The future of energy generation and storage

[rederob]

Next option:
Strategic microgrid funding:

• Given a quantifiable shortfall in supply during last week's heatwave, develop a shared cost model for, say, 100,000 homes to install battery banks which fall within agreed microgridded suburbs.

Next option is a variant of Snowy 2.0, but with fully accretive solar capacity values:

• Build a virtual battery via new solar farms and massively excess battery storage capacity
  • scale the battery size such that it would be in sufficient excess of probable worst case scenarios using last weeks load shedding as a base case.
  • this is a variant to traditional ideas in that the battery size would take days to weeks to be fully charged
  • while the objective of the virtual battery would be to prevent future NEM load shedding, nothing would prevent it in the interim from being fully functional when known weather patterns would not require it to be drawn upon
  • I will message Elon and ask him how Tesla2.0 sounds .

This option has no engineering impediments, could be in place comparatively quickly - depending on siting - and has the potential to place solar farms in geographic regions where supply is now or in future problematic, eg mining projects (Olympic Dam, Carrapateena) .
I have no idea how much it would cost, but it superior to Snowy 2.0 in that it would be designed for immediate purpose and be scalable as the electricity landscape changed.

 

[sptrawler]

Good summation Rumpy, you have been listening to smurf.

The one thing you have a bit wrong, is the time it would take to build a new coal station, if the used a site like the old Hazelwood site a lot of the infrastructure is already there coal handling, switchyard, etc.
As Hazelwood was 2,000MW, I would guess you could get 4 X 500MW units up within 4 to 5 years

Didn't have time to finish, got side tracked.
It would take another couple of years to install the other 6 units, but that would be 5,000MW of brand new plant, that would close down 5,000MW of existing coal plant.
Gas is a better option, but from what I've read I don't think there is the gas available to run it.
That is a lot of gas 5GW.

 

[rederob]

Good summation Rumpy, you have been listening to smurf.

We all listen to smurf .
And the problems have been well known for a long time - the point of #3057.
The NEM is presently ignoring its clearly outlined objective under National Electricity Law "to promote efficient investment in, and efficient operation and use of, electricity services for the long term interests of consumers...."
I can only repeat what I have now said many times, until the market has a clear policy framework to underpin their investment decisions, it's unreasonable to expect billions of dollars being committed to capacity builds.

 

[sptrawler]

We all listen to smurf .
And the problems have been well known for a long time - the point of #3057.
The NEM is presently ignoring its clearly outlined objective under National Electricity Law "to promote efficient investment in, and efficient operation and use of, electricity services for the long term interests of consumers...."
I can only repeat what I have now said many times, until the market has a clear policy framework to underpin their investment decisions, it's unreasonable to expect billions of dollars being committed to capacity builds.

I agree with that, I'm only talking from a practical position as to what IMO, is a realistic way to stop aging plant falling over and causing blackouts and achieving it it a reasonable time frame.
The politics of it is way above my pay scale.
I guess it will be hard to get efficient investment, in an assett that will lose value as soon as you build it.
If it's gas it will cost more and more to run, if it's coal well only the Government can build it. Rock and hard place comes to mind.
If it's renewables, well get used to blackouts, for a while longer.

 

[rederob]

If it's renewables, well get used to blackouts, for a while longer.

Nope .

 

[basilio]

Nope .

Good find Rederob. That is one big Virtual Battery.
Also thought the underground desalination reservoir was a story and a half.

The UAE has built the world’s largest desalinated water reserve—under a desert
https://qz.com/1180035/uae-has-built-the-worlds-largest-water-reserve-in-liwa-desert/

 

[basilio]

Excellent summary of what happened to our energy supplies in the heatwave - and the options we have.
Nick has clearly been following this thread..

What happened to our electricity system in the heat? Coal and gas plants failed
Nicky Ison
We still have time to avert the worst impacts of climate change, but heatwaves are now an inevitable part of Australia’s future
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...system-in-the-heat-coal-and-gas-plants-failed

 

[sptrawler]

Nope .

Well extrapolating on your post, if my back of the napkin is correct.

The UAE grid is 119GW, which is about what we need to install, but say we already have 30GW the article gives a hint at what it will cost.

