This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The future of energy generation and storage

Jump to new
Sean K said:
And they don't have to start reducing emissions till 2060, 3 decades after the World explodes.
Click to expand...
You continually make very poorly informed comments about China.
China is expected to peak CO2 emissions nearer 2025 according to CarbonBrief and be carbon neutral by 2060. However, China regularly beats its target dates and is on track to be carbon neutral much earlier.
Sean K said:
India is on the same trajectory, just a few years behind.
Click to expand...
India is not likely to be carbon neutral before 2070 and does not have the economic nor manufacturing base of China, so is over a decade behind on best estimates.
Sean K said:
There is something wrong with this plan.
Click to expand...
It's actually working out much better than it would have had the western ("developed") world continued its poor practices and maintained their status of having more than twice the per capita CO2 footprint of the developing world, and over 20 times the footprint of the undeveloped world.
China only took the peak emitter mantle from America in 2005, despite having 4 times its population, and then only because America - along with the rest of the western world - was rapidly offshoring manufacturing and its concomitant energy requirements. As matters stand, China's modern manufacturing facilities are world leading and use less energy per unit than in other other nations. That's aside from China now punching well above its weight in terms of renewable capacity additions. For example China's wind power additions in 2021 and 2022 were 3.6 times greater than the growth seen over the same period in the United States, and 7.3 times more than in Europe.
What appears to be wrong is the comparatively poor progress of developed nations:
 
rederob said:
What appears to be wrong is the comparatively poor progress of developed nations:
Click to expand...

China is not a 'developed' nation in your opinion ?

What defines 'developed' ?

It could be said that China continues to cry poor to cover the fact that it produces 30% of global emissions while having 18% of the world's population.

CO2 Emissions by Country - Worldometer

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions by Country in the world with Global share of CO2 greenhouse emissions by country
www.worldometers.info
 
SirRumpole said:
China is not a 'developed' nation in your opinion ?
Click to expand...
China is not classified as as such, so it's not an opinion.
SirRumpole said:
It could be said that China continues to cry poor to cover the fact that it produces 30% of global emissions while having 18% of the world's population.
Click to expand...
China is responsible for a third of the world's manufactured products (over 50% of global steel) and this is principally in energy intensive sectors, so given its population base then we should expect far higher than 30% of emissions. Then there is the fact that China manufactures more renewable energy products via wind and solar than any other nation, contributing more than any other nation to global decarbonisation efforts:
 
All so sad. ?
1983 – Invention of the Passivated Emitter and Rear Cell (PERC) Australian Professor Martin Green invented PERC technology in 1983 and over the next two decades perfected it with his team at UNSW (University of NSW). PERC technology is now used in more than 90 per cent of the world's solar panels manufactured today.

Reshoring solar cell production - by Shane West - Australian Manufacturing Forum

Achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050 is a credible target, but if it is to be achieved with local manufactured solar PV cells we need to mobilise the research and manufacturing sector as never before. Here Shane West us of the early history of solar cell production in Australia and the...
www.aumanufacturing.com.au

The picture below shows a typical1 kW PV array at the former Homebush Olympic village comprising BP Solar panels manufactured at Homebush.

A Public Private Partnerships and consortium approach similar to that used by the Sydney Olympic Park Authority (SOPA) for the Olympics could be replicated to regenerate a local renewable industry of scale.

A consortium of Mirvac, Lend Lease, Civil & Civic, ANZ and Westpac built over 1,500 residences and at the time making it the world’s largest solar village.

But then came the 2010 Building the Education Revolution (BER) that opened the Pandoras box to cheap imports mainly from China, and after the Sydney Olympics, the shift of solar technology was to Germany and China.

At the time of the Sydney Olympics Australia was the world leader and had production of the world’s best solar cells using UNSW ‘s Martin Green’s technology. This is the technology that has continued to evolve outside of Australia.

Here the lack of support and commercialisation of solar was not supported with any preferential sponsorship in Australia unlike China and Germany.

The introduction of the Federal and State Governments roof top solar subsidy scheme soon saw the Australian products languish and the Australian plant at Homebush closed in 2011.
 
sptrawler said:
Ideology is starting to run into reality.
Click to expand...
There's an even bigger shock coming for WA than that.

The good news is the state reserved 15% of natural gas for local use as has been widely publicised.

The bad news is this isn't enough, and the latest official forecast projects a serious shortfall in supply in the not too distant future. From AEMO data, available gas supply as a % of forecast demand being as follows:

2023 = 98.6%
2024 = 95.5%
2025 = 97.1%
2026 = 97.7%
2027 = 101.3%
2028 = 103.9%
2029 = 104.1%
2030 = 83.5%
2031 = 79.8%
2032 = 76.8%

So the short term situation is of finely balanced supply and demand. A bit short in the next 4 years, then a small surplus, so overall it's tight. These imbalances are manageable by withdrawal or injection to storage.

From 2030 onwards though WA has a crisis unless something's done. Note that's based on AEMO's figures not my own.

What's the problem? In short strong growth in gas demand for electricity generation runs into declining gas supply from existing and committed sources.

I expect to see some panic before too much longer......

