- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,337
- Reactions
- 17,642
Another one down:
I doubt this will be the last.
I doubt this will be the last.
Customers in NSW, QLD, SA impacted as power company collapses
Hundreds of customers across three states were warned they had 72 hours before their energy company would disconnect from the power grid.
Another one down:
I doubt this will be the last.
No disagreement from me on that one.Maybe (as awful as it sounds, eg banks), bigger but fewer suppliers would be better for economies of scale and possibly easier to regulate.
I thought about writing a lot but in short, the big problem is politics.Surely an appropriate formula could be found that incentivises renewables while still paying for availability ?
I'd like to hear the long version some time if you have the time and motivation, as to what you would do from an engineering perspective if politics wasn't an issue.I thought about writing a lot but in short, the big problem is politics.
It's as simple as that. Doesn't matter what option anyone comes up with, someone will want to tear it down for purely political reasons.
Anything less than 100% renewable and that puts one group offside.
Go to 100% and that puts another group offside.
Then there's those who've ideological desires to build nuclear, dam every last creek or build new coal.
Then there's the deniers. Those who deny that oil and gas reserves are relatively limited. Those who deny that nuclear is expensive. Those who deny this that and everything else if it suits whatever thing they want to build.
My view personally is that winter 2023 will kill the politics off.
Nuclear is expensive and not that safe but Bill Gates backed Terra power is developing the future modern reactor that will be cheaper and safer and produces less waste. My attitude is countries like Germany would benefit greatly from removing their reliance on coal and gas. Australia has less of of a need.I thought about writing a lot but in short, the big problem is politics.
It's as simple as that. Doesn't matter what option anyone comes up with, someone will want to tear it down for purely political reasons.
Anything less than 100% renewable and that puts one group offside.
Go to 100% and that puts another group offside.
Then there's those who've ideological desires to build nuclear, dam every last creek or build new coal.
Then there's the deniers. Those who deny that oil and gas reserves are relatively limited. Those who deny that nuclear is expensive. Those who deny this that and everything else if it suits whatever thing they want to build.
My view personally is that winter 2023 will kill the politics off.
I'm shocked I tell ya, shocked! </sarc>
California’s solar panel pile mounts up at landfill sites
Millions of solar panels in California risk being dumped on landfill sites as they reach the end of their life cycles.Over the past two decades, more than 1.3www.thetimes.co.uk
Another issue will be, when the panels are removed will people bother replacing them, if they aren't subsidised? The labour cost alone these days will be high, the only person I know who has had any problems was the guy over the road his inverter broke and he wasn't going to bother fixing it until I suggested he check if it is still covered by warranty, which it was.I'm shocked I tell ya, shocked! </sarc>
California’s solar panel pile mounts up at landfill sites
Millions of solar panels in California risk being dumped on landfill sites as they reach the end of their life cycles.Over the past two decades, more than 1.3www.thetimes.co.uk
The problem in Germany is much like the problem elsewhere including Australia.Time to talk about Germany yet?
Saw a chart showing that electricity are up 6x. Is it true?
What happened to the renewable utopia from a few years ago?
I'm shocked I tell ya, shocked! </sarc>
California’s solar panel pile mounts up at landfill sites
Millions of solar panels in California risk being dumped on landfill sites as they reach the end of their life cycles.Over the past two decades, more than 1.3www.thetimes.co.uk
The above links are good for Aus, but problem is, in the USA, its generally a disposable throwaway society, so landfill is much easier for them.I'm "puzzled" (nah..) at the horrors expressed over millions of solar panels finally needing to be recycled. Obviously nothing lasts forever . Solar panels are no different. Interestingly enough new generations of PV have every opportunity of being less resource intensive but in the meantime there are a number of industries being developed to recycle solar panels and extract the valuable resources.
There’s big money in recycling materials from solar panels
Recycling solar panels keeps them out of landfills, but also provides much-needed raw materials with Rystad Energy projecting a value approaching $80 billion by 2050.
July 18, 2022 Anne Fischer
View attachment 144498
Image: LaBella Associates
Share
View attachment 144499 View attachment 144500 View attachment 144501 View attachment 144502 View attachment 144503
From pv magazine USA
The question about what to do with solar panels at the end of their useful life is about to become moot as Rystad Energy analysis shows the incredible value of materials that can be extracted in the recycling process. Rystad estimates that recyclable materials from PV panels at the end of their lifespan will be worth more than $2.7 billion in 2030, up from only $170 million this year, and the value will approach $80 billion by 2050.
PV recycling is still in early stages, but it has been successfully implemented in Europe where the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) directive requires 85% collection and 80% recycling of the materials used in solar panels. In the US, California-based Solarcycle recently raised $6.6 million in growth funding to advance its solar recycling platform. Investors include some solar veterans such as SolarCity founders Peter and Lyndon Rive, and former CEO/CTO of Sunpower, Tom Dinwoodie.
