The future of energy generation and storage

[sptrawler]

Well, basically because Peter Costello told the States that they don't get any money for new infrastructure unless you sell the old stuff.

Some dId, some did not.

Well Rumpy that is exactly why I'm pragmatic, I can see both sides of the issue, but also I agree with you that essential services should remain in Govt control.

But there is the other side of the coin, the State Governments who sold off their their generation assets sold at a premium, with that money they probably put in social infrastructure (well they should have).
Now we have a new paradigm, where the infrastructure they sold at a premium, is becoming stranded, obsolete infrastructure, if they hadn't sold it, they would now be wearing it.
So to say it was a disaster is a misnomer, they sold the assets at a peak and should have re invested the money.
The States that didn't sell their generation assets are now wearing the losses, that the private sector would now be wearing.
I'm with you on the social aspect and have always said that, but on a financial basis, selling the assets was a winner, because the end result is the same but those who sold have made money.
Having said that, if the electrical system was still under Government control, I'm sure the transition to renewables would be a bumpless transition, as it would be centrally planned in a holistically way.
It may not have been the cheapest way, but it would be the most secure and seamless transition.
Now we have just jumped in with targets, that the Government has very little control over, so it will be interesting.

 

[Belli]

Well Rumpy that is exactly why I'm pragmatic, I can see both sides of the issue, but also I agree with you that essential services should remain in Govt control.

But there is the other side of the coin, the State Governments who sold off their their generation assets sold at a premium, with that money they probably put in social infrastructure (well they should have).
Now we have a new paradigm, where the infrastructure they sold at a premium, is becoming stranded, obsolete infrastructure, if they hadn't sold it, they would now be wearing it.
So to say it was a disaster is a misnomer, they sold the assets at a peak and should have re invested the money.
The States that didn't sell their generation assets are now wearing the losses, that the private sector would now be wearing.
I'm with you on the social aspect and have always said that, but on a financial basis, selling the assets was a winner, because the end result is the same but those who sold have made money.
Having said that, if the electrical system was still under Government control, I'm sure the transition to renewables would be a bumpless transition, as it would be centrally planned in a holistically way.
It may not have been the cheapest way, but it would be the most secure and seamless transition.
Now we have just jumped in with targets, that the Government has very little control over, so it will be interesting.

Who owns what gets complicated. And that means who is responsible and willing to pay for what also gets complicated.

Ownership of Australias Electricity and Grid - What is Labor Plan?

Ownership of Australias Electricity and Grid has transferred to private hands in some Australian states. Will there be a Federal corporation?

changediscussion.com

 

[Belli]

By the way, read the article in the link if you wish out of interest but don't take it as the be all and end all. There are some aspects of the site which can be, um, suspect and I don't think the articles are necessarily moderated on a peer reviewed basis.

Apologies for not including that disclaimer in the original post.

 

[sptrawler]

OOOPs, in the media we are starting to see a bit less high fiving and we've nailed it, to a bit more circumspect navel gazing.

My guess is, by the end of 2023, there will be a bit more of WTF is happening.??

Labor’s energy market intervention carries a number of risks

The price might constrain the supply of new energy, become self-perpetuating and annoy Australia’s neighbours and customers.

www.smh.com.au

 

[basilio]

Game changing LiOn battery development

A company called 24M has commercialised a process of producing LiOn batteries at 40% less cost than the current processes. It is far simpler, cheaper and has greater energy density. They have licensed the process to a number of commercial partners and production of these batteries in large volumes will occur in 2023

Technology - 24M

24M’s lithium-ion battery cell manufacturing process is a simple, space-efficient, low-cost, modular approach to lithium-ion battery manufacturing.

24-m.com

Partners & Investors - 24M

 

[basilio]

This story expands on the 24M technology.

MIT Has Beaten Tesla At Their Own Game.​

24M’s SemiSolid battery is a game changer.​

Musk’s plan to dominate the EV world was centred on Tesla’s 4680 battery. In theory, it could be one of the cheapest and highest-performance batteries out there, giving Tesla a massive technological advantage. But the reality of manufacturing them has kneecapped Musk’s plans, as they are currently underperforming and comparatively expensive due to massive manufacturing issues. Interestingly, 24M, an MIT spinoff company, used a completely different approach to create a high-performance battery that is cheaper than the 4680 and far easier to manufacture. So, how has 24M outdone Tesla? And will this threaten Tesla’s success?

