Financial Group Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FRN: 303190). The registered office address of both Group PLC and Financial Group Limited (registered in England No. 3157344) is MoneySupermarket House, St. David's Park, Ewloe, Chester, CH5 3UZ. Limited is an appointed representative of Financial Group Limited. Today, El Paso Electric is a regional electric utility providing generation, transmission and distribution service to approximately 417,000 retail and wholesale customers in a 10,000 square mile area of the Rio Grande valley in west Texas and southern New Mexico. Its service territory extends from Hatch, New Mexico to Van Horn, Texas.   Knowledge These sites make a number of assumptions If you haven't entered kilowatt hours, which is the most accurate way, then just giving a past bill can't actually tell the comparison sites your exact usage, so they each make some assumptions to work it out. Slight differences in those assumptions can affect the overall recommendations. Your Alerts Trending Wind News Compare Broadband by Type 180W AC 220V to DC12V 15A Car Lighter Power Converter Adapter Inverter US$20.99 (28) Power Quality for Businesses Celebrity odd couples Gexa Energy - Gexa Saver Supreme 24 24 months 9.6¢ / kWh Sponsored Content Mission analyze rate Wind power was so plentiful in Texas that producers sold it at a negative price. What?  36 plant bundle £7 all-in There are fixed-rate plans for Texas residents on ComparePower with rates as low as $0.070 Sneaky electricity companies Fixed-rate, long-term (contract) plans provide stability in electricity rates. If market energy costs suddenly trend upward where you live, you can rest assured that you won’t have to pay more out of pocket. However, if you want to switch to a different, lower-cost plan before the end of the contract term, you’ll likely have to pay a cancellation or early termination fee. Enough ‘Feeble Warnings’, Regulate ‘Wild West’ Crypto Market: UK Lawmakers 1.35% AER, min £1. Hear from Down to the Finish: Details Create Splendor Inside Coastal Chic Home Help Paying Your Bill Report: 4 out of 5 Americans have less than a year’s income saved for retirement 10.3¢ Southern Discomfort Durkan responded by telling City Light to trim the hikes to 4.5 percent by reducing its spending plan. The utility does not yet know how it will achieve all the cuts, a spokesman said last week. Just under 80% of households in this state have 1 refrigerator Prepare Your Home 2) Scan through our suppliers' cheapest tariffs list. Use the info above, then call your supplier and ask to switch. Be warned though the table above is based on average usage, and there can be regional variation. It should be fine though, do ask it to double-check the numbers for you and give you a bespoke price. Vacuum Cleaner Forgot username lmsixel State Direct Energy - Power on Command 24 24 months 10.6¢ / kWh Wind 30 60 Say goodbye to the middleman profiting on your electricity bill through markups and fees and say hello to Griddy. No matter how much electricity you use, you pay the wholesale rate of electricity. Never marked up. See all Power Express plans Jessica S. in Midland -- Commercial With a carbon price of $50/ton (which would raise the price of coal-fired power by 5c/kWh), solar PV is cost-competitive in most locations. The declining price of PV has been reflected in rapidly growing installations, totaling a worldwide cumulative capacity of 297 GW by end 2016. According to some estimates total investment in renewables for 2011 exceeded investment in carbon-based electricity generation.[95] How do I contact my energy supplier? Southern Discomfort No Termination Fee Featured Please enter a valid email address Shenandoah Valley Electric Cooperative Broadband Reviews PBS NewsHour Logo: Home That’s one debate, though, that the utilities don’t get too involved in. “At the end of the day, our job is not to take that into account,” Wright says. “Our job is to provide electrical service,” while ensuring that the rates charged cover the costs of building and operating the system. View Your Account Dashboard Our sign-up process is simple and straightforward, and can be completed in a matter of minutes. Should I take a short, cheaper fix, or fix long? I can't decide TVs Sign up to our Fair Deal 20 offer for 20% off electricity usage and 10% off natural gas usage. BY: We've been swamped with positive feedback, such as: Stan shows to watch Colorado[edit] At 45,000 MWd/t burn-up this gives 360,000 kWh electrical per kg, hence fuel cost = 0.39 ¢/kWh.Fuel costs are one area of steadily increasing efficiency and cost reduction. For instance, in Spain the cost of nuclear electricity was reduced by 29% over the period 1995-2001. Cost reductions of 40% were achieved by boosting enrichment levels and burn-up. Prospectively, a further 8% increase in burn-up will give another 5% reduction in fuel cost.Uranium has the advantage of being a highly concentrated source of energy which is easily and cheaply transportable. The quantities needed are very much less than for