Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The future of energy generation and storage

Jump to new
Lets hope they can get this working, it sounds like a game changer


Artificial leaf could soon fuel the planet, Melbourne researchers say

Melbourne researchers say it may only be a matter of years before the artificial leaf is fuelling every community, house and car on the planet.

The machine they have designed relies on a so-far largely untapped fuel source ”” hydrogen ”” and draws heavily on the plant process of photosynthesis, in which a plant converts sunlight into energy.

"We have to learn as much as we can from photosynthesis, which is what goes on in leafy plants, because that's where most of our energy comes from in terms of fossil fuels or current kinds of carbon materials that we use either as food or fuel," said Professor Doug MacFarlane from Monash University's School of Chemistry.

Photosynthesis is nature's most efficient way to make fuel.

"If we can learn what plants do with sunlight and use it to make carbon compounds, then we can potentially make artificially produced fuels for all of the reasons we need fuels currently," Professor MacFarlane said.

Over the years, other researchers have used a variety of metals as an artificial catalyst for the process, but many were rare and expensive.

By using nickel as the catalyst, Professor MacFarlane and his colleagues have been able separate hydrogen from water at a reasonable cost.

"Obviously the devices we're talking about are expensive to build and install," he said.

"So the efficiency in terms of producing fuel that it achieves has to be fairly high to make it worthwhile."

more at

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-17/27artificial-leaf27-an-untapped-fuel-source/6703364
Click to expand...
 
The big "G" is now in on it....brilliant!


Google: Introducing Project Sunroof​



​
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SirRumpole said:
Lets hope they can get this working, it sounds like a game changer


Artificial leaf could soon fuel the planet, Melbourne researchers say
Click to expand...


Looks very promising. Clean cheap pure hydrogen.

And then if you want to turn this back into clean electricity just run it through the latest, most cost effective fuel cell on the market.

AFC energy has developed a fuel cell that will revolutionize electricity generation.

http://www.afcenergy.com/default.aspx

So what's holding us back ?
 
Another (very) promising opportunity to create cheap solar power.

South African team may have solved solar puzzle even Google couldn't crack

Pioneering technology to deliver the cheapest, small-scale concentrated solar power plants in the world could revolutionise the renewable energy market

These heliostats, or mirrors to concentrate the sun, in a field near Stellenbosch in South Africa could become the most affordable, small, plug-and play solar solutions in the world. Photograph: Jeffrey Barbee/jeffbarbee.com

Jeffrey Barbee in Stellenbosch

Monday 24 August 2015 20.44 AEST


It is a problem that has so far stumped even Google’s brainy engineers – how to generate cheap solar electricity using a small-scale array of mirrors to concentrate the sun’s energy.

Now a team at a South African university – led by a former Intel strategic planner – believes they have cracked it. Once they have completed a prototype system in October they have big plans for rolling out the technology.

The idea behind the design – so-called Concentrated Solar Power or CSP – is simple. A field of mirrors on the ground tracks the sun and concentrates its rays on to a central point which heats up. That heat is converted into electricity.

...His team’s aim is to produce CSP technology that will be cheap and quick to install. “We are developing plonkable heliostats. Plonkable means that from factory to installation you can just drop them down on to the ground and they work.” So no costly cement, no highly-trained workforce, no wires, just two workers to lay out the steel frames on the ground and a streetlight-style central tower.
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...solved-solar-puzzle-even-google-couldnt-crack
 
All-in-one solution for homes meet Samsung SDI’s newest All-in-one energy solution that can be directly connected to your PV system.
With Samsung SDI’s "AWARD WINNING" All-in-one energy solution, you can save space to optimize power consumption and significantly reduce maintenance cost with amsung SDI’s monitoring system that can detect errors in advance and be controlled remotely.

The 3.6kWh All in One has two solar energy inputs (PV1, PV2). For each input, 3.3kW (per string) is the maximum output. The AC output of the All in One is connected to the Home Load and the Grid. Between the Home Load and the Grid, a Digital Energy Meter (Smart Meter) is placed for power metering. This is a true plug and play system.
Click to expand...


