The future of energy generation and storage

sptrawler said:

It is funny that you go on and on about the last 10 years, then post up as proof a roadmap written in June 2017, which is 5 years ago.

I'll watch from afar and make no further comment on the issue, there you go.

Click to expand...

It's pretty clear what had to happen, and the Blueprint arose out of frustration from industry that nothing was going to! So the point is that from the time the rules changed, with Abbott in power, energy policy fell in a heap while market forces took over.
It's clear that there is no quick fix because we are dealing with almost a decade of inaction, not simply from 2017 onwards, although that was bad enough. And as I posted a good while back, so as to ensure that COAG no longer interfered with the energy framework, Taylor got rid of this powerful group and replaced it with yet another non-event he commanded.

By the way, where is your self resolving answer to these problems? Or do you really mean it will take policy decisions from government, just like the one where Labor got AEMO to intervene in possible load shedding events? Which, as a precedent, may set the tone for more government directives to give AEMO necessary powers over generators in particular.

rederob said:

By the way, where is your self resolving answer to these problems? Or do you really mean it will take policy decisions from government, just like the one where Labor got AEMO to intervene in possible load shedding events? Which, as a precedent, may set the tone for more government directives to give AEMO necessary powers over generators in particular.

Click to expand...

It is self resolving, they are resolving it as we speak, the AEMO intervened by halting the market. They will resolve the issue one way or another, so it is self resolving, it wont be left to fall in a heap.
You obviously have trouble with colloquialisms, when I say fall in a heap, I don't actually mean a pile of rubble in one location, you do understand that don't you.?
Anyway as I said I'm only interested in watching it from a technical perspective, you will no doubt continue on you political crusade, no matter what the outcome.
At least now it wont be the Federal Governments fault.

sptrawler said:

It is self resolving, they are resolving it as we speak, the AEMO intervened by halting the market. They will resolve the issue one way or another, so it is self resolving, it wont be left to fall in a heap.
You obviously have trouble with colloquialisms, when I say fall in a heap, I don't actually mean a pile of rubble in one location, you do understand that don't you.?
Anyway as I said I'm only interested in watching it from a technical perspective, you will no doubt continue on you political crusade, no matter what the outcome.
At least now it wont be the Federal Governments fault.

Click to expand...

Come on SP government policy is clearly the problem whether that policy is to let the market, private businesses decide out comes and or allow them to gain monopoly power (note markets blow up all the time eh) or fiddle at the edges or direct markets paying a premium for those directions (isn't that's what happing now?) or run the show themselves.

Power is a critical service its no secret that the Coalition couldn't get an energy policy up due to the ideological infighting not just about renewables / climate change but also how to run the system private verses public, throw in the states who also messed it up perfect storm for a cluster and here we are.

It required leadership, some one to hold the hose...

sptrawler said:

It is self resolving, they are resolving it as we speak, the AEMO intervened by halting the market. They will resolve the issue one way or another, so it is self resolving, it wont be left to fall in a heap.

Click to expand...

Anything requiring external intervention cannot be self resolving. If it was as you say, then the answer would be obvious, and it's not!

sptrawler said:

Anyway as I said I'm only interested in watching it from a technical perspective, you will no doubt continue on you political crusade, no matter what the outcome.

Click to expand...

I don't have a crusade. I said way back that storage was necessary with renewables, and that's clearly a "technical perspective" - aka common sense. As to "falling in a heap", isn't that where we are now?
We all watched this ship slowly crash onto rocks as the captain joyously mounted his lump of coal in his trophy room, all the time warning him about a need to "do something".
There are lots of possible solutions and it's just a matter of working out which one they want to go with. However, none will be quick and none will be cheap. For starters, our grid is not properly configured to our inevitable energy future. Nor is it capable of transferring enough energy to where it's needed, when its needed.
Also as I said earlier, the cost is now somewhat irrelevant to the public who are desperate for a fix - whatever it takes.

rederob said:

Anything requiring external intervention cannot be self resolving. If it was as you say, then the answer would be obvious, and it's not!

