuela#cite_note-1">[1]</a></sup></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>In early 2011, then-president</span> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez" title="Hugo Chávez">Hugo Chávez</a> <span>and the</span> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Venezuela" title="Government of Venezuela">Venezuelan government</a> <span>announced that the nation's</span> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves" title="Oil reserves">oil reserves</a> <span>had surpassed that of the previous long-term world leader,</span> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia" title="Saudi Arabia">Saudi Arabia</a><span>.</span><sup id="cite_ref-english.ahram.org.eg_2-0" class="reference"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Venezuela#cite_note-english.ahram.org.eg-2">[2]</a></sup></p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC" title="OPEC">OPEC</a> <span>said that Saudi Arabia's reserves stood at 265 billion barrels (4.21</span><span>×</span><span>10</span><sup>10</sup><span> m</span><sup>3</sup><span>) in 2009.</span><sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Venezuela#cite_note-3">[3]</a></sup></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>The 2019 edition of the BP Statistical Review of World Energy reports the total proved reserves of 303.3 billion barrels for Venezuela and 297.7 billion barrels for Saudi Arabia</span> <sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Venezuela#cite_note-4">[4]</a></sup><span>.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>The US want to get control over these reserves, which means it has to oust Maduro, an elected President.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>Ukraine has little oil and gas.</span></p>
<p><span>It is of little use to the US or the EU, other than using it to PO the Russia.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>The US has plenty of energy.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>No needs for expensive wind and solar.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>Comments on Below Wind and Solar Cost Table</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cost-shifting-is-the-name-of-the-game-regarding-wind-and-solar" target="_blank">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cost-shifting-is-the-name-of-the-game-regarding-wind-and-solar</a></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Indirect subsidies </strong>are due to loan interest deduction and depreciation deductions from taxable incomes.</p>
<p><strong>Direct subsidies </strong>are due to up front grants, waiving of state sales taxes, and/or local property (municipal and school) taxes. See URL.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>An owner of ridgeline wind would have to sell his output at 18.8 c/kWh, if the owner were not getting the benefits of cost shifting and upfront cash grants and subsidies.</p>
<p>That owner could sell his output at 16.4 c/kWh, if his costs were reduced due to cost shifting.</p>
<p>He could sell his output at 9 c/kWh, if on top of the cost shifting, he also received various subsidies. The same rationale holds for solar. See table.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>In NE construction costs of ridgeline wind and offshore wind are high/MW, and the capacity factor of wind is about 0.285 and of solar about 0.14. Thus, NE wind and solar have high prices/MWh. See table.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In US areas, such as the Great Plains, Texas Panhandle and Southwest, with much lower construction costs/MW and much better sun and wind conditions than New England, wind and solar electricity prices/MWh are less.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Those lower prices often are mentioned, without mentioning other factors, by the pro-RE media and financial consultants, such as Bloomberg, etc., which surely deceives the lay public</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Future electricity cost/MWh, due to the planned build-out of NE offshore wind added to the planned build-out of NE onshore wind, likely would not significantly change, because of the high costs of grid extensions and upgrades to connect the wind plants and to provide significantly increased connections to the New York and Canadian grids.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>NOTE: </strong>For the past 20 years, Germany and Denmark have been increasing their connections to nearby grids, because of their increased wind and solar.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The subsidy percentages in below table are from a cost analysis of NE wind and solar in this article. See URL.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/excessive-subsidies-for-2200-kw-field-mounted-solar-system-in">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/excessive-subsidies-for-2200-kw-field-mounted-solar-system-in</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Values for 2018 are represented in below table.</p>
<p> </p>
<table>
<tbody><tr><td><p>NE Wind/Solar</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">NE Wind</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>%</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>NE Solar</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">%</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">Ridgeline</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">Large-scale</p>
</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr><td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">c/kWh</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">c/kWh</p>
</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Price to utility</p>
</td>
<td><p>No direct/indirect subsidies</p>
</td>