coal or oil. One kilogram of natural uranium will yield about 20,000 times as much energy as the same amount of coal. It is therefore intrinsically a very portable and tradeable commodity.The contribution of fuel to the overall cost of the electricity produced is relatively small, so even a large fuel price escalation will have relatively little effect (see below). Uranium is abundant and widely available.There are other possible savings. For example, if used fuel is reprocessed and the recovered plutonium and uranium is used in mixed oxide (MOX) fuel, more energy can be extracted. The costs of achieving this are large, but are offset by MOX fuel not needing enrichment and particularly by the smaller amount of high-level wastes produced at the end. Seven UO2 fuel assemblies give rise to one MOX assembly plus some vitrified high-level waste, resulting in only about 35% of the volume, mass and cost of disposal.This 'back-end' of the fuel cycle, including used fuel storage or disposal in a waste repository, contributes up to 10% of the overall costs per kWh, or less if there is direct disposal of used fuel rather than reprocessing. The $26 billion US used fuel program is funded by a 0.1 cent/kWh levy.Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs account for about 66% of the total operating cost. O&M may be divided into ‘fixed costs’, which are incurred whether or not the plant is generating electricity, and ‘variable costs’, which vary in relation to the output. Normally these costs are expressed relative to a unit of electricity (for example, cents per kilowatt hour) to allow a consistent comparison with other energy technologies.Decommissioning costs are about 9-15% of the initial capital cost of a nuclear power plant. But when discounted over the lifetime of the plant, they contribute only a few percent to the investment cost and even less to the generation cost. In the USA they account for 0.1-0.2 cent/kWh, which is no more than 5% of the cost of the electricity produced.External costsExternal costs are not included in the building and operation of any power plant, and are not paid by the electricity consumer, but by the community generally. The external costs are defined as those actually incurred in relation to health and the environment, and which are quantifiable but not built into the cost of the electricity.The European Commission launched a project, ExternE, in 1991 in collaboration with the US Department of Energy – the first research project of its kind "to put plausible financial figures against damage resulting from different forms of electricity production for the entire EU". The methodology considers emissions, dispersion and ultimate impact. With nuclear energy, the risk of accidents is factored in along with high estimates of radiological impacts from mine tailings (waste management and decommissioning being already within the cost to the consumer). Nuclear energy averages 0.4 euro cents/kWh, much the same as hydro; coal is over 4.0 c/kWh (4.1-7.3), gas ranges 1.3-2.3 c/kWh and only wind shows up better than nuclear, at 0.1-0.2 c/kWh average. NB these are the external costs only. If these costs were in fact included, the EU price of electricity from coal would double and that from gas would increase 30%. These are without attempting to include the external costs of global warming.A further study commissioned by the European Commission in 2014, and carried out by the Ecofys consultancy, calculated external costs for nuclear as €18-22/MWh, including about €5/MWh for health impacts, €4/MWh for accidents and €12/MWh for so-called ‘resource depletion’, relating to the “costs to society of consumption of finite fuel resources now, rather than in the future”. Although Ecofys acknowledges that the resource depletion cost is difficult to calculate since the scarcity of a finite natural resource is already reflected in its market price, and could therefore just as well be zero, a high estimate was asserted using a questionable methodology and without taking account of the potential for recycling nuclear fuel.Another report for the European Commission made by Professor William D’haeseleer, University of Leuven, in November 2013, estimated the cost of a potential nuclear accident to be in the range of €0.3-3/MWh.Pricing of external benefits is limited at present. As fossil fuel generators begin to incur real costs associated with their impact on the climate, through carbon taxes or emissions trading regimes, the competitiveness of new nuclear plants will improve. This is particularly so where the comparison is being made with coal-fired plants, but it also applies, to a lesser extent, to gas-fired equivalents.The likely extent of charges for carbon emissions has become an important factor in the economic evaluation of new nuclear plants, particularly in the EU where an emissions trading regime has been introduced but which is yet to reflect the true costs of carbon emissions. Prices have stayed relatively low within the national and sub-national jurisdictions that currently put a price