The future of energy generation and storage

sptrawler said:

My guess, would be high efficiency open cycle gay turbines, these days there isn't a huge difference in the efficiency, not like 30 years ago where open cycle were in the low 20% efficiency. Combines cycle has the problem of requiring operators and to get the steam set on presents the same issues that are plaguing the coal generators, cycling.
HEGT's these days are in the mid 40% efficiency, whereas combined cycle are in the low 50's, so IMO the increased flexibility and much shorter start up times makes the HEGT's the best option.
At least the report resolved the issue, 'here is what is required, now decide who, when and with what you are going to implement it'.

Click to expand...

Good to see you are being inclusive with the 'gay' turbines.

Thanks for that, big fingers and small screens, makes for embarassing mistakes. Lol

sptrawler said:

interestingly as I also said the States are basically the ones who are responsible for their generation, the article seems to reinforce that. The States just have to work out which route they are going to take.

Click to expand...

Yes, it could be that we are heading 'back to the future' where States competed against each other for lower prices to attract business and industry.

Better than having private operators compete to see who can charge the highest prices before consumers start screaming.

SirRumpole said:

Yes, it could be that we are heading 'back to the future' where States competed against each other for lower prices to attract business and industry.

Better than having private operators compete to see who can charge the highest prices before consumers start screaming.

Click to expand...

Yes I would say there will be a lot of argy bargy goes on, because ultimately it is a State function, the issue has been that no one has identified what was required to fix it in a holistic way. They now know how much is required, the options available to fill that requirement, now they just have to work out who wants to put in what, which goes back to ideology, cost and time constraints.

SirRumpole said:

Yes, it could be that we are heading 'back to the future' where States competed against each other for lower prices to attract business and industry.

Better than having private operators compete to see who can charge the highest prices before consumers start screaming.

Click to expand...

And today from Allan Finkle, he must read ASF. ?
Though some would argue with him, as is their want.?

Australia’s east coast electricity grid was under unprecedented pressure last week, laying bare the challenges of achieving a zero-emissions electrical system. It’s hard, really hard. And it’s only the beginning. The next step is to expand our zero-emissions electricity generation, and hydrogen produced from it, to replace oil and gas in transport, building heating and industry.

It has been easier for countries such as Norway and France because they have drawn on hydroelectricity and nuclear electricity to massively reduce their emissions. Tasmania, too, has achieved virtually 100 per cent emissions-free electricity through its combination of hydro and wind electricity.

sptrawler said:

And today from Allan Finkle, he must read ASF. ?
Though some would argue with him, as is their want.?

This energy revolution is hard - really hard - but it’s doable

The nation’s former chief scientist explains the lessons of the past weeks and why, with the right plan, Australia can make big strides towards zero-emissions electricity.

www.smh.com.au

Australia’s east coast electricity grid was under unprecedented pressure last week, laying bare the challenges of achieving a zero-emissions electrical system. It’s hard, really hard. And it’s only the beginning. The next step is to expand our zero-emissions electricity generation, and hydrogen produced from it, to replace oil and gas in transport, building heating and industry.

It has been easier for countries such as Norway and France because they have drawn on hydroelectricity and nuclear electricity to massively reduce their emissions. Tasmania, too, has achieved virtually 100 per cent emissions-free electricity through its combination of hydro and wind electricity.

Click to expand...

A great article by Alan Finkel that really sums up the situation and solution.

Pity the former government didn't implement more of his recommendations.

SirRumpole said:

A great article by Alan Finkel that really sums up the situation and solution.

Pity the former government didn't implement more of his recommendations.

Click to expand...

Yes, but now the new Govt has got the same problems, Chris Bowen in today's AFR, refused to be drawn on whether they will force the States to use coal and gas in their mix.
This is the real issue IMO, if the Feds tell the States what they have to do, then the Feds will have to pay for it.
The Feds have very little financial power over the States, they aren't allowed to tax the States, so who funds this?