 

[SirRumpole]

A rocky road ahead for Snowy Hydro.

The 'nation-building' project with issues as big as its ambitions

Snowy Hydro 2.0 is a water-fuelled dream of cheap, clean electricity. But to make it happen, there are hurdles needing to be overcome.

www.abc.net.au

 

[sptrawler]

Things should certainly get interesting from here on.

Carbon emission ceiling on Australia's biggest polluters to be lowered 4.9 per cent each year to 2030

The government will revamp a climate mechanism introduced by the Coalition government, proposing a 4.9 per cent cut on allowable emissions for the nation's biggest emitters each year to 2030.

www.abc.net.au

Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen said the changes being made would require big polluters to contribute their fair share towards cutting carbon emissions.

"Facilities covered by the safeguard mechanism are responsible for almost a third of Australia's emissions," Mr Bowen said.

"Twenty-eight per cent of emissions come from them — we will require 28 per cent of emissions reduction to come from safeguard facilities."

Limits on facilities such as coal and gas plants, aluminium smelters, manufacturing plants and airlines will be based on their emissions intensity, not overall emissions, meaning that companies will not be able to meet requirements by reducing production.

The emissions ceilings or "baselines" of each facility will now initially be determined individually, and then will be lowered by 4.9 per cent each year to 2030.

Facilities covered by the scheme will eventually be moved onto industry benchmarks that will be applied equally, making low emitters more competitive.

An overall carbon ceiling will also be set on the scheme, and applied equally to all facilities covered by it, to ensure the 2030 target is met.

 

[sptrawler]

A rocky road ahead for Snowy Hydro.

The 'nation-building' project with issues as big as its ambitions

Snowy Hydro 2.0 is a water-fuelled dream of cheap, clean electricity. But to make it happen, there are hurdles needing to be overcome.

www.abc.net.au

Yes, unfortunately it is one of those too big to fail projects, it has to be built.
A lot of the problems arise, when the input costs for these long running projects start climbing rapidly, then who foots the extra costs becomes a headache.
As I've said before engineering companies can be only one bad quote from bankruptcy, the buyer wants certainty of cost, the provider has no control over their costs.
Not a fun game to be in and recently there have been a large round of pay rises etc. It will be interesting to see who takes on the contract to finish Snowy 2.0 now Clough have gone belly up, whoever takes it on will want an open ended contract with the Government, because with inflation the costs will keep ramping.

 

[SirRumpole]

Things should certainly get interesting from here on.

Carbon emission ceiling on Australia's biggest polluters to be lowered 4.9 per cent each year to 2030

The government will revamp a climate mechanism introduced by the Coalition government, proposing a 4.9 per cent cut on allowable emissions for the nation's biggest emitters each year to 2030.

www.abc.net.au

Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen said the changes being made would require big polluters to contribute their fair share towards cutting carbon emissions.

"Facilities covered by the safeguard mechanism are responsible for almost a third of Australia's emissions," Mr Bowen said.

"Twenty-eight per cent of emissions come from them — we will require 28 per cent of emissions reduction to come from safeguard facilities."

Limits on facilities such as coal and gas plants, aluminium smelters, manufacturing plants and airlines will be based on their emissions intensity, not overall emissions, meaning that companies will not be able to meet requirements by reducing production.

The emissions ceilings or "baselines" of each facility will now initially be determined individually, and then will be lowered by 4.9 per cent each year to 2030.

Facilities covered by the scheme will eventually be moved onto industry benchmarks that will be applied equally, making low emitters more competitive.

An overall carbon ceiling will also be set on the scheme, and applied equally to all facilities covered by it, to ensure the 2030 target is met.

I doubt if Joe Average cares about emissions these day when he can't pay his power bill.

 

[sptrawler]

I doubt if Joe Average cares about emissions these day when he can't pay his power bill.

