Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The future of energy generation and storage

Jump to new
mullokintyre said:
From The OZ

Not surprisingly, the Tas govt won't end up with much as they rank behind the lending banks in the list of creditors.
Also highlights the risks of having a large supply dependant on one link.
Mick
Click to expand...
Sounds like a great opportunity for the Government State or Federal to step in and nationalise it, unless it is in such a state of disrepair, it isn't worth owning?
There is a second cable being installed, it may be a competition based decision, or a viability based decision.
 
mullokintyre said:
From The OZ

Not surprisingly, the Tas govt won't end up with much as they rank behind the lending banks in the list of creditors.
Also highlights the risks of having a large supply dependant on one link.
Mick
Click to expand...

I'll avoid comment on the legal aspects, but hypothetically if the cable was to cease operating on 1 December this year and remain out of service for the next 6 months (noting that's a hypothetical not a prediction) then realistically the technical risk is primarily on the northern end.

That is, failure to operate it (or failure of the cable as such) poses a far greater supply risk to Victoria in the short term than it does to Tasmania.

Tasmania's inflows from hydro + wind generation are now, with recently completed new wind farms, balanced. Hydro storage is at 52.6%, the hydro system of itself can meet peak demand and there's a gas-fired station sitting there if needed.

Versus Victoria which lacks sufficient firm generation to meet peak demand even with Basslink in service and which has a coal mine, the only source of coal to Yallourn power station, in danger of flooding should a major rain event occur prior to permanent repairs being completed.

Any supply shortfall in Victoria has a reasonable chance of spreading to SA under peak demand conditions (eg simultaneous heatwave in both states) although "it depends on the detail" so it's not a given. Temperature, wind speed, etc.

The technical risk, that of the lights going out, is far greater in Victoria over the short term than it is in Tasmania.

Financially though that's harder to work out. Victoria isn't exposed really at a government level but in terms of business, well loss of Basslink would lead to some increased curtailment of wind and solar at times and some more use of gas both of which do represent a loss but then Tasmania loses more directly. The answer is an "it depends" one really. Depends on the weather among other things. :2twocents
 
Last edited:
SirRumpole said:
What we should be doing more of imo, biofuels.

www.abc.net.au

In the heart of coal country, this city is already 30 per cent powered by renewables

For all the political posturing over the local resources sector, almost a third of Mackay's electricity comes from renewables — such as sugar cane.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
Click to expand...
Yes whether as a solid fuel, or changed into a liquid, there probably will be opportunities especially in GT's, I'm not sure it will get much of a run with steam plant.
It was given a trial at Muja A/B a few years ago, I didn't hear the outcome, but I will ask around.

All technologies really will need to be investigated thoroughly, I mean who would have thought 30 years ago when all the computer data was stored on reel to reel tape, that now the same amount of info can be stored on a piece of plastic smaller than a matchbox. o_O
 
12:55pm on 21 November 2021 - an historic day so far as energy is concerned.

That's the point where the demand on centralised generation in SA went negative. So far as is known, it's the first such occurrence globally for any large scale power system.

12:55 = -8.95 MW
13:00 = -28.58 MW
13:05 = -38.15 MW
13:10 = -20.35 MW

Measurements are AEMO's and have been converted by me to SA Daylight Savings time (since AEMO records all data using Queensland time for all states).

Those are negative values yes, below zero, meaning that in practice the whole of SA, including the Adelaide CBD and industrial loads, were powered from small scale generation primarily solar panels on house roofs.

As background well it's a fine sunny day in Adelaide, the maximum temperature having reached 22.3 degrees. So lots of solar generation and basically no heating or cooling loads apart from niche uses in industry or medical facilities etc. Perfect conditions for low demand.

What happens to the excess?

Bearing in mind that there's still a need to keep a small amount of gas-fired plant on for technical reasons, and there are also large scale solar farms and wind farms generating, the answer is:

*Some of it went to Victoria

*Some was used to charge batteries in SA

*A significant volume of large scale wind and solar generation was shut off due to nowhere for it to go.

