Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The future of energy generation and storage

This is a huge amount of coal generation.


And during that time:
Australia swapping a fossil fuel long term..aka centuries , unsustainability for immediate economic slavery.....
 
94.5GW

To put that into perspective:

Eraring = 2.88GW

Loy Yang A = 2.21GW
Loy Yang B = 1.17GW

Depending on whether one takes LY A and B to be one facility or two, either Eraring or Loy Yang is Australia's largest coal-fired power station.

For clarity there LY A and B are separate as such but they're right next to each other and both using coal that comes from the same mine up the same conveyors. An engineer sees them as separate since in that sense they are, but anyone looking at politics or macro economics would likely see them as one operation.

Eraring also has a 42MW gas turbine at the same site although that's operationally separate to the rest and is burning diesel not coal. This was added after the original construction and brings total site capacity to 2.922GW
 
94.5GW

To put that into perspective:

Eraring = 2.88GW

Loy Yang A = 2.21GW
Loy Yang B = 1.17GW

Depending on whether one takes LY A and B to be one facility or two, either Eraring or Loy Yang is Australia's largest coal-fired power station.

For clarity there LY A and B are separate as such but they're right next to each other and both using coal that comes from the same mine up the same conveyors. An engineer sees them as separate since in that sense they are, but anyone looking at politics or macro economics would likely see them as one operation.

Eraring also has a 42MW gas turbine at the same site although that's operationally separate to the rest and is burning diesel not coal. This was added after the original construction and brings total site capacity to 2.922GW
,yeap, 30 of these built just last year in China and India probably did better
 
Wow 8 months to build a mega factory.
At least our raw materials aren't going to waste, we get them back as batteries.


Meanwhile in Australia
1000016102.jpg


Today's afr..we do not even beed go see the end of the article
Saving the planet one bankruptcy at a time😂
 
What an original idea. Restrict gas exports to satisfy our own needs.

Instead of developing more gas, expert argues Australia should limit exports​


 
What an original idea. Restrict gas exports to satisfy our own needs.

Instead of developing more gas, expert argues Australia should limit exports​


The problem is, the Governments are so addicted to spending the money they earn from raw material exports, they can't reduce the dig and ship ideology.
It will only get worse as the demand for coal and our reluctance to mine it, starts to affect the export earnings, somethings got to give and even the plebs understand that.
 
They are falling unsurprisingly one after the others..saving the world..irony only..one bankruptcy at a time
Well we did say they would be running the ruler over a lot of processing industries, as to their viability, so this is just one of many announcements that will be made before 2030 IMO.
 
On the subject of power generation and making it cleaner.


European countries are extracting renewable energy from Morocco and Egypt to “greenwash” their own economies, while leaving north Africans reliant on dirty imported fuels and paying the environmental costs, a Greenpeace report says.

Both Morocco and Egypt are aiming to leverage their strategic locations south of the Mediterranean, and their solar and wind power potential, to position themselves as pivotal to Europe’s quest to diversify its energy supply.


Greenpeace’s report argues that European-backed renewable and lower-carbon projects producing energy for export are hampering the two countries’ ability to decarbonise their own economies, displacing local populations and consuming millions of litres of fresh water, in some cases in environments where it was already scarce.
 
On the subject of power generation and making it cleaner.


European countries are extracting renewable energy from Morocco and Egypt to “greenwash” their own economies, while leaving north Africans reliant on dirty imported fuels and paying the environmental costs, a Greenpeace report says.

Both Morocco and Egypt are aiming to leverage their strategic locations south of the Mediterranean, and their solar and wind power potential, to position themselves as pivotal to Europe’s quest to diversify its energy supply.


Greenpeace’s report argues that European-backed renewable and lower-carbon projects producing energy for export are hampering the two countries’ ability to decarbonise their own economies, displacing local populations and consuming millions of litres of fresh water, in some cases in environments where it was already scarce.
Not new..look at us or most european country
We have and always had hydro.
I being a sucker decide to go to a 100% green harvest and use only hydro
I pay a premium and am feeling all smug.
What is the result ..no change except my neighbour not subscribing to a green plan is now helping release more co2 per kw he uses than before..and so help reforestation of the Sahara
 
They are falling unsurprisingly one after the others..saving the world..irony only..one bankruptcy at a time
The exact situation people like me have been warning about for a very long time.

The problem there isn't limited to the means of generation though. It's not as though we're economically efficient at coal or gas these days either.

