The future of energy generation and storage

SirRumpole said:

Interesting video on the economics of nuclear power.

Click to expand...

Great post Rumpy and sums it up perfectly and in my opinion why in about 10 years time, the answer will become obvious.
Eventually the requirement to reduce emissions and still have a reliable electrical system, will lead to the obvious answer, it is only that the greenies will take 10 years to realise it.
By then technology will have moved on and clean, safe base load power generation will be available IMO.

Bio buildings. An interesting concept using algae.

SirRumpole said:

Interesting video on the economics of nuclear power.

Click to expand...

Yes, all true. but Gates and Buffett are working on a game changer. it doesn't need nuclear processing, making it not wanted by terrorists and it gets rid of the steam problem making it inherently safer among other things. i believe nuclear has a big future.

Western Australia moves quietly along the renewables path. @SirRumpole the last paragraph, what you and I have been talking about, for some time.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08...ject-rolls-out-farms-in-wa-mid-west/101297598
From the article:
Energy provider Horizon Power has announced it would build a centralised solar farm and battery in Norseman, about 720km east of Perth.

The 758 kilowatt solar farm would consist of 1,400 panels and would house a 336 kilowatt-hour battery energy storage system.

On completion, the project would see just over 24 per cent of the town's energy sourced from renewable energy.

Currently, the township relies entirely on a diesel-generated power station for its electricity.

The Norseman solar project was part of a broader roll out in which Horizon Power planned to install centralised solar and battery storages systems in the mid-west towns of Cue, Sandstone, Meekatharra, Mount Magnet, Wiluna and Yalgoo.
Curtin University professor of sustainability Peter Newman said the majority of new standalone power systems that were going into farms, remote stations and small towns still used diesel as a backup, even if a battery was available.

"Diesel is very expensive and it's quite poisonous, so the sooner we get rid of it the better and we are going through that change process now," he said.

"There is a new invention in Western Australia which is making hydrogen out of the excess solar that is around most days.
"That hydrogen can then be used instead of diesel, and I think is the way we will go in the future to get rid of the final bits of diesel."

Blackrock puts up a Billion for Battery Storage for Australian based assets...
A question those speculating on Battery technology might ask themselves, I know I did, is;
What Battery chemistry will make up the bulk if not all of that investment?

Oh and Keith Pttt if your reading; That's Battery's and many in QLD...
And for the Schmuck Schmo **** Show that's Big Batterys! not Bananas like the republic you dreamt of... So many early Freudian hints early on.

I see that Germany will have two Floating Storage and Regasification Units (FSRUs) fully supplied and operational by the start of the European winter. It's not the full solution to Germany's gas shortage, but not a bad effort to get this organised so quickly.

Meanwhile, our efforts to deal with our east coast gas shortage continue at a snail's pace.

The Money...
It's all about the Money..
VPP goes live today in California, for participants at a buy back of US $2/kw/h.

Self Sourcing Pudding...
Opening up of this Market and you're a long way to self solving a lot of problems. And making a lot of money for early adopters.


To bad Dingus Taylor wasn't in for another term the profits on this type of possiblity would have been off the Richter.

orr said:

The Money...
It's all about the Money..
VPP goes live today in California, for participants at a buy back of US $2/kw/h.

Self Sourcing Pudding...
Opening up of this Market and you're a long way to self solving a lot of problems. And making a lot of money for early adopters.

Click to expand...

Where the difficulty lies is with the financials.

You can't buy too much electricity at USD $2 per kWh when you're selling it for USD 6 cents per kWh which at the bulk level is roughly what it's worth (varies with location etc).

It needs a lot of ruthless efficiency elsewhere to offset even a small amount bought at those rates.

'Horrific for consumers'.

Report on power prices.

SirRumpole said:

'Horrific for consumers'.

Report on power prices.

Australia's biggest power providers are seemingly failing to cash in on the energy crisis. Why?

Record high energy prices are proving to be no picnic for the country's biggest power providers. So who is 'making out like a bandit'?

www.abc.net.au

Click to expand...

Basic problem is the NEM and gas industry in its present form is simply high cost.

Hence neither the investor owned companies which existed prior to it (eg AGL) nor the few remaining government owned entities can today match their historic pricing in real terms and nor is anyone making a particularly large profit out of it all.

