Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Maintenance. Maintaining all that equipment (you need more of it for the same amount of energy) costs alot.
Bingo.
I have a friend who's job is to predict future costs for the local electric company and choose which sources to purchase bases on the predictions (my electric company uses a combination of nuclear, wind, water, fossil fuel sources). I asked him about the increased cost for the wind energy. He stated that the maintenance costs for running a limited number of windmills was higher than the revenues for selling the electricity the windmills produce. Thus, a surcharge is necessary for them to come close to breaking even. I think they still lose a bit of money on the windmills, but they keep them around for PR reasons.
Yes, the electric company must pay for coal. But coal is rediculously cheap and it costs less than the costs to hire people to maintain the windmills.
If it really were cheaper for natural power, then your electric company would convert from coal to the natural sources, build a ton of natural power sources, and make a killing. Is your electric company doing this?
Of course, the last time I posted this, I got flamed for not having links. I guess, via ATOT bylaws, ATOT posters can't have knowledgeable friends and can only associate with the all powerful Google.