Read my comment above. This guy has no idea what Tony Seba's RE Ucurve actually means, namely that a 4x overbuild and 3.5x in battery is needed to meet the load X, the average over the year. This means it is 7.5 times MORE than what people think. 60 cents/kwh is minimum and supercharging will be 90++/kwh. Insane costs.
The point Seba's making is that the most obscene profits come with more renewables, especially solar, so it will inevitably happen. Sure, Jevons' Paradox means that for a while there'll also be more fossil fuels sold.. until suddenly there won't be any. Because the oligarchy isn't faithful to molecules, only to power and wealth. And that won't come from bitumen, coal, natural gas or oil anymore. Overbluster notwithstanding.
@@seaplaneguy1 Not to mention that when wholesale prices fall below zero, it is a great detractor to further investment. If only our world's esteemed leaders had spoken to some old hippy living off grid, who's known for the past 45 years that all the renewable power production that you can muster means nothing if you don't have storage. My electrician is one of those. He's lived off grid for the last 30+ years. You should see his eyes roll before he plants his face in is palms when you talk about the global renewable's rollout.
@@davidbrayshaw3529 Good point. My tech is what I want for me in car, seaplane, house, office. It will not need oil or grid. CO2 capture allows me to grow food at 36 times more per area in a greenhouse. Excess CO2 is then used to make fuels from solar. No battery needed. Fuel IS the battery. No fire risks with Ethanol (E100) as the fuel. I think the world will agree with me when I am ready to sell it to others.
Sunlight is cheap, Wind too. Thats where it ends. Building and maintaining the facilities, the distribution infrastructure, the TWh storage for reliability or backup power plants is not cheap.
Specifically, the cost of retail electricity is primarily composed of three parts: 1) Transmission 2) Distribution and 3) Generation. Then add administrative fees, monthly fixed connection fees, local surcharges, and taxes means that the electrical generation portion might be the less than one-third the final retail cost of electricity. Owners of generation plants do not have control of transmission and distribution (T&D) costs, nor have say in taxes, surcharges or connection fees. Owners of generation sites also don't have a say in global economic inflation. On top of all that, the CEOs and executives of electrical utility companies are making tens of millions in annual compensation, especially in the US. Solar & wind *generation* are at historic low costs per MWh generation and still continue to drive lower. The world has never seen electricity generation this low before nor growing as fast. We are living in historic times.
@@beyondfossilcorrect but you can’t run a grid on solar and wind without rebuilding the distribution infrastructure and storage. The cheap part is utilising solar panels or wind turbines the expensive part is rebuilding the grid. The operator of wind or solar can turn a profit as when it’s not in optimal Conditions it doesn’t matter to them. However the grid operator needs stability and so without adequate storage or transmission they cannot allow fossil fuel generators to go bankrupt. In the very long term it appears wind and solar is the best way but it would be much better to acknowledge this and be honest rather then only promote one side of the equation (generation) as a lot of investment is required which will mean prices won’t flow to the end user for a long time and gas solar and nuclear need to be propped up in the mean time.
@@8towely Yes true. But consider also a major grid expansion will be needed *regardless* of solar or wind. Because we need to gradually transition *hundreds* of exajoules of energy previously burned up on fossil fuels (gasoline, diesel, home heating, aviation, industry) etc. onto the electrical grids around the world. There are mitigating factors though: (1) The world consumes some 620-exajoules of energy annually of which some 100-exajoules is electrical. This seems like a large gap to transition but we know some 300-exajoules of that is waste heat. It is labeled as "rejected energy" or "loss" in the Sankey energy diagrams. This waste is almost entirely comprised of incredibly inefficient fossil fuels. So the gap is not as large just simply by switching to efficient electric power. For instance, EVs operate at some 90% efficiency while ICE runs at an awfully pathetic 20% to 30% nominal efficiency. Furthermore, there are also electric heat pumps that operate at *multiples* of efficiency *over* 100% and heat pumps provide both heating and cooling in one single unit. (2) Local storage unloads the grid. Battery storage is growing at exponential rates and eventually a home battery (with or without solar) could become as common as a washing machine. Homes can purchase and store power when its cheapest and most abundant such as when daytime solar floods the local grid with power. Battery powered homes can use this during the evening to lessen the peak grid demands of the duck curve. Battery homes also have an all-new capability to ride-out grid blackouts with whole home power for many hours. As the world becomes ever volatile from climate change and increasing geopolitical polarization, grid stability will be increasingly challenged thus increasing the demand for a home battery. China dominates battery production, but the world is realizing how critical this is so other nations (like the US) will be developing their own battery production, increasing supply/availability and driving down costs even further. (2a) Add in solar to battery storage to boost the effect of a battery even more. Because every watt generated and used locally is a watt that doesn't stress a distant power plant to generate that watt nor the grid to transmit that watt. Consider millions of homes and hundreds of thousands of commercial buildings like malls, factories, campuses, hospitals, warehouses, etc. starting to add solar with local battery storage. No other technology blends so seamlessly into the urban environment as solar photovoltaics solid-state electronics with no emissions or noise. A large metropolitan area like Los Angeles has enough roof and parking space to generate probably multiples of its annual energy use. There is also city outskirts and intra-city limits possibilities for smaller solar farms in addition to roof and parking lots. (2b) Solar even without storage removes hundreds to thousands TWh of electrical generation from grids around the world that would otherwise be generated by fossil fuels thus removing corresponding large amounts of pollution and carbon emissions. This then invites grid storage development to capture excesses and curtailment -- "if you build it, they will come". (3) As fossil fuel power plants (like coal) are decommissioned, their megawatt grid connections can be re-used. Their buildings also can be converted to house high=capacity long-term storage like ceramic/sand based thermal storage. Stored thermal can be used to drive industrial uses concrete and steel manufacturing. Thermal can also be converted back to electrical using steam and a turbine possibly re-using the thermal plants existing turbine and supporting infrastructure. Thermal commercial energy is a big part of the global energy (4) Fossil fuel power plants obviously have voracious *non-stop* fuel requirements. Thus their "footprint" extends thousands of miles beyond their physical power plant fence limits. Moreover, there is a non-stop requirement of exploring, drilling, refining, distributing that ultra-refined fuel at great cost of money, pollution and carbon emissions all before a *single drop* of fuel is burned for energy. (4a) All that energy and labor can and should be redirected towards expanding the grid. Those amounts are substantial and will be increasingly available as fossil fuels are winding down. In 2022, the IMF shows $7.1 *trillion* USD of subsidies were given to the global fossil fuel industry. Just take half or a fraction of that amount and redirect it to towards renewable investment, R&D and deployment and see what happens.
