Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The future of energy generation and storage

Never get between a Premier and a bucket of money- Paul Keating

I'm not sure that was entirely the case.

Howard/ Costello had an "asset recycling" policy whereby the States wouldn't get any more money for infrastructure unless they sold off existing assets.

It's hard to resist that sort of pressure.
 
We will never go back but it just seems to me that having State governments owning
Separate ownership, government, private or a mix, can work provided that there's someone in overall control of the whole show.

Two notable past examples of that:

Victoria - the SECV was in control as such from 1918 but up to 1932 the Victorian Railways (VR) owned the largest power station and Melbourne City Council (MCC) remained the third largest through to 1959. It was all under SECV control though, everything was interconnected and operated as a single system apart from the minor hurdle of the VR's need for 25 Hz supply.

There was no active attempt to get rid of that, indeed the MCC invested in new plant as late as the early 1950's and was still in the power generation business until 1983. Meanwhile the SECV built two new stations physically joined to the VR's and all sharing common facilities and fuel supply and effectively operating as one. That also continued until the early 1980's when the old parts of that operation closed and later demolished although Energy Australia still operates the remaining power station at that site today.

Tasmania - at one point the Launceston City Council and the Mt Lyell Mining & Railway Co were operating hydro stations in parallel with the HEC system and in both cases that continued for decades. No particular difficulties arose, the HEC was clearly in charge of running the show, and the final relics of that weren't sorted out until the end of 1994. There was also the small privately owned Moorina station which operated 1907 - 2007 and for the latter half of that as part of the statewide grid just under a different owner.

Likewise no issue over the years with various industrial companies running steam generating plant in parallel with the main state-owned system. They had direct lines to System Control, everyone worked on the basis that they were running one system despite the differences in ownership, and no drama. The divide was purely an accounting one not a practical or technical one.

Eg BHP have owned generating plant embedded in industrial operations in NSW, Vic, Tas and SA - and the latter three are still physically operating today (SA and Tas under different owners). Or I could mention that next time you buy anything frozen you probably wouldn't associate Birds Eye with generating power but incidentally yes they do own a small gas turbine plant in Tas. They want the "waste" hot water from it, they need huge amounts of that, but the actual electricity just goes into the grid mostly.

So different owners, including a mix of government and private, can work so long as there's a clear understanding that it's one system and someone's in charge with the authority not only over day to day operations but when it comes to directing investment etc too.

To clarify that, taking the MCC as the example they generated as directed by the SECV and plant outages, fuel supply etc were also co-ordinated as though it were all under the same ownership. Likewise much of the electricity the MCC supplied to the public, they had a defined supply area, was sourced from the SECV not MCC's own facilities. For that matter, going back further at one point the VR was generating a quarter of all power in the state and that certainly wasn't all going into trains. So all operating as a single system not just day to day but with planning etc as well. :2twocents
 
Last edited:
Renewables hit 50% of generation demand, for the first time, that is a big achievement.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...emand-on-australias-power-grid-for-first-time

From the article:
The report said Australia was now ahead of schedule in meeting the large-scale target of 33,000 gigawatt hours of renewables generation by 2020.

Other analysts say that clean energy could make-up 35% of Australia’s electricity needs within two years
 
Renewables hit 50% of generation demand, for the first time, that is a big achievement.
It is but on the other hand, 7 out of the past 7 days in SA there has been curtailment of solar farm output.

That's not a technical problem as such, in that it's not going to put the lights out etc, but someone is going to be taking a bath financially as a result of that. Who that is I haven't tried to work out but ultimately the costs have been incurred, and that is almost entirely a fixed cost not related to actual output, but with less output there's going to be less revenue than was presumably expected.

Hence my comments about being extremely cautious with any investments in this area. :2twocents
 
Morrison does backflip on SA battery.

The battery itself gets 50% bigger but the portion traded into the market under normal circumstances increases by a greater amount.

Now = 100 MW power / 129 MWh storage of which 70 MW / 11.7 MWh is reserved by a contract with the SA government, leaving 30 MW and 117.3 MWh available for Neoen to trade into the market.

After expansion = 150 MW power / 193.5 MWh storage so that means 80 MW and 181.8 MWh is available to trade into the market.

It's no silver bullet but it's dispatchable generation and it works so long as it's charged at least each day (assuming it's discharged daily). :2twocents
 
Morrison does backflip on SA battery.

Just shows how cynical politicians are.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-19/sa-big-battery-set-to-get-even-bigger/11716784
So not such a backflip...never trust their ABC, or Murdoch, of the Washington Post..Pravda is gone...
But batteries remain a useful indeed but surface only cosmetics.
What is the real financial advantage past smoothing the peak, of investing in a backup systems which needs a more powerful backup in place
It would be an interesting financial equation to reveal the threshold where more batteries are actually a waste of money vs using your gas whatever backup load that os needed anyway
The above only true if you really care about power continuity.you can go 100pc battery if you accept no power after 2 cloudy still days
 
What is the real financial advantage past smoothing the peak, of investing in a backup systems which needs a more powerful backup in place
The battery I've got at home will run the inverter at constant full output for 1.75 hours.