<td><p>No cost shifting</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">18.8</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>100</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>23.5</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">100</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Less cost shifting</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">2.4</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>13</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>2.1</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">9</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Price to utility</p>
</td>
<td><p>No direct/indirect subsidies</p>
</td>
<td><p>With cost shifting</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">16.4</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>87</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>21.4</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">91</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Less subsidy, wind</p>
</td>
<td><p>45% of 16.4</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">7.4</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">39</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Less subsidy, solar</p>
</td>
<td><p>45% of 21.4</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">9.6</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">41</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Price to utility*</p>
</td>
<td><p>With direct/indirect subsidies</p>
</td>
<td><p>With cost shifting</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">9.0</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>48</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>11.8</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">50</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>* Owner prices to utilities are based on recent 20-year electricity supply contracts awarded by competitive bidding in New England. These prices would have been about 48% to 50% higher without the direct and indirect subsidies and the cost shifting. Similar percentages apply in areas with better wind and solar conditions, and lower construction costs/MW, than New England. The prices, c/MWh, in those areas are lower than New England.</strong></p>
<p></p>
<p></p> Here is a more complete list…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-03-25:4401701:Comment:1842342020-03-25T02:09:31.186ZWillem Posthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/WillemPost942
<p>Here is a more complete list of the junk in Pelosi’s bill.</p>
<p>Welch, Bernie and Leahy support those items</p>
<p>Early voting for all states<br/>Same day voter registration<br/>Internet voter registration<br/>Post Office Bailout<br/>New Emission standards for Airlines<br/>Student Loan Forgiveness<br/>Corporate Pay info by race<br/>Expand collective bargaining rights for government workers<br/>Expansion of minority banks<br/>Wind & Solar tax credits</p>
<p>Here is a more complete list of the junk in Pelosi’s bill.</p>
<p>Welch, Bernie and Leahy support those items</p>
<p>Early voting for all states<br/>Same day voter registration<br/>Internet voter registration<br/>Post Office Bailout<br/>New Emission standards for Airlines<br/>Student Loan Forgiveness<br/>Corporate Pay info by race<br/>Expand collective bargaining rights for government workers<br/>Expansion of minority banks<br/>Wind & Solar tax credits</p> They are hoping for a collaps…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-03-25:4401701:Comment:1843132020-03-25T02:08:32.598ZWillem Posthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/WillemPost942
<p>They are hoping for a collapse of the economy, so they can win in November.</p>
<p>“Never let a crises go to waste”, per Rahm Emmanuel, in 2008.<br></br>The US is facing an unprecedented moment in an era that has already witnessed 9/11 and the 2008 crash.</p>
<p>“…we must be careful not to exacerbate the ongoing climate crisis,” Democratic Reps. Kathy Castor of Florida, Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico, and Jared Huffman of California wrote in a March 20 letter to House Speaker Nancy…</p>
<p>They are hoping for a collapse of the economy, so they can win in November.</p>
<p>“Never let a crises go to waste”, per Rahm Emmanuel, in 2008.<br/>The US is facing an unprecedented moment in an era that has already witnessed 9/11 and the 2008 crash.</p>
<p>“…we must be careful not to exacerbate the ongoing climate crisis,” Democratic Reps. Kathy Castor of Florida, Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico, and Jared Huffman of California wrote in a March 20 letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.”</p>
<p>What the (fill in your own word) has the “climate crisis” got to due with, never minding, “exacerbating”, the epidemic!</p>
<p>The Dems have gone crazy!</p>
<p>Dems are holding the virus bill hostage by inserting their:</p>
<p>Climate Change agenda, and<br/>Other Liberal Dreams; a total Disgrace</p>
<p>Demself inserted into the virus bill that the aviation industry to practice:</p>
<p>Adoption of low-carbon fuels,<br/>Support for greenhouse gas efficiency standards, and/or<br/>Electrification of ground support equipment at airports</p>
<p>In the virus bills were tax credits for solar panels and wind turbines.<br/>60% of all solar panels are made in China.<br/>How stupid could these people be to literally hand out hard American currency to China?<br/>Who knows how much of wind turbines are made in China.</p>
<p>Dems look terrible by trying to hold this relief bill hostage to their laundry list of leftwing desires.</p>
<p>Trump’s approval rating for handling the Wuhan virus crisis is 55 percent favorable, according to a new ABC poll, and 60 percent in another poll.</p>