@@beyondfossil what you state is simply not true. There is no need for a connected grid if we continued on a power plant source of power. This isn’t me saying it shouldn’t be done. What I am saying is the generation cost power wind and solar is low. Rebuilding the grid to transform huge amounts of power over large distances and then adding in enough storage is not. Stating evs are more efficient than ice this doesn’t really have anything to do with the conversation but yes no arguments there. I’m not saying don’t go the renewable route. I’m stating stop telling everyone it’s going to give every one cheap power. It simply will not for a long long time as someone has to pay for all the infrastructure. So it doesn’t matter if wholesale power goes negative it matters the price the end user pays. You cannot simply stop fossil fuels tomorrow either. I myself have solar panels on my home it’s a great thing. Don’t think I’m against renewables but there are a lot of arguements which are intentional to make it look better then for the everyday person and when they realise there power prices are going up and not changing will think they have been conned so stop telling half truths.
@@8towely The grids around the world are going to need expansion, especially considering growing population sizes and deeper electrification. Greater total generation (watt hours) and, critically, greater peak loads (watts). This will stress the amperage capacity of T&D and associated assets (substations, switches, fuses). Solar and wind may more frequently be built in more remote locations. But fossil fuel, nuclear, coal, hydro cannot be built just anywhere either. Natural gas and coal power plants must be built where existing non-stop supply of its fuel can be economically sourced. They have environmental restrictions on air quality emissions. They require hundreds to thousand+ gallons water *filtered* water per MWh of generation to avoid fouling their heat exchangers. Solar and wind require no water, no fuel, and emit no emissions. As you can see, there is give and take here. I don't need to explain hydro or nuclear.
The "free" part is referring to electricity generation. There are still transmission and distribution fees that make up around two-thirds the final retail cost of electricity. Then there's administration fees, connection fees, taxes, local price riders, etc. Electricity generators don't have a say in those costs.
Solar and wind are on track to be so inexpensive that advertisers and vendors will gladly pay for the power you use to recharge your EVs in exchange for viewing their ads and trickle charging in their parking lots while you shop nearby.
We are currently speaking wholesale on the energy market. Plans in britain and germany aswell conclude that by 2040 the prices will have reached private consumers. Itssue is the rightwigers like the afd and farage aswell as the cdu and tories blabber its nonsentical amd will be suuuuuper expensive, acting and preferring to do nothing instead, leaving the private market to pick up the slack. Labour and the spd/greens are currently expanding the network to the point germany had a whole week of negative energy prices in 2024. Same in britain, i know whomst i will vote for. The changing of the energy sector never ever should have been such a mess, germany could be at 40% wind and 20-25% solar if not more by now, but the cdu chose to drag its feet like crazy. And the right, even calls the idea of negative energy prices nonsentical, choosing to rave about how expensive negative energy prices are in germany, whilest the greens laugh.
Same in germany. It hasnt reached private consumers yet. Big oil telling you the cheap stuff will be more expensive, when every scientist ever tells the opposite and logic aswell
We keep hearing how renewables are going to be cheaper, but ever since they started implementing them the price has just kept going up. How come what the 'Scientists are saying' and 'logic' don't conform with realty?
UK is 50% renewable. When there's high wind and low demand you might see free electricity at 3am when most people are asleep. Unfortunately the opposite is also true. In low wind and high demand we saw a peak price of 100p kWh at 6pm on 12-12-2024. That's $1.24 US per kWh!
@@calc1657right now I pay .86cents daily charge plus per KWh. That daily charge would have to quadruple at least. $0 dollar marginal cost will never happen for the consumer.