I could write some very harsh words about how we got into this mess but I'll be polite. Let's just say we need competent people in charge. :2twocents
 
Not new..look at us or most european country
We have and always had hydro.
I being a sucker decide to go to a 100% green harvest and use only hydro
I pay a premium and am feeling all smug.
What is the result ..no change except my neighbour not subscribing to a green plan is now helping release more co2 per kw he uses than before..and so help reforestation of the Sahara
You've no idea how many hours I've spent trying to convince certain persons on this point. :banghead:

Think many, many hours. Enough hours that I could probably have walked from Adelaide to Melbourne in that time. Actually, I could probably have walked to Perth in that time.....

Taking from A and giving to B doesn't increase the total.

PS - In the event anyone does decide to walk from Adelaide to Melbourne, or use a more conventional ground-based approach like driving, stop and take a look at the park just on the SA side of the state border at the appropriately named Bordertown. Only place I've spotted white kangaroos. Maybe they're common somewhere else but they're a novelty to me.

Also in Bordertown well at least they should have electricity. It's on the grid but at power stations go, this one's pretty much the ultimate example of hiding in plain sight.


Capacity is just 4 MW. Fuel = diesel. Primary usage is to overcome network constraints in the area when demand is high although it can be run to support the rest of the system if needed albeit with a small output.

:)
 
Last edited:
How community polarisation is slowing the development of essential infrastructure.

The problem here isn't the technology per se but it's the lack of co-ordination surrounding it all.

There are examples where company 1 built a wind farm, then company 2 built one, then company 3 built one, and they all built their own transmission, there was no co-operation and so on. End result well I wouldn't want to live there either because it's just a mess.

Versus if we had a single approach to it all well it can be viewed as one big project, even if built in stages, and that can avoid duplication of transmission, it can avoid duplication of roads and so on. It can also avoid inefficient layout of the turbines etc. That also makes it possible to discuss the whole thing up front, hear rational arguments regarding any specific problems, and seek to resolve those. Eg just take 5 turbines out if they're particularly problematic or move where the line goes or whatever.

That's not to say there won't be some situations where it's difficult to resolve but with a proper approach to planning it could certainly be improved. :2twocents
 
The problem here isn't the technology per se but it's the lack of co-ordination surrounding it all.

There are examples where company 1 built a wind farm, then company 2 built one, then company 3 built one, and they all built their own transmission, there was no co-operation and so on. End result well I wouldn't want to live there either because it's just a mess.

Versus if we had a single approach to it all well it can be viewed as one big project, even if built in stages, and that can avoid duplication of transmission, it can avoid duplication of roads and so on. It can also avoid inefficient layout of the turbines etc. That also makes it possible to discuss the whole thing up front, hear rational arguments regarding any specific problems, and seek to resolve those. Eg just take 5 turbines out if they're particularly problematic or move where the line goes or whatever.

That's not to say there won't be some situations where it's difficult to resolve but with a proper approach to planning it could certainly be improved. :2twocents
I would disagree ,however coordination you add and whatever commonsense you could get, you can not fight physics and energy density .
For the same amount of energy:
If you burn wood, you have to fell down
whole forests,but it is regrowing and i personally do not find forest ugly.
With coal,the energy is densified and gathered in a smaller footprint,which can be underground.
With oil, gas always underground, liquid and often far away off the sea or overseas.. someone else problem....
Even if flying over Texas and looking at hectares upon hectares of pipe/pond fields of fracking oil,quite horrendous..but in the land of the free, the owner gets to own the ground and so the wealth.
Nuclear: a very small mine for a lot of energy
Now solar or wind: wildly un-concentrated energy, with very inefficient rate of capture so the need to cover even more surface for production.
When the solar are on a building roof or parking, not such a big deal realistically unless you are in an historic building commission .and we do not see too many windmills in town hacking rainbow lorikeets in backyards.
But in the country, we are defacto urbanising countryside , increasing heat capture, often concentrated along existing infrastructure and or optimised geography.
So yes, it is definitely a renewable energy issue.even hydro i am a fan of, planning does not really help, you have to flood properties for dams but i find a lake nice and great for biodiversity.
Add the mandatory requirement to increase substantially the rated production to get a stated average due to weather conditions and day/night cycles and yes.. definitely a solar/wind issue that would pop up even if managed properly.
 
Now for something which is required whatever RE or other are usdd
A parody of 2025 australia
Our borumba hydro-battery on a diet, overcost Australia oye oye oye and "discovery of a new culturally significant site"?
ROL😭
1000016417.jpg

These sites are so significant you have ho spend 5 y to even know about them ...
 
Top