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
I don't disagree with that, it was the dumbest thing ever, to a degree W.A dodged that bullet and as I said in an earlier post I hope the private sector don't step up to the mark and it forces the States to re enter the generation market.
As we discussed early in this thread, generation really is an essential service and should be in Government hands.
The other point we made very early on is that with electricity generation there is a requirement for a lot more installed capacity, than is actually required, that doesn't lend itself to a open market style system and will actually become more of a problem as renewables become more prevalent.
It really will end up a mess, so no doubt as Rob says there will be a requirement for Federal intervention, when and how that is done will be the real problem.
As has been widely reported, the problems associated with high penetration of renewables are only recently showing up, because we are in a fairly unique situation and the AEMO is dealing with problems that no one knew would arise.
Hopefully a technically driven plan is formulated, rather than a taxpayer funded slush bucket approach that we normally have to live with.
One thing for sure is, the system wont be allowed to collapse, that wont be an option. So if it becomes essential that there is serious political intervention there will be.
 
Interesting article on consumer switching suppliers.
https://www.theage.com.au/business/...wer-to-find-better-rates-20200628-p556zx.html
From the article:
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is scheduled to issue a proposals paper in early July specifying how the consumer data regime will operate in the energy sector. The ACCC will advise the public on the timeline for implementing the consumer data right.


The ACCC delayed the introduction of the banking sector's reforms from February to July after it identified technical defects and decided to spend more time making sure the data sharing regime was resilient against cyber-security threats.

A consumer could be almost a $1000 better off by switching from the worst to the best electricity plan in South Australia and by around $750 in New South Wales, according to the government. A small business could be more than $7000 better off in South Australia and $3000 better off in Victoria or New South Wales from a similar switch.
 
sptrawler said:
As has been widely reported, the problems associated with high penetration of renewables are only recently showing up, because we are in a fairly unique situation and the AEMO is dealing with problems that no one knew would arise.
Click to expand...
AEMO was reporting on renewables penetration over a decade ago so it should never have been a surprise that we have the problems we now do in terms of grid integration.
We had the opportunity to learn from Europe which has a more complex and sophisticated energy system with much greater renewable penetration, or from the USA or China which have similar geographic dispersals with renewables.
The idea that our situation is somehow unique flies in the face of international experience.
 
https://www.afr.com/politics/aemo-i...-solar-in-victorias-full-grid-20181012-h16l0h
From the article:
A crackdown by the Australian Energy Market Operator has snared French energy giant Total Eren, which will launch Victoria's biggest solar farm this week minus one of its anchor customers.

This follows delays caused by a standoff with AEMO over grid system security in north-west Victoria where there is a bulging pipeline of new wind and solar.
AEMO said the problem was being exacerbated by foreign developers failing to appreciate the unique susceptibility of Australia's long, thin grid to the strains of adding new wind and solar generation to parts that did not previously support generation to replace coal-fired power shutting down elsewhere. Australia has the developed world's longest, thinnest grid, stretching about 5000 kilometres from South Australia's west to far north Queensland.

"With a large number of new entrants unfamiliar with uniquely Australian conditions, we are seeing some proponents make commercial commitments ahead of confirming grid connection requirements – this has the potential to lead to suboptimal investment and power system performance outcomes," an AEMO spokesperson said.

https://www.aemo.com.au/-/media/Fil...ections/Power-System-Limitations-December.pdf

https://aemo.com.au/en/news/constraints-lifted-for-west-murray-solar-farms

SMA Australia Head of Service, Scott Partlin, said: “SMA is extremely pleased and proud of the role we have been able to play in providing a ground-breaking technical solution to our customers and the network, which has seen these curtailments finally lifted. These unique Australian technical challenges were successfully solved by our German-based Research & Development engineers by working closely with AEMO. The new capability in our SMA Sunny Central inverters should assist to benefit the Australian power grid as the share of renewables increases. We look forward to continuing to work closely with AEMO to see this new capability realised across our Australian fleet of inverters.”
 