Consumers being conned - Wind already provides 50% of UK electric generation on average but bills are increasing ! Even if your electric is from 100% renewable sources the per KW cost to consumer is 22p ( 25c) /Kw . 3 years ago about 9p/Kw. The generators are making huge profits and not passed on - consumers even pay for wind generation when it has to be dumped ( over supply when wind strong)
Exactly same was claimed about nuclear in the 60's ! The wind farm contracts given out by Uk Gov guarantees a minimum price for suppliers for life - set about same price per Kw as charged today - that's why price will never be low and on top consumers have to pay for complete new cable network upgrade to handle increased demand for ev's and heat pumps
I live in the UK. I just came across a 5 year old electricity bill from 2019, when I was paying £0.09 per kWh but roll on to 3 January 2025, and I am having to pay £0.29 per kWh. So I am paying more than 3 times the rate I was paying 5 years ago. I live in a big 300 year old house, I used to pay £4,000 per year for gas and electricity but, in 2023, it was about £25,000. People are saying that the retail cost is linked to the wholesale price of gas, in 2022 that more than doubled in cost but now, in 2025, the cost of gas is no higher than it was in 2019. It seems that, as a result of the government’s failure to regulate the power industry, they were allowed to quadruple rates when the cost of gas went up but, now that the cost of gas has come down the utility companies have realised that we did not stop buying gas and electricity when the prices went up, so why bring the prices back down, when there is no real competition and they can carry on raking in ludicrous profits, mostly going back to shareholders in China who are laughing all the way to the bank. Yes, Cadent, one of the main gas suppliers, now is owned by China. Why are the pockets of Chinese shareholders more important than UK residents? I notice that, in Spain, there has been very little change in the cost of electricity because the government imposed controls on prices.
In the 50s and 60s the British public was told electricity would be free as reading the meters would cost more than the electricity supplied. Turned out to be a gross lie to get the public to buy in to nuclear power……. Fast fwd and that is the case today. Comparing a blip in oversupplied power wholesale is not the same as windless periods when back up is needed to step in to cover intermittent. Back up HAS to be costed against unreliable power supplies for a true cost.
The model has been shifted ...with first peak demand stored power. ...but more profound is the distributed grid level storage nodes. But you need longer storage and life batteries. The cable and tower infrastructure also has to change . Govts have repeatedly baulked at having to do the real graft of actually planning and giving direction a situation since all utilities were privatised and sold off.. passing the parcels since the late 70s.🦕🦖 🧙🏼♂️🥼🌍
I was just watching 'Will blackouts come to Britain?' on youtube by UnHerd talking to Kathryn Porter and was really interesting talking about a recent very close blackout situation and coming situations which there is a real danger of future blackouts and because the Government is still not really asking the 'hard questions' about renewables. And there is given a load of data of the electricity supply and how it works and how NESO works(National Electricity System Operator). Very interesting and you can google it but the solar input as per info given in winter is very small and wind also very variable. Battery storage will not cut it, it's dire and with 2 nuclear plants going in 2027 (according to them) and more gas plants retiring later, the situation is really grim. I really enjoy your channel but had to let you know here. And have installed solar 6 years ago here in NZ and have increased it's size recently. I love it but there are limits
It is disaster when prices reach zero as it have nothing to do with the cost of production. It’s simply a vast imbalance in supply and demand due to lack of base- and regulating power!
@@swhbpocl correct. The market mechanism is broken. Go ask the Noggies and the swedes that were stupid enough to build interconnectors that dragged up electricity prices.
So, wait a minute, the UK HAS nuclear power but their electricity prices are still sky high? What went wrong? Thought nuclear would bring the price down? And negative wholesale prices don't mean consumers get cheaper electricity even I know that.
In the Uk the cost of electricity will stay as the most expensive in the world for the forseeable future. It is going to rise steadily to almost double its current cost and will never fall as the £100 Billion they want to invest will never get repaid.
I gave this guy the benefit of the doubt for a while, but after this I realise he’s a renewable ideologue. The UK has the dearest electricity prices in the developed world because of their idiotic obsession with their fanciful net zero myth. It’s not a secret, it’s the simple truth. Ask anyone in the UK.
Agreed, I watch for the EV news, but Viking's net zero agenda is getting more and delusional, there are serious doubts about the ability of solar and wind being able to solely power an industrialized country that are becoming more obvious, and just blindly ignoring that and continuing push the 'benefits' regardless, is just going to end up doing more harm in the long run.
It is just expensive getting there but there will come a time costs will be lower. Most of the cost is up front which is why it is expensive as bad old fossil fuels for now. all sorts of new stuff starts out expensive then gets ever better and cheaper. It is not unreasonable that this will happen. Flight used to be for the rich only now any person can get a cheap flight. Hopefully not for much longer though lol.
As cheap as water ? What in 1000 years time ? UK is building more nuclear reactors. Hickey point C. Sizewell C and Bradwell B. That's the future. It's no con because it's there 24 hours a day irrelevant of weather conditions.
I can't believe your still telling lies like this. I live in the UK and pay £170pm on my energy bills,Far from free. Do your research before posting nonsense like this
This comment is naive. When the wind blows the owner of wind mills will not get paid enough so they all will make a loss. At the same time owners of nuclear reaktorn and fossil fuel generators get paid to not use their capacity. Those costs goes to your electricity bills. So the more wind and solar we have the more of these extra costs will rise. In Sweden all wind mills have red figures. The one that make money are the company that produce the wind mills and the construction companies.