:2twocents
 
This IMO, is the key to getting mega scale renewables up and running, land access. The State Government opening up access to rural leasehold land and allowing diversity, is a huge step forward.

www.smh.com.au

‘Open, competitive process’ key to unlocking of millions of hectares of land in WA

The WA government has announced a plan to amend the Land Administration Act to more easily enable solar, carbon, and wind farms to be built.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au
From the article:
The WA government wants to amend the Land Administration Act to allow for a new type of access lease on pastoral and unallocated Crown land, which would more easily enable solar, carbon, and wind farms to be built.
Consultation on the proposed changes starts next month and comes after lobbying by WA billionaire Andrew Forrest and large companies, like Woodside, to open up land access for large-scale renewable projects and bio-sequestration – the capture of carbon through biological processes.
Under the changes, proponents would be able to apply to the state for a ‘diversification’ lease over unallocated Crown land but would still need an Indigenous Land Use Agreement if there was native title over the area.

Similarly, pastoralists could apply to undertake a more diverse range of activities outside of livestock on their leaseholds. Pastoralists would have to agree to surrender the area they were not running cattle, however, and negotiate an ILUA for any new diversification leases.
There would also be non-exclusive tenure options for conservation organisations and native titleholders wanting to undertake economic development activities like cultural tourism.
The move to open up land tenure came two days after the state government launched an environment, social and governance information pack to market the ‘green’ credentials of its debt securities program.
The government sells debt as bonds around the world but WA saw its reputation take a blow in recent years, alongside mining state Queensland, when Sweden’s central bank dumped its holdings in both jurisdictions over climate policy concerns.
Earlier this year, Hydrogen Industry Minister Alannah MacTiernan said many hydrogen projects would require significant amounts of land, but pastoral leases occupied most suitable sites.

She said on Thursday the new amendment would smooth the pathway for large-scale renewable energy projects around the state.
“While the state government is already facilitating access to land for renewable hydrogen projects, these changes will provide new long-term tenure options for proponents,” Ms MacTiernan said.
Companies ultimately owned by Dr Forrest earlier this year applied for several mining exploration and miscellaneous tenements in the Pilbara, Gascoyne, and Kimberley.
Fortescue’s Gascoyne tenements stretch hundreds of kilometres, from south of Carnarvon and up to Onslow and join up with miscellaneous mining licence applications on Uaroo Station, owned by the Forrest family, where the mining company flagged in December it could build a wind and solar hub.
The iron miner’s Uaroo tenements are connected to two long corridors of miscellaneous applications as potential electricity transmission lines linking the cattle station to Fortescue’s closest iron ore operation in the Pilbara, Eliwana.

Under the proposed amendments, mining and exploration activities would still be allowed to occur. However, Dr Forrest could lock out other resources interests by holding the tenements over potential wind and solar corridors.

ASX-listed Province Resources Limited, backed by French renewable energy giant Total Eren, is trying to start a green hydrogen project on the coast of Carnarvon and welcomed the government’s new proposal.

The company’s managing director David Frances said Province would continue to pursue access to land under its existing tenure regime – a drawn out process under existing legislation, but the new form of lease provided an additional option.

Energy and gas giant Woodside, which had sent letters to the Premier Mark McGowan calling for land access for carbon off-set projects, was another major company to praise the amendment.
“Woodside welcomes initiatives that have the potential to make land available for the responsible development of carbon farming opportunities,” a spokesperson said.
“Carbon farming has the ability to rehabilitate land and provide regional economic opportunities.”
Woodside has plans to build 210,000 solar panels over 200 hectares of land near the Pluto LNG Plant in the Pilbara to deliver 50 megawatts of power. A similar amount of electricity could also be supplied to Perdaman’s urea plant in a proposal between the two companies.