Click to expand...

Of course it is, it was all the last Governments fault because they didn't have a plan, the new Government has a plan, so as you say it will be resolved . I don't know what you're on.?
It is self resolving because the Labor party have a plan and they wont lift a finger, yet it will be resolved, it wont be left to fall on its ar$e, so we the general public don't need to get our knickers in a knot ( not literally, just for your info).
By the way have you informed Chris that we could save heaps by canning the Snowy2.0 project, by the way canning doesn't mean to put it inside a can (again just so you understand).

IFocus said:

Come on SP government policy is clearly the problem whether that policy is to let the market, private businesses decide out comes and or allow them to gain monopoly power (note markets blow up all the time eh) or fiddle at the edges or direct markets paying a premium for those directions (isn't that's what happing now?) or run the show themselves.

Power is a critical service its no secret that the Coalition couldn't get an energy policy up due to the ideological infighting not just about renewables / climate change but also how to run the system private verses public, throw in the states who also messed it up perfect storm for a cluster and here we are.

It required leadership, some one to hold the hose...

Click to expand...

Firstly you and I aren't in anyway affected by anything that is happening over East in the power system, until there is a time that the Government has to increase taxes to pay for something they have instigated, so extrapolating that out into what you have said above.

I agree with most of what you have written, there obviously was a huge internal issue with the Nationals, but I actually don't think that earlier Government intervention would have changed where we currently are.
Renewable technology has really only hit its straps in the last 5 years, prior to that it was all a cottage industry, wave generators, molten salt storage, roof top solar with high efficiency panels, are a relatively recent thing, so everything has muddled along quite well.
The HV transmission links between S.A and NSW were being upgraded a couple of years ago, Snowy 2.0 was kicked off and the second Tassie undersea cable is being laid.
So IMO having a loose guideline enabled private companies to install solar/wind farms at their own risk, there was a schedule of retirement dates for coal fired stations @Smurf1976 has posted it on numerous occasions, so there was a rush to put in these renewables which really no one new how it would work.
So they found that in areas of the network it was causing huge oscillations between solar farms and their inverters, that actually caused a lot of these projects to not be allowed to generate, if they had been instructed to build that to conform with a Government directive who is to say they couldn't have recourse.
It also highlighted a weakness in the Mildura area in the grid, which was identified and is being or has been strengthened, they had restrictions put on their output, that caused a lot of anger from the owners but they had no recourse, if it was built there with the Government approval and as per a Government requirement I'm sure they would.

Now we move on to where we currently are, the new Government has changed the goalposts, they are legislating an increase in carbon reduction up from 30% to 43% ( I think), that means the penetration of renewables and the stress applied to the coal fired stations changes a lot, they will be required to cycle more or be on less and be even less viable.
That is fine and it would come to this at some time, but the changing of the targets changes the dynamics for the fossil fueled generators and their business model, so instead of a situation where the last Govt was going to install firming capacity at Kurri Kurri and the gradual change over continues, we now have the push the big red button moment where the fossil fueled generators gradual slide into oblivion has been blown to bits.
More fossil fueled coal generators will be pushed off the bars, but unless the storage is installed to compliment the increase in renewables, all of them will be required back on overnight, so the cycling problem gets compounded.

There isn't a right or wrong in this, technology is changing 100 year old technology is being replaced, but it isn't a switch as in old/new. How it is handled will be directly correlated to what it costs the taxpayer IMO.
As Rob has said there are hundreds of ways of doing this, but we will end up at the same end point, what it costs the taxpayer in the transition is the only variable and the rich well they don't care what it costs just do it , the poor well who gives a $hit as usual.

One thing for sure as soon as the Government says, "I've got a plan, this is what we are going to do", you now this happens.