Going from your article:
The country plans to spend $160 billion by 2030 on renewable energy, setting a 2050 goal to get more than 60% of its electricity from carbon-free sources.

That means, again back of the napkin, $160B probably U.S so $200B aussie, to put in 71GW of renewables.

Well that is going to make electricity expensive, by my reckoning, if you want any return on capital. It is probably o.k if you own an oil well, but problematic for the average Aussie.
Like I said waiting for that to happen any time soon, you had better get used to blackouts.
The immediate problem is replacing some of the old generators.
It will be very interesting, to see what the experts come up with.
Just my opinion

 

[basilio]

It has been brought up earlier but it bears remembering. In 2019 new renewable energy including storage is cheaper than new coal.

https://www.csiro.au/en/News/News-r...finds-renewables-are-cheapest-new-build-power

 

[sptrawler]

It has been brought up earlier but it bears remembering. In 2019 new renewable energy including storage is cheaper than new coal.

https://www.csiro.au/en/News/News-r...finds-renewables-are-cheapest-new-build-power

But as has been shown, you need to build twice as much of it and add to that the cost of storage.
Not saying don't put it in, just saying quickest cheapest way to get us over this hump, for a few years.

 

[sptrawler]

It has been brought up earlier but it bears remembering. In 2019 new renewable energy including storage is cheaper than new coal.

https://www.csiro.au/en/News/News-r...finds-renewables-are-cheapest-new-build-power

Thinking about the issue from your perspective Bas, I would guess if Labor get in, which is very likely.
The way they do things, I would guess they will use taxpayers money, to pay the generators to refurbish the old stations accelerated depreciation.
This will do two things, reduce the need for a new fossil fueled station and remove the cost of refurbishment from the owner.
It is kicking the can down the road a bit, but hey, who cares.
Just a thought, it is all very intriguing.

 

[rederob]

Well extrapolating on your post, if my back of the napkin is correct.

The UAE grid is 119GW, which is about what we need to install, but say we already have 30GW the article gives a hint at what it will cost.

Going from your article:
The country plans to spend $160 billion by 2030 on renewable energy, setting a 2050 goal to get more than 60% of its electricity from carbon-free sources.

That means, again back of the napkin, $160B probably U.S so $200B aussie, to put in 71GW of renewables.

Well that is going to make electricity expensive, by my reckoning, if you want any return on capital. It is probably o.k if you own an oil well, but problematic for the average Aussie.
Like I said waiting for that to happen any time soon, you had better get used to blackouts.
The immediate problem is replacing some of the old generators.
It will be very interesting, to see what the experts come up with.
Just my opinion

I cannot find your numbers anywhere.
Are you talking about capacity or consumption?
Consumption is presently almost 150GWh
Consumption is expected to increase so we should also see it being accommodated by capacity.
You might want to add a growth factor to the back of your napkin.
But none of that changes the fact that renewables can incorporate batteries... intermittency problem solved.

 

[sptrawler]

I cannot find your numbers anywhere.
Are you talking about capacity or consumption?
Consumption is presently almost 150GWh
Consumption is expected to increase so we should also see it being accommodated by capacity.
You might want to add a growth factor to the back of your napkin.
But none of that changes the fact that renewables can incorporate batteries... intermittency problem solved.

reading back through the article, I think you are right, it is referring to consumption it is written a bit ambiguously .
This would mean the installed capacity is considerably less, which makes the quoted costs astronomical, there must be something wrong with the $160B figure.

Here is a post on the UAE renewable plan.
https://www.export.gov/article?id=United-Arab-Emirates-Renewable-Energy

Interesting that they still envisage coal in the mix.

 

[rederob]

But as has been shown, you need to build twice as much of it and add to that the cost of storage.
Not saying don't put it in, just saying quickest cheapest way to get us over this hump, for a few years.

The requirement to double capacity was based on 100% renewables without storage according your linked Report:

Importantly, the LCOB calculated in this work is an upper bound – we use 2016 prices and do not include demand management or batteries. A large fraction of LCOB relates to periods of several successive days of overcast and windless weather that occur once every few years.​

Clearly batteries affect the equation markedly, and storage capacity build is a given in the present system. Just a matter of how much and how fast.

