This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The future of energy generation and storage

Jump to new
See what I mean Rumpy, no mention of what is going to replace 23GW of aging generation, in the near term.
Just a mention it needs replacing and more is needed on top of that for E.V's
 
sptrawler said:
See what I mean Rumpy, no mention of what is going to replace 23GW of aging generation, in the near term.
Just a mention it needs replacing and more is needed on top of that for E.V's
Click to expand...
You have issues with basic comprehension - that was covered:
rederob said:
The solution is not hard.
All the options for market participants are available to add capacity.
Click to expand...
 
sptrawler said:
See what I mean Rumpy, no mention of what is going to replace 23GW of aging generation, in the near term.
Just a mention it needs replacing and more is needed on top of that for E.V's
Click to expand...

Che ?? What will replace 23 GW of aging generation ? A swarm of small and large scale solar, wind, possibly wave , maybe solar thermal projects. And backing them up and providing flexibilty will be a range of batteries, pumped hydro and perhaps linked domestic battery systems

These are all available and looking for an opportunity to be built and brought on line SP. They also also more cost effective than new coal fired power stations - quite apart from the health and environmental problems these present.

But these investment cannot go ahead in a unified way until a National energy framework is established that offers clear guidelines and structures for this new direction and investment.
 
rederob said:
But you and others here have not worked out that until there is a clear policy framework for them to commercialise their options, there is no point investing into a potentially poisoned pot.
Click to expand...

Wasn't that framework the Finkle report, before it was poisoned ?
 
Projects like this are becoming the new normal.
They can be put together quickly, but they don't provide dispachable supply.
These ones do.
This article gives some idea of how battery storage costs are reducing.
 
So far as anything which could be termed a "market reform" is concerned, the reason I say not much and am unenthusiastic about the details is simply that nothing I've seen thus far suggests that the Australian Government, regardless of which party is in power, is willing to go far enough so as to enable suitable outcomes at the technical level.

CO2 and fossil fuels are an issue but the trouble we have would to a large extent still have occurred even if those issues did not exist at all. The basic problems being two:

1. Proper co-ordination of the operation of assets is required.

2. There will always be some assets which are unprofitable in a financial sense under any realistic arrangement but necessary at the technical level. Someone necessarily owns those and needs to be willing to keep coming up with the money.

With regard to point 1, there are many issues there but as one example I'll point to the operation of battery systems in SA and Vic during the recent load shedding. Having a battery that can be dispatched when required is all well and good - but not if you commence discharging it two hours before it's needed and it then runs flat when you actually do need it, load shedding the being the result.

Yep, that's exactly what happened. Comes back to the problem that rival companies aren't co-operating at the technical level out of fear that the ACCC will whack them over the head for doing so (and legally the ACCC has the law on their side absolutely - my point being to change the law or change how the market works).

With regard to point 2, I'll point to Wallerawang power station as an example. There was nothing major wrong with it, just needed maintenance as usual, but ultimately the owners could make more money without it than with it and so they closed it. End result = now NSW is on the edge and there's all the fuss about trying to patch up Liddell, which is in far worse shape than Wallerawang was, until Snowy 2.0 is built in a hurry.

Focusing on the technical aspects I really don't mind what those on the financial side do but it needs to enable appropriate technical outcomes if we want supply to be reliable. In other words, Wallerawang needed to stay open and if that costs $x million a year then so be it. Work out some way to pay for it.

In that context it's fair to say that just about everyone on the "technical" side would have a lot more sympathy for the "market / financial" approach if it had actually reduced costs to consumers. In practice however it has lead to major price increases in real terms whilst also compromising the system technically. It is thus rather hard to see what the actual point of it all has been.

So overall I just don't have confidence that any "reform" proposed by politicians is going to bring about a situation that, using the above examples, would have lead to technically appropriate operation of the batteries or which would have compelled the owners to keep Wallerawang open.

Since we're always going to have something in the grid that's unprofitable on a stand alone basis, and we're having more and more batteries, if we keep going as we are then we'll keep getting the same results. We'll keep knocking down power stations and then having to build new ones and we'll keep having batteries discharged at the wrong time.

The examples I cite are just that, examples. There's a lot more of those, including some which push emissions up unnecessarily, but they all come back to the same problems. Different bits being owned by different companies who don't co-operate well together due to economic ideology and the law taking precedence over sound technical practices. Plus the problem that someone has to own the unprofitable bits and in a competitive market nobody's keen on holding the hot potato.

I just don't see government being willing to make the necessary changes until such time as we've had a crisis big enough that forces it.

CO2 is relevant in all of this but the problems would still exist, at least to considerable extent, without it. Wallerawang didn't close because someone forced them to not emit any CO2 and the batteries weren't discharged too early because of CO2 either. Emissions are a problem but only part of it.
 
sptrawler said:
You should start a thread, "Great Australian P.M's and Premiers and what made them Great", it might give the current crop something to read up on.

We are probably getting completely off thread.
Click to expand...

The point was the reliable gas supply for power and industry
 
That's not a bad way of putting it really.
 
sptrawler said:
See what I mean Rumpy, no mention of what is going to replace 23GW of aging generation, in the near term
Click to expand...
If I look ahead at what I'll call "short term", since I think we both know that anything less than a decade is indeed short term when it comes to this sort of stuff, then for NSW, Vic, SA:

*Lots more wind and solar all over the place.

