Case Green

“Green Man was good. It got me through some hard times”

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@SimonMahan I miss the good old days, when we always knew what would happen 5 years in advance

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@abluecrab1 and so little E to be found

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

god I hate RE+

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@Dan_Canoeth everyone single one of them asking for months in advance “will you be at RE+?”

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

no need for the subterfuge and “back doors” into our infrastructure. you could probably task rabbit the entire job for $1,000

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

the funny thing about the grid-protection-from-foreign-adversaries discourse is that you could pay 15 back woods gun nuts to shoot a few select MPTs and cause absolute mayhem

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@SimonMahan is that actually in the Potomac deck?

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@SlBrandin what national interests specifically

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@cody_a_hill son of a bitch you’re saying it was an option to ignore all of this and just spend time with my children

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@xiaowang1984 @SlBrandin @duncancampbell does it make a difference if it’s a higher PPA price vs. lower PPA price + pass through of system upgrades on a separate line of the bill? in theory load is paying the same right? maybe there’s a system planning dynamic I’m missing here

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

this is an under appreciated dynamic of energy policy and power market structure. all roads lead to the load meter - some of them just take the long way around.

[Sam @SlBrandin]

@xiaowang1984 @duncancampbell I hate to break it to you but load always pays. It’s most efficient for it to be direct so consumers have maximum ability to manage those costs as they see fit

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@SolarInMASS gotcha - most carbon pricing frameworks assume an escalation in the marginal cost of new emissions - are you suggesting something different?

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@SolarInMASS I’m dense, but this doesn’t make sense to me. you’re saying an aging fossil fleet will become less reliable over time?

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@ShanuMathew93 @forrest_f_ $90-$100 is the going rate for solar in PJM-DOM right now….

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@jjsunandsnow @ShanuMathew93 this is the least flawed way of approaching the problem, but it’s a political loser

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

if you follow the line of reasoning for most of the discourse on both sides of this debate, you end up back at the question of how you should price carbon emissions, and if the cost is high enough to justify the challenging aspects of deploying lots of intermittent resources

[Tyler Norris @tylerhnorris]

“If solar and wind are the most affordable and fastest to build resources, why do they need tax credits?” A reporter asked me this fair question yesterday. Here's the steelman case, in my view:

1) Market failure correction: Social value of solar and wind (e.g. reduced fuel price volatility, CO2 emissions, air pollution) exceeds private market value; tax credits help internalize these public benefits

2) Offsetting non-price barriers: Solar and wind face significant non-price barriers (e.g. permitting delays, interconnection challenges, transmission constraints) that favor incumbent resources; tax credits help counterbalance

3) Energy security: Solar and wind don’t rely on globally traded fuels, providing insulation from potential actions of adversarial governments while enabling lower-cost fuel export to allies

4) Supporting rapid load growth: With electricity demand rising quickly, tax credits help scale up new generation faster and mitigate backsliding into higher-emission resources

5) Accelerating deployment: Even in regions where solar and wind are cost-competitive, the pace of market-driven adoption may not align with public objectives; tax incentives help close the gap

6) Offsetting tariff impacts: Tariffs have raised costs of a variety of input materials and grid equipment; tax credits help offset these added burdens and keep projects economically viable

7) Addressing uneven economics: While solar and wind are the most affordable new energy sources in many markets, this isn’t universally true, especially in regions with weaker RE resources

8) Consistent w/ historical precedent: Nearly all major energy sources in US history have received federal subsidies; supporting renewables continues that tradition in service of modern priorities

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

@agelston lol that probably explains why so many of his tweets are appearing in my timeline

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

but carbon pricing is off the table politically, so we’ve inserted subsidies and a whole new language surrounding pros/cons of renewables and IMO most of it is a giant smoke screen to avoid mentioning GW or carbon

[Case Green @CaseGreen4]

it’s not honestly about whether solar/wind are cheapest to deploy. in some spots of the country they are. in other parts of the country you need big subsidies (higher implied price on carbon)