Fuel prices are part of the problem but by no means the whole story, there are more fundamental issues than that which won't be resolved simply by changing the means of generation or a lowering of fuel prices.

All is good in the kingdom, only 12 weeks in office and we are starting to see the benefits of a new Government.
If they can do this in twelve weeks, it will be truly breathtaking what they can achieve in three years.
Because nothing has been done for the last 10 years.

Solar briefly eclipses coal power for first time​

Solar supplied more generation than coal into the national grid for the first time ever on Friday, underscoring the sweeping advance of renewables.

Smurf1976 said:

Basic problem is the NEM and gas industry in its present form is simply high cost.

Hence neither the investor owned companies which existed prior to it (eg AGL) nor the few remaining government owned entities can today match their historic pricing in real terms and nor is anyone making a particularly large profit out of it all.

Fuel prices are part of the problem but by no means the whole story, there are more fundamental issues than that which won't be resolved simply by changing the means of generation or a lowering of fuel prices.

Click to expand...

All will be sorted next week, the molten salt solar storage base load replacement units will be commissioned and whallah problem solved.
I know I shouldn't be so cynical.

sptrawler said:

All is good in the kingdom, only 12 weeks in office and we are starting to see the benefits of a new Government.
If they can do this in twelve weeks, it will be truly breathtaking what they can achieve in three years.
Because nothing has been done for the last 10 years.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fbusiness%2Frenewable-energy-economy%2Fsupply-from-solar-generators-exceeded-that-from-all-nsw-qld-and-victorian-coal-generation%2Fnews-story%2F7387b0fdb5cbd8068c338c49e8a95d7a&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21=dynamic-low-control-score&V21spcbehaviour=append

Solar briefly eclipses coal power for first time​

Solar supplied more generation than coal into the national grid for the first time ever on Friday, underscoring the sweeping advance of renewables.

Click to expand...

The proof of the pudding is in the prices.

NEW - German benchmark power price surged over €700 per MWh for the first time today.




14x the seasonal average over the past 5 years.

Yesterday, German Economy Minister Habeck of the Green Party ruled out extending the lifetime of the country's last 3 remaining modern nuclear power plants.

@disclosetv

DB008 said:

NEW - German benchmark power price surged over €700 per MWh for the first time today.

View attachment 145802


14x the seasonal average over the past 5 years.

Yesterday, German Economy Minister Habeck of the Green Party ruled out extending the lifetime of the country's last 3 remaining modern nuclear power plants.

@disclosetv

Click to expand...

Here follows the argument for closing down 2 of remaining 3 reactors. It's doesn't seem to me that compelling with the present problems.

Knobby22 said:

Here follows the argument for closing down 2 of remaining 3 reactors. It's doesn't seem to me that compelling with the present problems.

German economy minister rules out keeping nuclear plants running to save gas

German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out on Sunday extending the lifespan of the country's three remaining nuclear power plants in order to save gas, saying it would save at most 2 percent of gas use.

www.reuters.com

Click to expand...

A simple case of ideology overriding logics and common sense, this is the sort of thing that puts the Greens in a bad light, making people suffer without compromise.
Europe is only just moving into winter, it will be interesting to see how they come through, the rich will be fine as the cost of heating isn't a problem for them.
I wonder if people will start burning wood and coal again, the thing with people they quickly learn to manage, one way or another they wont let their kids freeze.
Closing down clean energy, when you haven't got the renewables installed to replace it, just smacks of madness IMO.

Hooray, at last an article about the reality of the 'green transition' and relying purely on renewables, it has taken a long, long time but the reality is starting to be told to the unwashed masses.
What have I being saying for years? People just don't get it, they don't understand the enormity of the issue, yet rabbit on endlessly as though it is just a matter of wanting to.
Now the real issues can be discussed, rather than the emotionally driven media clap trap, about it is the Federal Governments fault.
Now the greenies, the indigenous and the general public can appreciate what really is required, not some smoke and mirrors nonsense driven by vested interests and media sensationalism.
From the article:
Australia’s north would be transformed by five or six “Tasmania-sized” solar arrays and huge hydrogen hubs, and draw several million additional people as an army of workers arrives to build and service a vast net-zero economy.