<p>That’s despite Dems and lapdog media doing everything they can do to undermine Trump in a time of crisis, including this instance of blackmail.</p>
<p>Dems are going to pay at the polls.<br/>They are making a perfect case for why they should no longer wield power.</p>
<p>Trump is working tirelessly to help ordinary people through a crisis, whilst those in the left/green movement are pushing their left wind agendas</p>
<p>I hope, people will remember all in November.</p> Who is John Galt?tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-03-24:4401701:Comment:1843112020-03-24T16:10:49.735ZThinklike A. Mountainhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/ThinklikeAMountain
<p>Who is John Galt?</p>
<p>Who is John Galt?</p> The left wing pushing RENEWA…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-03-24:4401701:Comment:1841842020-03-24T14:39:48.574Zarthur qwenkhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/arthurqwenk
<p>The left wing pushing RENEWABLE PTC and other (GREEN)subsidizations would prefer to have Americans obtain NO emergency help if THEY DO NOT GET THEIR WAY with continued UNNECESSARY SUBSIDIZATION. In effect , let them die!</p>
<p>THE LEFT WING DEMS have Become IMMORAL Perverts of Power, no Better than the Chinese Communist Government and the Chinese Wuhan Virus . </p>
<p>The left wing pushing RENEWABLE PTC and other (GREEN)subsidizations would prefer to have Americans obtain NO emergency help if THEY DO NOT GET THEIR WAY with continued UNNECESSARY SUBSIDIZATION. In effect , let them die!</p>
<p>THE LEFT WING DEMS have Become IMMORAL Perverts of Power, no Better than the Chinese Communist Government and the Chinese Wuhan Virus . </p> Have these wind bastards no S…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-03-23:4401701:Comment:1841822020-03-23T22:47:12.967ZWillem Posthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/WillemPost942
<p>Have these wind bastards no SHAME?</p>
<p>The want to keep on sucking from the government tit.</p>
<p>Billions of subsidies each year, already for about 30 years</p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>Cost Shifting From Millionaire Owners to Struggling Ratepayers and Taxpayers </strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Clever multi-millionaires have known about wind and solar being much more expensive compared with existing generation (coal, oil, gas, nuclear, hydro, etc.) for at least 25 years.…</p>
<p></p>
<p>Have these wind bastards no SHAME?</p>
<p>The want to keep on sucking from the government tit.</p>
<p>Billions of subsidies each year, already for about 30 years</p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>Cost Shifting From Millionaire Owners to Struggling Ratepayers and Taxpayers </strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Clever multi-millionaires have known about wind and solar being much more expensive compared with existing generation (coal, oil, gas, nuclear, hydro, etc.) for at least 25 years.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/IER_LCOE2019Final-.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/IER_LCOE2019Final-.pdf</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>By beating the drums of climate change and global warming, and using clever lobbyists in the halls of Congress and State legislatures, they were able to get all sorts of goodies, such as upfront cash grants, upfront tax credits, low-cost loans, generous, above-market, feed-in tariffs, production tax credits, and loan interest and asset depreciation write-offs to avoid paying income taxes.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>All that enables them, and others to claim wind and solar is equivalent and competitive with other workers. What more could these millionaires ask for?</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Cost Shifting</strong>: Here is a partial list of the costs that were <strong>shifted</strong>, i.e., <strong>not charged </strong>to wind and solar plant owners, to make wind and solar appear less costly than in reality to the lay public and legislators.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>1) The various forms of grid-stabilizing inertia (presently provided by synchronous gas, coal, oil, nuclear, bio and hydro plants).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>2) The filling-in, peaking and balancing by traditional generators (mostly gas turbines in New England), due to wind and solar variability and intermittency, 24/7/365. Their random outputs require the other generators to inefficiently ramp up and down their outputs at part load, and to inefficiently make more frequent starts and stops, which also causes more wear and tear, all at no cost to wind and solar owners.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The more wind and solar on the grid, the larger the required up and down ramping of the gas turbines, which imparts added costs to owners for which they likely would not be paid: And the wind and solar erratic output is coddled by government programs and subsidies!!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Owners of traditional generators:<span> </span></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>-</strong> Have <strong>less annual production</strong> to cover power plant costs, which jeopardizes the economic viability of their plants.