Part of Generation Network »

Generation Professionals Group

The Generation Professionals Group is for utility professionals who work in biomass, coal, gas/oil, hydro, natural gas, or nuclear power generation fields. 

Shared Link

What Governments Got Wrong About The Global Energy Transition | OilPrice.com

James Kirby's picture
James Kirby 398
Retired Senior Manager At Ontario Power Generation, Retired

Areas Of Expertise- Toxic contaminants, New Technology assessments, Computer Modeling, Interconnections - Reliability Assessments, Purchase and sales Forecasting, Reserve value of...

  • Member since 2020
  • 30 items added with 2,170 views
  • Oct 11, 2021
  • 275 views

In my opinion, the rapidly rising fossil fuel prices are like the canary in the mine. They are warning us to plan the transition better than we have. If we failed to do that, we want to risk of a public backlash against the Green transition.

What Governments Got Wrong About The Global Energy Transition | OilPrice.com

The logistics of the transition off fossil fuels has not received enough attention. Managing the decline of the existing fossil industries has not received...

Read More
Source: www.linkedin.com
Discussions
Matt Chester's picture
Matt Chester on Oct 11, 2021

Consumers do not pay spot prices, and contracts may reduce the volatility in the average price of gas somewhat.But the spot markets are the canary in the mine. It is warning us to do a better job of planning the transition then we are.

Makes you wonder-- I've heard DOE is considering tapping into the SPR to ensure prices don't go up, which is totally understandable politically and economically, but those levers may also be dampening the seriousness of the situation in the minds of many (sort of the opposite of 'don't let a good crisis go to waste')

James Kirby's picture
James Kirby on Oct 12, 2021

Your point is well taken. An objective that involves prices not going up is completely inappropriate. The objective should be to ensure that prices reflect genuine total costs, capital and operating, for the marginal generation or load management needed to supply the load. Prices that are kept artificially low just encourage more consumption and make it much more difficult To reduce greenhouse gases. Prices that are artificially high encourage excess construction of resources.

 

There is no unique answer to the extent that the load is price-sensitive. So, the objective has to be supplying the price-sensitive load In such a way that the benefits to society are maximized and everybody is compensated or charged fairly. Having an objective to keep prices low does not necessarily achieve that objective. It starts with a vision followed by the objective. In my mind the vision should be the maximum benefit to society over the long term. The objective flows from that.

James Kirby's picture
Thank James 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.
More posts from this member

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 »

Your access to Member Features is limited.

Apply for membership
Related Content
What is the difference between FCEM and AOCE
Japanese floating wind project partners begin EIA process
Social cost of co2 emission
Net Metering: A Missed Opportunity for Utilities to Embrace Distributed Energy Resources