Broadly speaking that's where the financial sweet spot is turning out to be for most - somewhere around the 2 hour mark give or take a bit.

That's useful for shifting some solar output from midday to evening and it's useful for frequency control and as peaking plant but it's only a minor step away from fossil fuels. Whether it's Neoen's about to be 150,000 kW / 193,500 kWh battery or it's the little 5 kW / 8.8 kWh battery I've got at home the same applies. They have a role but they're not an actual replacement for other dispatchable generation beyond purely peaking plant. They're still relying on a guaranteed ability to be charged daily regardless of the weather.

The good news though is looking at the performance of the one I've got at home during Saturday's incident in SA, it did what it ideally ought to do. Both AC lines tripped between SA and Vic, the DC line was already out, and that resulted in separation of SA from the rest of the grid. Since power flow was from SA to Vic at the time, that transmission loss caused the frequency to rise in SA and my system did respond in a desirable manner, albeit on a scale too small to be of any importance but it proves the concept. Some energy was shoved into the battery that otherwise wouldn't have been and load on the grid increased accordingly. That's the desired response in that situation so it worked as intended.

Not that my 5kW is going to do overly much but the concept works so if enough of them are installed then it becomes significant. :2twocents
 
Some Big Business interests in really big renewable energy projects.

Billionaires invest in giant Australian solar farm to supply power to Singapore
Andrew ‘Twiggy’ Forrest joins Mike Cannon-Brookes to raise tens of millions of dollars for Sun Cable

The mining magnate and philanthropist Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest has joined fellow billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes in raising tens of millions of dollars to build a giant solar farm in the Northern Territory to supply electricity to Singapore.

The company behind the project, Sun Cable, said Forrest’s Squadron Energy and Grok Ventures, the investment firm of Cannon-Brookes and his wife, Annie, had become co-lead investors in the $20bn-plus development.

David Griffin, Sun Cable’s chief executive, said the company had raised “less than $50m, but in the tens of millions” in an oversubscribed capital raising that would fund development work for what it calls the Australia-Singapore Power Link.

If successful, the development would include a 10-gigawatt-capacity array of panels spread across 15,000 hectares near Tennant Creek, backed by about 22 gigawatt-hours in battery storage.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...alian-solar-farm-to-supply-power-to-singapore
 
A couple of extremes in SA over the past few hours:

About 4am this morning, electricity from Victoria supplied 71.4% of load in SA. Can't push transmission between the two states much harder than that.

About 1pm today solar generation within the state was equal to 81.5% of load in SA. That's large scale solar farms as well as the estimated output of small systems on house roofs etc. Add wind to that and total supply available from renewables exceeded consumption and power was flowing from SA to Vic.

So two opposing extremes just 9 hours apart which illustrates the volatility in all this. Times are SA local time.

PS - AGL are still testing and commissioning their new Barker Inlet plant. They've had it up to full capacity a couple of times now. :2twocents
 
Superpower: Australia’s low carbon opportunity

‘The fog of Australian politics on climate change has obscured a fateful reality: Australia has the potential to be an economic superpower of the future post-carbon world.’—Ross Garnaut

We have unparalleled renewable energy resources. We also have the necessary scientific skills. Australia could be the natural home for an increasing proportion of global industry. But how do we make this happen?

In this crisp, compelling book, Australia’s leading thinker about climate and energy policy offers a road map for progress, covering energy, transport, agriculture, the international scene and more. Rich in ideas and practical optimism, Superpower is a crucial, timely contribution to this country’s future.

Well worth reading. Great investment opportunities as well! Particularly if we are still around to enjoy the value..

https://www.rossgarnaut.com.au/australian-economy/superpower-australias-low-carbon-opportunity/
 
Where the issue arises is that there's a portion of the population, and I'm referring to the general public here not anyone on this thread, which does seem to think that if we just put up some solar panels, wind farms and batteries then that's it, all our energy problems are fixed forever.

Have a look at the Facebook page of any of the major energy companies. They're full of comments from people to that effect - why on earth are you guys stuffing about with gas or hydro when we can just use solar and batteries?

In reality batteries with present and near term foreseeable technology have an application for peak capacity, frequency control and as short term backup at the fringes of the network but that's about it.

Looking at wind and solar data the reality is both good and bad.

The good bit is there's plenty of it and it works.

The bad bit is the poor seasonal alignment with overall energy consumption and in particular heating loads. At the same time as total energy (not just electricity but all forms) consumption peaks in the southern parts of the country, solar is at its seasonal minimum and wind is subject to all too frequent "droughts" which see low output in all states for a week or more.

