Solar Cheaper Than LNG in Asia Power Generation, Bernstein Says

[jpak]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-04/solar-cheaper-than-lng-in-asia-power-generation-bernstein-says

Solar power is cheaper in many parts of Asia than electricity from liquefied natural gas, meaning photovoltaics don’t need subsidies to compete with fossil fuels.

The Middle East will consume less oil, off-grid areas in developing markets will reduce kerosene and diesel demand, while Asia, the U.S. and Europe will burn less gas as the adoption of solar accelerates, according to a report by Sanford C. Bernstein & Co.

The market for costly plants built to supply electricity at peak daytime hours could collapse, while distribution utilities which shut out rooftop solar projects that reduce demand for grid power will drive consumers to start storing energy in batteries, according to the report. The rise of solar may begin to depress fossil-fuel prices within the decade.

“All of the above eats away – at the margin – at oil and gas demand,” analysts Michael W. Parker and Flora Chang said in the report. “It competes with oil, kerosene, diesel and LNG in developing markets.”

<more>

[bloomington-lib]

1. They might not need subsidies anymore but they should still get them. It's only fair since oil doesn

t need them either.

[Champion Jack]

2. So this kind of says a lot about the whole idea of completely ruining...

Rural America so that they can ship the natural gas to Asia.
tell me again why we are in such a rush to Frack every square inch of America?

[hunter]

3. What kind of batteries?

This is important. Encouraging the use of lead-acid batteries in "developing" nations is unethical. Even in nations with adequate environmental regulation of lead-acid battery recycling, lead-acid batteries still suck.

I'm still waiting to see how the situation with Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries turns out, or how increasing production of lithium batteries for electric automobile use will affect the greater battery market. (For dumpster-diving-hunter-gatherers like me batteries from wrecked hybrid cars sometimes turn up for cheap; same with laptop computer batteries.)

In any case, solar or wind is never going to reduce fossil fuel consumption so long as the use of fossil fuels is legal. What gasoline I don't use, what new automobiles I don't purchase, someone else will.

I'm currently using about six gallons of gasoline a month in my mid-eighties salvage title car. But someone in China has a brand new car and they are driving all over the place.

So long as fossil fuels are legal they will be burned, the carbon dioxide will still end up in the atmosphere. And sooner or later the human race reaches that tipping point where climate change causes the collapse of our world economy.

The only way to deal with this problem is to outlaw, worldwide, new fossil fuel uses, while dismantling the existing fossil fuel infrastructure. It's a grim fantasy to believe that's going to happen, even if solar panels can be made as inexpensively as float glass.

Therefore, if humanity is unable to outlaw fossil fuels, then sooner or later nature is going to kill off our economy that depends on fossil fuels, and great numbers of people too.

Humans really aren't that special in the history of earth. This old planet has seen many "innovative" species experience exponential growth and collapse.