The future of energy generation and storage

[Smurf1976]

Considering 1 litre of water equals about 1 kilogram, it is understandable.

To put some figures on it:

Discharge at Liapootah as shown in the video I linked is about 34,000 litres per second per machine, there being 3 machines only one of which is tripped for the test.

Discharge at Dartmouth when operating at full capacity was 117,000 litres / second from its single when originally built (completed 1980). After the incident it was enlarged by about 10% during the reconstruction.

With a Francis turbine, slamming the turbine vanes shut as occurred when the steel beam entered also has the effect of shutting off the water flow in addition to mechanical impacts on the turbine from the steel itself. Hence the Dartmouth incident was dramatic and happened extremely fast - all over in just one revolution of the turbine.

The track record of Australian power stations is generally good in that major incidents have been rare but it's a reality that anything involving high temperature, pressure or voltage does have the potential to go horribly wrong.

 

[basilio]

The latest analysis of the costs of new energy production energy kills coal stone dead. Be interesting to see the impact of this report in 2019.

CSIRO/AEMO study says wind, solar and storage clearly cheaper than coal

Giles Parkinson 21 December 2018 Comments
share

Australia’s leading scientific research group and the country’s energy market operator have released a benchmark study that shows the cost of new wind and solar – even with hours of storage – is “unequivocally” lower than the cost of new coal generation.

The joint study – GenCost 2018 – by the CSIRO and AEMO shows that the levellised cost of energy (LCOE) of solar and wind is well below that of any other generation source.

Even adding two and six hours of storage with batteries or pumped hydro still leaves the cost of “firm” solar and wind power cheaper than any fossil fuel alternative.

The study follows similar conclusions from the likes of Bloomberg New Energy Finance, and the observations of big utilities such as AGL, Origin, and the government’s own Snowy Hydro. But it has added significance because of the importance and reputation of the two institutions involved.

“I fully expected the LCOE of renewables to be cheaper,” CSIRO economist and lead author Paul Graham told RenewEconomy in an interview. “I thought that once you added storage, maybe it would be line ball. But it is unequivocally cheaper. Wind and solar are still lower cost even if you take into account those balancing costs.”

And Graham says these are conservative estimates. He points out, as previous studies from the CSIRO and chief scientist Alan Finkel have shown, that the level of storage required for wind and solar is minimal up to a point of around 50 per cent.
https://reneweconomy.com.au/csiro-a...-and-storage-clearly-cheaper-than-coal-45724/

 

[basilio]

What changed our world in energy generation in 2018 ? Some very significant events. Well worth a read to understand why not moving to renewables is just dumb.

Six developments that changed the world of energy in 2018
https://reneweconomy.com.au/six-developments-that-changed-the-world-of-energy-in-2018/

 

[Smurf1976]

An update on current circumstances given the high temperatures.

In short there are no current problems meeting demand and none expected within the next week. Yes it's hot but underlying demand is seasonally low due to schools being closed, many businesses closed, people on holiday not at home, etc.

Current operational details as follows for the 3 common problem states. Note that supply won't exactly match demand due to compilation from different data sets a few minutes apart plus transmission losses.

Solar generation and total demand figures include estimated output from small systems (households etc) since this is not directly measured in real time. All other data is measured.

SA:
Demand = 2430 MW
Wind = 954 MW
Gas = 943 MW
Solar = 483 MW
From Victoria = 97 MW

Vic:
Demand = 7278 MW
Coal = 4337 MW
Hydro = 901 MW
Solar = 739 MW
Wind = 675 MW
Gas = 491 MW
From Tasmania = 469 MW

NSW:
Demand = 10,822 MW
Coal = 7430 MW
Solar = 1282 MW
From Queensland = 1201 MW
Hydro = 537 MW
From Victoria = 201 MW
Wind = 186 MW
Gas = 19 MW

 

[Smurf1976]

A significant occurrence is currently forecast for tomorrow (3 January) in the electricity market in SA.

AEMO is currently forecasting, for the SA region:

Maximum demand of 2811 MW at approximately 18:30 market time (19:00 SA local time).

Available generation within SA at this time = 2791 MW

Available supply from Vic to SA at this time = 797 MW

Spot price = $10,262 / MWh between 18:00 and 19:00 market time (18:30 - 19:30 SA local time) which is over 100 times the 2018 average spot price of $98.10

Price is forecast to exceed $1000 / MWh in SA constantly between 17:00 and 20:00 market time.