 
Tour time again! :)

Tungatinah Power Station - Saturday 10th October. 10am - 2pm.

Paloona Power Station - Saturday 24th October. 10am - 2pm.

And after a lot of requests over many years, Poatina Power Station tour will be on Saturday 14th November, 10am - 2pm.

The above are real, working power stations and all located in Tas.

Not too many rules regarding public entry - basically just proper shoes, long sleeves and no drinks, food or bags inside. Cameras are OK. No bookings required, just turn up.

Note - Poatina is underground and yes that's where the tour goes - underground. The other two are above ground.

Details here: http://www.hydro.com.au/community/power-station-tours

:)
 
Smurf1976 said:
Tour time again! :)

Tungatinah Power Station - Saturday 10th October. 10am - 2pm.

Paloona Power Station - Saturday 24th October. 10am - 2pm.

And after a lot of requests over many years, Poatina Power Station tour will be on Saturday 14th November, 10am - 2pm.

The above are real, working power stations and all located in Tas.

Not too many rules regarding public entry - basically just proper shoes, long sleeves and no drinks, food or bags inside. Cameras are OK. No bookings required, just turn up.

Note - Poatina is underground and yes that's where the tour goes - underground. The other two are above ground.

Details here: http://www.hydro.com.au/community/power-station-tours

:)
Click to expand...

Sounds good, will avail myself of them, when visiting the apple state.:xyxthumbs
 
DB008 said:
Could this have something to do with the massive supply charge increase (39% in 1 year) ?


Queensland Budget: $4.1 billion of State debt to be transferred to power distributors​


Click to expand...


Well, well, well...look what turned up...Glad I got my solar system in last quarter.


Ergon and Energex dividends to Queensland Government triple, electricity lobby group says prices too high​

The Queensland Government's dividend from state-owned power companies has tripled in one year, prompting a call for profits to instead be passed onto consumers via lower power bills.

The Energex annual report, released last week, shows dividends paid to the State Government rose from $406 million in 2014 to $1.3 billion in the 2014-2015 financial year.

Alliance of Electricity Consumers lobby group spokesman Jonathan Pavetto told 612 ABC Brisbane Ergon dividends rose from $400 million to $1.9 billion over the same period.

He said profits for Ergon and Energex doubled in one financial year.

"It's quite clear that electricity prices are too high," he said.

"These are companies that make money off electricity prices and electricity consumers, and if you're making this sort of money by selling a single product it just shows the price must be too high.

"Energex and Ergon are responsible for moving the electricity from the power station through to your house or business or industrial centre. They're the poles and wires that run up and down your street.

"The cost of running their businesses hasn't materially changed in the past 10 years, yet the price of their services has increased by 300 per cent."
Click to expand...

 
what a great thread this is.

Wish I had read this before posting in the climate change thread though, Wouldn't have made a goose of myself over there.

Anyway what I am trying to get my head around: when figures are quoted for power generated by coal v hydro do they take into account or reduce the coal generated power by the amount of coal used to pump water up in the hydro schemes?

About solar: Never had to do the calcs on solar for our house. We look over a golf course and our North facing roof also faces a par 4 tee about 130m from the tees 50m odd off the centre of the fairway.... Solar will never be economic under those conditions. :( oddly enough before our new neighbours moved in two years ago they installed solar and the tragedy is the company that installed it didn't warm them they don't work on golf courses.

We have both solar pool heating and solar hot water heating. The solar pool heating is quite robust and the hot water system works without a glass panel over it as it happens....
 
In response to this post in the "Resisting climate hysteria" thread:

Apart from hydro.

After reading your posts it has only just dawned on me now that hydro schemes are just like a big battery.

Are there any of these schemes where wind power is used to run pumps that pump water back above the hydro turbines during high wind and allows water through to generate power the rest of the time? With a big enough wind scheme and pump and storage you would have power all the time even if you had only enough water inflow for losses. You could potentially run the pumps directly from wind rather than an electric pump. Say a direct wind over hydraulic pump.

Apologies if you have explained all this previously in this thread, as I am new here I haven't had time to read through the 333 pages yet but am considering going back and doing that now.
Click to expand...