Yes it will be interesting to see if more industries close down, because it isn't financially viable to reduce emissions and much easier just to relocate the processing to China.
Meanwhile China keeps putting in coal fired power stations, ideology driving the bus at the moment, hopefully a degree of common sense prevails.
I wonder if it wouldn't be better to work with the industries to achieve a mutually agreed pathway forward, just telling them that they have to reduce emissions by a certain amount per year, to achieve a target that the Government has dreamt up just doesn't seem like a sensible way to do it.
Because the scale of processing and smelting in Australia is so small, it would seem to me that the businesses would just say, to hell with it we will just ship the raw materials.
Time will tell, at least we will know the answer soon, 2030 isn't far away and the industries have been warned.

 

[Smurf1976]

Yes it will be interesting to see if more industries close down, because it isn't financially viable to reduce emissions and much easier just to relocate the processing to China.
Meanwhile China keeps putting in coal fired power stations, ideology driving the bus at the moment, hopefully a degree of common sense prevails.

The big problem with all this, from all sides of politics, is it fails to fix the problem.

All it does when we lose industry from Australia is further entrench the nation's position as someone else's quarry. That being the last thing we ought be doing.

 

[sptrawler]

Maybe the reality is starting to hit some of those who were ramping up the hyperbole, time will tell, as usual. ?

World’s biggest solar and battery project hangs in balance as Sun Cable enters administration

Sun Cable enters voluntary administration amid hints of a falling out between the company’s two biggest backers, Mike Cannon-Brookes and Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest.

reneweconomy.com.au

Sun Cable, the developer of what promises to be the world’s biggest solar and battery storage project here in Australia, has gone into voluntary administration.

In a statement on Wednesday, Sun Cable said the “difficult decision” to appoint FTI Consulting as voluntary administrators of the company had “followed the absence of alignment with the objectives of all shareholders.”

This could suggest a falling out between the two major backers of the company’s huge Australia-Asia PowerLink project, tech billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes – who is also the chair of Sun Cable – and iron ore magnate Andrew Forrest. RenewEconomy could not immediately confirm whether or not this was the case.

Sun Cable’s “marque” project, the Australia-Asia PowerLink, proposes to build up to 20GW of solar near Elliott in the heart of the Northern Territory, and 42GWh of battery storage, providing clean energy for green industry in Darwin and to Singapore through a 4,200km sub-sea cable.

Sun Cable had aimed to begin construction on the AAPLink next year, complete financial close by the start of 2024, start supplying 800MW of electricity capacity to Darwin in 2027, and to be in full operation – helping to power Singapore – by 2029.

 

[mullokintyre]

Maybe the reality is starting to hit some of those who were ramping up the hyperbole, time will tell, as usual. ?

World’s biggest solar and battery project hangs in balance as Sun Cable enters administration

Sun Cable enters voluntary administration amid hints of a falling out between the company’s two biggest backers, Mike Cannon-Brookes and Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest.

reneweconomy.com.au

Sun Cable, the developer of what promises to be the world’s biggest solar and battery storage project here in Australia, has gone into voluntary administration.

In a statement on Wednesday, Sun Cable said the “difficult decision” to appoint FTI Consulting as voluntary administrators of the company had “followed the absence of alignment with the objectives of all shareholders.”

This could suggest a falling out between the two major backers of the company’s huge Australia-Asia PowerLink project, tech billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes – who is also the chair of Sun Cable – and iron ore magnate Andrew Forrest. RenewEconomy could not immediately confirm whether or not this was the case.

Sun Cable’s “marque” project, the Australia-Asia PowerLink, proposes to build up to 20GW of solar near Elliott in the heart of the Northern Territory, and 42GWh of battery storage, providing clean energy for green industry in Darwin and to Singapore through a 4,200km sub-sea cable.

Sun Cable had aimed to begin construction on the AAPLink next year, complete financial close by the start of 2024, start supplying 800MW of electricity capacity to Darwin in 2027, and to be in full operation – helping to power Singapore – by 2029.

That might explain the departure of the FMG CFO just recently.
And from The Australian

However, Dr Forrest’s Squadron Energy is understood to have raised concern that Sun Cable failed to meet its Series B funding milestones and was “burning cash” at unsustainable rates.