on carbon emissions. In Europe, since 2013, the European Union Allowance price is stagnating around €5-9/tCO2. The European Union is considering a reform to the Emissions Trading System to ensure more stable and higher permit prices needed to support the delivery of its 1990-2030 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 40%.An analysis by the Brattle Group in 2016 showed that zero-emission credits for nuclear power could secure the economic viability of nuclear plants in competition with subsidised renewables and low-cost gas-fired plants. It said: "A typical revenue deficit for a vulnerable nuclear power plant is around $10/MWh," which is equivalent to costing "the avoided CO2 emissions... between $12 and $20 per ton of CO2, varying with the regional fossil fuel mix that would substitute for the plant." It said: "This cost compares favorably with other carbon abatement options such as state policies designed to reduce CO2 emissions from the power sector, as well as with many estimates of the social cost of carbon."“These findings demonstrate that the retention of existing nuclear generating plants, even at a modest operating cost recovery premium for a limited period, represents a cost-effective method to avoid CO2 emissions in the near term and would enable compliance with any future climate policy at a reasonable cost. Sustaining nuclear viability in the interim is a reasonable and cost-effective insurance policy in the longer term.”Under New York's Clean Energy Standard (CES), zero-emission credits (ZEC) will be implemented in six tranches over a period of 12 years starting April 2017. For the first two-year period nuclear generators will receive ZECs of $17.54/MWh, paid by the distribution utilities (and hence eventually ratepayers) but otherwise similar to the federal production tax credits applying to renewables since 1993 on an inflation-adjusted basis, though at a lower rate than its $23/MWh for wind. ZECs would escalate to $29.15/MWh over subsequent years.The NY Public Service Commission on 1 August 2016 approved the Clean Energy Standard. The majority vote was reported to be on three main criteria: grid reliability, reducing carbon emissions, and maintaining jobs. The governor’s announcement stated: “A growing number of climate scientists have warned that if these nuclear plants were to abruptly close, carbon emissions in New York will increase by more than 31 million metric tons during the next two years, resulting in public health and other societal costs of at least $1.4 billion.”In Illinois, in December 2016 the Future Energy Jobs Bill was passed, with a core feature being the establishment of the Zero Emission Standard (ZES) to preserve the state’s at-risk nuclear plants, saving 4,200 jobs, retaining $1.2 billion of economic activity annually and avoiding increases in energy costs. The bill provided ZECs similar to those in New York – "a tradable credit that represents the environmental attributes of one megawatt hour of energy produced from a zero emission facility" (such as the nuclear power plants which supply about 90% of the state’s zero-carbon electricity). It will provide up to $235 million annually to support two plants – 2,884 MWe net capacity – for ten years.Other costsIn order to provide reliable electricity supply, provision must be made for backup generation at times when the generating plant is not operating. Provision must also be made to transmit the electricity from where it is generated to where it is needed. The costs incurred in providing backup and transmission/distribution facilities are known as system costs.System costs are external to the building and operation of any power plant, but must be paid by the electricity consumer, usually as part of the transmission and distribution cost. From a government policy point of view they are just as significant as the actual generation cost, but are seldom factored into comparisons of different supply options, especially comparing base-load with dispersed variable renewables. In fact the total system cost should be analysed when introducing new power generating capacity on the grid. Any new power plant likely requires changes to the grid, and hence incurs a significant cost for power supply that must be accounted for. But this cost for large base-load plants is usually small compared with integrating variable renewables to the grid.For nuclear and fossil fuel generators, system costs relate mainly to the need for reserve capacity to cover periodic outages, whether planned or unplanned. The system costs associated with renewable generation relate to their inability to generate electricity without the required weather conditions and their generally dispersed locations distant from centres of demand.The integration of intermittent renewable supply on a preferential basis despite higher unit cost creates significant diseconomies for dispatchable supply, as is now becoming evident in Germany, Austria and Spain, compromising security of supply and escalating costs. At 40% share of electricity being from