In Australia we have an assortment of hydro schemes, the main ones being as follows:

Hydro-electricity produced from dams primarily built for other purposes (irrigation or urban water supply) - the big one is the Snowy Hydro system (physically all in NSW but electrically partly in NSW and partly in Vic). Also various other schemes in Qld, NSW, Vic, Tas and WA.

Hydro-electricity produced where the main, or only, purpose of the scheme is electricity production. Most of the Tasmanian system is in this category with some much smaller operations in other states.

Beyond the reasons for original construction, there are also three basic categories in terms of how they operate:

1. Base load power generation. That is, the power station runs most or all of the time and the water enters naturally (from rainfall). Within Australia this approach is primarily confined to Tasmania where hydro has always been the main source of electricity generation and is a significant industry in itself.

2. Power stations which operate intermittently with the timing of operation driven by either the need to release water for other purposes and/or demand for electricity. This is the majority of hydro power production in Australia.

3. Pumped storage which re-uses the same water over and over. Run it through the power station when power is needed, pump it back up at some other time when there's surplus power from other sources.

An example of base load production is the Butlers Gorge - Tarraleah scheme in Tasmania. Apart from maintenance outages it runs 24/7/365 at a steady output. Water falls from the sky, is stored in Lake King William and released constantly via Butlers Gorge and Nieterana power stations (located at the dam), then travels 19km via man-made canals before entering steel pipelines and dropping 300m vertically (much longer actual pipeline distance) down to the Tarraleah power station.

For pumped storage there are 3 schemes in Australia currently operating although many others are technically possible to build. The 3 are:

Tumut 3 (Snowy Hydro scheme). It's a 1500 MW power station which receives a natural (man-made diversion) flow and thus generates energy as such although the average output is low such that it only operates a few % of the time at full output (or can run for longer periods at lower output). To enable more frequent operation, 3 of the 6 turbines feature pumps which can be used to reverse the water flow so as to re-use the same water.

Shoalhaven (NSW). A 240 MW scheme primarily associated with urban water supply (pumped to Sydney) but the water can be run back down through the power station instead (then pump it back up again either for supply to Sydney or to use it again through the power station).

Wivenhoe (Qld). A 500 MW scheme, later upgraded to around 600 MW, based on a large water supply dam which supplies much of Brisbane's water. The power station operates independently of water supply to Brisbane - it's the same water reservoir but a separate operation in a practical sense. Pump the water up, run it through the power station, pump it up again. It's a pumped storage power station added to a dam that was built for other purposes (water supply and flood control).

As for hydro schemes which operate intermittently, there's plenty of those. The key differences being when and why they operate.

Eg those in the Snowy operate in order to achieve water diversion for other purposes (irrigation mostly) and generate their power primarily at times of high electricity demand. But a key point there is that the water needs to be moved and as such they can't not generate power for an extended period. Decide which day and at what time yes, but they have to generate sometime otherwise the water doesn't move and the Murray River dries up.

There are other hydro schemes which work the same way elsewhere, primarily in NSW and Vic, too. They produce energy as such, but the water needs to be released for irrigation etc so there's some limitation in flexibility as to when the power is produced. It can certainly be made to occur when electricity demand is highest (that's what is done in practice) but they can't decide to simply not operate at all for an extended period.

Then there are those for which the sole or primary purpose is power generation. Most of the Tasmanian system is in this category, we built 53 large dams and another 150 weirs for the only real purpose of generating power, any other use of the water being a secondary consideration (and the vast majority of it is not used for any other purpose, simply running out to sea after passing through the power stations).

Looking at the operation of Gordon power station (Tas).

Annual yield in electrical terms is 1472 GWh (gigawatt hours).

Storage capacity is 4699 GWh (that's just over 3 years' worth of inflows).

Power station has 3 x 144 MW machines (total 432 MW).

No re-use of the water downstream but formal environmental requirements require that some river flow is maintained constantly (equivalent to about 20 MW generation).

So an average output of 168 MW and a peak of 432 MW. Practical operation, given the very large storage capacity, is a balance to the rest of the system (Great Lake is used in the same way and has even larger storage).