Those are among the key findings of a landmark forward-looking, multi-year modelling project led by experts at the universities of Melbourne, Queensland and Princeton in the US, which for the first time details the staggering scale of the nation’s decarbonisation pathway.

Delivering on that vision of a near-zero carbon economy that exports energy to the world will also require wind and solar energy capacity equivalent to 40 times that of today’s national electricity market.
And in a serious wake-up call for the Labor government, the work suggests meeting the 43 per cent cut in emissions due to be legislated next month by the Senate implies the country will require solar, wind and transmission equal to almost five national electricity markets.

Alongside the staggering numbers involved, the research raises serious questions about how the country will manage what are almost certain to be critical skills shortages, the need for more foreign workers and a push to secure sovereign supply chains.
The report’s authors warn of the need to engage and win the support of households, landowners and communities, as well as the farmers who will host many of the wind and solar farms, pipelines and carbon-absorbing plantations.

They note that Indigenous-controlled lands are among the most suitable for making green power from hydrogen.

The Net Zero Australia report adopts methodology used in Princeton University’s 2021 Net Zero America project, and explores how renewables will produce almost all domestic energy by 2050, alongside carbon capture and storage (CCS) and an energy export industry.

To close the gap between targets for emissions cuts and other ambitions, and the real-world impacts and costs, as well as land use, the study analyses several versions of what the future could look like.

Export industry​

This includes alternative worlds in which only renewables are allowed by 2050, and one scenario in which CCS is limited.

Across most of the modelled versions of the future, capital investment to fund decarbonisation of Australia’s domestic needs will be at least 50 per cent greater than what would happen if the country remained on fossil fuels.

The total annual domestic energy system cost will balloon from just under $90 billion a year today to more than $150 billion a year by the late 2030s and stay at that level through the 2060s.


Expanding that to develop an energy export industry capable of offsetting current earnings from coal and gas – for instance, via green hydrogen – involves investment from $100 billion a year to $600 billion.

Supporting that growth will require between 1 million and 1.2 million workers, the great majority of whom will be across northern Australia, helping support several million more residents.

Alongside the headline numbers involved, the project uniquely maps where all this activity will take place, suggesting many of Australia’s traditional resources regions will be among the big winners, including politically sensitive central Queensland.

The project received financial support from APA, Dow, Worley and the Minderoo Foundation, as well as input from the ACTU, National Farmers Federation and Australian Conservation Foundation.

Trawler ???
40 X ??? In 30 odd years.

If we take the example of one export customer for our thermal coal and LNG, Japan. By 2030 their offshore wind is expected to supply approx 25% of eletricity demand about 10 giga/w. The Japanese are aiming at upto 65 giga/w of wind by 2050. About 125% of current demand.

Of course none other of our export customers are likely to pump for a nationaly sourced secure and cheaper alternative to imported hydrogen from australia...

Smurf1976 said:

Where the difficulty lies is with the financials.

You can't buy too much electricity at USD $2 per kWh when you're selling it for USD 6 cents per kWh which at the bulk level is roughly what it's worth (varies with location etc).

It needs a lot of ruthless efficiency elsewhere to offset even a small amount bought at those rates.

Click to expand...

It's obviously a hedge against spot market price spikes. So selling for anything north of $2 doesn't seem to 'financially difficult'.

orr said:

Trawler ???
40 X ??? In 30 odd years.

If we take the example of one export customer for our thermal coal and LNG, Japan. By 2030 their offshore wind is expected to supply approx 25% of eletricity demand about 10 giga/w. The Japanese are aiming at upto 65 giga/w of wind by 2050. About 125% of current demand.

Of course none other of our export customers are likely to pump for a nationaly sourced secure and cheaper alternative to imported hydrogen from australia...

Click to expand...

The article is only pointing out what is required, to supply the generation for proposed projects, whether they come to fruition time will tell.
The workforce required would be extremely hard to amass and then as most of the proposed sites are in inhospitable locations, the logistics are huge.
IMO, there is a lot of green can dreaming going on.
But as I said, time will tell, I wouldnt put money on it.
Even the 2030 target seems a very voter friendly vote catcher, that will be hard to achieve.
Just my opinion.