This view is 100% silly nonsense. Tony Seba promotes the RE U-curve which shows that a 100% RE grid will need ~4x MORE than X, the average load for minimum costs. It also will need battery back up of ~ 3.5x. The overbuild is to minimize the insane battery costs that are crazy at 1.5x needed just to make a RE cycle work. So, Seba FAILED to understand his own curve which states that 7.5x more costs are needed than X. UK is only at 0.4x now. RE now is 5 cents/kwh wind and 13 for solar. Add in 2-3 cents/kwh for line charges and you have over 8-9 cents/kwh. 7.5 x 8 is 60 cents/kwh at buildings and 90 at super chargers. The lie this video states is that all the machines are free, which they are not. You have to still pay each even if you have to waste 3/4th of it due to them actually working. In contrast, OFF grid is less than 1.5 cents/kwh with NO line charge. Fuel making is 2x, for a fuel cost of 3 cents/kwh. Add in CO2 capture of 1.2 cents/kwh and you get 4.2 cents/kwh wholesale at the plant. Fuel can compete with oil down to around $1.5/gallon (4.5 cents/kwh), but 100% RE grid cannot. Just a fact.
I don’t think you understand how prices work in the UK. Electric price is based on the cost of the most expensive way to produce that electric regardless of how it’s “actually” produced. That’s gas, yep. electric price is based on the gas price. So it doesn’t matter how much renewables you have, because of how the pricing structure works, it’s won’t be cheaper. Think you need to do a lot more research as you do not understand this topic. Also your claim that nuclear power is the most expensive is utterly false too. Nuclear has a high setup cost, but once you’ve built the plant it’s the cheapest source of energy including renewables. Please, go and do some research and stop with the fake news. Unless the regulators change how we prices cap electricity it will never be cheap.
Oh yes, trillion dollar companies now want to give you free stuff 😅. Newsflash Blackrock and vanguard own both industries and your getting nothing for free ever. Who pays you to publish this haha some NGO?
I live in the UK. I just came across a 5 year old electricity bill from 2019, when I was paying £0.09 per kWh but roll on to 3 January 2025, and I am having to pay £0.29 per kWh. So I am paying more than 3 times the rate I was paying 5 years ago. I live in a big 300 year old house, I used to pay £4,000 per year for gas and electricity but, in 2023, it was about £25,000. People are saying that the retail cost is linked to the wholesale price of gas, in 2022 that more than doubled in cost but now, in 2025, the cost of gas is no higher than it was in 2019. It seems that, as a result of the government’s failure to regulate the power industry, they were allowed to quadruple rates when the cost of gas went up but, now that the cost of gas has come down the utility companies have realised that we did not stop buying gas and electricity when the prices went up, so why bring the prices back down, when there is no real competition and they can carry on raking in ludicrous profits, mostly going back to shareholders in China who are laughing all the way to the bank. Yes, Cadent, one of the main gas suppliers, now is owned by China. Why are the pockets of Chinese shareholders more important than UK residents? I notice that, in Spain, there has been very little change in the cost of electricity because the government imposed controls on prices.
I live in the UK. I just came across a 5 year old electricity bill from 2019, when I was paying £0.09 per kWh but roll on to 3 January 2025, and I am having to pay £0.29 per kWh. So I am paying more than 3 times the rate I was paying 5 years ago. I live in a big 300 year old house, I used to pay £4,000 per year for gas and electricity but, in 2023, it was about £25,000. People are saying that the retail cost is linked to the wholesale price of gas, in 2022 that more than doubled in cost but now, in 2025, the cost of gas is no higher than it was in 2019. It seems that, as a result of the government’s failure to regulate the power industry, they were allowed to quadruple rates when the cost of gas went up but, now that the cost of gas has come down the utility companies have realised that we did not stop buying gas and electricity when the prices went up, so why bring the prices back down, when there is no real competition and they can carry on raking in ludicrous profits, mostly going back to shareholders who are laughing all the way to the bank. Yes, Cadent, one of the main gas suppliers, now is owned by people in another country. Why are the pockets of foreign shareholders more important than UK residents? I notice that, in Spain, there has been very little change in the cost of electricity because the government imposed controls on prices.
Does anyone seriously think that the oligarchy is going to allow the rest of us to access energy without them makin obscene profits?
Read my comment above. This guy has no idea what Tony Seba's RE Ucurve actually means, namely that a 4x overbuild and 3.5x in battery is needed to meet the load X, the average over the year. This means it is 7.5 times MORE than what people think. 60 cents/kwh is minimum and supercharging will be 90++/kwh. Insane costs.
The point Seba's making is that the most obscene profits come with more renewables, especially solar, so it will inevitably happen.
Sure, Jevons' Paradox means that for a while there'll also be more fossil fuels sold.. until suddenly there won't be any.
Because the oligarchy isn't faithful to molecules, only to power and wealth. And that won't come from bitumen, coal, natural gas or oil anymore.
Overbluster notwithstanding.
@@seaplaneguy1 Not to mention that when wholesale prices fall below zero, it is a great detractor to further investment.
If only our world's esteemed leaders had spoken to some old hippy living off grid, who's known for the past 45 years that
all the renewable power production that you can muster means nothing if you don't have storage.
My electrician is one of those. He's lived off grid for the last 30+ years. You should see his eyes roll before he plants his face in is palms when you talk about the global renewable's rollout.
@@davidbrayshaw3529 Good point. My tech is what I want for me in car, seaplane, house, office. It will not need oil or grid. CO2 capture allows me to grow food at 36 times more per area in a greenhouse. Excess CO2 is then used to make fuels from solar. No battery needed. Fuel IS the battery. No fire risks with Ethanol (E100) as the fuel. I think the world will agree with me when I am ready to sell it to others.
