This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.

Post

Energy 24/7: No Fuel Costs - The Sexy Seduction of Renewables [PODCAST]

No fuel costs. That is renewable energy’s most powerful and seductive selling point. No need to discuss climate change with all its emotional hot buttons. No need to explain and justify how much carbon is avoided. No need to politicize the discussion. It’s simple. It’s sexy. It’s seductive. And it will drive investment. No fuel costs.

Renewable energy has been the subject of endless heated emotional debates and diatribes. Some more rational than others. It has also evolved to incorporate different arguments used by different sets of apologists. Such arguments warn of intermittency, solar “free-loaders” on the grid, the death of birds and the aesthetic horrors of wind farms. I don’t know…I kinda like them! These same arguments, however, are heard over and over again until they have now become trite. Is anyone still listening?

Well, we need to be listening not to old “stories” but to new facts.

Money talks. So if you want to see where the next trend is look for the investment potential. And there is massive investment potential in decarbonizing the economy. So much so that I am going to make a prediction. Once investors and policy makers really comprehend just how much money can be made by transitioning the economy away from fossil fuels, there will be no stopping that train. Here’s why…

No fuel costs.

Yep, that’s it. No fuel costs. Because no fuel costs avoids the vagaries of the commodity markets which in turn equals price stability. And less involvement in politically unsavory regions. It also means significant additional capital becoming available which would otherwise go up in smoke in the form of burned hydrocarbons. That is what will drive the markets toward renewable adoption. It doesn’t hurt that wind and solar are technologies too. And technologies always get cheaper as they reach scale. So now we have no fuel costs and falling prices. It also helps that energy is the bedrock of the global economy and so anything using energy will benefit from…you guessed it…no energy fuel costs. So now we have no fuel costs, falling prices and price deflation across the global economy. And I used that word deflation on purpose though not in its more common sense. Here’s why…

Investopedia defines deflation as a decline in prices. They go on to state:

“Declining prices, if they persist, generally create a vicious spiral of negatives such as falling profits, closing factories, shrinking employment and incomes, and increasing defaults on loans by companies and individuals.”

It is precisely this aspect that I find so utterly fascinating about renewables. When renewable prices decline, profits increase. Profits increase because demand skyrockets. Manufacturing can now pass on cost savings to the consumer because their energy bills have fallen. Employment rises as more and more people want solar panels on their roofs. And investment returns increase often at exponential rates because of the growth and perceived potential. And this is bearing out in the markets as I write. This is not Camelot hyperbole.

For instance, the most recent numbers being used to actually structure institutional investment in renewables are coming in at astonishing rates. The National Bank of Abu Dhabi issued a report in March 2015 which stated:

“…fossil fuels can no longer compete with solar technologies on price…The latest solar PV project tendered in Dubai returned a low bid that set a new global benchmark and is competitive with oil at US$10/barrel and gas at US$5/MMBtu.”

And this was without subsidies.

Further, investors did not place monies into this project out of the goodness of their hearts or for moral purpose. They expect a reasonable return. And their projections tell them they will get it even at such low prices.

Employment has also increased for solar particularly when juxtaposed against oil and gas. Solar jobs have increased to more than double the job creation in oil and gas since 2012. And this in spite of the shale revolution and before the massive layoffs in the fossil fuel sector. Which brings us to another point. Oil and gas created jobs over the past 15 years while oil prices rose 450%. As prices have declined, jobs have been slashed. It is estimated by Continental Resources that over 100K jobs have been cut to date in the oil sector globally. This is in direct contrast to solar which has created more jobs as prices fell rather than as prices rose. Seeing the usual deflationary modes being turned on their head is like waking up and realizing that Newton’s laws of physics no longer are valid.

Going back to the no fuel costs scenario, IEA estimated in 2014 that it would cost approximately $50 trillion to decarbonize the global economy by 2050. That is a cost, true, but it is also an investment opportunity which could potentially generate returns. But IEA went on to state that the fuel costs savings would amount to about $117 trillion, far outweighing the $50 trillion price tag to decarbonize. And that is capital that can be employed in something other than the burning of fossil fuels. Stop and imagine the potential impact of $70+ trillion dollars of new investment in the global economy that would otherwise, literally, have primarily poured out of exhausts. Moreover it is simply a more efficient deployment of capital. Why burn money if you don’t have to?