This does not pose a credible threat to supply* since there's still a reasonable margin between capacity and demand which allows for unexpected problems but anyone who isn't hedged and is buying from the spot market is about to have their finances burned. No households are in that situation but some businesses are by choice.

*Nobody will ever give you a 100% guarantee that all this stuff works because the nature of it is that things can and do fail. Supply is still secure at that level within accepted industry practices based on engineering however, it would take 3 separate supply failures to cause a shortfall, so this could be considered a financial event not a physical one.

The above could of course change real quick if traders decided to bid supply at lower prices. Doing so needs most of them to do it however (there are some who will already be bidding low prices but the highest accepted sets the spot price as with any market).

 

[Smurf1976]

It seems that one or more traders has "blinked" and the current forecast for prices in SA this afternoon is now drastically lower.

The highest price forecast is now $578.81 in the 18:30 - 19:00 period (market time) so that's drastically lower than the previous forecast.

SA generators are at the margin bidding high prices however with transfer Vic to SA forecast to run close to the technical limit during the peak (supplying about 26% of SA load at that time) whilst considerable generating capacity in SA sits idle. Reason = price the traders want for output from those facilities in SA exceeds the marginal price of supply from interstate. Note that forecast wind output at this time is minimal so wind farms aren't in the market beyond a fairly minimal level whilst solar is always fairly low at that time.

Note - Market time in the National Electricity Market is always AEST without Dayling Savings taken into account (so that's Qld time year round) regardless of the state in question. So during Summer SA is 30 minutes ahead of market time whilst NSW, Vic and Tas are 1 hour ahead (the ACT is part of the NSW electrical region whilst the NT and WA are not part of the National Electricity Market.

 

[Smurf1976]

The next few days are set to be somewhat "interesting" to say the least.

Circumstances can and do change at short notice. First because things fail unexpectedly and second because an electrical load forecast is ultimately a derivative of the weather forecast and likewise solar and wind generation forecasts are also derivatives of the weather forecast.

So there's some uncertainty but for tomorrow, Monday 14 January 2019:

Victoria forecast maximum electricity demand = 8407 MW
Victoria forecast available supply within state = 8292 MW

Now from a physical perspective filling a 115 MW gap from NSW, Tas or SA isn't difficult, each of those three states could do that volume individually and collectively they certainly can, but it does bring about two issues.

First is price. Electricity in Vic is currently trading at about $80 / MWh with prices forecast by AEMO to exceed $14,000 tomorrow afternoon. To put it into perspective, at that level electricity in Victoria is quite literally a $2 million per minute industry all up.

Second is there's not a lot of room to cope if anything goes wrong with supply. On AEMO's official scale of 0 to 3, with 0 being normal and 3 being blackouts, tomorrow has been declared a 2 in Victoria during the peak. In layman's terms that means if all goes to plan then that level of demand can be supplied but it will only take one significant mishap and down we go.

The rest of the week, thus far at least, looks somewhat worse in both NSW and Vic. Any business buying from the spot market is about to have their funds drained.....

 

[sptrawler]

Oh well, it looks as though the gas pipeline from the NW of WA to the Eastern States isn't yet viable, at least the project was assessed properly. They should have some valuable info, that will drive future discussion on the viability.

https://thewest.com.au/business/energy/west-east-gas-pipe-dream-fails-to-add-up-ng-b881075919z

 

[rederob]

Current operational details as follows for the 3 common problem states. Note that supply won't exactly match demand due to compilation from different data sets a few minutes apart plus transmission losses.

Solar generation and total demand figures include estimated output from small systems (households etc) since this is not directly measured in real time. All other data is measured.

Smurf, this links to a live graphic of electricity supply & demand.
I found it interesting to see how strongly renewables contributed in South Australia.
The other interesting take was how State subsidies for solar have skewed PV output - NSW is a laggard.

 

[sptrawler]

Smurf, this links to a live graphic of electricity supply & demand.
I found it interesting to see how strongly renewables contributed in South Australia.
The other interesting take was how State subsidies for solar have skewed PV output - NSW is a laggard.

Great link there rederob, well done.

It kind of puts things in perspective.

 

[Ann]

Smurf, this links to a live graphic of electricity supply & demand.
I found it interesting to see how strongly renewables contributed in South Australia.
The other interesting take was how State subsidies for solar have skewed PV output - NSW is a laggard.