Conservation Council WA policy and legal director, Piers Verstegen, said the amendment was a positive step to allowing more flexibility for conservation management and renewable energy projects on pastoral leases.
“Currently, pastoral leases have to maintain a certain stocking rate and are not easily able to pursue other opportunities like renewable energy, carbon farming or conservation, even though they may be more sustainable and more profitable,” he said.
“As a result, large areas of land have been managed under a regime that has led to very poor environmental and economic outcomes.
“Removing these restrictions could see an increase in investment in conservation across the rangelands, which would create employment and support local communities.
“WA also has great potential for large-scale renewable energy projects, however potential conflicts between these projects and environment and conservation will have to be closely managed.”

Pastoralist Dave McQuie from Bulga Downs in the Mid West, who has taken part in carbon farming in recent years, welcomed the new diversification leases as opportunities for leaseholders.
“It has a lot of potential to do a lot of good for rehabilitation, diversification and profitability on pastoral leases,” he said.
“Land reform changes will legitimise carbon farming and other land uses on properties and will give small unviable leases the ability to earn different income sources.
“There is still some caution needed around regulation, but I’m keen to be a part of the conversation and learn more about what these changes will mean.”
Kimberley Pilbara Cattle Association chairman David Stoate said further details on the diversification leases and potential new powers for the Pastoral Lands Board under the changes needed to be examined further.
But he was pleased with other proposals as part of the broader amendment which included changes to the pastoral lease rent model and a more uniform approach to providing 50-year extensions to leases.
 
SirRumpole said:
I take it that there is no facility to turn on hot water systems at this time ?
Click to expand...
Funny you should say that..... :laugh:

Suffice to say I'm somewhat known as "that guy on about water heaters" on that subject. It seems like a dead obvious solution yes, and for the record SA Power Networks did start changing time settings, but then there's regulators, bureaucrats and all the rest so that's where it ends.

Qld and NSW both have remote control of electric water heating loads via ripple control (which is 1950's tech by the way and incredibly simple). Two channels are used with different signals, one for those who want it on once a day to heat, and the other is on almost all the time at a higher price for use with pool pumps, smaller water heaters and so on for which a shorter duration isn't suitable. For the record NZ also has the same system.

SA however no such luck. What we've got is nothing more than timers mounted at the switchboard and, apart from recently installed smart meters, any adjustment to them requires someone manually going to each and every house to do it.

Having crunched the numbers, well I and plenty of others are keen on that idea, it would indeed put to use some wind/solar that's being wasted and would mean less fossil fuel is burned (since otherwise they're heating water overnight when the sun definitely isn't shining). But bureaucracy and regulations.....

Bearing in mind that it wouldn't be a perfect solution given that about 57% of SA homes use gas to heat water and 8% are solar hot water which, despite usually being electric boosted, generally won't need to boost on a day when there's so much sun. That leaves 35% as purely electric, about 30% on off peak controlled load supply once those in small apartments etc on continuous supply are excluded. Still enough to be worthwhile.

Mine at home is indeed programmed to operate during the middle of the day however but only after jumping through some hoops to get it to happen. So my heat pump water heater was happily putting about 900 Watts to use - a drop in the ocean but still, it's one of those things where if everyone did it.....

Ultimately I'll probably get done but it's caught up in the general rules, regulations, red tape and so on.
 
@Smurf1976 it would be really easy to install a wifi inline switch, I installed one to switch on an alarm system it has programmable timers, can be switched on and off from an app on the phone, timer schedules can be changed, different schedules for each day etc, it really is a great bit of gear.
$25.15 :xyxthumbs

www.bunnings.com.au

Deta Grid Connect Smart Inline Switch

Find Deta Grid Connect Smart Inline Switch at Bunnings. Visit your local store for the widest range of products.
www.bunnings.com.au www.bunnings.com.au
 
The penny is dropping.
reneweconomy.com.au

World needs up to 140TWh of long duration energy storage to meet net-zero goals

New report says energy storage of eight hours and more will be crucial to shift to renewables, and we’ll need a lot of it between now and 2040.
reneweconomy.com.au reneweconomy.com.au
From the article:
Between 85 and 140 terrawatt-hours of long-duration energy storage technologies such as pumped hydro, flow batteries and concentrating solar thermal will need to be deployed globally to achieve net-zero emissions power grids by 2040, a new report has found.