So despite renewable issues being over a decade old, our government's have not supported policies which get the cheapest energy into the grid.
Finkel Reported on what needed to be done in 2017, and here we are 3 years later sitting on our hands!
 
Typical, change tack, change the debate, start the circular argument.
You wanted evidence that the Australian grid is unique, regarding renewable deployment, I provided that.

The State governments are going to have to reconfigure their transmission networks, to facilitate major remote generation, this will take time.
Meanwhile the State Governments, other than S.A and W.A, don't seem to have the stomach for change maybe the electoral backlash worries them.
Or maybe the fact, that they lost control of their generation base and now have to somehow replace it, maybe they should have held the money they made from the sale in trust?
Victoria didn't have any trouble cancelling $1billion in road infrastructure contracts, that would go a long way in supporting the adoption of renewables.
I don't know what N.S.W and Vic are doing to mitigate the loss of coal generation.
S.A and W.A seem to be transitioning o.k
W.A only has one privately owned coal fired station, as I've already mentioned, therefore the transition to gas/renewables should be fairly trouble free. Not a lot of conflicts of interest, to put a fly in the ointment.
 
Last edited:
Your points have related to a "self resolving" system.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Despite years and years of warnings about what was necessary, the work has not been done.
So what you did was confirm my point in that we are uniquely unprepared while other nations have acted on the obvious.
You can read numerous Reports over many years at AEMO's website, plus industry submissions, noting our unpreparedness.
Have a look at what China and Brazil have done with multi-thousand kilometre HVDC lines to get renewable energy from far flung places. These are completed projects and we don't even have any planned.
In terms of adding new capacity, industry wants investment certainty before making billion dollar commitments.
 
It will be self resolving, as I've said over and over, the system will not be allowed to completely collapse.
Western society and especially a first world country, is dependent on a working electrical grid, therefore whatever is required to maintain a reliable grid will be implemented.
If that doesn't include your preferred model, who gives a damn.
It is a pointless going around in circles.
If AGL doesn't want to install new capacity and Origin doesn't want to, then the States will have to install it themselves, then the generating companies lose market share.
It will be self resolving, you think it will be a case of everthing on the East coast shutting down, get a grip.
 
sptrawler said:
It will be self resolving, as I've said over and over, the system will not be allowed to completely collapse.
Click to expand...
This statement seems completely out of character coming from a person with a high level engineering skill.
I can't imagine any complex engineering project being "self resolving". Engineers need, no demand, to know the parameters of what they are expected to achieve. They don't anticipate "self resolving" the overall designs of the project as they go.

I can understand that on a micro level, project engineers will encounter some issues around a build which need to be addressed. A tweak here , another approach there. A cleverer way to make an agreed project work. But that is nowhere near expecting the whole design system of interconnected grids, voltage protection, load protection etc to just happen by omnipresent Intelligent Design.
 
I don't know how to explain it better to you, but what you are saying is "self resolving" is in fact nothing of the sort.
It's a bit like saying a war is self resolving. It is a meaningless sense.
Moving on, as your points above note, the system cannot meet the additional renewable capacity now being contemplated.
Intervention is necessary.
Furthermore, I don't have a preferred model. You plan to cope with future demands in accordance with probable international trends that are capable of being replicated in Australia. Inherent in the planning process in decarbonising our generation to the maximum extent practicable.
AEMO has been doing this. Finkel has added his two bob's worth.
But successive federal Energy Minister's are tone deaf to renewables so here we are... floundering.
I suggest you read the very many industry submissions that make it clear that the likes of AGL and Origin are willing to invest in new capacity, but will not do so until there is policy certainty.
 
I was referring to the fact there is no reason to scare the hell out of people, when intervention is required, intervention will be taken as it is an essential service.
I have no doubt at all that there is a myriad of things happening, that the general public isn't aware off, it is a shame everyone is so needy.
I guess it is a result of social media, making everyone feel they are so important, they should be informed as to everything that is happening.
 