Investment means growth and growth means economic prosperity for more people. Demographics tell us that we can’t provide energy security to a burgeoning human population based on a finite source of energy. But wind and sun are infinite and completely without fuel cost. And that is what will drive investment.

Call it the holy grail. Call it the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Or just call it no fuel costs. That’s seductive enough.

The post PODCAST: Energy:24/7: No Fuel Costs: The Sexy Seduction of Renewables appeared first on Energy Policy Forum.

Photo Credit: What is the potential of renewables?/shutterstock

Deborah Lawrence's picture

Thank Deborah for the Post!

Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.

Discussions

Bob Meinetz's picture
Bob Meinetz on May 7, 2015 3:38 pm GMT

Deborah, what’s the purpose of repackaging your April 16th post by reading it and posting it again?

Without rendering any judgment on the validity of the points you raise, spamming TEC with your point of view seems like it could backfire.

Can we look forward to the Broadway musical version?

Deborah Lawrence's picture
Deborah Lawrence on May 7, 2015 3:49 pm GMT

Bob,

Some people prefer to listen to podcasts rather than read. But I have to ask, do you ever get tired of being negative and rude?

Bob Meinetz's picture
Bob Meinetz on May 7, 2015 4:27 pm GMT

Deborah, I apologize if I come off that way.

But let’s face it – it’s not only unfair to your readers, but authors who are posting fresh, relevant content to simply plaster your opinion in multiple formats over and over again.

I have enormous respect for your dedication, enthusiasm, and intelligence. It would be better channelled by doing the hard work of finding fresh angles and new technologies to write about.

Jesper Antonsson's picture
Jesper Antonsson on May 7, 2015 4:19 pm GMT

Increasing employment is a negative thing. No fuel costs, sure, but comparable O&M costs in total nevertheless and very high capital costs. Any investor will look at total cost of ownership.

Also, it is important to note that as intermittent renewables gets cheaper due to high deployment rates and learning effects, their produced value/kWh diminishes. Since solar and wind are very concentrated in time, they tend to outcompete themselves.

Solar is still exorbitantly expensive and can only thrive on subsidies and the suboptimization of grid parity.

Steve K9's picture
Steve K9 on May 9, 2015 1:00 am GMT

Essentially no fuel costs for nuclear (that will literally be true when fast-neutron reactors take over) either.  And 24/7 non-fluctuating power too …

Deborah Lawrence's picture
Deborah Lawrence on May 9, 2015 3:01 pm GMT

Steve,

I, too, thought that nuclear had virtually no fuel costs but in doing some research I came across this from NEA: 

“Fuel costs make up 30 percent of the overall production costs of nuclear power plants. Fuel costs for coal, natural gas and oil, however, make up about 80 percent of the production costs”.

There is also the cost of decommissioning the plant and disposing of spent fuel. 

Paul O's picture
Paul O on May 9, 2015 4:44 pm GMT

Obviously fou missed the phrase “Fast Neutron” in Steve’s post.

Deborah Lawrence's picture
Deborah Lawrence on May 9, 2015 4:47 pm GMT

My apologies! I certainly did!

Nathan Wilson's picture
Nathan Wilson on May 9, 2015 9:35 pm GMT

Compared to fossil fuels like gas and oil, nuclear’s fuel cost is almost negligible.  The NEA term “production cost” is not the total levelized cost, but likely just the “variable cost” (the cost that depends on the amount of electricity produced) and the “fixed O&M” (the bills other than capital cost that get paid even when the plant is off-line).  As the EIA data show, nuclear has a variable cost of 1.2 ¢/kWh, which is closer to zero than fossil gas’ 4.9 ¢/kWh and biomass’ 4 ¢/kWh

Nuclear spent fuel disposal and payments into the decomissioning funds are trivial, at about 0.1 ¢/kWh each.

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »