So where were you dudded, hope you didnt assume, I've done that ...
Science/Environment Moving Australia to 100% Renewable Energy would actually SAVE us money.
- Thread starter A Cut Above
- Start date
- Tagged users None
So where were you dudded, hope you didnt assume, I've done that ...
00Stinger
100 - 7
it was the mrs decision so i left it her
Long term it will probably save me money but not enough to really justify it tbh
Having said that when/if lithium batteries come down to a reasonable price i might buy one of them as I wont need the grid
Sent from my SM-A505YN using Tapatalk
Sounds like the little lady got her way, again .... my experience of solar last century suggests a battery is the way to go.
There can be little doubt that The Guardian article that kicked off this thread is/was rubbish & ignored all of the costs
reneweconomy.com.au
'......the increasingly complex connection rules and commissioning delays, worsened by increased congestion in key parts of the grid and rule changes that have caused significant disputes between project owners and contractors over who should bear the financial cost of delays and lost revenue.'
The result is substantial companys being wary of building solar farms with promoters not paying. IMHO its obvious the due diligence process is inadequate, but thats one for the Courts after the issue of building costs are decided.
Contracting giant lifts lid on dispute over delayed Sunraysia solar farm
Decmil lifts lid on dispute over the delayed Sunraysia solar farm in NSW, which has now widened to include the inverter supplier.
reneweconomy.com.au
'......the increasingly complex connection rules and commissioning delays, worsened by increased congestion in key parts of the grid and rule changes that have caused significant disputes between project owners and contractors over who should bear the financial cost of delays and lost revenue.'
The result is substantial companys being wary of building solar farms with promoters not paying. IMHO its obvious the due diligence process is inadequate, but thats one for the Courts after the issue of building costs are decided.
Because potential investors are not always that clever, and due diligence is often performed by rote.
100% renewable would actually save us money, if the sun shone constantly 24 hours a day, and the sky was not cloudy ever, and the wind never changed.
There can be little doubt that The Guardian article that kicked off this thread is/was rubbish & ignored all of the costs
Contracting giant lifts lid on dispute over delayed Sunraysia solar farm
Decmil lifts lid on dispute over the delayed Sunraysia solar farm in NSW, which has now widened to include the inverter supplier.
'......the increasingly complex connection rules and commissioning delays, worsened by increased congestion in key parts of the grid and rule changes that have caused significant disputes between project owners and contractors over who should bear the financial cost of delays and lost revenue.'
The result is substantial companys being wary of building solar farms with promoters not paying. IMHO its obvious the due diligence process is inadequate, but thats one for the Courts after the issue of building costs are decided.
A large solar farm, requiring transmission to the user over long distances, makes little sense.
If we are going to use PV cells it makes more sense to put them on the point of use, ( factory roof ), avoid having to pay for SP Ausnet infrastructure, and avoid the markups of energy providers.
I believe there are companies who will install solar panels on your roof for free ( they remain the owner of the infrastructure ) , they will sell you the electricity from the panels at wholesale price ( ie cheaper than you can buy it from an Energy marketer ), and sell anything you don't use back into the grid.
Bad news for the Energy Marketers , but hell, do they really deserve money for nothing?
What is the case for large "solar farms " far remote from point of use?
We've all seen the solar road signs.
Does it make sense to put the same solar panels from 100 signs all in a little fenced off area a mile away?
Compared to Thermal Solar energy the big factor of PV cells is portability.
No infrastructure connection is fine but it needs to mean no right to that power. No doubt things will continue to evolve in this space, & projections on future costs are unreliable.
You can still have a connection to the infrastructure , the same way that a household with Solar does.
Obviously its harder to go off grid. ( Though Solar , with diesel backup may still be an overall improvement on Coal ).
That's much different to having to run transformers and a transmission line from your solar farm.
It was claptrap then, as it is today:
Energy giant suffers financial hit from problems at Australia’s biggest solar farm
European energy giant Enel Green Power has taken a substantial hit from the ongoing production delays at what should be the biggest solar farm in operation in Australia, the Bungala solar project near Port Augusta in South Australia.
The Bungala solar farm has been built in two stages of 110MW each, and the combined capacity of 220MW should amount to the biggest solar project to be constructed in the country to date. But the second stage of the project, Bungala 2, has been held back at a hold point allowing less than 20 per cent of its output because of what Enel describes as “technical problems”
That has meant that – nearly two years after its planned full commissioning in August, 2018 – the project is still unable to deliver in full on the power purchase agreement it signed with leading Australian utility Origin Energy.
Enel now reveals, in notes to its accounts in its voluminous annual report for calendar 2019, that it has taken a hit of €43 million ($A73.5 million) to its accounts in the last year because of this.
Energy giant suffers financial hit from problems at Australia’s biggest solar farm
Owner of country’s biggest solar farm takes financial hit because of near two-year delays in reaching full production, and is not flattering of Australia political and regulatory environment.
reneweconomy.com.au
Plans announced for Australia's first net-zero hybrid power station
EnergyAustralia announces plans to build a new power station capable of using both hydrogen and natural gas, with the NSW and federal governments to contribute $83m.
Australia's first power plant — capable of running on both hydrogen and natural gas — will be built in NSW, following an agreement between the private sector and both state and federal governments.
EnergyAustralia committed to build the power station near Lake Illawarra south of Wollongong after the New South Wales and federal governments pledged $83 million towards the 300-megawatt plant.
The Tallawarra B power station will sit alongside the company's existing Tallawarra A 435-megawatt gas plant.
The project will be fast-tracked to be operational by 2023-24 in a bid to help ensure reliable electricity supplies to the grid once the Liddell coal-fired 500-megawatt plant in the Hunter Valley closes.
Key points:
- The gas power plant could begin using green hydrogen as early as 2025
- EnergyAustralia plans to buy 200,000kg of green hydrogen a year — equivalent to five per cent of the plant's fuel use
- The Illawarra project is expected to deliver a $300-million boost to the economy and support about 250 jobs during construction
The use of hydrogen is predicted to negate direct operational carbon emissions from the project over the course of its lifetime.
"This project sets a new benchmark for how gas generators can be consistent with NSW's plan to be net zero by 2050 by using green hydrogen and offsetting residual emissions," said the state's Energy Minister Matt Kean said.
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
Plans announced for Australia's first net-zero hybrid power station
EnergyAustralia announces plans to build a new power station capable of using both hydrogen and natural gas, with the NSW and federal governments to contribute $83m.www.abc.net.au
Australia's first power plant — capable of running on both hydrogen and natural gas — will be built in NSW, following an agreement between the private sector and both state and federal governments.
EnergyAustralia committed to build the power station near Lake Illawarra south of Wollongong after the New South Wales and federal governments pledged $83 million towards the 300-megawatt plant.
The Tallawarra B power station will sit alongside the company's existing Tallawarra A 435-megawatt gas plant.
The project will be fast-tracked to be operational by 2023-24 in a bid to help ensure reliable electricity supplies to the grid once the Liddell coal-fired 500-megawatt plant in the Hunter Valley closes.
Key points:
- The gas power plant could begin using green hydrogen as early as 2025
- EnergyAustralia plans to buy 200,000kg of green hydrogen a year — equivalent to five per cent of the plant's fuel use
- The Illawarra project is expected to deliver a $300-million boost to the economy and support about 250 jobs during construction
The use of hydrogen is predicted to negate direct operational carbon emissions from the project over the course of its lifetime.
"This project sets a new benchmark for how gas generators can be consistent with NSW's plan to be net zero by 2050 by using green hydrogen and offsetting residual emissions," said the state's Energy Minister Matt Kean said.
Hydrogen has an exciting future ahead but net zero hybrid power should be deemed a misleading and deceptive statement
I'd love to hear about natural gas being net zero and keen to hear about this net zero hydrogen production
but hydrogen is a very logical pathway to reliability of supply
- Banned
- #113
i love hydrogen, been talking about it for decades (literally did uni work on the subject over 10 years ago) but what i think is stupid is using gas/hydrogen. the big whinge about solar/wind is what happens if its dark and still (news flash, they seem to manage ok in the uk). it makes much more sense to be solar/wind-hydrogen hybrid, with the hydrogen picking up the times when the solar/wind isnt enough.
but that doesnt line the coffers of the gas miners or their mates in the government. i wonder how much of a kickback berejiklian is getting?
then again, the idea of a centralised power plant is an antiquated technology anyway. When a hydrogen cell the size of a mattress can power 4+ homes, and solar panels are becoming more and more available, it makes much more sense for everyone to have their own fridge sized fuel cell powering their home. The power saving from transmission losses alone probably saves so much carbon dioxide.
Doesnt this address the closure of Liddell in part or in full, with the comments on hydrogen being more PR to keep the critics of gas at bay.
- Banned
- #115
yeah, thats why i think its stupid and just to keep the fossil fuel vested interests at bay. greenwashing at its best. the kind of halfwit "we'll burn coal but also plant a couple trees to offset" nonsense that makes australia a laughing stock on the world stage
I see it a little differently.
A "good" ( and they aren't all good ) gas plant can put out less than half the CO2 per MWh that black coal does. Perhaps a third of that which Brown Coal does.
Better doesn't mean perfect , but better is better, and if its done right its significantly better.
I see gas used alongside renewable's until such time proper storage systems are viable.
By ignoring it, and protesting the construction of "good" gas stations we are actually pushing to market to maintain the older crappier power sources.
A "good" ( and they aren't all good ) gas plant can put out less than half the CO2 per MWh that black coal does. Perhaps a third of that which Brown Coal does.
Better doesn't mean perfect , but better is better, and if its done right its significantly better.
I see gas used alongside renewable's until such time proper storage systems are viable.
By ignoring it, and protesting the construction of "good" gas stations we are actually pushing to market to maintain the older crappier power sources.
- Banned
- #117
The thing is, proper storage systems are viable and do exist. look at the tesla battery in adelaide for example. in some places, hydrogen itself is used as a storage system (solar electrolyzes water into hydrogen during the day and stores it, to be burnt at night when solar isnt working).
burning gas is certainly better than coal, but overlooking new technology and simply building a less worse power station to replace the old one, is a lazy short term fix. its going to be basically outdated and redundant the minute its finished.
we all know that the only reason the libs are so obsessed with burning gas against basically all expert (and state) advice, is because their friends own it. gotta look after their true base.
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
Actually solar/ wind is a failed model by itself in the UK and every other jurisdiction on the planet unless it is backed up by hydo or nuclear. The UK is regularly in the 200+g CO2 per kwh where the leaders are 14-70g.
Hydrogen has the capability of stabilising power supply, maximising utility and delivering 14-70g.
I also believe the idea that centralised power is not finished for a long time as power is about economies not homes. We will see a massive expansion of grids, not less in the decades ahead.
Its not our coal burning at the centre of the coal argument, its our exports, those mongrels buying it.
But this proposal exposes the weakness in renewable power, dispatchable power in the immediate future on the east coast.
Claims to offsets are indeed virtue signalling to the converted.
- Banned
- #120
thats why i said to use hydrogen alongside. Solar and wind provides over 50% of the uks power and its getting larger and larger every year, thats hardly a failed model unless youre wanting it to fail.
So why is the east coast grid (aka the national grid
) vulnerable with the closure of Liddell? Is it because of hydrogen viability ?Is it the scale of batteries today ?
Mofra
Moderator
- Dec 6, 2005
- 67,057
- 198,241
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Footscray, Coney Island Warriors
- Moderator
- #122
Or alternatively a critical mass of people who use their electric cars for energy storage as well.
One 'model to reduce stress (i.e. peak demand) from the grid is to have people drive to work, plug in and recharge the car during work hours, drive home use use some of the remaining charge as top-up supply for the house.
We're moving to a more dynamic generation and storage situation in the near future and these are the types of discussions already taking place.
- Banned
- #123
is it? victoria is closing coal stations left right and centre. actually, theyre closing themselves because theyre not economically viable. but the libs dont like free market forces when it doesnt go the way they want.So why is the east coast grid (aka the national grid
Is it the scale of batteries today ?
the generation tech exists, the battery tech exists (again, adelaide is proof it is is both possible and quick). its years of lack of investment and maintenance causing pretty much all the issues. yay for years of privatisation and coal subsidies.
Try & take the politics out of it & deal with capacity of the east coast grid to sustain itself over the 2020s ... e.g the Adelaide battery, its capacity to deal with the interconnect going down.
My point is the practicality/reality of where the east coast is without Liddell & thats ignoring Yallourn North a few kms from where I live.
I have looked at the tesla battery. Obviously you havent.
Similar threads
