The future of energy generation and storage

[Smurf1976]

Is there a similar list for the construction and start of service dates for their replacements ?

Answering that gets difficult in terms of the detail....

There's an abundance of interest in developing wind and solar farms, indeed there's more announcements than there are needed projects so the answer in that context is a definite "yes".

Some of those will inevitably come to nothing but overall there doesn't seem to be any major problem with getting wind and solar built so no real cause for alarm there.

To make wind and solar work as an actual alternative to fossil fuel plant however requires more than just building wind and solar farms. It requires that we also build transmission lines to connect them and to move the power to where it's required and that we build storage (batteries / hydro) or backup generation. Just building the wind and solar farms isn't all that's required.

Now for the pain.....

There's been plenty of public announcements of proposals to build storage or alternatively backup (eg gas) generation but to be blunt, not many have actually got to the point of being committed projects.

Meanwhile pretty much every major transmission project is stuck somewhere in the regulatory approvals process, even those with political support. SA - NSW, Vic - NSW upgrade, Vic - Tas second cable. Are all in the same situation as are other projects within states. Lots of promises, lots of engineers screaming that it's getting desperately urgent, still no go in terms of getting regulatory approval and without that nothing's being built.

That reality, the two paragraphs above, is what's causing all the alarm among engineers and at least the occasional politician who "gets it".

The AGL Newcastle one is a case in point. Big company that is already in the industry so should know what's involved and they already own the land and have gas infrastructure close by. Sounded like a sure thing but, it seems, perhaps not.....

Origin Shoalhaven expansion was another one that comes to mind with lots of investigation and a seemingly easy project but ultimately it's a no go.

That's just two examples but there's many, many more. Lots of pumped hydro proposals in SA and many thought the question was which one will be built first? In reality the question has ended up being whether any of them will be built at all.

Hence the concern. The building of transmission and storage (or backup generation) isn't proceeding anywhere near as quickly as it needs to and time's running short.

So what's actually a goer then?

Based on AEMO's official data, the following are "committed" and I'll add that they also happen to be physically under construction so they're pretty certain:

SA - Upgrade of existing Quarantine power station (gas), adds 20 MW of which 5 MW already completed and rest by end of 2023. Note that this does not change the closure date, it's just an improvement to the existing plant.

NSW - Upgrade of existing Bayswater power station (coal), adds 100 MW of which 25 MW already completed and rest by end of 2023. Note that this does not change the closure date, it's just improving the existing plant.

NSW - "Snowy 2.0" pumped hydro project. Capacity is nominally 2040 MW with 349,980 MWh of storage with completion stated as late 2024 - early 2025.

Victoria - "Victorian Big Battery" (that's the correct official name of it not just a colloquial one). Capacity is 300 MW power with 450 MWh of storage, so that's a 90 minute discharge time for peak load use. Completion is due before the end of 2021.

Victoria - "Bulgana Green Power Hub Battery Energy Storage System". Capacity is 20 MW with 34 MWh of storage and completion before the end of 2021.

That's it for things actually under construction.

Queensland - Kidston pumped hydro 250 MW / 2000 MWh. All the paperwork seems to finally be sorted, there should be no barrier to building it and they're about to start construction which is expected to take about 4 years to complete so that would be completion in 2025.

NSW - Australian Government has made a very high profile political commitment that a 750 MW gas (open cycle) plant will be built at Kurri Kurri. Completion is targeted before the end of 2023. Note that the site already has a sub-station and transmission line and is cleared flat land so it's as easy as it gets.

NSW - Energy Australia has made a recent high profile commitment to build a 300 MW gas (open cycle) plant alongside the existing Tallawarra power station (combined cycle) on land already owned by EA. Given the politics of it, it would be unlikely to not proceed although legally they probably could back out if they really wanted to. Completion stated as by the end of 2023.

Victoria - Upgrade to unit 2 at existing Loy Yang A power station (coal) is planned during a major outage 2025. It's not an officially "committed" project, by anyone, at this stage however. Capacity increase is 15 MW.