Sunlight is cheap, Wind too. Thats where it ends. Building and maintaining the facilities, the distribution infrastructure, the TWh storage for reliability or backup power plants is not cheap.
Specifically, the cost of retail electricity is primarily composed of three parts: 1) Transmission 2) Distribution and 3) Generation.
Then add administrative fees, monthly fixed connection fees, local surcharges, and taxes means that the electrical generation portion might be the less than one-third the final retail cost of electricity.
Owners of generation plants do not have control of transmission and distribution (T&D) costs, nor have say in taxes, surcharges or connection fees. Owners of generation sites also don't have a say in global economic inflation.
On top of all that, the CEOs and executives of electrical utility companies are making tens of millions in annual compensation, especially in the US.
Solar & wind *generation* are at historic low costs per MWh generation and still continue to drive lower. The world has never seen electricity generation this low before nor growing as fast. We are living in historic times.
@@beyondfossilcorrect but you can’t run a grid on solar and wind without rebuilding the distribution infrastructure and storage.
The cheap part is utilising solar panels or wind turbines the expensive part is rebuilding the grid. The operator of wind or solar can turn a profit as when it’s not in optimal Conditions it doesn’t matter to them. However the grid operator needs stability and so without adequate storage or transmission they cannot allow fossil fuel generators to go bankrupt.
In the very long term it appears wind and solar is the best way but it would be much better to acknowledge this and be honest rather then only promote one side of the equation (generation) as a lot of investment is required which will mean prices won’t flow to the end user for a long time and gas solar and nuclear need to be propped up in the mean time.
@@8towely Yes true. But consider also a major grid expansion will be needed *regardless* of solar or wind. Because we need to gradually transition *hundreds* of exajoules of energy previously burned up on fossil fuels (gasoline, diesel, home heating, aviation, industry) etc. onto the electrical grids around the world.
There are mitigating factors though:
(1) The world consumes some 620-exajoules of energy annually of which some 100-exajoules is electrical. This seems like a large gap to transition but we know some 300-exajoules of that is waste heat. It is labeled as "rejected energy" or "loss" in the Sankey energy diagrams. This waste is almost entirely comprised of incredibly inefficient fossil fuels. So the gap is not as large just simply by switching to efficient electric power. For instance, EVs operate at some 90% efficiency while ICE runs at an awfully pathetic 20% to 30% nominal efficiency. Furthermore, there are also electric heat pumps that operate at *multiples* of efficiency *over* 100% and heat pumps provide both heating and cooling in one single unit.
(2) Local storage unloads the grid. Battery storage is growing at exponential rates and eventually a home battery (with or without solar) could become as common as a washing machine. Homes can purchase and store power when its cheapest and most abundant such as when daytime solar floods the local grid with power. Battery powered homes can use this during the evening to lessen the peak grid demands of the duck curve. Battery homes also have an all-new capability to ride-out grid blackouts with whole home power for many hours. As the world becomes ever volatile from climate change and increasing geopolitical polarization, grid stability will be increasingly challenged thus increasing the demand for a home battery. China dominates battery production, but the world is realizing how critical this is so other nations (like the US) will be developing their own battery production, increasing supply/availability and driving down costs even further.
(2a) Add in solar to battery storage to boost the effect of a battery even more. Because every watt generated and used locally is a watt that doesn't stress a distant power plant to generate that watt nor the grid to transmit that watt. Consider millions of homes and hundreds of thousands of commercial buildings like malls, factories, campuses, hospitals, warehouses, etc. starting to add solar with local battery storage. No other technology blends so seamlessly into the urban environment as solar photovoltaics solid-state electronics with no emissions or noise. A large metropolitan area like Los Angeles has enough roof and parking space to generate probably multiples of its annual energy use. There is also city outskirts and intra-city limits possibilities for smaller solar farms in addition to roof and parking lots.
(2b) Solar even without storage removes hundreds to thousands TWh of electrical generation from grids around the world that would otherwise be generated by fossil fuels thus removing corresponding large amounts of pollution and carbon emissions. This then invites grid storage development to capture excesses and curtailment -- "if you build it, they will come".
(3) As fossil fuel power plants (like coal) are decommissioned, their megawatt grid connections can be re-used. Their buildings also can be converted to house high=capacity long-term storage like ceramic/sand based thermal storage. Stored thermal can be used to drive industrial uses concrete and steel manufacturing. Thermal can also be converted back to electrical using steam and a turbine possibly re-using the thermal plants existing turbine and supporting infrastructure. Thermal commercial energy is a big part of the global energy
(4) Fossil fuel power plants obviously have voracious *non-stop* fuel requirements. Thus their "footprint" extends thousands of miles beyond their physical power plant fence limits. Moreover, there is a non-stop requirement of exploring, drilling, refining, distributing that ultra-refined fuel at great cost of money, pollution and carbon emissions all before a *single drop* of fuel is burned for energy.
(4a) All that energy and labor can and should be redirected towards expanding the grid. Those amounts are substantial and will be increasingly available as fossil fuels are winding down. In 2022, the IMF shows $7.1 *trillion* USD of subsidies were given to the global fossil fuel industry. Just take half or a fraction of that amount and redirect it to towards renewable investment, R&D and deployment and see what happens.