While lithium-ion battery storage technologies ranging from behind the meter applications to grid-sale big batteries are becoming a regular feature on electricity grids around the globe, the need to store renewable energy for eight hours or more (LDES) is largely still unmet.

The Long Duration Energy Storage Council, an organisation launched at the COP26 by member companies ranging from Siemens, Rio Tinto and BP down to Australia’s own Redflow, seeks to bridge this gap with its inaugural report, published on Tuesday in collaboration with McKinsey &Co.

The modelling finds that achieving net-zero power grids by 2040 would require a global deployment of 1.5-2.5 TW and 85-140 TWh of LDES, would account for 10% of electricity consumed worldwide, and need an estimated investment of $US1.5 trillion to $SU3 trillion.

In Australia, as you can see in the chart below, the report puts the total addressable market for LDES from 2030 to 2040 at between 20-40GW and 0.5-1 TWh.

Screenshot 2021-11-23 182440.png
 
SirRumpole said:
What we should be doing more of imo, biofuels.

www.abc.net.au

In the heart of coal country, this city is already 30 per cent powered by renewables

For all the political posturing over the local resources sector, almost a third of Mackay's electricity comes from renewables — such as sugar cane.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
Click to expand...
like all things renewables, just endless bogus claims noting to actuarially back it up.

wouldn't the burning of the bio fuel be bad for the environment seeing its pumping gasses in to the air? isn't this the argument for the case of no nuclear power
 
Investoradam said:
like all things renewables, just endless bogus claims noting to actuarially back it up.

wouldn't the burning of the bio fuel be bad for the environment seeing its pumping gasses in to the air? isn't this the argument for the case of no nuclear power
Click to expand...
Ah Adam, you have to remember that not all Co2 molecules are equal.
CO2 produced from burning coal is ten times more deadly than the Co2 molecules produced by burning biomass (its renewable you see).
And like the CO2 thats produced when coal is burnt in Australia is ten times more deadly than the equivalent Co2 when coal is burnt in China. Especially if that coal is imported by China from Australia, its Australias Co2 problem , not Chinas.
Mick
 
Investoradam said:
like all things renewables, just endless bogus claims noting to actuarially back it up.

wouldn't the burning of the bio fuel be bad for the environment seeing its pumping gasses in to the air? isn't this the argument for the case of no nuclear power
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

link.springer.com

The Effect of Biofuel Production on Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions

Fossil fuel consumption is a major cause of climate change. Biofuels can reduce the consumption of fossil fuels and thus reduce carbon dioxide emissions, because biofuels are carbon neutral. More specifically, the carbon dioxide that is emitted when a biofuel is...
link.springer.com link.springer.com
 
mullokintyre said:
Ah Adam, you have to remember that not all Co2 molecules are equal.
CO2 produced from burning coal is ten times more deadly than the Co2 molecules produced by burning biomass (its renewable you see).
And like the CO2 thats produced when coal is burnt in Australia is ten times more deadly than the equivalent Co2 when coal is burnt in China. Especially if that coal is imported by China from Australia, its Australias Co2 problem , not Chinas.
Mick
Click to expand...
lol according to what!
the only truth to any of that claim is thecnology of the coal power station, most of Australians ones are 40 to 60 years old compared to chinas a few decades to a few months old
the ones china are building are similar to the ones Japan are building of the new CCT burn

again there is nothing in the ABC article like with most anything climate related propaganda, just claims with fancy pictures
 
The carbon cycle.

Grow any sort of vegetation and it takes CO2 out of the air, stores the C and releases the O2.

Burn that vegetation completely (that is, complete combustion) and it takes O2 out of the air, combines it with the C, and puts CO2 into the air.

So long as the volume grown and burned matches, and excluding things like fuel used to transport it, then it's a balanced cycle.

Versus coal, oil or gas which involve taking carbon stored deep underground, combining it with O2 and releasing that to atmosphere as CO2. It's a one-way trip, there's nothing to balance it.