I may be completely wrong, these are only my thoughts and I've never thought I know the answers just my opinions.

sptrawler said:

Of course it is, it was all the last Governments fault because they didn't have a plan, the new Government has a plan, so as you say it will be resolved . I don't know what you're on.?
It is self resolving because the Labor party have a plan and they wont lift a finger, yet it will be resolved, it wont be left to fall on its ar$e, so we the general public don't need to get our knickers in a knot ( not literally, just for your info).
By the way have you informed Chris that we could save heaps by canning the Snowy2.0 project, by the way canning doesn't mean to put it inside a can (again just so you understand).

Click to expand...

Of course, your thinly veiled sarcasm is purely technical perspective, and you're not on a political crusade at all, oh no.

Eager said:

Of course, your thinly veiled sarcasm is purely technical perspective, and you're not on a political crusade at all, oh no.

Click to expand...

Actually I'm not, I voted McGowan State and Albo Federal, so I'm not on a political crusade. Just helping get people what they want.
But it is great to see you take an interest in a topic, that affects the masses, rather than the investors, kudos to you.
If there is one thing I can take credit for, is to drag you down from your ivory tower.?

sptrawler said:

I agree with most of what you have written, there obviously was a huge internal issue with the Nationals, but I actually don't think that earlier Government intervention would have changed where we currently are.

Click to expand...

You conveniently overlook the point on every occasion that industry was keen to invest in dispatchable supply in conjunction with renewables, but never got the answers they needed from government

sptrawler said:

Renewable technology has really only hit its straps in the last 5 years, prior to that it was all a cottage industry, wave generators, molten salt storage, roof top solar with high efficiency panels, are a relatively recent thing, so everything has muddled along quite well.

Click to expand...

Solar and wind have been around for decades and continue to advance in terms of technology, efficiency, and cost effectiveness, so irrespective of when you start, later offerings will perform better on these metrics. So let's look at your claim and see if it stacks up.
In 2020, renewable energy sources made up 37.5 % of gross electricity consumption in the EU. In 2020, 24% of Australia’s total electricity generation was from renewable energy sources.
Given our natural resource advantage, "cottage industry" or not, we should not be so far behind Europe.
How about comparing us with United Kingdom?
We see this: "UK power generation in 2020: Renewables up to 43%."
We are a pathetic laggard, and we know that what happened in Europe remains strongly driven by policies that support renewable investment across the board, unlike here.

sptrawler said:

Now we move on to where we currently are, the new Government has changed the goalposts, they are legislating an increase in carbon reduction up from 30% to 43% ( I think), that means the penetration of renewables and the stress applied to the coal fired stations changes a lot, they will be required to cycle more or be on less and be even less viable.

Click to expand...

First, the new government is not changing the energy goalposts as that change has been in place since the 1990's. What they will need to do is accelerate the ability of renewables to participate in the market by ensuring the grid is properly structured for intermittent energy generators and distributed energy resources. They also need to get the necessary transmission infrastructure in place, such as what allows energy transfers to occur across about 30 separate European nations, to occur in a handful of States in one country here.
At the same time they have to manage the transition process. That will involve immediately actioning the Energy Security Board's recommendations which the Coalition sat on and tried to push back to 2025! Key to transition are their principles of investment certainty and risk minimisation, which the Coalition refused to support when industry was seeking it.

rederob said:

We see this: "UK power generation in 2020: Renewables up to 43%."

Click to expand...

Does that include nuclear ?

SirRumpole said:

Does that include nuclear ?

Click to expand...

Not according to the attached chart in the link:

rederob said:

Not according to the attached chart in the link:
View attachment 143009

Click to expand...

Still quite an increase by nuclear.

Anyway, moving along, an article by the RBA, as to renewable energy.

From the article:

Drivers of Investment​

A number of factors have driven investment in large-scale renewable projects since 2016, including elevated wholesale electricity prices, government policy incentives, declining technology costs and improved access to finance.