@@beyondfossil what you state is simply not true. There is no need for a connected grid if we continued on a power plant source of power. This isn’t me saying it shouldn’t be done.
What I am saying is the generation cost power wind and solar is low. Rebuilding the grid to transform huge amounts of power over large distances and then adding in enough storage is not.
Stating evs are more efficient than ice this doesn’t really have anything to do with the conversation but yes no arguments there.
I’m not saying don’t go the renewable route. I’m stating stop telling everyone it’s going to give every one cheap power. It simply will not for a long long time as someone has to pay for all the infrastructure. So it doesn’t matter if wholesale power goes negative it matters the price the end user pays. You cannot simply stop fossil fuels tomorrow either.
I myself have solar panels on my home it’s a great thing. Don’t think I’m against renewables but there are a lot of arguements which are intentional to make it look better then for the everyday person and when they realise there power prices are going up and not changing will think they have been conned so stop telling half truths.
@@8towely The grids around the world are going to need expansion, especially considering growing population sizes and deeper electrification. Greater total generation (watt hours) and, critically, greater peak loads (watts). This will stress the amperage capacity of T&D and associated assets (substations, switches, fuses).
Solar and wind may more frequently be built in more remote locations. But fossil fuel, nuclear, coal, hydro cannot be built just anywhere either.
Natural gas and coal power plants must be built where existing non-stop supply of its fuel can be economically sourced. They have environmental restrictions on air quality emissions. They require hundreds to thousand+ gallons water *filtered* water per MWh of generation to avoid fouling their heat exchangers. Solar and wind require no water, no fuel, and emit no emissions. As you can see, there is give and take here. I don't need to explain hydro or nuclear.
Unfortunately the truth is ppl are paying more with the electricity bills. Someone is benefitting the -ve prices, definitely not the citizens of UK
Yes, those with negotiating power use it to leverage more than they're rightly due.
Someone in the UK belongs on trial. Won't happen, of course.
Free electricity sounds great in theory, but the infrastructure will require billions of dollars of investment.
And government subsidies
The "free" part is referring to electricity generation. There are still transmission and distribution fees that make up around two-thirds the final retail cost of electricity. Then there's administration fees, connection fees, taxes, local price riders, etc. Electricity generators don't have a say in those costs.
@@JDMSwervo2001 The global fossil fuel industry gets trillions in subsidies annually. Its been like this for decades.
Solar and wind are on track to be so inexpensive that advertisers and vendors will gladly pay for the power you use to recharge your EVs in exchange for viewing their ads and trickle charging in their parking lots while you shop nearby.
@@beyondfossilthat's why behind the meter generation and storage is so good, you can avoid most of those charges.
electricity tarrif may drop but the service fee will increase to cover this drop.
What are you on mate. I live in the UK. The prices have just gone up again. It's far from free in this country.
He's talking wholesale rates, not retail.
@icowrich then he should make this clear in his videos.
We are currently speaking wholesale on the energy market. Plans in britain and germany aswell conclude that by 2040 the prices will have reached private consumers.
Itssue is the rightwigers like the afd and farage aswell as the cdu and tories blabber its nonsentical amd will be suuuuuper expensive, acting and preferring to do nothing instead, leaving the private market to pick up the slack.
Labour and the spd/greens are currently expanding the network to the point germany had a whole week of negative energy prices in 2024. Same in britain, i know whomst i will vote for.
The changing of the energy sector never ever should have been such a mess, germany could be at 40% wind and 20-25% solar if not more by now, but the cdu chose to drag its feet like crazy.
And the right, even calls the idea of negative energy prices nonsentical, choosing to rave about how expensive negative energy prices are in germany, whilest the greens laugh.
Just like in the Netherlands, only in the summer lower prices. When you have a variable contract you definitely know it's not that low.
It still will not be free. As someone needs to maintain the equipment etc. that's far from free. Unless you have qualified slave labour of course.
Not in the Netherlands....
Same in germany. It hasnt reached private consumers yet.
Big oil telling you the cheap stuff will be more expensive, when every scientist ever tells the opposite and logic aswell
How about alternatives?
We keep hearing how renewables are going to be cheaper, but ever since they started implementing them the price has just kept going up.
How come what the 'Scientists are saying' and 'logic' don't conform with realty?
UK is 50% renewable. When there's high wind and low demand you might see free electricity at 3am when most people are asleep. Unfortunately the opposite is also true. In low wind and high demand we saw a peak price of 100p kWh at 6pm on 12-12-2024. That's $1.24 US per kWh!
You need more nuclear
Problem is companies wont invest in new capacity or maintenance of existing capacity if electricity prices are too low.
I believe electricity will be cheaper, but how will the companies investing billions recoup and make money.
Am I missing something?
$0 marginal cost. You will still pay for the service, though.
@@calc1657right now I pay .86cents daily charge plus per KWh.
That daily charge would have to quadruple at least.
$0 dollar marginal cost will never happen for the consumer.
Interesting!!!!
Not in the UK, prices have just reached an all time high as its set by a private consortium who own our national grid
Prices to consumers won’t go down it just means more money for shareholders.
Transmission will always be a significant cost to cover, as will be retailer costs.
Absolute cobblers.