This is going to cost a lot, who foots the bill will be the hot potato, Victoria doesn't want to use gas, NSW does, W.A is paying to change over already, Tassie already is renewable.

As Finkle said this is the beginning and he was appointed special advisor to the Govt a couple of years ago, so he will be well versed with the issues.
Snowy 2.0 is being built, many say it shouldn't be, now we find out many more are required, Kurri Kurri has been bagged endlessly, now it looks like many more are required, where do you get the gas to run them from?
The current Fed resources minister is wondering the same thing, there is a call for gas, but when Kurri Kurri was announced everyone said no. As they keep saying , as yet, you can't firm up renewables with renewables they need at call generation to allow the transition to renewables to proceed, but in the next breath saying they don't want gas, not an easy situation to deal with especially when dealing with irrational people that don't understand the issues and are driven by a media driven narrative that loves to cause chaos.




Getting consensus between the states is going to be hard enough, without even discussing who pays for what, this is only just starting.
As I've said over and over, I'm amazed how far we have got in such a short period of time, when you think about dealing with all the participants, tribal politics and competing media's .
It's a wonder anything has been achieved IMO.
it certainly is an exciting and interesting time in history IMO.
P.S I can't read Finkle's whole article, the phone wont let me.?

sptrawler said:

Yes, but now the new Govt has got the same problems, Chris Bowen in today's AFR, refused to be drawn on whether they will force the States to use coal and gas in their mix.
This is the real issue IMO, if the Feds tell the States what they have to do, then the Feds will have to pay for it.
The Feds have very little financial power over the States, they aren't allowed to tax the States, so who funds this?

This is going to cost a lot, who foots the bill will be the hot potato, Victoria doesn't want to use gas, NSW does, W.A is paying to change over already, Tassie already is renewable.

As Finkle said this is the beginning and he was appointed special advisor to the Govt a couple of years ago, so he will be well versed with the issues.
Snowy 2.0 is being built, many say it shouldn't be, now we find out many more are required, Kurri Kurri has been bagged endlessly, now it looks like many more are required, where do you get the gas to run them from?
The current Fed resources minister is wondering the same thing, there is a call for gas, but when Kurri Kurri was announced everyone said no. As they keep saying , as yet, you can't firm up renewables with renewables they need at call generation to allow the transition to renewables to proceed, but in the next breath saying they don't want gas, not an easy situation to deal with especially when dealing with irrational people that don't understand the issues and are driven by a media driven narrative that loves to cause chaos.

NSW will need Narrabri gas, federal resources minister says

Madeleine King has warned of a bigger energy crisis in the future without new gas fields, blaming years of inaction on the need to switch to renewables.

www.smh.com.au

Getting consensus between the states is going to be hard enough, without even discussing who pays for what, this is only just starting.
As I've said over and over, I'm amazed how far we have got in such a short period of time, when you think about dealing with all the participants, tribal politics and competing media's .
It's a wonder anything has been achieved IMO.
it certainly is an exciting and interesting time in history IMO.
P.S I can't read Finkle's whole article, the phone wont let me.?

Click to expand...

• National
• Alan Finkel

OPINION​

This energy revolution is hard - really hard - but it’s doable​

By Alan Finkel​

June 20, 2022 — 5.00am
Save
Share
Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size
0
Leave a comment

Australia’s east coast electricity grid was under unprecedented pressure last week, laying bare the challenges of achieving a zero-emissions electrical system. It’s hard, really hard. And it’s only the beginning. The next step is to expand our zero-emissions electricity generation, and hydrogen produced from it, to replace oil and gas in transport, building heating and industry.
It has been easier for countries such as Norway and France because they have drawn on hydroelectricity and nuclear electricity to massively reduce their emissions. Tasmania, too, has achieved virtually 100 per cent emissions-free electricity through its combination of hydro and wind electricity.