renewables, the capital cost component of power from conventional thermal generation sources increases substantially as their capacity factor decreases – the utilisation effect. This has devastated the economics of some gas-fired plants in Germany, for instance.In some countries, market design results in a market failure wherby reliable (and low carbon), but capital-intensive technologies (such as large hydro and nuclear) cannot be financed because long-term power purchase contracts are not available, meaning there is no certainty that investments can be recouped. Long-term electricity storage solutions (when/if the technology becomes available) face the same financing problem because these will also be capital-intensive.The overall cost competitiveness of nuclear, as measured on a levelised basis (see figure below on Comparative LCOEs and System Costs in Four Countries), is much enhanced by its modest system costs. However, the impact of intermittent electricity supply on wholesale markets has a profound effect on the economics of base-load generators, including nuclear, that is not captured in the levelised cost comparisons given by the International Energy Agency (IEA) - Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) reports. The negligible marginal operating costs of wind and solar mean that, when climatic conditions allow generation from these sources, they undercut all other electricity producers. At high levels of renewable generation, for example as implied by the EU’s 30% renewable penetration target, the nuclear capacity factor is reduced and the volatility of wholesale prices greatly increases whilst the average wholesale price level falls. The increased penetration of intermittent renewables thereby greatly reduces the financial viability of nuclear generation in wholesale markets where intermittent renewable energy capacity is significant. See also Electricity markets section below.An OECD study (OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (2012), Nuclear Energy and Renewables: System Effects in Low-carbon Electricity Systems) found that the integration of large shares of intermittent renewable electricity is a major challenge for the electricity systems of OECD countries and for dispatchable generators such as nuclear. Grid-level system costs for variable renewables are large ($15-80/MWh) but depend on country, context and technology (onshore wind < offshore wind < solar PV). Nuclear system costs are $1-3/MWh.See also paper on Electricity Transmission Grids.Nuclear-specific taxes are levied in several EU countries. In 2014 Belgium raised some €479 million from a €0.005/kWh tax. In July 2015, Electrabel agreed to pay €130 million tax for the year 2016, alongside a fee for life extension of Doel 1&2 (€20 million/yr). From 2017 onwards, a formula will apply for calculating tax contributions, with a minimum of €150 million per year.In 2000 Sweden introduced a nuclear-specific tax on installed capacity, which gradually increased over time; in 2015, the tax raised about €435 million. In June 2016 the Swedish government, amid growing concerns over the continued viability of existing plants, agreed to phase out the tax on nuclear power from 2017 onwards.In Germany, a tax was levied on nuclear fuel that required companies to pay per gram of fuel used over six years to 2016. After various court rulings, in June 2017 the Federal Constitutional Court finally ruled that the nuclear fuel tax was “formally unconstitutional and void,” which meant that the three major utilities could be reimbursed some €6.3 billion paid between 2011 and 2016 – €2.8 billion by E.On, €1.7 billion by RWE and €1.44 billion by EnBW, plus interest.The UK exercises a Climate Change Levy, which continues to 2023. It is a downstream tax on energy delivered to non-domestic users in the UK introduced in 2001. Initially levied against fossil fuels and nuclear, the government removed renewables' exemption in its July 2015 Budget. In 2011 the government introduced a carbon floor price – a mechanism that has long been seen as fundamental to the economics of new UK nuclear power. The government set a minimum of £16 per tonne CO2 from 2013, rising steadily to £30 per tonne in 2020, and £70 per tonne in 2030.See also paper on Energy subsidies and external costs.Electricity marketsThe economics of any power generation depends primarily on what each unit (kWh, MWh) costs to produce and get to the consumer who creates the demand for that power. This is the LCOE as outlined above. But secondly it depends on the market into which the power is sold, where the producer and grid operator run into a raft of government policies often coupled with subsidies for other sources. Such policies raise the question of what public good is served by each, and whether overall the public good is optimised. Where the outcome is not maximising public good effectively, there is market failure.