If the wind is blowing strongly, electricity demand is low and/or there is high inflow to the smaller dams which have limited ability to store water (use it or lose it), then there is simply no need to run Gordon and so we don't. It shuts down almost completely (has to maintain a small level of water flow for environmental reasons downstream) and the lake fills up due to natural inflows.

At the other extreme, if there's no wind, if electricity demand is high and/or there's minimal inflow to the smaller dams then Gordon can be run at high output either during peak demand times (starting and stopping each day) or constantly 24/7 if needed.

So with a storage of that size, there is a complete disconnect between inflows and production. We can run the power station flat out 24/7 during a drought and we can shut it down during a flood. Neither will rapidly fill or drain the lake, only a very sustained period of high or low loading would do that.

Looking at actual operations, Gordon was running hard last night due to lack of wind generation and currently being a priority source of water due to low inflows to the smaller dams (water there being preserved to enable operation of those stations when needed to meet peak demand, or in the case of a breakdown elsewhere in the system). But in contrast, this afternoon Gordon was pretty much idle with the wind blowing strongly.

11pm last night - was generating 280 MW.

3am = 155 MW

8am this morning = 277 MW

3pm this afternoon = 22 MW and that was only to maintain river flows (for environmental reasons) downstream. Wind blowing strongly, not much demand for electricity = no need to run Gordon.

11pm tonight - back up to 190 MW. Power demand is low but there's not a lot of wind either.

Looking at a shorter time frame and another hydro power station, Trevallyn (97 MW capacity, located in suburban Launceston).

Today (21 October 2015)
5:10am = 0 MW (shut down)
5:15am = 5 MW
5:20am = 19 MW
5:25am = 21 MW
5:30am = 21 MW
5:35am = 69 MW
5:40am = 73 MW

Those numbers aren't huge, there are power stations (coal) in Australia producing up to 2800 MW, but they illustrate that hydro is certainly very flexible in being switched on and off.

So yes, we can and do bring hydro stations online quickly if the wind stops blowing, demand goes up or there is some other reason to do so. Output at Trevallyn has been back down, then back up, then down again during the course of today and that's not unusual operation.
 
Tom32 said:
Anyway what I am trying to get my head around: when figures are quoted for power generated by coal v hydro do they take into account or reduce the coal generated power by the amount of coal used to pump water up in the hydro schemes?
Click to expand...

Coal is dominant in Australia, producing 76.5% of total electricity generated in 2014-15.

Hydro dominates only in Tasmania where it accounts for most electricity produced. It's a modest contributor to total supply in Vic, NSW and Qld (primarily at peak demand times).

Wind is significant, around a third of total supply, in SA and to a lesser extent in Vic and Tas.

Gas is dominant in NT and very significant in WA and SA. It's less significant in Qld, NSW and Vic and a trivial source in Tas.

Coal dominates in Qld, NSW and Vic and is a major source (along with gas) in WA. It is a relatively small source (which is about to close down permanently) in SA. There are no coal-fired plants in NT or Tas.

Biomass is a minor source used primarily in Qld.

Oil isn't used on a daily basis (apart from boiler start up etc) in the main grid but there are oil-fired power stations located on the main grid in several states (most notably Qld and SA) which are used at times of very high demand (eg hot weather). Oil is also used as a backup fuel (in case of gas supply interruption) at a number of gas-fired plants (since oil is easy to store onsite whereas storing gas would be far more difficult).

Not included here is small scale generation such as solar. In absolute terms it is largest in Qld but as a % it's largest in SA where at times of bright sunshine and moderate temperatures (no heating or cooling loads) solar is a major source of power into the grid.

Complicating all this is that Qld, NSW / ACT, Vic, Tas and SA are all electrically interconnected such that power can be moved between states. So some SA wind power ends up being used in Vic, some Vic coal power ends up being used in SA, power flows in both directions between Tas and Vic on a regular basis (sometimes changing several times per day), power flows between NSW and Vic in both directions quite often too. The only real constant is that most of the time there's a flow from Qld into NSW (though on occasion it goes the other way).