*There's a couple of 25 - 30 MW battery projects in Vic (2019)

*New 210 MW Barker Inlet gas / diesel power station in SA (2019)

*Progressive closure of 480 MW at Torrens Island A in SA (2019-21)

*Upgrade of Loy Yang B to add 80 MW in Victoria (2020)

*New 800 MW line between NSW and SA (rough guess 2021)

*Closure of 1680 MW at Liddell in NSW (2022)

*Addition of 2000 MW via Snowy 2.0 in NSW (realistically probably not before the 2024-25 summer).

The sum total of all the above is a gain of about 200 MW which is not totally irrelevant but it's pretty close. That's less than 1% of combined peak demand across the three states.

Everything else is either just an idea or uncommitted proposal at this stage.

Plus I will speculate that if you consider the age of other plant in the system and the varying quality of maintenance then whilst it's hard to guess the details the odds are something not listed above will fail or at least be de-rated during that period.

Plus there's the question of the supply of gas and what limits that may place on the operation of gas-fired generation. That in itself is a problem, since gas is widely used for things other than generating power, but it's a likely truth that in the event of a shortfall the first thing to be cut will be supply to power stations (since cutting one big gas load is a lot easier than cutting a million small ones).

So overall as yet there's no actual proposal to fix the problem. All we've got is what amounts to a net zero with a big hole in peak capacity during the 2022 - 24 period.
 
Smurf1976 said:
*Addition of 2000 MW via Snowy 2.0 in NSW (realistically probably not before the 2024-25 summer).
Click to expand...
Smurf, this is not additional.
And the near certainty of over a million EVs need charging by 2025 isn't accounted for.
 
Don't stress smurf, a swarm of solar plants large and small, possible wave and maybe a couple of thermal projects, plus a range of batteries.

It will be interesting, when you consider that you need to install double the capacity of renewables, to cover on demand fossil fueled generation.
So back of the napkin, that's about, 46GW of renewables , that's 46,000MW OMG.

I don't think people can visualise, how much that is in size of installations, they obviously think it is a battery here and there and a couple of wind farms, house batteries and a couple of solar thermal plants.
I know it doesn't have to be put in tomorrow, however some of this old coal plant is going to have to keep running for a long, long time, before sufficient renewables are installed to close them.

You are certainly going to have your work cut out for you.
 
Smurf1976 said:
*Lots more wind and solar all over the place.
Click to expand...
Smurf this is most certainly the big unknown. I suppose the question is how much will be established and what sort of policy framework is required to encourage further developments.

The next question is how quickly these can come on line. There is certainly a big hole to fill in the near term. And as SP points out it is a heck of a lot of planning, siting and construction. It is not just a couple of units here and there at all.

Having said that perhaps what this country needs now is an energy engineering led economic recovery with a number of projects across the country.
 
sptrawler said:
It will be interesting, when you consider that you need to install double the capacity of renewables, to cover on demand fossil fueled generation.
So back of the napkin, that's about, 46GW of renewables , that's 46,000MW OMG.
Click to expand...
UK's installed wind power capacity hits 20 GW.
If a small country like the UK can add that much via wind alone then we won't have trouble getting there with wind and solar.
You need to stop thinking like a troglodyte.
That's aside from more bad maths.
 
Yep, i'll head back into the cave and watch with interest, it will certainly will be an interesting period in Australian history.

One closing comment rederob:#2900
My quote:
The only viable renewable of size ATM is windfarms, the molten salt is still fairly untested technology.
Your answer
That is not true. China had a 1 GW PV array back in 2016 and larger ones have been built since especially in India. Solar concentrators date back to first commercial installation in 1984
and the technology has only improved since.
Now your quoting wind to support your argument.
 
Last edited:
The possibility of Australia making giant strides with offshore wind farms is there
The probability such a program will be implemented ? Only if we are dead set serious. But it could be done.

I had another thought for a partial solution. (I don't see an single silver bullet here). Across all the big cities are industrial parks , shopping centre, schools with thousands of acres of flat roof space and capable of being oriented in any direction. They all use power as well.

Why not encourage and enable these roofs to have solar panels and incorporate a good sized battery bank between a certain number to enable storage capacity as well ? With a guaranteed number of customers costs could very quickly become more competitive. It would certainly require some policy work but from my understanding the financial figures are very favorable for the tenants.

Minimal energy transport losses. Scaleable. Decent enough individual projects to get economies of scale. Great employment opportunity. Potential good investment opportunity. Great way to stimulate local solar and battery industries. Great opportunity to develop a process that can be exported as well.
https://www.australianvanadium.com.au/vanadium-batteries/
 
rederob said:
Smurf, this is not additional.
Click to expand...

Yep, Snowy 2.0 is indeed additional peak capacity via a completely new pumped storage scheme (well, the reservoirs are existing but everything else is new). Include with it is additional transmission to NSW and to a lesser extent to Vic.

It's not really an overall addition once you count closure of Liddell and Torrens Island A that's true but I've included those in the list.

And the near certainty of over a million EVs need charging by 2025 isn't accounted for.
Click to expand...

Hopefully they're not mostly going to be charged during the peaks. If they are, well then we're going to be in a world of pain in oh so many ways.

The problem is that with the current way the industry works there's nobody really planning for EV's in an effective manner. Nobody working out exactly how consumers will really charge them in the real world and whether some intervention, of whatever sort, is required there or not. And even if there was, well there's nobody to really make that happen anyway.

By the time someone does realise then we'll have a million of them and a mad panic to implement something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gen Alpha
Replies
13
Views
853
moXJO
M
Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
628
Smurf1976
The Effect of Deepseek on Australian Stocks
Replies
7
Views
722
Smurf1976
SS1 - Sun Silver
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
Sean K
How to totally xuck the worlds largest economy with a chainsaw
Replies
14
Views
532
basilio
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...