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>- Are left with <strong>inefficient remaining production</strong> (more fuel/kWh, more CO2/kWh), due to up and down ramping at part load, and due to more frequent starts and stops, which leads to less fuel and CO2 reduction than claimed, and increased costs for owners. See URL</p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fuel-and-co2-reductions-due-to-wind-energy-less-than-claimed" target="_blank">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fuel-and-co2-reductions-due-to-wind-energy-less-than-claimed</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>- Have more wear and tear of their gas turbine plants, which further adds to owner costs</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>NOTE</strong>: All of this is quite similar to a car efficiently operating at a steady 55 mph, versus a car inefficiently operating at continuously varying speeds between 45 mph to 65 mph, and accelerating for frequent starts and decelerating for frequent stops.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>3) Any battery systems to stabilize distribution grid with many solar systems. They would quickly offset downward spikes due to variable cloud cover. See URL.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/large-scale-solar-plants-require-large-scale-battery-system" target="_blank">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/large-scale-solar-plants-require-large-scale-battery-system</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>4) Any measures to deal with DUCK curves, such as a) daily gas turbine plant down and up ramping, b) utility-scale storage and c) demand management.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>NOTE</strong>: GMP in Vermont, has determined 70 of its 150 substations will eventually need upgrades to avoid “transmission ground fault overvoltage,” (TGFOV), if more solar is added per requirements of the VT Comprehensive Energy Plan. This is nothing new, as utilities in southern Germany have been dealing with these issues for over ten years, which has contributed to German households having the highest electric rates (about 30 eurocent/kWh) in Europe.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>5) Grid-related costs, such as grid extensions and augmentations to connect the remotely distributed wind and solar, and to deal with variable and intermittent wind and solar on the grid. Those grid items usually are utilized at the low capacity factors of wind and solar, i.e., a lot of hardware doing little work.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>6) Utility-scale electricity storage (presently provided by the world’s traditional fuel supply system).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.neon-energie.de/Hirth-2013-Market-Value-Renewables-Solar-Wind-Power-Variability-Price.pdf">https://www.neon-energie.de/Hirth-2013-Market-Value-Renewables-Solar-Wind-Power-Variability-Price.pdf</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The above 6 items are entirely <strong>separate</strong><span> </span>from the high levels of <strong>direct and indirect</strong>subsidies. They serve to make wind and solar <strong>appear</strong> <span>to be </span>much less costly than in reality. See sections 1 and 2 and Appendix.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>All that enables wind and solar proponents to endlessly proclaim: “Wind and solar are competitive with fossil and nuclear”.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Example of Cost Shifting</strong>: For example, to bring wind electricity from the Panhandle in west Texas to population centers in east Texas, about 1000 miles of transmission was built at a capital cost of $7 billion. The entire cost was “socialized”, i.e., it appeared as a surcharge on residential electric bills. Wind in Texas would have been much more expensive, if the owning and operating cost, c/kWh, of those transmission lines were added to the cost of wind.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Example of Cost Shifting</strong>: Often the expensive grid connection of <strong>offshore wind plants</strong>, say from 20 miles south of Martha's Vineyard, across the island, then about 7 additional miles under water, and then to the reinforced mainland grid, is not separately stated in the capital cost estimates, i.e., all or part of it is provided by the utilities that buy the electricity under PPAs to make PPA-pricing appear smaller than in reality. That cost would be “socialized”, i.e., it appears as a surcharge on residential electric bills, or is added to the rate base.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Wind and Solar Wholesale Prices in NE</strong>: Here are some wholesale prices of wind electricity RE folks in New England, especially in Maine, do not want to talk about. They would rather dream RE fantasies, obfuscate/fudge the numbers, and aim to convert others to their dream scenarios, somewhat like religious missionaries. See table 2.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Comments on Below Wind and Solar Cost Table</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Indirect subsidies </strong>are due to loan interest deduction and depreciation deductions from taxable incomes.</p>
<p><strong>Direct subsidies </strong>are due to up front grants, waiving of state sales taxes, and/or local property (municipal and school) taxes. See URL.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>An owner of ridgeline wind would have to sell his output at 18.8 c/kWh, if the owner were not getting the benefits of cost shifting and upfront cash grants and subsidies.</p>
<p>That owner could sell his output at 16.4 c/kWh, if his costs were reduced due to cost shifting.</p>