Government policies​

Government climate change-related policies have also encouraged investment in large-scale renewable electricity generation. One key Australian Government policy is the Renewable Energy Target (RET), which targets 33,000 gigawatt hours (GWh) of additional large-scale renewable electricity generation by 2020.[4] The RET incentivises the development of new renewable energy power stations. It does this by requiring liable entities, predominantly electricity retailers, to source an annually increasing proportion of their electricity requirements from renewable generators. Under the RET, renewable power plants can create large-scale generation certificates (LGCs) for each megawatt hour (MWh) of renewable electricity generated. These certificates can then be sold or transferred to liable entities or other companies looking to surrender certificates voluntarily.[5]

State government policies have also encouraged renewable generation investment. These policies are more varied and include reverse auctions (where renewable energy projects bid for power supply contracts with the state government), state-based renewable energy targets and other commitments. While not all state-based commitments are legislated, they tend to target a larger proportion of renewable generation than the national RET (Table 1).

Table 1: Renewable Energy Generation by State



W.A no commitment, just quietly getting it done.

sptrawler said:

Anyway, moving along.

Click to expand...

Another day, another argument.

SirRumpole said:

Another day, another argument.

Click to expand...

I deal with OCD people every day, the wife is and four of the grandkids are.

sptrawler said:

I deal with OCD people every day, the wife is and four of the grandkids are.

Click to expand...

Well, the Red has some relevant things to say and contributes well, but is a bit obsessed with winning arguments. It makes life interesting I suppose .

SirRumpole said:

Well, the Red has some relevant things to say and contributes well, but is a bit obsessed with winning arguments. It makes life interesting I suppose .

Click to expand...

Well the weather here is terrible and I'm trying to replace some balustrade, so this gives me something to do between showers.

If it wasn't for Red, I would probably have to entertain the missus, when i'm doing this she thinks I'm busy.

He is just a typical bureaucrat, unless you're throwing taxpayers money at something, you're not doing it right.
The bigger their budget the more important their position and dept is, just the way they roll, career bureaucrats.?

Well at last it looks like the States are starting to man up.
Blackout warnings for the eastern seaboard have been lifted after the energy grid chief assured the public that enough power supply had come back online over the past 48 hours to meet expected demand over the weekend.

The reprieve for households came as NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet declared Australia would need gas from the state’s controversial Narrabri project as soon as possible. His Victorian counterpart, Daniel Andrews, said he was also willing to consider new gas projects while reaffirming his government’s ban on coal seam gas extraction.


I bet any new gas projects, include a reserve allocation for the State.

SirRumpole said:

Another day, another argument.

Click to expand...

Not really.
It's more a history lesson.
We can look at what was occurring overseas and compare that to here.
Europe took the high road on climate change and introduced policies to reduce GHGs, and funded these arrangements.
Australia stuck its head in the sand.
Industry players in Australia put to government what was necessary for an orderly transition of our energy generation capacity, and Finkel clearly outlined it in his Blueprint.
The ESB further clarified transitional issues and for years has presented a pathway to government to make it work. CAOG, ESB, Finkel and the energy industry has watched and waited... and waited, and waited.
None of this is a mystery, but it might be to the media who look for a headline without understanding the background.
We are now playing catchup.

None of the above is controversial.
@sptrawler has an irrational belief that a electricity fixes itself and flows everywhere it's needed without the need for intervention.
Good luck with that.

rederob said:

None of the above is controversial.
@sptrawler has an irrational belief that a electricity fixes itself and flows everywhere it's needed without the need for intervention.
Good luck with that.

Click to expand...

Incorrect yet again, I have a belief that Australia has put in considerable renewable generation already, with minimal Government intervention and taxpayers money.
That is about to change, so be it.
But if you are going to make an aspersion, at least be accurate, that should be a another light bulb moment for you.

As for comparing Europe to Australia, well that just highlights your lack of understanding, of the underlying problems associated with HV transmission grids.