There’s big money in recycling materials from solar panels
Recycling solar panels keeps them out of landfills, but also provides much-needed raw materials with Rystad Energy projecting a value approaching $80 billion by 2050.www.pv-magazine.com
Solar Panel Recycling | NuWay Solar
Nuway Solar educates people on solar panel recycling. How replacing old solar panels helps us protect the environment and save more on the power bill. Call us to know morenuwaysolar.com.au
Home - PV Industries
PV Industries is leading the way in solar panel recycling in Australia.www.pvindustries.com.au
If you noticed one of the early players in recycling PV cells is a US company.The above links are good for Aus, but problem is, in the USA, its generally a disposable throwaway society, so landfill is much easier for them.
And they have big numbers as well.
Mick
In the US, California-based Solarcycle recently raised $6.6 million in growth funding to advance its solar recycling platform. Investors include some solar veterans such as SolarCity founders Peter and Lyndon Rive, and former CEO/CTO of Sunpower, Tom Dinwoodie.
I have obtained access to one of the most secret, but nation-changing documents in Australia – the Exxon estimates of Victoria’s massive low-cost, onshore, likely carbon neutral gas reserves that do not require fracking.
They are near the Longford, Gippsland, treatment plant and the east coast pipeline network. The best-case Exxon estimate is that the reserves total 4.996 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of gas or some 60 per cent of the last 50 years of Bass Strait production.
But there is a “high” estimate of reserves at 12.6234 TCF that makes the Victorian reserves second only to the North West Shelf.
The “secret” report titled ‘Onshore natural gas from lignite’ was prepared in 2014 by Gippsland Gas (then chaired by John White who was the chief executive of the company that won the contract to build the ANZUS frigates) and Exxon.
It was based on Exxon’s Houston researchers’ extensive technical review of the Gippsland Basin.
Houston studied oil exploration wells that been drilled in the 1950s and 1960s (some by Woodside) plus drilling conducted in earlier decades to map brown coal reserves.
Exxon found that many of these wells had encountered gas dissolved in water deep below the normal aquifers.
At the time, the drillers did not value the gas.
Exxon then took their Houston research to world-renowned gas and oil reserve estimator MHA Petroleum Consultants, now part of the giant Sproule group.
The MHA estimated a potential gas reserve bonanza, which now could replace the requirement to develop more expensive gas in Bass Strait.
The Gippsland Gas/Exxon revelations were first disclosed to the Denis Napthine Coalition government before the 2014 Victorian election.
Scared of Green votes, Napthine kept the lid on the discovery.
The ALP’s Daniel Andrews became premier after the election and banned further exploration and development of the gas, again for green reasons.
To conceal its existence, he spent large sums on an “expert” committee commissioned to check whether there was any likelihood of discovering onshore gas in Victoria.
The committee was forbidden to look at the area covering the massive Exxon discovery and other promising gas areas and dutifully reported that there was unlikely to be onshore gas in Victoria.
The local press, often with deep green views, did not disclose the obvious community deceit.
The Gippsland Gas and Exxon report told the government that water produced from the lignite could be used in agricultural activities to help grow carbon-absorbing plants “to a promote zero net emissions framework”.
Woodside, which is now a joint venture partner with Exxon, last week called for more exploration in Victoria, presumably knowing that the required gas has already been found by its Bass Strait partner and the reserves estimated by MHA.
Woodside say that if Victoria cannot explore for gas, then the only alternative is, what I regard as one of the most ludicrous proposals ever conceived in Australia – that gas-rich Victoria import high-cost liquefied natural gas.
The Victorian government itself wants gas being exported from Queensland to be sent to Victoria and NSW in the full knowledge that, subject to the tests, the state’s abundant low-cost gas can supply domestic demand on the East Coast of Australia.
And the Victorian gas, unlike Queensland, does not require fracking.
However I emphasise that the Gippsland Gas/Exxon report reveals that further work needs to be done, not to determine the reserves, but to make sure that production and permeability will duplicate the first test wells.
But they were so confident that they planned to spend $200m (in 2014) on the project, arranged for BlueScope and other major gas users to pencil intent contracts and signed six agreements with local landholders who would benefit from the development.
So, if even a modicum of what he writes, the Napthine Liberal government can take as much, if not morte than the existing Labour government for the problems Victorians now face.Those Gippsland farms would have become droughtproof had the gas development proceeded.
The report sets out that Exxon planned to drill six holes to test for gas saturation and coal permeability.
Each well would have taken between two and four weeks and a detailed drilling plan been established.
But faced with the antics of the Victorian government, Gippsland Gas and Exxon concluded that developing the gas was just too hard and they had better things to do.
As result, the leases are now owned by the Victorian Government.
Australia-wide the Greens do not want any more gas development and there will be similar sentiments in the inner suburbs of Melbourne.
But subject to the saturation and permeability tests, Australia has gas reserves with production costs at a small fraction of the current price.
Release of this gas would save large numbers of Australian industrial companies and slash the cost of gas to consumers on the east coast, reducing Australia’s inflation.
Snowy Hydro has now been forced to restrict using its gas-fired power stations.
These could be resumed and provide valuable back-up to make renewable energy more reliable.
And although it’s heretical to mention it, a new gas-fired power station that can be turned on when renewables are interrupted would enable massive reductions in carbon because Yallourn brown coal would be shut down much faster that is currently likely.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?