I agree with sptrawler, very interesting link thanks Rob and I was quite shocked to see no gas fired power in either Vic or NSW. I understand gas to be the most efficient of all the fossil fuels for energy generation.

Looks like Vic and NSW are about to get some more coal-fired power stations. I am surprised the LCP are doing this, I would have thought it would kill any chance of being re-elected. If some miracle happens and they are re-elected it might be the beginning of the end for renewables to any major degree.

St Baker, China Partner Plan A$6 Billion Coal Plants: Australian
By
David Stringer

January 19, 2019, 12:08 PM GMT+11

• Tycoon will set out plans for Australia projects next week
• Energy policy a key issue ahead of country’s looming election

Australian power-sector tycoon Trevor St Baker will set out plans to build new coal-fired plants under proposals for A$6 billion ($4.3 billion) of developments with a Chinese joint venture partner, the Australian newspaper reported.

St Baker, founder of ERM Power Ltd. and chairman of privately-held Sunset Power International Ltd., will submit plans next week to Australian Energy Minister Angus Taylor, according to the newspaper. Taylor has called for new investment in coal-powered plants and demanded generators help to lower electricity prices. More........

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...n-a-6-billion-coal-plants-proposal-australian

 

[explod]

Renewables cheaper than coal, says Gupta, “it’s obvious”

"Even UK steel billionaires get the blues. For more than a year now, Sanjeev Gupta has been letting his actions – and investments – do the talking on renewables in Australia.

Since his GFG Alliance bought the ailing Arrium steel producer in Whyalla last July, Gupta and his team have been detailing bigger and better and clearer plans to build up to 10GW of solar, as well as storage, to power his own and other energy intensive industrial majors, and generally revitalise Australia’s manufacturing sector.

But still, the message is not getting through – at least, not to some. And the frustration is starting to show.


“It’s still everybody’s perception that it is cheaper to make power from coal than it is from renewables, and it is no longer the case,” Gupta told Guardian Australia in an interview on Monday."

https://reneweconomy.com.au/renewables-cheaper-than-coal-says-gupta-its-obvious-10880/

 

[rederob]

Renewables cheaper than coal, says Gupta, “it’s obvious”
"Even UK steel billionaires get the blues. For more than a year now, Sanjeev Gupta has been letting his actions – and investments – do the talking on renewables in Australia.

Almost 8 years ago Ross Garnaut prepared an excellent report on the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) - used as a common cost measure for testing the financial viability of power generation.
Skip to page 12 for the the key results with respect to LCOE forecasts for 2020, 2030 and 2040.
Now compare these results to Lazzard's latest LCOE.
Garnaut almost got wind right, but badly miscalculated solar - not a bad effort overall.
Only combined cycle gas comes close to wind and solar.
Thermal coal is best left in the ground.

 

[Smurf1976]

Smurf, this links to a live graphic of electricity supply & demand.
I found it interesting to see how strongly renewables contributed in South Australia.
The other interesting take was how State subsidies for solar have skewed PV output - NSW is a laggard.

AEMO puts out all the data in real time, the public website version is updated every 5 minutes, and there are a number of third party websites which present that raw data in an easier to understand form.

That's much the same as saying that the ASX provides data in real time which your broker's website or any other service you are using then presents in a more useful form via charts, scanning tools and so on. Same concept in that there's an "official" data source which others then do various things with.

What the electricity generating companies themselves do with it depends heavily on their own capabilities and strategy. It ranges from absolutely nothing, being purely a passive participant, to a fully fledged trading room with monitors everywhere displaying exactly what every plant, regardless of who owns it, is doing and which looks much like the sort of thing you'd see on financial news coverage in the background to some commentator speaking or footage of the trading floor at the New York Stock Exchange.

In terms of physical control, AEMO has two complete setups to run the National Electricity Market (Qld, NSW, ACT, Vic, Tas, SA). One's in Brisbane and the other is in Sydney and both are fully capable in the event that one were to be blown up by terrorists or whatever.

In addition to that Hydro Tasmania also has it's own fully fledged control room capable of running everything in Tasmania from the one place. Since Tas is part of the NEM that's effectively a backup to AEMO's systems but it's fully setup and could be considered as "plan C". For the record if the worst did happen then there are further options beyond that.

The other states don't have a single control room capable of running the whole show from one place but the power stations do have their own control rooms to run that power station and there are other places for controlling networks etc.