Mr Cannon-Brookes’ Grok Ventures, meanwhile, was planning to invest an extra $60m into Sun Cable, but that proposal was not agreed to by Squadron, sources said.

Edited to add the OZ quote.
Mick

 

[sptrawler]

This explanation sounds more feasible, with regard the Sun Cable collapse. IMO
I could never understand why we would be using our land, to put in a massive solar farm, that would feed Singapore, When we will need as much as possible for our own generation and to supply the power for manufacturing liquid hydrogen.

Squadron ‘wanted to unplug Sun Cable export plan’​

Mike Cannon-Brookes backs the ambitious plan to send power from Darwin to Singapore while Andrew Forrest wants Sun Cable as a domestic power supplier.

 

[Knobby22]

This explanation sounds more feasible, with regard the Sun Cable collapse. IMO
I could never understand why we would be using our land, to put in a massive solar farm, that would feed Singapore, When we will need as much as possible for our own generation and to supply the power for manufacturing liquid hydrogen.

Squadron ‘wanted to unplug Sun Cable export plan’​

Mike Cannon-Brookes backs the ambitious plan to send power from Darwin to Singapore while Andrew Forrest wants Sun Cable as a domestic power supplier.

We can do 3 things, supply Singapore, local towns and use capacity for hydrogen.
Return on capital, how long? That's the question. Singapore need to stump up.

 

[sptrawler]

We can do 3 things, supply Singapore, local towns and use capacity for hydrogen.
Return on capital, how long? That's the question. Singapore need to stump up.

Good point, maybe Twiggy sees a better return of capital, making the hydrogen and selling that to Singapore. My guess is Singapore would take as much electricity, as the farm could produce.

 

[sptrawler]

Several pumped hydro projects are in the planning phase.

Plans in place for drought-prone lake to become hydro-electric powerhouse

A proposal is in the pipeline for a massive hydro-electric plant in regional NSW capable of powering 400,000 homes with renewable energy.

www.abc.net.au

But as @SirRumpole points out, they aren't a done deal, as yet.

Fears pumped hydro dam will 'take away identity' of culturally significant mountain

Wiradjuri people around Lithgow in New South Wales are concerned about plans for a 40-metre-high concrete reservoir on top of a mountain that holds great importance to them.

www.abc.net.au

Worth the bill? 'Disastrous' hydro project threatens platypus

A hydro-electricity project proposed by Energy Australia has met stiff resistance over concerns for platypus in the area and local tourism.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Smurf1976]

Several pumped hydro projects are in the planning phase.

Plans in place for drought-prone lake to become hydro-electric powerhouse

A proposal is in the pipeline for a massive hydro-electric plant in regional NSW capable of powering 400,000 homes with renewable energy.

www.abc.net.au

But as @SirRumpole points out, they aren't a done deal, as yet.

Fears pumped hydro dam will 'take away identity' of culturally significant mountain

Wiradjuri people around Lithgow in New South Wales are concerned about plans for a 40-metre-high concrete reservoir on top of a mountain that holds great importance to them.

www.abc.net.au

Worth the bill? 'Disastrous' hydro project threatens platypus

A hydro-electricity project proposed by Energy Australia has met stiff resistance over concerns for platypus in the area and local tourism.

www.abc.net.au

Therein lies the problem as I've said many times.

Ask people if they want renewable energy and they practically all say yes.

But when it comes to actually doing it, there's no escaping that some pain is involved.

We don't need to "dam the lot" and we don't need a transmission line running over everyone's roof but ultimately we do need hydro and we do need transmission lines. We can't "save the lot" either, some sacrifices do need to be made and those do come with impacts.

BANANA isn't an option.

 

[sptrawler]

Therein lies the problem as I've said many times.

Ask people if they want renewable energy and they practically all say yes.

But when it comes to actually doing it, there's no escaping that some pain is involved.

We don't need to "dam the lot" and we don't need a transmission line running over everyone's roof but ultimately we do need hydro and we do need transmission lines. We can't "save the lot" either, some sacrifices do need to be made and those do come with impacts.

BANANA isn't an option.

It has only just started, how an absolute debacle is avoided, will be very interesting.

2030 is rapidly approaching and the exit from coal is now a certainty, whether it can be replaced in a timely manner isn't. ?