Therein arises the requirement that we have something which isn't wind, solar or batteries which is capable of carrying serious load for a week or more constantly.

Hydro is one option and the obvious one if the aim is to use renewable energy. Failing that, large scale hydrogen production and storage could work but does involve a lot of losses - it could well be part of the solution though.

Beyond that though, well pragmatic reality is that there are 5 LNG import proposals and numerous gas-fired power generation proposals across NSW, Vic and SA with the Barker Inlet power station (gas) opened in SA today (more info about that in the AGL thread).

That's the divide basically. Private enterprise favours wind, solar and gas with a few batteries here and there. Under that model gas provides around half the total supply.

On the other side, the two big hydro operators propose themselves building big pumped hydro schemes, others building more wind and solar and smaller hydro and battery systems, and in due course minimal use of gas.

Something needs to be done though. If you went to Yallourn right now you'd find three quarters of the plant's idle and the rest's struggling along. No Sir, it ain't going at all well not in the slightest. Not to worry though - the politicians of all colours will have already rehearsed their speech for when old grandpa tries to run another marathon this summer and keels over in the heat. "Not our fault" they'll scream whilst throwing a few stones at the other side of politics. :2twocents

Hey Mate,

What are your thoughts on "Sun Cable", eg the company planning to build solar panel farm in NT and export to Singapore.

Is this Viable from an engineering standpoint? do you think this sort of project can deliver a return on capital to make it worthwhile for investors.

I mean if we can deliver solar power via a cable to Singapore, It means we could deliver it anywhere inside Australia, I mean we could have Solar panels in WA (at 3pm local time) delivering power into the east coast 6pm peak period, and maybe Auckland and Perth could absorb excess East coast Australian Solar during midday Sydney time, and Sydney could use off peak Kiwi hydro during the night.

Is this sort of thing possible???
 
Hey Mate,

What are your thoughts on "Sun Cable", eg the company planning to build solar panel farm in NT and export to Singapore.

Is this Viable from an engineering standpoint? do you think this sort of project can deliver a return on capital to make it worthwhile for investors.

I mean if we can deliver solar power via a cable to Singapore, It means we could deliver it anywhere inside Australia, I mean we could have Solar panels in WA (at 3pm local time) delivering power into the east coast 6pm peak period, and maybe Auckland and Perth could absorb excess East coast Australian Solar during midday Sydney time, and Sydney could use off peak Kiwi hydro during the night.

Is this sort of thing possible???

Not to pre-empt Smurf's expert knowledge on this, but what would worry me about such large scale solar projects is how do you compete long term when the cost to produce solar power is falling year by year at a fairly significant rate. IMO you would need a positive return on the total project within a 5 to 7 year time frame, otherwise competing projects will be coming on line with a cost structure that is perhaps half of what this project cost.
 
Not to pre-empt Smurf's expert knowledge on this, but what would worry me about such large scale solar projects is how do you compete long term when the cost to produce solar power is falling year by year at a fairly significant rate. IMO you would need a positive return on the total project within a 5 to 7 year time frame, otherwise competing projects will be coming on line with a cost structure that is perhaps half of what this project cost.

I think the most of the value would be in the cables moving the energy around, I mean even if in 7 years there is some super efficient solar cell available, some one wanting to built a solar farm would still have to build their own cables to transport the power to its destination or beg for space on the existing cables.

my main question though is how likely is it that long distance cables become a viable thing.

As I said, being able to transport excess midday east coast solar over to Auckland and Perth would be convenient, and transporting off peak newzealand hydro and excess Perth solar back to the east coast would be good to.
 
I think the most of the value would be in the cables moving the energy around, I mean even if in 7 years there is some super efficient solar cell available, some one wanting to built a solar farm would still have to build their own cables to transport the power to its destination or beg for space on the existing cables.

my main question though is how likely is it that long distance cables become a viable thing.

As I said, being able to transport excess midday east coast solar over to Auckland and Perth would be convenient, and transporting off peak newzealand hydro and excess Perth solar back to the east coast would be good to.

This may answer some of your questions.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2012/12/121206-high-voltage-dc-breakthrough/
 
Another round of gas price rises is coming through the system

I received an email this morning outlining costs for next years gas. Interestingly enough the heading of the email said that my gas bill would rise by an estimated $31 a year - only 1.47% increase. No real biggie there...

Anyway I went through the tariffs and realised there is something seriously wrong in their "calculations". The Winter Gas tariff after the first 100 Mj per day has jumped by 23.1% . It went from .0147 to .0181c

Other increases in monthly charges and general rates are smaller but still well over "1.47%" .

I have opened a conversation with the company to explain the discrepancy. Anyone else received information on gas increases for next year ?
 
Top