Nyrstar’s Port Pirie smelter in South Australia, where owner Trafigura plans to build a $750 million ‘green’ hydrogen plant. CREDIT: SUPPLIED
From an engineering perspective, hydroelectricity and nuclear are dream players, producing electricity on demand and contributing to the secure and reliable operation of the grid. Solar and wind generation are less co-operative, but realistically that’s all that mainland Australia has at hand. To deploy them, they must be supported by transmission lines, storage and arguably a modest amount of natural gas generation.
Australia has made good progress. There has been record investment in the past three years that has seen our solar and wind generation in the east coast grid almost double from 12 per cent in 2018 to 23.5 per cent in 2021. On a per capita basis, our solar and wind generation is comparable with California. Looking just at solar electricity, on a per capita basis Australia is No. 1 in the world.

Where we are behind schedule is on the construction of transmission lines, especially the local lines required to connect solar and wind energy zones to metropolitan and industrial loads. These transmission lines, combined with batteries, will substantially improve the reliability of our electricity system.

RELATED ARTICLE​

Electricity​

Coal, gas to smooth transition to clean power: Top energy officials​

The requirements for transmission lines are well described in the Australian Energy Market Operator’s integrated system plan, a recommendation of the 2017 review of the national electricity market that I chaired. The new federal government’s $20 billion fund for transmission lines and grid strengthening will accelerate implementation.
As we design the electricity system of the future it is essential to plan for the extremes, not the averages. In the past few weeks alone, we have suffered from a combination of floods, international price pressures, generator breakdowns, lower than usual wind and the normal low winter sunshine. A rare combination of events indeed, but rare events come in many shapes and sizes and, overall, one or the other happens frequently. More foreseeable is that every few years we will see low sunshine and low wind weather patterns lasting for many days or a week or two.
The solution is to invest in long-duration storage. Today, the only way to achieve long-duration storage is with pumped hydro, but such projects have been few and far between because of local objections to the facilities themselves and to installing the transmission lines to connect them. In future, hydrogen made from excess solar and wind electricity during good weather will be stored in large volumes and used to fuel converted natural gas generators to provide long-duration storage.

The economics for investing in storage work well for short-duration storage of an hour or two. For that reason, investment in big batteries in Australia is already happening and growing rapidly, as it must. However, because the existing electricity market only pays for energy (megawatt-hours) dispatched, long-duration storage that will only be called upon infrequently is not an attractive investment. The solution is to introduce payments for the capacity to provide electricity on demand. This is an additional market mechanism known as a capacity market.

RELATED ARTICLE​

Analysis​

Anthony Albanese​

‘Slow and careful’: Four weeks in and no major hitches for Albanese​

Details for such a market have been planned by the Energy Security Board and, encouragingly, federal, state and territory energy ministers have agreed to fast-track its adoption.
There are questions about whether it should include coal and natural gas. Coal generation needs separate attention to manage a planned exit. If the federal government in 2017 had not rejected the clean energy target recommended by the Finkel review, the coal generation owners would already be participating in an orderly exit consistent with the targeted emissions reduction trajectory.
On the other hand, natural gas generation could be included because it provides on-demand electricity that can ramp up and down within minutes to match the variable solar and wind. Natural gas generators will increasingly only be used as the last resort for a small number of hours per year, providing high value by keeping the lights on for short, medium and long durations. But the natural gas has to be available in volume and at reasonable price, which could be achieved by encouraging more supply and implementing a domestic reserve.

The fear that building new natural gas generators will lock them in for decades can be avoided by ensuring that in future they can be powered by hydrogen, as in the Tallawarra B power station under construction in NSW.

