Looking at NSW, Vic, SA and Tas combined, as of right now:
*All hydro generation in NSW and Vic is off. In Tas about 30% of available capacity is running with heavy southbound flow on the Tas - Vic interconnector. There's no hydro of significance in SA.
*200 MW of hydro pumping load is on in NSW.
*All diesel / kero plant in NSW and SA is off completely. There's none in Vic or Tas other than as fuel backup in gas-fired plant.
*All gas-fired plant in NSW, Vic, Tas is off completely.
*SA gas-fired plant is running at the minimum technically safe configuration for system strength. That has 1 x CCGT (one gas turbine + one steam turbine) and 2 x separate steam units on all at minimum output. Whilst other configurations are possible at the detail level, overall can't go any lower in total without risking a system collapse. Between them current output is just over 8% of installed gas-fired generating capacity in SA.
*NSW coal plant - 15 (of 16) units are on. Between them they're running at 62% of their capacity or 59% of the total coal-fired capacity in NSW.
*Vic coal plant - 8 (of 10) units are on. Between them they're running at 85% of their capacity or 76% of the total coal-fired capacity in Vic.
*SA wind generation is running at about 80% of available capacity. Rest is curtailed. Wind generation in other states is fully utilised. Wind contribution to demand is presently about 5% in NSW, 35% Vic, 105% SA, 15% Tas.
All that's a pretty standard response to low load by the way. Increasing load would be a cinch right now - even a few thousand MW across those states would be pretty straightforward so long as it was an expected occurrence.
Only reason I've left other states out was for simplicity but it's the same basic pattern.
You are arguing about something with someone who is actually trained to do the very calculations that you are using to make your claim, whilst simultaneously not even understanding the very reports which you think prove you right.
They don't say what you think they do. You are talking past me and trying to defeat a point I never made.
The reports say an increase in peak power demand needs an infrastructure buildout. I've never disputed that. In fact I've been saying it. I didn't need a whole stack of reports to know that I can assure you.
Then there's the cost of running service stations
His doctor is happy to report that he won the argument with himself, although has made another appointment to be sure to be sure.I've even tried the doctor analogy now, we'll see how it goes.
This is actually fun though. I'm about 30/70 facepalm vs laughing. Like it's kind of amazing really.
The only thing I know about electricity is to always hold the step ladder when a lady is changing a ceiling light bulb.
gg
I'm going to try the flood analogy next - you know, not needing to build more drains if the rain doesn't all come at once. Maybe that'll work.
But probably not.
Sir Garpal, only you could put a new twist a "light bulb" moment.The only thing I know about electricity is to always hold the step ladder when a lady is changing a ceiling light bulb.
gg
You are arguing about something with someone who is actually trained to do the very calculations that you are using to make your claim, whilst simultaneously not even understanding the very reports which you think prove you right.
It's akin to arguing with a doctor and thinking something you've found on google proves him wrong when in reality it doesn't but you just think it does because not being a doctor, you don't understand it.
They don't say what you think they do. You are talking past me and trying to defeat a point I never made.
His doctor is happy to report that he won the argument with himself, although has made another appointment to be sure to be sure.
I have yet to see a poster here suggest we will not need additional capacity and an improved grid. So rather than rant, what exactly is your point?On contrary, you are disregarding people who are trained to do the calculations who actually compile the reports.
You are telling me that we won't to worry about the additional electrical consumption and that the grid can handle. Yeah right, you keep believing that.
Time for you to be put on performance review.
I have yet to see a poster here suggest we will not need additional capacity and an improved grid. So rather than rant, what exactly is your point?
You appear to not have worked out that many who post here have a pretty good idea that things need to change, while you continue to be "winning" a discussion that nobody else is having with you.So now we have personal attacks because people have been showcased as not having a clue about the increase in electrical consumption.
That's presently the case. And it will be the case for quite a few years to come, even when load shedding events prevail due to excessive daytime temperatures overloading the system.Over9k said it. He reckons that we can just charge the vehicles in off-peak and it will be fine.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?