<p>He could sell his output at 9 c/kWh, if on top of the cost shifting, he also received various subsidies. The same rationale holds for solar. See table.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>In NE construction costs of ridgeline wind and offshore wind are high/MW, and the capacity factor of wind is about 0.285 and of solar about 0.14. Thus, NE wind and solar have high prices/MWh. See table.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In US areas, such as the Great Plains, Texas Panhandle and Southwest, with much lower construction costs/MW and much better sun and wind conditions than New England, wind and solar electricity prices/MWh are less.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Those lower prices often are mentioned, without mentioning other factors, by the pro-RE media and financial consultants, such as Bloomberg, etc., which surely deceives the lay public</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Future electricity cost/MWh, due to the planned build-out of NE offshore wind added to the planned build-out of NE onshore wind, likely would not significantly change, because of the high costs of grid extensions and upgrades to connect the wind plants and to provide significantly increased connections to the New York and Canadian grids.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>NOTE: </strong>For the past 20 years, Germany and Denmark have been increasing their connections to nearby grids, because of their increased wind and solar.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The subsidy percentages in below table are from a cost analysis of NE wind and solar in this article. See URL.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/excessive-subsidies-for-2200-kw-field-mounted-solar-system-in">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/excessive-subsidies-for-2200-kw-field-mounted-solar-system-in</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Values for 2018 are represented in below table.</p>
<p> </p>
<table>
<tbody><tr><td><p>NE Wind/Solar</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">NE Wind</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>%</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>NE Solar</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">%</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">Ridgeline</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">Large-scale</p>
</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr><td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">c/kWh</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">c/kWh</p>
</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Price to utility</p>
</td>
<td><p>No direct/indirect subsidies</p>
</td>
<td><p>No cost shifting</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">18.8</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>100</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>23.5</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">100</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Less cost shifting</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">2.4</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>13</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>2.1</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">9</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Price to utility</p>
</td>
<td><p>No direct/indirect subsidies</p>
</td>
<td><p>With cost shifting</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">16.4</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>87</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>21.4</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">91</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Less subsidy, wind</p>
</td>
<td><p>45% of 16.4</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">7.4</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">39</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Less subsidy, solar</p>
</td>
<td><p>45% of 21.4</p>
</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">9.6</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">41</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><p>Price to utility*</p>
</td>
<td><p>With direct/indirect subsidies</p>
</td>
<td><p>With cost shifting</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">9.0</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>48</p>
</td>
<td style="text-align: right;"><p>11.8</p>
</td>
<td><p style="text-align: right;">50</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>* Owner prices to utilities are based on recent 20-year electricity supply contracts awarded by competitive bidding in New England. These prices would have been about 48% to 50% higher without the direct and indirect subsidies and the cost shifting. Similar percentages apply in areas with better wind and solar conditions, and lower construction costs/MW, than New England. The prices, c/MWh, in those areas are lower than New England.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>APPENDIX 1</strong></p>
<p><strong>Wind and Solar Subsidies Provide a Bonanza for Wall Street</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-more-wind-and-solar-the-higher-the-electric-rates" target="_blank">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-more-wind-and-solar-the-higher-the-electric-rates</a></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>This URL shows wind and solar prices per kWh would be at least 50% higher without direct and indirect subsidies. They would be even higher, if the costs of other items were properly allocated to the owners of wind and solar projects, instead of shifted elsewhere. See below section High Levels of Wind and Solar Require Energy Storage.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/economics-of-tesla-powerpack-and-powerwall-systems">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/economics-of-tesla-powerpack-and-powerwall-systems</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/large-scale-solar-plants-require-large-scale-battery-systems" target="_blank">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/large-scale-solar-plants-require-large-scale-battery-systems</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.usu.edu/ipe/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/UnseenWindFull.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.usu.edu/ipe/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/UnseenWindFull.pdf</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>This URL shows about 2/3 of the financial value of a wind project is due to <strong>direct and indirect </strong>subsidies, and the other 1/3 is due to electricity sales.</p>