Tasmania - Hydro Tasmania has proposed building several pumped storage schemes and 2 x 750 MW transmission cables to Victoria with completion of the first in 2028 and the second in 2032 or thereabouts. The project stacks up economically for reasons best explained by noting the CSIRO's generation cost estimates which put pumped storage in Tasmania at just under half the cost of building the same capacity in another state. That saving covers the cost of transmission and makes it a goer financially. The problem, however, is that transmission networks are regulated and as per my comment above that process is going ever so slowly much to the frustration of many. End result is that nothing is actually being physically built at this stage despite the extensive planning and having the stated support of the Liberal and Labor parties both state and federal.

Victoria - Energy Australia has publicly "committed" to building a 350 MW / 1400 MWh battery at Jeeralang (an existing power station owned by EA) or a nearby location for operation before the end of 2026. This is however ultimately just an announcement much the same as all the others. How certain it is in the absence of development approvals, contracts etc is anyone's guess (though personally I do think this one is serious).

NSW - Greenspot is proposing to build the "Wallerawang 9 Battery" which will be a 500 MW / 1000 MW battery with completion aimed for 2023. They've gone as far as buying land from Energy Australia, which has a major substation and transmission connection on it, and engaging a demolition contractor to remove existing redundant structures at the site. They have not however signed a contract to build the battery so far as I'm aware in which case it's not "committed" in the formal sense although they would seem to be serious given they've bought land etc.

SA - SA Water proposes to build storage with a total of 15 MW and 30 MWh spread across 4 existing sites owned by SA Water. Note that these are all battery projects, not hydro, despite their location alongside water infrastructure. This project is officially classified as "emerging" and is not committed as such but has gone beyond just an announcement.

Beyond that, we're into the domain of what AEMO calls "publicly announced" and it means nothing more than that. Someone says they're going to put batteries in or build a pumped hydro scheme or whatever but that's all, it's a media release from someone. Some will end up being goers, many won't.

Summary:

Under construction = 2475 MW
Quarantine power station upgrade (gas, SA, 20 MW, 2023)
Bayswater power station upgrade (coal, NSW, 100 MW, 2023)
Snowy 2.0 pumped hydro (NSW, 2040 MW / 349,980 MWh, 2024-25)
Victorian Big Battery (Vic, 300 MW / 450 MWh, 2021)
Bulgana Green Power Hub battery (Vic, 20 MW / 34 MWh, 2021)

About to start construction = 250 MW (Kidston pumped hydro, Qld, 250 MW / 2000 MWh, 2025)

Political commitments = 1800 MW
Kurri Kurri open cycle gas turbines (NSW, 750 MW, 2023)
Tallawarra B open cycle gas turbines (NSW, 300 MW, 2023)
Tasmanian pumped hydro and Marinus Link to Victoria (Tas - Vic, 750 MW, 2028 with second 750 MW in the 2030's)

Energy Australia company public commitment = 350 MW
Jeeralang battery (Vic, 350 MW / 1400 MW, 2026)

Non-committed upgrade at existing facility = 15 MW
Loy Yang A (coal, Vic, 15 MW, 2025)

Others = 764.6 MW
Wallerawang battery (NSW, 500 MW / 1000 MWh, 2023). Looks like it's a goer but so far as I'm aware not every box has been ticked thus far. Looks promising however.

AGL Newcastle (NSW, gas, 252 MW). Anyone's guess if it'll actually happen or not.

Batteries at various sites in SA (15 MW / 30 MWh).

Beyond that = it's just media releases and announcements. Some will end up as serious projects, many won't.

So in short, some things are happening but we need to go a lot faster. Get transmission built where it's needed and get storage projects moved from merely being announced and in most cases going nowhere though to actually being built.

 

[Smurf1976]

That is exactly what has to happen, the transmission lines are already there, the switchyard is already there, it makes perfect sense to put a massive amount of storage there.
It might not be ideal as a renewable solar or wind site, but it may be a perfect site for storage, as all the HV infrastructure is already there.

I'd already written most of my previous post including this one so haven't edited it.

Looks like a goer but I haven't seen anything to say it officially has every box ticked.

As for the site, there's an abundance of capacity best explained by noting the former coal-fired plant:

A station = 120 MW (4 x 30 MW) in service 1957

B station = 120 MW (2 x 60 MW) in service 1961

C station = 1000 MW (2 x 500 MW) in service first unit 1976 and second 1980

All three were in operation during the 1980's after which only C station remained through to closure.

Here's an old photo of the site with C station in operation: https://secureservercdn.net/198.71....S-0102-Wallerawang-power-station-1-scaled.jpg

The shortest two stacks relate to A station and the medium height one to B station. Top right in the background is Mt Piper PS still in operation.