Intervention has been necessary for years.
It's either not happening at all or happening too slowly.
By international standards the blackouts experienced in recent years in SA and Victoria are exceptional.
For example over a 15 month period South Australia experienced blackouts on 1 November 2015 (110,000 households), a system black event on 28 September 2016 (whole state), 1 December 2016 (200,000 households), 27 December 2016 (155,000 households), 20 January 2017 (55,000 households) and 8 February 2017 (90,000 households).
Little wonder South Australia has such a high percentage of rooftop solar!
The general public is well aware of the potential for blackouts as they get a lot of media coverage for good reason.
They may not be well informed about what is happening to fix the problem. That, however, is largely due to the fact that it's not a lot.
 

No argument there but I'll add that Victoria is similarly fragile.

There are differences between the two states but both are in bad shape. Victoria with lack of capacity and reliance in single items of critical infrastructure. SA with a bit more capacity but still not enough and with difficulties maintaining voltage control and system inertia. That SA's non-intermittent generating capacity is very heavily concentrated geographically is a concern too if something were to happen there.

After that, NSW is next. Not in great shape in terms of capacity but they don't have the same reliance on single points of failure or controlling the system that Vic and SA do. So long as Queensland keeps the megawatts flowing over the border then NSW will have some hiccups but nothing drastic unless some major fault occurs.

NT has the problem of scale meaning high reliance on single pieces of equipment. Otherwise not too bad apart from that risk.

Queensland, WA, Tasmania in far better shape. They could have an incident, the risk is never zero, but that would be down to an unfortunate series of events if it did occur.

Tasmania does have the most inherently fragile gas supply however. That's not an issue of any real significance in terms of electricity supply but it's a risk in terms of supply gas for use as gas. That said, most states
 
A few interesting points made in the article.
https://www.afr.com/companies/energ...llion renewable,2027, according to its backer.
From the article:
The grant would examine early feasibility work on the Urannah project, which would initially involve 1 gigawatt of pumped hydropower generation, with seven hours of storage capacity, as well as a further 500MW with a longer storage capacity. The solar and wind projects could be developed earlier, given their shorter approvals process.
While Genex's proposed Kidston pumped hydro project in Queensland is more advanced, Mr McDonald noted that the Australian Energy Market Operator has identified the need for one or more large-scale pumped hydro projects in Queensland by 2035 to help with security of supply amid the major growth in generation from intermittent renewable energy.

The project would also help reduce transmission losses due to congested supply during peak generation periods and allow major coal fired power stations to operate more efficiently and under less stress because they would not be required to vary their output so often, the group said.

It would also help with voltage and frequency regulation, and system strength, for the power grid, especially as existing coal-fired power stations retire from the market and close, starting with the Callide generator in 2028.
 
AGL to link executives pay to climate targets.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...0-p557jr.html?js-chunk-not-found-refresh=true
From the article:
"We understand that, as Australia's largest carbon emitter, our management team has a role to play in the transition and we want to hold ourselves accountable to this," AGL chief Brett Redman said.
However, AGL's new climate strategy made no changes to plans to bring forward the retirement of its fleet of coal-fired power generators, the biggest source of emissions. AGL would continue running its Bayswater plant in NSW until the end of its economic life in 2035 and Loy Yang A plant in Victoria's Latrobe Valley until 2048 unless customer demands accelerated to the point that they were prepared to pay the higher prices caused by removing coal from the grid sooner.

"If, universally, our customers said tomorrow 'we want nothing but green power and we're prepared to pay the price of that' then we would meet that customer demand," Mr Redman said.
"What our customers are telling us today is that they want to get to a low- or no-carbon future but they want to get to it in a way that balances cost."
Mr Redman said carbon-neutral offerings would be made available to all AGL electricity customers from Wednesday and to all gas and telecommunications plans by next year. Under the government-certified products, customers could choose to pay $1 a week and small businesses $4 a week to help offset their share of emissions through AGL investing in certified initiatives such as restoring forests or developing clean cookstove technology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gen Alpha
Replies
13
Views
713
moXJO
M
Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
469
Smurf1976
SS1 - Sun Silver
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
Sean K
PGTX - Platinum Global Transition Fund
Replies
1
Views
615
Dona Ferentes
ASK - Abacus Storage King
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
finicky
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...