 

[rederob]

reading back through the article, I think you are right, it is referring to consumption it is written a bit ambiguously .
This would mean the installed capacity is considerably less, which makes the quoted costs astronomical, there must be something wrong with the $160B figure.

Here is a post on the UAE renewable plan.
https://www.export.gov/article?id=United-Arab-Emirates-Renewable-Energy

Interesting that they still envisage coal in the mix.

Always hard to tell what is covered in a scant report. I assumed the figure included 4 nuclear reactors which have been commissioned - who knows?
Anyhow, I used Lazzard's LCoS calculations where AUD$150/MWh gets utility scale PV and storage. Those numbers keep falling, and given we are only talking about filling an intermittency void it's not a big investment in the greater scheme of things, given the PV capacity was going to be added anyway. This compares favourably with Lazzard's LCOE average price of coal power, which is AUD$125/MWh.

 

[sptrawler]

There you go, your OCD approach and my lack of interest, are blending beautifully. Lol

 

[basilio]

Thinking about the issue from your perspective Bas, I would guess if Labor get in, which is very likely.
The way they do things, I would guess they will use taxpayers money, to pay the generators to refurbish the old stations accelerated depreciation.
This will do two things, reduce the need for a new fossil fueled station and remove the cost of refurbishment from the owner.
It is kicking the can down the road a bit, but hey, who cares.
Just a thought, it is all very intriguing.

I'm not sure if it would really make sense to refurbish a failing coal power station. One would have to ask how much would it cost vs investing that amount and obviously a bit more in latest gen wind/solar/ and battery. Perhaps if the cost was invitingly low you might.

But if I was an engineer I would ask where do you start and where do stop with refurbishing ? It wouldn't be hard to see some big bills and in the end the breakdown will happen with the parts that havn't been replaced.

In the renewable example one gets cheaper ongoing power with no use of water, particulate pollution or GG emissions. It could be a bit like deciding to fix up a tired car vs buying a new well priced electric car.
________________________________
With regard to building double the amount of renewable to equate a coal fired station ? I would be highly confident that that would be the parameter around which they measured the costs. It is just too basic an item to overlook. They have to equate arguably equal outputs if they are going to provide a fair cost comparison.

 

[rederob]

I'm not sure if it would really make sense to refurbish a failing coal power station. One would have to ask how much would it cost vs investing that amount and obviously a bit more in latest gen wind/solar/ and battery. Perhaps if the cost was invitingly low you might.

But if I was an engineer I would ask where do you start and where do stop with refurbishing ? It wouldn't be hard to see some big bills and in the end the breakdown will happen with the parts that havn't been replaced.

In the renewable example one gets cheaper ongoing power with no use of water, particulate pollution or GG emissions. It could be a bit like deciding to fix up a tired car vs buying a new well priced electric car.

Bas, the NEM would likely not allow it. It's effectively outside its scope to have the Commonwealth prop up a generator. And the Commonwealth would, in any case, need to open its offer to all market participants on a fair and equitable basis if it stepped outside the NEG.
None of it makes any sense, from any level of sanity.

 

[basilio]

There is another excellent analysis of the role of EV in Australia and the need for a serious government plan. As we have said if/WHEN we go this way we need to seriously upgrade our power supplies and hopefully plug the cars into the national grid as a sort of super virtual battery.

Road to nowhere: why Australia lags behind in electric vehicle revolution
Report recognises urgent need for national plan, as the rest of the world powers ahead
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ia-lags-behind-in-electric-vehicle-revolution

 

[basilio]

Bas, the NEM would likely not allow it. It's effectively outside its scope to have the Commonwealth prop up a generator. And the Commonwealth would, in any case, need to open its offer to all market participants on a fair and equitable basis if it stepped outside the NEG.
None of it makes any sense, from any level of sanity.

Hey that wasn't my idea ! I was trying to let SP down gently...

I know enough about engineering (and I am not an engineer..) to realise refurbishing a tired coal plant is not a great idea for all the practical (as well as regulatory) reasons I outlined.