Here's a much older photo with A & B in operation and C not built yet so would be 1960's. Fumes were quite bad it seems...... https://farm66.static.flickr.com/65535/48022872091_2cdd551224.jpg

The cooling tower that's to remain is the parabolic one whilst the stack that's to remain is one of the short ones from A station (noting that the rest of A and B stations are already demolished). Also the coal dome, a covered coal storage, is to remain.

 

[sptrawler]

It looks as though the Feds actually don't have an option, other than build something, if no one else is stepping up. Strange that this is in the SMH, they normally are decrying the call for more at call generation, I guess the penny might be starting to drop in even the most unlikely places. ?
I would also like to hear Victoria's plan, they have committed to 50% renewables by 2030 a comprehensive plan would be good IMO.
The article underlines what @Smurf1976 said, about the difference between proposed and committed projects.
My guess is that the bringing forward of coal closures, will become an avalanche, as they become less and less viable.

Yallourn exit ratchets up risk of future blackouts in Victoria, SA

The early closure of the Yallourn coal-fired power plant has forced authorities to declare a heightened threat of blackouts in Victoria and South Australia in less than 10 years.

www.theage.com.au

From the article:
The federal energy market operator has declared a heightened risk of blackouts in Victoria and South Australia later this decade unless new, on-demand facilities are built to replace the Yallourn coal-fired power plant.

Following EnergyAustralia’s decision in March to bring forward the shutdown of Yallourn in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley to 2028, four years sooner than initially scheduled, updated modelling from the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) points to potential electricity supply shortfalls emerging between 2028 and 2030.
The fresh supply-and-demand modelling weighed the implications of Yallourn’s exit against new power projects set to be connected to the grid, including French renewable energy developer Neon’s 300-megawatt, 450-megawatt-hour Victorian Big Battery project near Geelong. The AEMO modelling warns there will be a breach of the market’s minimum reliability standards in the absence of a “further commitment of dispatchable capacity”.
The Morrison government has repeatedly expressed concerns about the impact of coal-fired power plants closing early without enough “dispatchable” projects – assets capable of quickly cranking up and down, such as gas or batteries – to supply the grid at times when weather conditions for wind and solar farms are unfavourable.
The government insists an extra 1000 megawatts of such capacity is required to fill the gap created by the closure of AGL’s Liddell coal-fired power plant in 2023, and has called on private power generators, as essential service providers, to step in with new investments before Yallourn shuts in 2028.

“It is imperative that the private sector step up to invest in new dispatchable capacity to replace Yallourn,” Mr Taylor said on Monday. “This is what is needed to keep the lights on and prices low.”
The market operator noted the long notice period until Yallourn’s 2028 closure provided “ample opportunity” for the market to prepare for a smooth transition without loss of reliability or excessive price impacts on consumers.
Alex Wonhas, AEMO’s chief system design officer, said the supply outlook would be improved by a number of projects, including EnergyAustralia’s 350-megawatt battery in Victoria and its 300-megawatt Tallawarra B gas plant in the Illawarra, which did not yet qualify as “committed” projects under the agency’s criteria, but were considered “very likely to proceed”.

“These new generation sources will help transition our electricity market as two out of three of today’s coal-fired generators are due to retire by 2040,” Dr Wonhas said.

The government agency’s new forecasts come at a time of significant upheaval for the energy market, as the transition away from fossil fuels towards cleaner sources of energy gathers pace.

Although coal still accounts for the majority of the country’s energy supply, an influx of renewable energy into the country’s main power grid in recent years is placing enormous pressure on coal generators by driving down daytime electricity prices to levels where they are unable to compete, threatening early closures.

Victorian Energy Minister Lily D’Ambrosio has repeatedly said she was confident the state had sufficient power to meet demand, and believed an influx of renewable energy into the grid by 2028 would keep prices down.

 

[Smurf1976]

The article underlines what @Smurf1976 said, about the difference between proposed and committed projects.

Indeed:

which did not yet qualify as “committed” projects under the agency’s criteria, but were considered “very likely to proceed”

Is a huge issue in all of this. Lots of things proposed and media releases put out but most have gone nowhere.