** This section draws heavily on the Nuclear Economics Consulting Group webpage on Market Failure.A market can work well to achieve its stated objectives, but still result in market failure. This is often explained by externalities – negative or positive impacts of an industry – that are not reflected in the market. With electricity, the direct (private) costs of generating power do not usually include the external costs (e.g. emissions, system costs due to intermittent operation, land use, noise) nor do they account for the benefits of positive externalities (e.g. knock-on economic activity from jobs, system reliability, fuel diversity).Electricity markets rely on direct or private costs to dispatch (i.e. turn on and turn off) generators to meet varying real-time demand for power. Those costs determine merit order of dispatch. Meeting real-time electricity demand is a difficult and challenging process. The electricity markets do this, but do not reflect the externalities of the generators participating in the market and may result in market failure. An electricity market with efficient short-term spot prices should not be expected to achieve other objectives such as lower emissions, long-term system reliability, or implementation of national policy.Merchant generating plants rely on selling power into a commodity market which is shaped by policies including those which may favour particular sources of power regardless of their immediate and longer-term deficiencies in relation to the public good. (Generating plants in a regulated or government-owned electricity industry can deliver power essentially on a cost-plus basis, with regulators or governments able to reflect externalities in decisions.) Nuclear power plants provide a range of benefits to society that are not compensated in the commodity electricity market revenue stream. These public benefits include emission-free electricity, long-term reliable operation, system stability, system fuel diversity and fuel price hedging, as well as economic benefits from employment.Generic approaches to fix market failure include imposing costs on negative externalities such as CO2 emissions, providing compensation to support positive externalities, and government ownership of sectors likely to experience market failure. Some US states make zero emission credit (ZEC) payments to nuclear generation to reward the positive externalities. ZECs are similar to the production tax credits applying to wind power, though lower, but are based directly on estimated emission benefits. They mean that the value of nuclear electricity can be greater than the LCOE cost of producing it in markets strongly influenced by low gas prices and subsidies on variable wind generation which has market priority. Without the ZEC payments, nuclear operation may not be viable in this situation.Comparing the economics of different forms of electricity generationIn 2017 the US EIA published figures for the average levelised costs per unit of output (LCOE) for generating technologies to be brought online in 2022, as modelled for its Annual Energy Outlook. These show: advanced nuclear, 9.9 c/kWh; natural gas, 5.7-10.9 c/kWh (depending on technology); and coal with 90% carbon sequestration, 12.3 c/kWh (rising to 14 c/kWh at 30%). Among the non-dispatchable technologies, LCOE estimates vary widely: wind onshore, 5.2 c/kWh; solar PV, 6.7 c/kWh; offshore wind, 14.6 c/kWh; and solar thermal, 18.4 c/kWh.The 2015 edition of the OECD study on Projected Costs of Generating Electricity showed that the range for the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) varied much more for nuclear than coal or CCGT with different discount rates, due to it being capital-intensive. The nuclear LCOE is largely driven by capital costs. At 3% discount rate, nuclear was substantially cheaper than the alternatives in all countries, at 7% it was comparable with coal and still cheaper than CCGT, at 10% it was comparable with both. At low discount rates it was much cheaper than wind and PV. Based on a 0% discount rate, LCOE for nuclear soared to three times as much as the 10% discount rate, while that for coal was 1.4 times and for CCGT it changed very little. Solar PV increased 2.25 times and onshore wind nearly twice at 10% discount rate, albeit with very different capacity factors to the 85% for the three base-load options. For all technologies, a $30 per tonne carbon price was included. LCOE figures omit system costs.Comparative LCOEs and system costs in four countries (2014 and 2012)** LCOE plant costs have been taken from Projected Costs of Generating Electricity 2015 Edition. System costs have been taken from Nuclear Energy and Renewables (NEA, 2012). A 30% generation penetration level for onshore wind, offshore wind and solar PV has been assumed in the NEA estimates of system costs, which include back-up costs, balancing costs, grid connection, extension and reinforcement costs. A discount rate of 7% is used throughout, which is therefore consistent with the plant level LCOE estimates given in the 2015 edition of Projected Costs of Generating Electricity. The 2015 study applies a $30/t CO2 price on fossil fuel use and uses 2013 US$ values and exchange