The one big word of caution I'll sound when looking at data is to realise that it is instantaneous unless stated otherwise. For example there's more than 2000 MW of gas-fired plant in Victoria literally none of which is running at the moment. Yes it can and does run but right now there's no need since demand is low, wind and solar are producing significant outputs, and with one exception all coal-fired plant is running flat out. So there's gas-fired plant which exists but if you look at anything displaying "live" production data you could well come away completely unaware of that.

The only other "catch" with data websites is that they don't distinguish when a fuel other than the main fuel is being used. Eg a lot of gas-fired plant fires oil as a backup fuel but they won't pick that up, since they just have power station x listed as "gas", and will thus show the source as "gas" even though oil is being fired in practice. That said, it's not common to fire oil in plant that mostly uses gas but it does happen from time to time - it was done in two generating units at one particular power station in SA last week for example.

Oil? Depending on the plant in question that's fuel oil (a thick black liquid), diesel, kerosene (jet aircraft fuel) or LPG ("BBQ gas") all of which are liquids partly (LPG) or entirely (the others) derived from crude oil. For convenience they're generally lumped together and referred to as either "liquid fuels" or simply "oil".

In terms of efficiency, that's a complex one. Coal plant efficiency doesn't vary hugely across the present fleet. The absolute worst is about two thirds as good as the absolute best so the variation isn't massive and the majority is in a narrower range in the middle. The difference isn't simply due to technology although that's a factor. The composition of the coal used is a major influence on the level of thermal efficiency which can be achieved and climate is also a factor.

For gas and oil fired plant however the differences are far greater with the worst gas-fired plant using more than twice as much gas, per unit of output, as the best and it's similar where liquid fuels are involved.

On a state by state basis over the past 12 months:

NSW:
Coal = 77.9%
Import from other states = 8.0%
Solar = 4.3% (3.0% houses etc, 1.3% large solar farms)
Wind = 4.2%
Hydro = 3.9%
Gas = 1.8%
Oil = minor
Export to other states = 0.4% of NSW supply

Qld:
Coal = 83.1%
Gas = 9.1%
Solar = 6.0% (of which houses etc 4.8%, large scale solar 1.2%)
Hydro = 1.2%
Biomass = 0.4%
Wind = 0.2%
Imports from NSW = 0.1%
Oil = 0.01%
Export to NSW = 8.5% of Qld supply

Vic:
Coal = 74.2%
Wind = 9.1%
Hydro = 5.8%
Gas = 4.3%
Solar = 3.7% (houses etc = 3.4%, large scale = 0.3%)
Imports from Tas, SA, NSW = 2.9%*
Exports to SA, Tas, NSW = 4.4% of Vic supply

*A complicating factor with Vic is that fairly often exports from one state to Vic are ultimately transferred to another state and recorded as such in the other state's figures. The physical quantity imported to Vic as a transit route, eg Tas or SA to NSW, is thus significantly greater than the 2.9% shown. A similar complexity exists with exports.

SA:
Gas = 42.9%
Wind = 39.0%
Solar 9.2% (houses etc 8.3%, large scale solar 0.9%
Import from Vic = 8.5%
Oil = 0.1%
Exports to Vic = 7.1% of SA supply

Tas:
Hydro = 81.9%
Wind = 8.7%
Import from Vic = 4.9%
Gas = 3.3%
Solar = 1.2% (all of which was small scale on houses etc)
Export to Vic = 14.5% of Tas supply

Those figures are annual for the past year.

In the short term however, wild variations can and do occur. Eg looking at the week ahead on the 24th forecast load significantly exceeds supply available within the state in Victoria. There is thus a significant reliance on Tas, SA and NSW to keep the lights shining in Melbourne on that day and not much room for anything to go wrong without ending up in trouble. Ultimate cause = hot weather.

So in the space of a few hours it goes from lots of plant sitting idle to a scramble to find adequate supply. That's a pretty routine occurrence.

 

[Smurf1976]

In addition to the previous post, I don't have data for locations outside the NEM but for the bigger separate systems:

Mt Isa region and surrounds in Queensland = almost totally from gas.

NT = gas in Darwin and Alice Springs. Other towns it's either gas or diesel.

WA (South-West Interconnected System including Perth) = it's about half from coal, 40% gas, rest is wind and solar. Roughly.

WA (North-West Interconnected System) = all gas apart from a bit of diesel as backup fuel.

For those not aware, the SWIS and NWIS in WA are completely separate systems not connected to each other (too far apart to economically do so). The NWIS serves, in practice, mostly the mining industry and associated towns.