It's a pretty long list of projects and an issue there is that anyone who just reads the news and sees all this would be wondering what all the fuss is about. Given they recall so many announcements there's going to be a power station on every second street it would seem but in practice no, the overwhelming majority of those announcements went nowhere.

Credit where it's due however - Origin Energy did put out a proper announcement to say they weren't proceeding with Shoalhaven, at least not for the foreseeable future, so at least everyone else could cross it off the list unless they revive it at a future time.

There's also the other issue. If you're going to have gas-fired power stations well then you need gas to run them with. Well, you need gas unless someone's got deep enough pockets to fork out for rather a lot of kerosene or diesel.

 

[sptrawler]

There's also the other issue. If you're going to have gas-fired power stations well then you need gas to run them with. Well, you need gas unless someone's got deep enough pockets to fork out for rather a lot of kerosene or diesel.

There seems to be some indicators that China may be thinking about embargoes on our LNG, that will free up a bit for the domestic market.

 

[Smurf1976]

There seems to be some indicators that China may be thinking about embargoes on our LNG, that will free up a bit for the domestic market.

Interesting - I hadn't heard that one.

What I certainly have observed though is that natural gas prices have become extremely volatile.

Looking at the spot market in Victoria:

24 hours ago = $5.01 / GJ
Now = $6.00
Forecast 12 May = $7.39

So it's all over the place whereas historically the day to day movement would be a few cents either way at most.

 

[sptrawler]

Interesting - I hadn't heard that one.

There is this article in the Australian, I can't get access.

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

But we have had some issue with China in the past with the LNG situation, might be just speculation, who knows.

Sour China-Australia ties hit talks over LNG deal, says Woodside

Australia's Woodside Petroleum shelved talks to sell stakes in a gas field and liquefied natural gas (LNG) project to Chinese firms because of the diplomatic row between Australia and China, the company's chief executive said on Thursday.

www.reuters.com

Blow for Santos as China’s ENN exits

Santos said today that its largest shareholder had sold about one third of its stake worth A$785 million ($603.7 million) in the Australian gas producer.

www.energyvoice.com

 

[SirRumpole]

There is this article in the Australian, I can't get access.

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

But we have had some issue with China in the past with the LNG situation, might be just speculation, who knows.

Sour China-Australia ties hit talks over LNG deal, says Woodside

Australia's Woodside Petroleum shelved talks to sell stakes in a gas field and liquefied natural gas (LNG) project to Chinese firms because of the diplomatic row between Australia and China, the company's chief executive said on Thursday.

www.reuters.com

Blow for Santos as China’s ENN exits

Santos said today that its largest shareholder had sold about one third of its stake worth A$785 million ($603.7 million) in the Australian gas producer.

www.energyvoice.com

Why is it a "blow" for Santos ?

The shares have to be owned by someone, does it matter if they are not Chinese ?

 

[sptrawler]

Why is it a "blow" for Santos ?

The shares have to be owned by someone, does it matter if they are not Chinese ?

Knowing Australia, the reporter was probably meaning the chance of a full buyout has diminished, you know how we love to sell everything off.

 

[Smurf1976]

A single chart which illustrates the overall issues with the transition to renewable energy pretty well:

Yellow = solar
Green = wind
Blue = hydro
Light Blue = batteries (there's a tiny bit there if you look closely around the peak)
Orange = gas
Black = coal
Purple = import from other states
Below the zero line = export to other states

Red line at the bottom shows the spot price.

So the wind and sun both died out leading up to the peak just after 6pm, a situation that's unfortunately not uncommon.

My point being not against wind and solar but rather, saying that more storage is the missing piece of the puzzle here. Fill it up when there's plenty, draw on it when there's not. That's what we really need more of and we need it before more coal or other conventional plant is closed.

I've made the point previously but just thought this chart illustrates it very clearly. Wind and solar both work, just not constantly so storage is what's going to be needed but often overlooked.

 

[SirRumpole]

A single chart which illustrates the overall issues with the transition to renewable energy pretty well:

View attachment 124181

Yellow = solar
Green = wind
Blue = hydro
Light Blue = batteries (there's a tiny bit there if you look closely around the peak)
Orange = gas
Black = coal
Purple = import from other states
Below the zero line = export to other states

Red line at the bottom shows the spot price.

So the wind and sun both died out leading up to the peak just after 6pm, a situation that's unfortunately not uncommon.