RELATED ARTICLE​

Opinion​

Energy​

Gradually then suddenly: how energy markets failed and what happens next​

Alison Reeve​

Climate Change and Energy Deputy Program Director at Grattan Institute
Small market tweaks would also help. For example, the $300 per megawatt-hour cap on the wholesale price was set more than 20 years ago. This cap is too small, not just because of inflation but because of our exposure to international coal and natural gas prices. If it had been set at a higher value, the operator might not have had to suspend the trading market.
The imminent threat of blackouts has been averted through excellent system management by AEMO, supported by constructive action by the energy ministers. We must learn from the current price and availability crunch that the transition will not be easy, but with the kind of determination currently being manifest it should be eminently doable.
Alan Finkel was Australia’s chief scientist from 2016 to 2020 and chaired the 2017 national electricity market review, the 2019 national hydrogen strategy and the 2021 low-emissions technology roadmap.


Save
Share
License this article

• Alan Finkel
• Opinion

0
Leave a comment

MOST VIEWED IN NATIONAL​

New ferry wharves, ‘New York-style’ high line slated for Circular Quay​

‘More spectacular than the Daintree’: $56 million rainforest walking track for NSW​

Two arrested in police raid on climate activist group Blockade Australia​

NSW to trial shared equity scheme to help nurses, teachers buy homes​

Performance pay, revamped school hours: Premier flags education reforms​

Opinion​

The surprising offer from Sky News that I had to refuse​

This is your last article. Register or log in now to unlock more articles.
Show content

FROM OUR PARTNERS​

Yes it is a great article and actually repeats what we have been saying in this thread for a long time.
The H.V transmission reconfiguration and building it will be the achilles heel IMO, as building big projects over recent times has been a huge problem, first covid in 2019 now the Russia, supply issue and add to that a lot of the work is in remote areas and it will be diifficult.
Snowy is falling behind as are most major construction jobs, it will be a while before supply lines are freed up and even getting enough workers is an issue.
So it is terrific the new Govt is going to throw a lot of money at it and I think it should be Fed funded, but whether that big bucket of money, translates into a faster build out, I'm not so sure. ATM there is a lot of headwind with issues that can't be resolved by money.
But at least the responsibilities are being identified, which is a big step forward IMO.
The other good outcome is, coal and gas can now be mentioned, without the media going into a meltdown and the ranting and chanting starting. That in itself is possibly the greatest step forward, the lack of rational discussion has been holding back any sort of resolution.

Another good article, it is amazing how good journalism comes to the fore, when they get off their pet agendas.


As Australia's power crisis began to ramp up early this month, Snowy Hydro was called on to increase production.

But the hydro-electric generator remains significantly constrained by a surprising problem — too much water.

It's only one example of how weather extremes have deepened the nation's man-made power crisis.

Snowy Hydro's biggest power station is Tumut 3. At maximum output, it can generate 1,800 megawatts of electricity.

That's as much as a large coal-fired power station, but with zero emissions.

The huge volumes of water used by Tumut 3 are either pumped back up the hill to an upper reservoir or emptied into Blowering Dam.
The problem according to Snowy Hydro is that Blowering Dam is full, following back-to-back years of La Niña rain, and increased hydro-electric generation risks flooding, according to an alert released by Snowy Hydro on June 3.
"Generation from Tumut 3 Power Station is significantly constrained by the current storage levels in Blowering Reservoir and the release capacity of the Tumut River.

"In order to meet the predicted energy demands in the coming days, it is possible Blowering Reservoir will fill and spill, potentially exceeding the Tumut River channel capacity.

"In this scenario, there is potential for the inundation of low-level causeways and water breaking out of the river channel onto agricultural land adjacent to the river."
Snowy Hydro doesn't own or operate Blowering Dam. It's managed by WaterNSW, which has been releasing water to lower dam levels there for months, while trying to avoid flooding people downstream.

​

Well @SirRumpole the issues regarding available power looks to have been resolved, as I suggested quite a while ago, they will have to pay the coal generators an availability allowance.
They can't make the generators run at a loss, they can't allow the system to fall on its ar$e and they can't have the generators just shut them down and walk away.
So like I said it would be resolved, looks like it is, they are designing an availability allowance, nothing changes the generators now just get paid to be available if required.
Surprise, surprise.