The bottom line from a climate perspective is that the "green" states are Tas (mostly renewable - hydro and wind) and SA (about 40% renewable - wind and solar). Everywhere else, coal or gas are dominant (hydro and wind are significant in NSW and Vic, just nowhere near as large as coal).:2twocents
 
Tom32 said:
what a great thread this is.

About solar: Never had to do the calcs on solar for our house. We look over a golf course and our North facing roof also faces a par 4 tee about 130m from the tees 50m odd off the centre of the fairway.... Solar will never be economic under those conditions. :( oddly enough before our new neighbours moved in two years ago they installed solar and the tragedy is the company that installed it didn't warm them they don't work on golf courses.
Click to expand...
:confused:
why would solar not work on golf course?
do you have trees/shades?
 
qldfrog said:
:confused:
why would solar not work on golf course?
do you have trees/shades?
Click to expand...

First up big thank you to smurf for the posts above in this thread.

Qldfrog, yes, Golf ball strikes are very potent against hard objects.

So solar panels will never work on every roof.

As I said in the post above the pool solar and hot water heater, minus its glass cover (that we lost to a ball strike) are both fine but solar panels would almost certainly break every time they were struck.

They wouldn't get struck often but in my case I would be lucky to get 2-3 years out of them.

We get around 1 ball a week so there would be parts of the roof that would be shielded enough, however our north and East facing roof is toward the golf course.

Don't get the idea I am complaining though. You gotta take the good with the bad when you cannot afford front row water views. Manicured fairways look ok to me too and the golf balls I expect keeps the price down a little. IMO Champagne views on a chardonay budget.

On the two forms of water heating both run quite efficiently due to a dark roof.

One benefit around the pool heating I have discovered and never read anywhere is that the pool heating appears to keep the house cooler due to taking a few degrees off our north north west facing roof which has what seems like a profound influence on allowing our evaporative air con to keep the house cool on all but the most humid days. Perth of course doesn't get humid days (in summer) very often.
 
Tom32 said:
One benefit around the pool heating I have discovered and never read anywhere is that the pool heating appears to keep the house cooler due to taking a few degrees off our north north west facing roof which has what seems like a profound influence on allowing our evaporative air con to keep the house cool on all but the most humid days. Perth of course doesn't get humid days (in summer) very often.
Click to expand...

Adiabatic cooling
 
Tom32 said:
First up big thank you to smurf for the posts above in this thread.

Qldfrog, yes, Golf ball strikes are very potent against hard objects.

So solar panels will never work on every roof.

As I said in the post above the pool solar and hot water heater, minus its glass cover (that we lost to a ball strike) are both fine but solar panels would almost certainly break every time they were struck.

They wouldn't get struck often but in my case I would be lucky to get 2-3 years out of them.

We get around 1 ball a week so there would be parts of the roof that would be shielded enough, however our north and East facing roof is toward the golf course.

Don't get the idea I am complaining though. You gotta take the good with the bad when you cannot afford front row water views. Manicured fairways look ok to me too and the golf balls I expect keeps the price down a little. IMO Champagne views on a chardonay budget.

On the two forms of water heating both run quite efficiently due to a dark roof.

One benefit around the pool heating I have discovered and never read anywhere is that the pool heating appears to keep the house cooler due to taking a few degrees off our north north west facing roof which has what seems like a profound influence on allowing our evaporative air con to keep the house cool on all but the most humid days. Perth of course doesn't get humid days (in summer) very often.
Click to expand...
In your case, I would protect it with a wire mesh, you would still get a lot of output.Agree about solar pool heating, does indeed cool down the house, when you actually need it so double gain!!!
 

Similar threads

System
SS1 - Sun Silver
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
Sean K
Sean K
Dona Ferentes
PGTX - Platinum Global Transition Fund
Replies
1
Views
570
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
System
ASK - Abacus Storage King
Replies
18
Views
3K
divs4ever
divs4ever
System
D3E - D3 Energy
Replies
2
Views
1K
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
Derrick Kow
  • Article
The Financial Future is Hybrid: Crypto’s DeFi and TradFi Blend
Replies
1
Views
967
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
Top