My point being not against wind and solar but rather, saying that more storage is the missing piece of the puzzle here. Fill it up when there's plenty, draw on it when there's not. That's what we really need more of and we need it before more coal or other conventional plant is closed.

I've made the point previously but just thought this chart illustrates it very clearly. Wind and solar both work, just not constantly so storage is what's going to be needed but often overlooked.

Apart from Snowy Hydro 2.0 there seems little actual investment in pumped hydro schemes.

Is his correct ?

Considering how long they take to build whoever is going to build them better get on with it pretty quickly, and someone needs to do something to plug the gap untill the hydros are operational.

 

[rederob]

A single chart which illustrates the overall issues with the transition to renewable energy pretty well:

View attachment 124181

Yellow = solar
Green = wind
Blue = hydro
Light Blue = batteries (there's a tiny bit there if you look closely around the peak)
Orange = gas
Black = coal
Purple = import from other states
Below the zero line = export to other states

Red line at the bottom shows the spot price.

So the wind and sun both died out leading up to the peak just after 6pm, a situation that's unfortunately not uncommon.

My point being not against wind and solar but rather, saying that more storage is the missing piece of the puzzle here. Fill it up when there's plenty, draw on it when there's not. That's what we really need more of and we need it before more coal or other conventional plant is closed.

I've made the point previously but just thought this chart illustrates it very clearly. Wind and solar both work, just not constantly so storage is what's going to be needed but often overlooked.

So here's the thing:
It appears wind and solar are profitable with prices a bit over $50/MWh, but coal needs average prices over $150/MWh.
There is no commercial imperative for wind or solar to build more capacity by adding battery (water/chemical/mechanical) storage.
Snowy 2.0 is the complete opposite. It's funded by we taxpayers and is contracting wind (mostly) energy suppliers to refill the dam.
Policy wise wind/solar projects could be required to build significant excess capacity and add batteries which are "recharged" during curtailment so that average cost for renewables would be around $100/MWh. That would bring down power costs and not burden taxpayers, while also stimulating the renewable economy.

 

[Smurf1976]

Apart from Snowy Hydro 2.0 there seems little actual investment in pumped hydro schemes.

Is his correct ?

Snowy are building 2040 MW in NSW.

Genex look to to be a goer with 250 MW in Queensland.

Hydro Tasmania don't have it signed off but almost certainly will build a number of projects in Tasmania for supply to / from Victoria. Aiming for 750 MW by 2028, another 750 MW in the early 2030's then could go further if required.

Beyond that, there's been a lot of proposals but not a lot of action and what it really comes down to is what I'll describe as the only real debate in the industry:

What is the end game? What's the goal here? Are we going to 100% renewables or not?

Wind + solar + batteries + gas will get us to 60 - 80% renewable depending on the detail of how it's done pretty easily and is the private sector's "default" option. Not necessarily the outright cheapest but it's the best fit from a business perspective.

If we want a higher % of renewables, or even 100%, however well then pumped hydro simply has to be in the mix in the context of things we can commit to building today. Hydrogen perhaps at a future time we'll see gas turbines running on it but not yet, that's not at a point where a board can sign off on it today but, and here's the trouble, time's running out to sign off on something given the lead times for construction.

It would be far easier for engineers, senior management of the companies and so on if society could make its' mind up on that one. Doing so would then enable everyone to stop wasting time on things that don't fit with whichever way it's going to go noting that politics, not economics or engineering, is calling the shots there in practice.

 

[Smurf1976]

A few interesting points in the Kurri Kurri power station (the 750 MW gas turbine plant proposed by Snowy Hydro) EIS:

Plant thermal efficiency 37.4% on average. No surprises there, it's in line with what I'd expect.

They are seeking approval to operate at an annual capacity factor of 10% on natural gas and 2% on diesel, so 12% total.

Huge surprise that one, it's pretty much unheard of that someone seeks to restrict operation of their own plant as a condition of approval without first trying to get it approved without restrictions. Very unusual that.

Noted that it may be diesel only for the first 6 months until the gas pipeline is built.

A really interesting one states that "the production of aluminium became unviable due to the increasing privatisation of the local electricity market....." which I thought was an interesting comment to say the least, all things considered. I wonder if that reflects government thinking or just Snowy's?

As background to the above, the power station site is a former (now demolished) aluminium smelter site.