Consumers being conned - Wind already provides 50% of UK electric generation on average but bills are increasing ! Even if your electric is from 100% renewable sources the per KW cost to consumer is 22p ( 25c) /Kw . 3 years ago about 9p/Kw. The generators are making huge profits and not passed on - consumers even pay for wind generation when it has to be dumped ( over supply when wind strong)
BTW Many of the images in your video are of cooling towers. They release water vapour not smoke.
Exactly same was claimed about nuclear in the 60's ! The wind farm contracts given out by Uk Gov guarantees a minimum price for suppliers for life - set about same price per Kw as charged today - that's why price will never be low and on top consumers have to pay for complete new cable network upgrade to handle increased demand for ev's and heat pumps
California has a ton of renewable energy, and yet they pay around $0.30 per kw-hour. PLEASE EXPLAIN
I live in the UK.
I just came across a 5 year old electricity bill from 2019, when I was paying £0.09 per kWh but roll on to 3 January 2025, and I am having to pay £0.29 per kWh.
So I am paying more than 3 times the rate I was paying 5 years ago.
I live in a big 300 year old house, I used to pay £4,000 per year for gas and electricity but, in 2023, it was about £25,000.
People are saying that the retail cost is linked to the wholesale price of gas, in 2022 that more than doubled in cost but now, in 2025, the cost of gas is no higher than it was in 2019.
It seems that, as a result of the government’s failure to regulate the power industry, they were allowed to quadruple rates when the cost of gas went up but, now that the cost of gas has come down the utility companies have realised that we did not stop buying gas and electricity when the prices went up, so why bring the prices back down, when there is no real competition and they can carry on raking in ludicrous profits, mostly going back to shareholders in China who are laughing all the way to the bank.
Yes, Cadent, one of the main gas suppliers, now is owned by China.
Why are the pockets of Chinese shareholders more important than UK residents?
I notice that, in Spain, there has been very little change in the cost of electricity because the government imposed controls on prices.
In the 50s and 60s the British public was told electricity would be free as reading the meters would cost more than the electricity supplied. Turned out to be a gross lie to get the public to buy in to nuclear power……. Fast fwd and that is the case today. Comparing a blip in oversupplied power wholesale is not the same as windless periods when back up is needed to step in to cover intermittent. Back up HAS to be costed against unreliable power supplies for a true cost.
The model has been shifted ...with first peak demand stored power. ...but more profound is the distributed grid level storage nodes. But you need longer storage and life batteries. The cable and tower infrastructure also has to change
. Govts have repeatedly baulked at having to do the real graft of actually planning and giving direction a situation since all utilities were privatised and sold off.. passing the parcels since the late 70s.🦕🦖 🧙🏼♂️🥼🌍
In parys watwr costs a fortune?
I was just watching 'Will blackouts come to Britain?' on youtube by UnHerd talking to Kathryn Porter and was really interesting talking about a recent very close blackout situation and coming situations which there is a real danger of future blackouts and because the Government is still not really asking the 'hard questions' about renewables. And there is given a load of data of the electricity supply and how it works and how NESO works(National Electricity System Operator). Very interesting and you can google it but the solar input as per info given in winter is very small and wind also very variable. Battery storage will not cut it, it's dire and with 2 nuclear plants going in 2027 (according to them) and more gas plants retiring later, the situation is really grim. I really enjoy your channel but had to let you know here. And have installed solar 6 years ago here in NZ and have increased it's size recently. I love it but there are limits
Every windmill increases the electricity bill.
It is disaster when prices reach zero as it have nothing to do with the cost of production. It’s simply a vast imbalance in supply and demand due to lack of base- and regulating power!
@@swhbpocl correct. The market mechanism is broken. Go ask the Noggies and the swedes that were stupid enough to build interconnectors that dragged up electricity prices.
@DR-00700jag är svensk 😢
So, wait a minute, the UK HAS nuclear power but their electricity prices are still sky high? What went wrong? Thought nuclear would bring the price down? And negative wholesale prices don't mean consumers get cheaper electricity even I know that.
Err. How come I can't afford to put the electric on for long in my house.😮
Electricity in the UK is double the European average..
How come prices are rising.
In the Uk the cost of electricity will stay as the most expensive in the world for the forseeable future.
It is going to rise steadily to almost double its current cost and will never fall as the £100 Billion they want to invest will never get repaid.
Leccy will be cheaper than water cos the price of water is going to rocket up
euhh ....most of it will be taxes anyway.....so the cost will be maintained.
Yea, it will be cheap during the day and extortion at night.
I gave this guy the benefit of the doubt for a while, but after this I realise he’s a renewable ideologue. The UK has the dearest electricity prices in the developed world because of their idiotic obsession with their fanciful net zero myth. It’s not a secret, it’s the simple truth. Ask anyone in the UK.
You are absolutely correct. It is time for the UK to awake from this insane pipe dream before the CCP is running the entire country.
Agreed, I watch for the EV news, but Viking's net zero agenda is getting more and delusional, there are serious doubts about the ability of solar and wind being able to solely power an industrialized country that are becoming more obvious, and just blindly ignoring that and continuing push the 'benefits' regardless, is just going to end up doing more harm in the long run.
It is just expensive getting there but there will come a time costs will be lower. Most of the cost is up front which is why it is expensive as bad old fossil fuels for now. all sorts of new stuff starts out expensive then gets ever better and cheaper. It is not unreasonable that this will happen.
