Reference: This graphic comes from an excellent Energy Tribune post, "Wind Energy’s House of Cards," By Steve Goreham. I have referenced the EIA energy cost data set several times. The most recent set was released on January 1010.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe To Nuclear Green
Posts
Comments
Some neat videos
| Nuclear Advocacy Webring Ring Owner: Nuclear is Our Future Site: Nuclear is Our Future |
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Get Your Free Web Ring by Bravenet.com |
||||
4 comments:
Is this one of the EIA projections? A citation would be very helpful.
Hi Charles I like your graph. I had an ambitious plan to do a useful comparison chart and the abandoned it as too hard to research. maybe you could add this as something to consider
http://thoriummsr.wordpress.com/2010/08/12/comparing-nuclear-advantages/
Thanks Rick Maltese
Charles,
Please do cite the reference URL. I'll use it in my course.
So, using the EIA numbers, the difference in price between the cheapest non-carbon electrical source (biomass, ostensibly) and the cheapest carbon-producing electrical source (Adv CC), about 31.7 $/MWh, including what we know about natural gas (@100%eff, produces ~49 MJ/kg), a high efficiency estimate for combined cycle (call it 50%), and the known carbon ratio for methane (1 tonne methane + 4 tonnes oxygen => 2.25 tonnes water + 2.75 tonnes carbon dioxide), we can calculate that a carbon tax would need to be a minimum of 78.45 USD / tonne CO2 in order to be properly effective in reducing emissions.
Plug it into google and play!
((111.0 - 79.3) USD / MWh) * (0.5 * 49 megajoules/kg) / (2.75) in USD / tonne
Post a Comment