Plus some minor sources like rooftop solar etc in all the above.

 

[basilio]

Cam across this interview with a scientist at Toyota. Hydrogen fuelled cars seem far closer to reality than some would believe. I have been following AFC energy fuel cell progress so I can see where he is coming from. Liked his conclusion.


Exclusive: Toyota Hydrogen Boss Explains How Fuel Cells Can Achieve Corolla Costs
Hydrogen fuel cells have been written off for decades, but Toyota's Katsuhiko Hirose says they area just coming into their own.

http://www.thedrive.com/tech/26050/...ains-how-fuel-cells-can-achieve-corolla-costs

......Hirose is an outspoken man, and he doesn’t “like the term hydrogen society,” as he admits. “Hydrogen society means we fully bet on hydrogen. Instead, we should bet on a portfolio of solutions for a sustainable society. Of course, the government can incentivize, but in the long term, we need to provide what the customer likes to choose. This is not about batteries vs. fuel cell. It is about sustainable, zero emission transportation, and about customer choice.”

“A sustainable society is a lot of work,” Hirose says as he collects his things to catch his Shinkansen back to Nagoya, “but if we postpone decisions about matters like global warming, we steal the future of our children. As a company man, I should not say this,” he tells me, “but maybe you can.”

 

[basilio]

Interesting new development in the application of fuel cell technology.

AFC Energy has launched a low cost fuel cell to recharge EV's. One of the questions about the extensive use of electric vehicles is the requirement for far more mains supplied electricity to charge the batteries. Good description of the technology and the options to provide the hydrogen.

UK firm launches fuel cell charge point for electric cars – but will hydrogen power our electric dreams?

share

The BMW i8 plugged in to the first ever hydrogen fuel cell EV charging station

• Ed Wiseman

18 January 2019 • 8:00 AM
British firm AFC Energy has launched the first ever hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle charger, a system it describes as a “breakthrough” in clean mobility.

By using hydrogen fuel cells to recharge battery-electric vehicles in car parks and service stations, the system will help bridge the growing gap between electricity need and generation capacity caused by a projected rise in EV uptake. The modular, low-cost charger also solves some of the logistical issues currently associated with electric car charging, and can even operate entirely off-grid. It's a completely different model to our current use of hydrogen in mobility, in that the vehicles themselves are BEVs rather than FCEVs, and could be deployed extremely rapidly.


“The UK government has targets for electric vehicle uptake, aiming for 100 percent of new cars to be zero-emission by 2040,” says Adam Bond, CEO of AFC Energy.

“The additional power required is somewhere around 27 gigawatts. That’s 17,000 wind turbines; one hundred London Arrays. It is enormous power that hasn’t been considered within the context of the policy on EV charging.

“It is one thing to stick a couple of EV charger points on the motorway, but that is not going to deliver the policy. What we are trying to do is take from government or industry the need to create another 20 gigawatts of power, and displace that with localised, decentralised, standalone clean energy solutions that will operate 24/7, as and when you need them.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/ne...uel-cell-charge-point-electric-cars-will/amp/

 

[basilio]

A further report/analysis on the AFC fuel cell charge point.
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/01/18/bmw-gets-a-new-hydrogen-powered-twist-for-ev-charging-but-why/

 

[Smurf1976]

Interesting new development in the application of fuel cell technology.

There would be potential applications for it but at a national level what they're proposing is:

Take electricity that is generated by whatever means.

Turn it into hydrogen.

Use the hydrogen to generate electricity to charge EV's, thus avoiding the need for additional mains electricity to charge EV's.

It's a potential workaround to distribution network constraints and is a means of storage via the hydrogen but ultimately it means significantly more, not less, actual electricity is required. As such it's not a solution to that problem - there's no free lunch and hydrogen is not itself an energy source, since it first has to be produced.

There's a potential role for it but it's akin to a bank account and using EFTPOS to make purchases. Convenient and gets around any hassles with carrying physical cash but it doesn't replace the need for an income, or electricity, in the first place since you still need that to fill the bank account or make the hydrogen, there's no magic involved.

 

[basilio]

One of AFC's objectives is to use current waste hydrogen from industrial process to power the fuel cells.
Because they don't need totally pure hydrogen they can stand some contaminants.

The hydrogen could come from excess electricity production from PV or Wind generation. Certainly plenty of concern about how these will be managed.

But I agree with the overall premise - the power has to come from somewhere..