<p><a href="http://johnrsweet.com/Personal/Wind/PDF/Schleede-BigMoney-20050414.pdf">http://johnrsweet.com/Personal/Wind/PDF/Schleede-BigMoney-20050414.pdf</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>- Indirect </strong>subsidies are due to federal and state tax rebates due to loan interest deductions from taxable income, and federal and state MARCS depreciation deductions from taxable income.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>- Direct </strong>subsidies are up-front federal and state cash grants, the partial waiving of state sales taxes, the partial waiving of local property, municipal and school taxes. See URLs.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/excessive-subsidies-for-2200-kw-field-mounted-solar-system-in">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/excessive-subsidies-for-2200-kw-field-mounted-solar-system-in</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/subsidy/pdf/subsidy.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/subsidy/pdf/subsidy.pdf</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Any owner, foreign or domestic, of a wind and/or solar project, looking to shelter taxable income from their other US businesses, is allowed to depreciate in 6 years almost the entire cost of a wind and solar project under the IRS scheme called Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System, MARCS. The normal period for other forms of utility depreciation is about 20 years.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Then, with help of Wall Street financial wizardry from financial tax shelter advisers, such as BNEF*, JPMorgan, Lazard, etc., the owner sells the project to a new owner who is allowed to depreciate, according to MARCS, almost his entire cost all over again. Over the past 20 years, there now are many thousands of owners of RE projects who are cashing in on that bonanza.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Loss of Federal and State Tax Revenues</strong>: The loss of tax revenues to federal and state governments due to MARCS was estimated by the IRS at $266 billion for the 5y period of 2017 - 2021, or about $53.2 billion/y.</p>
<p>The IRS is required to annually provide a 5y-running estimate to Congress, by law.</p>
<p>The next report would be for the 2018 - 2022 period</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The <strong>indirect</strong> largesse of about $53.2 billion/y, mostly for wind and solar plants^ that produce expensive, variable/intermittent electricity, <strong>does not show up in electric rates</strong>. It likely is added to federal and state debts.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Most of the <strong>direct </strong>federal subsidies to all energy projects of about $25 billion/y also <strong>do not show up in electric rates</strong>. They likely were also added to the federal debt.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Most of the <strong>direct </strong>state subsidies to RE projects likely were added to state debts.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The additional costs of state-mandated RPS requirements likely were added to the utility rate base for electric rates.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>* BNEF is Bloomberg New Energy Finance, owned by the pro-RE former Mayor Bloomberg of New York, which provides financial services to the wealthy of the world, including providing them with tax avoidance schemes.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>^ In New England, wind is near zero for about 30% of the hours of the year, and solar is minimal or zero for about 70% of the hours of the year. Often these hours coincide for multi-day periods, which happen at random throughout the year, per ISO-NE real-time, minute-by-minute generation data posted on its website. Where would the electricity come from during these hours; $multi-billion battery storage, insufficient capacity hydro storage?</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68227.pdf">https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68227.pdf</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/tax-equity-investors-break-their-silence-on-tax-bill#gs.GDbC2YIS">https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/tax-equity-investors-break-their-silence-on-tax-bill#gs.GDbC2YIS</a></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Warren Buffett Quote:</strong> "I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire's tax rate," Buffet told an audience in Omaha, Nebraska recently. "For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit." </p>
<p><a href="https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/nancy-pfotenhauer/2014/05/12/even-warren-buffet-admits-wind-energy-is-a-bad-investment" target="_blank">https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/nancy-pfotenhauer/2014/05/12/even-warren-buffet-admits-wind-energy-is-a-bad-investment</a></p> The wind industry is really r…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-03-23:4401701:Comment:1841802020-03-23T22:11:00.596ZPenny Grayhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/PennyGray
<p>The wind industry is really rather shameless in asking for even more handouts at a time when taxpayers are struggling to survive.</p>
<p>The wind industry is really rather shameless in asking for even more handouts at a time when taxpayers are struggling to survive.</p>