 

[sptrawler]

I wonder if those who are against the building of the Feds gas station, would be prepared to underwrite any financial loses incurred for disruption of supply, if it isn't built?
Now if they were prepared to do that, I would say don't build it, let's wing it.
So many people, with so much to say and sod all responsibility, if everyone is left in darkness.

Hunter Valley gas plant ‘would only operate a week a year’

The much-touted Kurri Kurri gas-fired power station that the Morrison government is urging to get built would operate at just two per cent of the time and employ only 10 full-time workers.

www.smh.com.au

 

[sptrawler]

An interesting article, regarding bitcoin and energy usage.

176,000,000,000,000,000,000 per second: The reason Elon Musk is moving away from Bitcoin

Elon Musk says Bitcoin is bad for the environment, and some very big numbers are behind it.

www.abc.net.au

From the article:

If Bitcoin is virtual, why are there environmental concerns?​

The issue is that all these computer farms working overtime to mine bitcoin use up a lot of real-world energy.

The grunt work of adding to the block chain has computers run guessing games involving an astronomically large number of guesses each second.

To be more precise, the network is currently estimated as being able to handle 176,000,000,000,000,000,000 (that's 176 quintillion) computations every single second.

All those numbers are energy intensive, so the power consumption of the Bitcoin network is huge.

According to the University of Cambridge's Centre for Alternative Finance, the estimated annualised consumption of electricity by the Bitcoin network is 149.6 terawatt hours and growing.

That's more than countries like Sweden, Pakistan and Malaysia, and about 61 per cent of Australia's total energy consumption.
A report from the centre noted that miners "have long competed on accessing the cheapest energy source".

Many of those sources are fossil fuels.

According to German research published in the academic paper Joule in 2019, Bitcoin was responsible for up to 51 megatons of CO2 emissions annually.

 

[Smurf1976]

So many people, with so much to say and sod all responsibility, if everyone is left in darkness.

I've never met anyone who can't grasp the basics of all this if they want to.

Trouble is, some do prefer ignorance......

 

[sptrawler]

I've never met anyone who can't grasp the basics of all this if they want to.

Trouble is, some do prefer ignorance......

The problem is smurf, you are thinking that most people look at things holistically and logically.
As you get older, you realise most people just look at things as they want to see them, then they make the rhetoric fit with their reality.
As I said early on in the climate change thread, how many of the most vocal have actually done anything to mitigate their carbon footprint, especially if it was going to cost them money?
I bet the most vocal still run an ICE vehicle, don't have a home battery, but may have solar panels if they were subsidised.
So many make judgements, without any thought to their own hypocrisy.


I will put this as a PS
But at the moment they have center stage, that is until everything turns to $hit, then they are conspicuous by their absence.
That is the way at the moment in Australia, we are riding a wave of political correctness, of climate change affirmative action and when that wave crashes it wont be good.
The media wont pay to clean up the mess.
Just my opinion.

 

[Smurf1976]

The problem is smurf, you are thinking that most people look at things holistically and logically.
As you get older, you realise most people just look at things as they want to see them, then they make the rhetoric fit with their reality.

I do realise that what you are saying is true.

It will never cease to frustrate the **** out of me that this is the case however.

For the record, I do have a home battery, do have solar and so on. My comments about the practical realities of home batteries are thus from experience indeed gaining that was half the reason why I got one.

Car's petrol yes but I'm probably the only person who's ever tinkered with a 4 cylinder N/A engine with a view to making it more economical. Nothing drastic, I just tuned it to the Euro specs rather than the Australian specs. Uses less fuel and emits less CO2 now at the expense of needing RON 95 petrol in it.

 

[sptrawler]

I do realise that what you are saying is true.

It will never cease to frustrate the **** out of me that this is the case however.

For the record, I do have a home battery, do have solar and so on. My comments about the practical realities of home batteries are thus from experience indeed gaining that was half the reason why I got one.

Car's petrol yes but I'm probably the only person who's ever tinkered with a 4 cylinder N/A engine with a view to making it more economical. Nothing drastic, I just tuned it to the Euro specs rather than the Australian specs. Uses less fuel and emits less CO2 now at the expense of needing RON 95 petrol in it.

I know you meant N/A as naturally aspirated, but i have rebuilt a couple of NA Mazda 1600 motors in Capellas, great motors. A lot of people removed the 12a rotaries and put in NA 1600's now they wish they had left them original.