Part I yesterday established that wind electricity erodes the market share and utilization rates of our base-load fleet. But do governors and state legislators understood even that much?

I hope they do–or that they are coming to that understanding. Does wind electricity save some fuel? Yes. But that is all that it saves, while its cost impacts to electricity consumers extend beyond the direct costs of wind energy. It lowers the capacity factors of base-load generators which raises those generators’ per MWh breakeven price point to the extent those base-load generators have fixed costs.

Existing generators often have lower fixed costs than new ones due to the fact that their initial construction debt is partially or fully paid off. And it is true that new combined-cycle gas (CC Gas) generators have lower fixed costs than new coal or new nuclear plants.…

The role and economic viability of different kinds of power plants involves highly interdependent value propositions because decisions affecting installed capacity of one type of power plant affects the break-even cost of production for many if not all of the others.

This primer to optimizing the system average (levelized) cost of electricity production is divided into two segments.

Part I (today) suggests that most of our electricity generators fall into one or both of two general categories, serving two basic roles or “essential market segments.” A third type is also defined and discussed. The post suggests an importance of optimizing the utilization rate of both existing and new generating resources, and that the amount of such importance corresponds to the extent and duration a resource has fixed costs.

Part II (tomorrow) discusses in more detail the third category of generators and how the design and operational characteristics and market share of plants in that category influence the breakeven cost of electricity from the primary types described in Part I.…

“Clearly, the interpretation of what constitutes ‘begin construction’ is important. Yet at no time during the two years since the PTC was extended with this wording did the IRS bother to seek public comment under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the federal statute that requires federal agencies to provide notice and an opportunity to comment before promulgating rules.”

When Congress extended the wind energy production tax credit (PTC)  at the beginning of 2013 , it relaxed the terms upon which developers could qualify for the credit by requiring projects “begin construction” by the end of 2013, the expiration date of the PTC. The IRS released guidance a few months later defining what it meant to begin construction.

Similar to the Section 1603 Program, the IRS provided two methods for determining when construction began.…

“When you can no longer hide and you have not obeyed the law, just ask your friends in Congress to bail you out. This is what this bill [H.R. 493] represents.”

For those that do not believe America has lost its way, all one has to do is look at the relationship between the wind industry and Washington D.C.  Unbiased observers will see a shell-game democracy funneling out untold billions for a highly destructive and inefficient “energy strategy.” One of the primary benefactors of this arrangement is a Washington-based group of panhandlers know as the wind industry. But this industry’s windfall set-up with Washington is threatened because word of wind power’s undisclosed impacts is reaching the public.

Profits at Risk

In the last several years it has come to the attention of the American people that the wind industry is not what it appears to be.…