Also @SirRumpole of interest in the report, was that we will need 50 Snowy 2.0 schemes to back up renewables, that would probably be seen as obscenely grandiose to some.
But fortunately the experts have spoken, rather than the self appointed experts, who spent a career as spin doctors.

sptrawler said:

Well @SirRumpole the issues regarding available power looks to have been resolved, as I suggested quite a while ago, they will have to pay the coal generators an availability allowance.
They can't make the generators run at a loss, they can't allow the system to fall on its ar$e and they can't have the generators just shut them down and walk away.
So like I said it would be resolved, looks like it is, they are designing an availability allowance, nothing changes the generators now just get paid to be available if required.
Surprise, surprise.

Click to expand...

Well, we knew it wasn't going to be cheap.

In the long run is it better than just nationalising the whole thing ?

Seems we will have effective nationalisation anyway but with the taxpayers paying for the private company's profits, it seems to be rewarding slackness.

Anyway, if it keeps the lights on and the power prices down then I suppose most people won't complain.

But you do wonder, if there will be a picture of Bowen holding up a handfull of cash, instead of Morrison holding a lump of coal, it just depends who is in favour at the time.
Like I said there wasnt many options, either throw the kitchen sink and everyones living standards at it, or work with what you have to get the fastest, smoothest transition practicable, now we have got rid of the media we continue down the obvious path, without the ranting and chanting.
Everyones a winner, but not much changes.

The wife was away tonight, so I watched a bit of current affairs and there was a perfect example of ridiculous blame shifting.
The programme had Allan Carpenter the ex WA premier who got the gas reservation up and running and also stopped the ridiculous pollies super, which he doesn't get much credit for.
But back on thread, he tried to infer that the reservation policy was a federal failing, then said that Ian McFarland who must have been a Lib Fed pollie in his day, tried to stop him from putting the reservation in place. Obviously he as State Premier over ruled him and reserved the gas anyway.
It would be so much easier to sort stuff out, if they all put Australia first rather than political tribalism, it just makes them all look like a bunch of shyster's IMO.
Why the hell can't they just be honest, they only sell themselves short IMO.
Treating everyone as a mushroom these days doesn't cut it, with social media there are way too many ways to find the truth, so spinning BS eventually gets caught out.

Ken Henry supports windfall gas export tax.

SirRumpole said:

Ken Henry supports windfall gas export tax.

A gas export tax would help to fix Australia's energy crisis, says Dr Ken Henry

Australia has blown its chance to use its vast gas fields to help the economy transition to renewable energy, says former Treasury secretary Ken Henry.

www.abc.net.au

Click to expand...

yeah, I have no doubt Ken would.
He's never go over the fact that the government of the day did not enact all the beaut things in the Henry Tax report.
He's an economist, not an engineer.
Sees no problem in changing the rules when you have spent a lot of years operating under the old rules.
Would he also support the returning of those super profits to those who have to pay them if the arse fell out of the market and gas went back to the prices of 5 years ago?
Nah, of course not.
Mick

mullokintyre said:

Would he also support the returning of those super profits to those who have to pay them if the arse fell out of the market and gas went back to the prices of 5 years ago?

Click to expand...

Would the gas companies support returning of profits to the taxpayers now that they are making motzas from high prices ?

Nah, of course not.

SirRumpole said:

Would the gas companies support returning of profits to the taxpayers now that they are making motzas from high prices ?

Nah, of course not.

Click to expand...

The GAS companies are not the ones making the rules.
They explored for the gas, build the infrastructure to extract and deliver it with SFA from the government.
They do what every good non government entity should do, make the most money under the rules they get dumped with.
Mick

mullokintyre said:

The GAS companies are not the ones making the rules.
They explored for the gas, build the infrastructure to extract and deliver it with SFA from the government.
They do what every good non government entity should do, make the most money under the rules they get dumped with.
Mick

Click to expand...

I agree, but rules can be changed as are governments.