The problems with biomass however are many:

1. Scale. We could take all the food eaten by humans in Australia, turn that into liquid fuel, and we'd have enough to run all the cars in South Australia which has 7% of the national population. Noting that's all the cars, it's not trucks, it's not aircraft, ships, boilers, furnaces, power generation or anything else. Just cars and just in SA and we'd have nothing left to eat.

2. Agriculture itself is a huge environmental problem with land degradation and so on.

3. Agriculture is also a major energy user and there's a "gotcha!". Between fertilizers, chemicals and fuel to run machinery it's going to use up much of what's produced. Estimates vary so I won't quote figures but it's akin to spending $3 to make $4, the self-consumption is pretty substantial if we're talking about conventional farming methods.

That said, for niche uses growing fuel crops may well make sense and of course if the material used is waste well then the inputs to growing it are being used regardless of what's done with it so it's effectively "free" in that sense.

There's also other practical aspects to biofuels. For example ethanol is an oxygenate and high octane blending component. Done properly, which does not mean simply adding ethanol to petrol that was already suitable for use without it, it's possible to achieve substantial reductions in conventional (non-CO2) pollutants such as CO and unburned hydrocarbons.

Smurf being Smurf, well I've got a hedge trimmer that runs on fuel containing some alcohol. Can be done with proper precautions. :2twocents
 
As much as I respect your knowledge on Electricity generation and storage, i think you have glossed over a few bits.
Firstly, burning the vegetation completely is carbon nuetral, though difficult to actually do as there will be some plant products where the chemical makeup will produce carbon based ash, but at least its not Co2 in the atmosphere.
These will require some processing in planting, harvesting and maybe drying, all of which require energy.
Then there are the oil production plants like canola, palm oil, coconut oil, peanut , olive oil etc.
Besides the planting, harvesting, maybe fumigating and pruning, these products need to be treated by crushing, soaking, splitting etc to release the oil.
This product can then often be used in diesels without any further refining apart from being strained through a fine mesh filter.

The production of ethanol is generally done via fermenting the organic products in the presence of yeast.
Any organic material that contains sugars can be used.
The sucrose from sugar cane, the fructose from fruit, the lactose from dairy products are thee such sugars.
The fermenting process uses the sugar content of the organic material, but there is always a waste residue that does not ferment.
Sometimes, intermediate processes need to be completed to make the sugars available.
Brewers for example, "malt" barley by soaking it in water to cause it to germinate.
This causes the starches in the barley to convert into sugars, which can then be fermented.
The fermented brew makes esters and other types of alcohol, called cogeners, all with different boiling temperatures.
It is these boiling point differentials that allow the distiller to separate the ethanol from the other cogeners in the distilling process.
The higher the sugar content , the higher yield of alcohol.
So at the end of the fermentation process, there is usually a varying amount of organic matter that is either burnt, turned into fertilise- either by working it back into the soil or reprocessing into a spreadable mix.
Manildra, the Australin based ethanol producer uses Australian grown wheat to brew ethanol.
Wilmar Sugar in FNQ uses sugar cane as its fuel stock, producing mostly for the E10 fuel market.
Dalby Bio Refinery uses mostly sorghum, and it works with feedlots to produce high protein feed from the non fermented by products.
Dalby claim that Ethanol production produces 67% more energy than it consumes in production.
I could be wrong, but from the wording of their statement, I do not believe this figure includes the cost of preparing soil, planting, harvesting and transport of the grain to the site, so thast figure may be a bit of an exageration.
Mick
 

Similar threads

System
SS1 - Sun Silver
2
Replies
23
Views
4K
Sean K
Sean K
Dona Ferentes
PGTX - Platinum Global Transition Fund
Replies
1
Views
520
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
System
ASK - Abacus Storage King
Replies
15
Views
3K
finicky
finicky
System
D3E - D3 Energy
Replies
2
Views
1K
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
ducati916
August DDD
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
18K
ducati916
ducati916
Top