rates.Projected nuclear LCOE costs for plants built 2015-2020, $/MWh Multifamily “It’s just a taxing and very large initial barrier for companies to develop the groundwork,” Brekken said. “The technology is there; it’s been proven. There’s nothing exotic about wave-energy-conversion technology itself—it’s just expensive to do stuff in the ocean.” Overpaying your Mortgage Broadband FAQs Dongjie Zhang is a Senior Research Analyst covering the power and coal market analysis on Greater China. DC 12.08 11.63 3.9 111.6 41 Hotel Sales POPULAR No Credit Check Electric Vehicles and Your Business Ocala Electric Utility Houston day care where child died after being left on bus ordered to close Map of Average Electricity Rates by State More Ways to Watch Our Experts Outdoor Safety Paper Towels Businesses spend several thousand dollars in energy expenses. Deregulation allows consumers to compare and shop their electricity providers for their businesses. Thus a business could save up to 30% on their energy costs by simply switching their energy plan to a different provider and or by simply changing their energy plan. Top Savings Accounts Georgia 11.62¢ / kWh 11.7¢ / kWh DOWN -0.683 % Julia L. in Webster Compare Phone Plans Affect Energy Toro TimeCutter SW4200 (42") 24.5HP Steering Wheel Zero Turn Lawn Mower Tesla Motors' home battery pack. Highlighted Resources 5 California 19.90 Earn some extra spending money or energy credits by sending your friends to Acacia Energy. Company information Power Delivery Compare Car Loans Gexa Energy - Gexa Saver Value 12 months 11.3¢ / kWh $966.87 Watch Part 2 Green Mountain Energy Pollution Free 36 Preferred 36 months $0.086/ kWh Registered office: Tower House, 10 Southampton Street, London, WC2E 7HA, United Kingdom  Marketcap HSBC: Bitcoin Price Ticker Widget Spark Energy Regulatory New NHS tool lets you check if… February 19, 2016 Cold-climate heat pumps Is Ted Cruz or Beto O'Rourke leading Senate race? How to make sense of… Texas Electric Cooperatives represents the interests of 75 electric cooperatives with more than 3 million members throughout the state. TEC serves its members by providing products and services that help sustain cooperative businesses in the 21st century. Enroll 855-632-7028 Updated Daily Users Guide Depending on your boiler's age, a shiny new efficient one could save you up to £320/year. New boilers typically cost £2,300 – a fabulous freebie. Click to Compare RatesView Rates Job Opportunities Decoupling Residential Electricity Rates by State ‡Terms and conditions apply Hinges See Similar Items DC 12V To AC 220V Modified Power Inverter 6000W Power Converter US$89.99 Read more about electricity from The Watchdog: Energy Choice Ohio TV Providers Subscribe to our newsletter Kick back, relax and move.  1.     Contracts:  Before, there were no contracts.  You signed up or you didn’t.  When it’s the only game in town, you have to play by their rules.  Nowadays, you’ll see these ultra-fabulous rates bandied about but it’s only by carefully scrutinizing the fine print that you’ll discover those wonderful rates come with a one-year lock-down or other catches. Jon Talton There's a better way to personalize your website experience. With myConnection, the profile you create allows you to set up a unique starting point for the tasks and transactions that you want to complete in your time on this website. Use myConnection to gather the information that you most care about from across this website into one central location, giving you greater control over how you connect with your community. Minnesota  13.61 36  West Virginia  11.6 16  Now Round 3. My new strategy: Play the inside game. Let's find a respected state lawmaker familiar with the system and beseech him or her to lead our cause. Best Cryptocurrency Exchanges for Beginners IGS Energy Core Values, Respect & Leaders Who Walk the Talk: Why Employees Think Omnidian Tops the Charts 100 days until Christmas Distributed Ledger Technology Payment and billing Electronic Data Interchange Kid Safety Origin Energy Follow Us: Facebook Twitter YouTube LinkedIn Instagram iPad app Oink Energy Cordless Angle Drills A small Australian, privately owned, Brisbane-based electricity retailer. Its call centre is in the Philippines. Earn? Your information remains private unless you choose to share it But there's a catch. Plattsburgh has a monthly megawatt limit. Exceed it, and they have to pay much higher rates on the open market. Sections “African countries must think outside the box. The sun is free and inexhaustible. Solar technology — photovoltaic panels — converts the sun’s radiation directly into electricity with no pollution or damage to the environment. The panels can generate enough power to run stoves, pump water, light clinics and power televisions. Africa has one of the best climates for this type of energy,” Mr. Makokoro told Africa Renewal. Best Electric Company In Alpine Texas | Electricity Rates Best Electric Company In Alvarado TX | Cheap Electricity Best Electric Company In Alvarado TX | Power On Today
Legal | Sitemap