HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » That's what I'm talking a... » Reply #6

Response to FBaggins (Reply #5)

Tue May 1, 2012, 02:46 PM

6. Yes they are. I didn't hear you objecting to their projections on nuclear.

There are a lot of criticisms leveled at them, and one of the main ones comes from a view that I share - they represent a view that is founded in preserving the existing systems we have, including our energy systems.
Whether I agree with them or not the significance of this projection on solar is important precisely because they are inclined towards finding more value in traditional energy sources like coal and nuclear than I think is warranted. In this report, in fact, they are quoting both new nuclear and new coal as competition at far lower costs than is justified by what is happening in the world where externalized costs are increasingly playing a significant role in decision-making.

In short, this report uses assumptions that are not particularly favorable to solar. It is primarily oriented towards market forces operating independently of policy direction and even then it doesn't take into account the erosion of market share that coal and nuclear will experience with rapidly escalating renewable penetration. As such, it is hard to see it as anything other than a conservative appraisal.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
kristopher Apr 2012 OP
kestrel91316 Apr 2012 #1
kristopher May 2012 #3
MichiganVote Apr 2012 #2
kristopher May 2012 #4
FBaggins May 2012 #5
LineLineLineLineNew Reply Yes they are. I didn't hear you objecting to their projections on nuclear.
kristopher May 2012 #6
kristopher May 2012 #7
XemaSab May 2012 #8
Please login to view edit histories.