Flight used to be for the rich only now any person can get a cheap flight. Hopefully not for much longer though lol.
As cheap as water ? What in 1000 years time ?
UK is building more nuclear reactors. Hickey point C. Sizewell C and Bradwell B.
That's the future. It's no con because it's there 24 hours a day irrelevant of weather conditions.
I can't believe your still telling lies like this. I live in the UK and pay £170pm on my energy bills,Far from free. Do your research before posting nonsense like this
But more prole are preferring nuear power, say pakistan and china?
Delusion complete.
This comment is naive. When the wind blows the owner of wind mills will not get paid enough so they all will make a loss. At the same time owners of nuclear reaktorn and fossil fuel generators get paid to not use their capacity. Those costs goes to your electricity bills. So the more wind and solar we have the more of these extra costs will rise.
In Sweden all wind mills have red figures. The one that make money are the company that produce the wind mills and the construction companies.
This view is 100% silly nonsense.
Tony Seba promotes the RE U-curve which shows that a 100% RE grid will need ~4x MORE than X, the average load for minimum costs. It also will need battery back up of ~ 3.5x.
The overbuild is to minimize the insane battery costs that are crazy at 1.5x needed just to make a RE cycle work.
So, Seba FAILED to understand his own curve which states that 7.5x more costs are needed than X. UK is only at 0.4x now.
RE now is 5 cents/kwh wind and 13 for solar. Add in 2-3 cents/kwh for line charges and you have over 8-9 cents/kwh. 7.5 x 8 is 60 cents/kwh at buildings and 90 at super chargers.
The lie this video states is that all the machines are free, which they are not. You have to still pay each even if you have to waste 3/4th of it due to them actually working.
In contrast, OFF grid is less than 1.5 cents/kwh with NO line charge. Fuel making is 2x, for a fuel cost of 3 cents/kwh. Add in CO2 capture of 1.2 cents/kwh and you get 4.2 cents/kwh wholesale at the plant. Fuel can compete with oil down to around $1.5/gallon (4.5 cents/kwh), but 100% RE grid cannot. Just a fact.
Funnily enough the UK is going green and guess what we have the most EXPENSIVE energy bills in the flipping world so stop with the lies.
I don’t think you understand how prices work in the UK. Electric price is based on the cost of the most expensive way to produce that electric regardless of how it’s “actually” produced. That’s gas, yep. electric price is based on the gas price. So it doesn’t matter how much renewables you have, because of how the pricing structure works, it’s won’t be cheaper. Think you need to do a lot more research as you do not understand this topic.
Also your claim that nuclear power is the most expensive is utterly false too. Nuclear has a high setup cost, but once you’ve built the plant it’s the cheapest source of energy including renewables.
Please, go and do some research and stop with the fake news. Unless the regulators change how we prices cap electricity it will never be cheap.
Delusion
Oh yes, trillion dollar companies now want to give you free stuff 😅. Newsflash Blackrock and vanguard own both industries and your getting nothing for free ever. Who pays you to publish this haha some NGO?
It's not free bro, trust my wallet
I live in the UK.
I just came across a 5 year old electricity bill from 2019, when I was paying £0.09 per kWh but roll on to 3 January 2025, and I am having to pay £0.29 per kWh.
So I am paying more than 3 times the rate I was paying 5 years ago.
I live in a big 300 year old house, I used to pay £4,000 per year for gas and electricity but, in 2023, it was about £25,000.
People are saying that the retail cost is linked to the wholesale price of gas, in 2022 that more than doubled in cost but now, in 2025, the cost of gas is no higher than it was in 2019.
It seems that, as a result of the government’s failure to regulate the power industry, they were allowed to quadruple rates when the cost of gas went up but, now that the cost of gas has come down the utility companies have realised that we did not stop buying gas and electricity when the prices went up, so why bring the prices back down, when there is no real competition and they can carry on raking in ludicrous profits, mostly going back to shareholders in China who are laughing all the way to the bank.
Yes, Cadent, one of the main gas suppliers, now is owned by China.
Why are the pockets of Chinese shareholders more important than UK residents?
I notice that, in Spain, there has been very little change in the cost of electricity because the government imposed controls on prices.
I live in the UK.
I just came across a 5 year old electricity bill from 2019, when I was paying £0.09 per kWh but roll on to 3 January 2025, and I am having to pay £0.29 per kWh.
So I am paying more than 3 times the rate I was paying 5 years ago.
I live in a big 300 year old house, I used to pay £4,000 per year for gas and electricity but, in 2023, it was about £25,000.
People are saying that the retail cost is linked to the wholesale price of gas, in 2022 that more than doubled in cost but now, in 2025, the cost of gas is no higher than it was in 2019.
It seems that, as a result of the government’s failure to regulate the power industry, they were allowed to quadruple rates when the cost of gas went up but, now that the cost of gas has come down the utility companies have realised that we did not stop buying gas and electricity when the prices went up, so why bring the prices back down, when there is no real competition and they can carry on raking in ludicrous profits, mostly going back to shareholders who are laughing all the way to the bank.
Yes, Cadent, one of the main gas suppliers, now is owned by people in another country.
Why are the pockets of foreign shareholders more important than UK residents?
I notice that, in Spain, there has been very little change in the cost of electricity because the government imposed controls on prices.