The raw figures are as follows (all units are PJ per annum):

Supply:
2023 = 1084

2028 = 1158
2029 = 1219
2030 = 1077
2031 = 1025
2032 = 982

Demand:
2023 = 1099

2028 = 1115
2029 = 1171
2030 = 1290
2031 = 1284
2032 = 1278

The original report's here for those who wish to read it. https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/g...2-wa-gas-statement-of-opportunities.pdf?la=en

 
Let's be honest, 6 months ago everyone was saying why hasn't the Eastern States got the gas reservation policy that W.A has.
Now we have half of W.A;s generation capacity shut down on a brain fart and the reserve gas capacity is down the toilet, plus we the taxpayer are paying a private coal mine to supply coal to a private coal power station that's novel.
Meanwhile over East we still have the ranters and chanters going on about the solar/wind dawn, while gas is already on the outer.
Let's be honest the loonies are running the show, can't wait to see the PC outcome.
China must be pizzing themselves watching this unfold, the muppets running the critical infrastructure roadmap.
What a hoot.
Sounds like we have the loonies and the media in control of the power generation grid, can't wait to see how it works out, absolute FW's.
My guess, very soon the media will be told to shut the fluck up, we are in a bit of $hit. ?
 
Last edited:
sptrawler said:
Let's be honest the loonies are running the show, can't wait to see the PC outcome.
Click to expand...
Suffice to say the whole thing frustrates me greatly. It didn't have to be this way as we both know.

On the other hand, I think perhaps the economists are right indeed the theory applies far beyond just economics. A periodic purge is needed to clear out the dead wood - in this case society's arrogance and silliness is going to give it a pretty swift kick.
 
Absolutely flucking right, this whole situation is getting completely out of control and it wont be long before the politicians realise they are way beyond their depth and pay scale.
I can understand why Albo is up front and central in the gay parade, the vote catcher is there, not in the humungous mess happening in our power system.
This is going to come to a head really quickly IMO, the coal generators will flick the bird, the Government can't afford trillions of dollars and doesn't have the manpower to to do much anyway, so taxpayers are going to be screwed.
Sad, but hey be careful what you wish for, you want it, you get it.
Win/win
I think the options are limited, the coal generators can't make money and no one wants them, they make up the majority of base load.

Suck it up princess, ring @basillio and the shovel for the answers, they always have them. ? ? ? ?

I tell you what smurf, I don't think many have any idea how bad this is.
 
The much maligned Turnbull at least tried to get it right by asking for an expert opinion (Finkel) and if it wasn't for the deadheads in his party we might have been on our way to a decent solution by now.

Too many politicians thinking they are engineers, they are right out of their depth. They need to appoint a panel of scientists and engineers and give them a blank cheque to design the best system with nothing ruled out or in by the politicians. If the panel says we need nuclear, then we do it, if they say we need new coal and gas then we do it. Get ideology out of the equation. Just my opinion.
 
Oz company, Hyzon Motors have realeased their HR truck platform based on a hyderogen fuel cell producing electricity.
From Prime Mover


Lots of markieting hype in the statement, but (a), it is made in Australia, and (b) they are actually building a plant.
The down side comes when you look at the efficiency of the cells versus say a direct EV truck like the volvo or Tesla Semi.


As much as I hate to admit it being an engineer, there are times when the economics will trump the engineering.
Mick
 
Smurf1976 said:
Given China's reported to have done 30 year deals with Russia to secure increased fossil fuel supplies, and is actively tying up supplies from other countries too, I'll reserve judgement on that one until it happens.
Click to expand...
It's a matter of maths.
FFs are declining proportionately in China's energy mix, so while China will remain a large emitter - and continue to tie up long-term FF supply deals - it's on track to peak before 2030.
China's 2060 net zero target reflects the extent it will have built - and continues to build - FF energy infrastructure that will be functional for the next three to four decades.
China's coal power plants are now planned to use ultra-supercritical power generation technology which is about 15% more efficient and also less CO2 intensive.
Some here deride China because it's the biggest CO2 emitter. However, the fact remains that through an average year China has to restrict energy consumption in some provinces because it simply does not have enough to keeps the lights on and manufacturing plants running. That's not surprising when per capita consumption is less than half that of America's despite having the world's greatest manufacturing base:
 
rederob said:
FFs are declining proportionately in China's energy mix, so while China will remain a large emitter - and continue to tie up long-term FF supply deals - it's on track to peak before 2030.
Click to expand...
As I say, I'll reserve judgement there.

That's not saying wrong or right, but they're putting in some pretty serious new capacity both for the supply and use of fossil fuels so I'm doubtful as to their intentions. One doesn't renovate a house if they're about to demolish it.

Time will tell.
 
Smurf1976 said:
That's not saying wrong or right, but they're putting in some pretty serious new capacity both for the supply and use of fossil fuels so I'm doubtful as to their intentions. One doesn't renovate a house if they're about to demolish it.
Click to expand...
While that is true, some of that "new" capacity is actually replacement capacity as older plant are phased out and replaced with ultra super-critical coal plant.
As can be seen below, from the past few year's data, new coal generation capacity is less than half that from other sources:


 
The other issue China has, is the fact they are the manufacturing base for most western countries, so due to that fact alone they will be emitting a lot of carbon that would otherwise be emitted by the western countries.
The problem with first world countries, is the individual usage by the people, multiple t.v's, multiple fridges, multiple A/C's, multiple everything that is an energy consumer, basically indulgence, because we can.
 
rederob said:
As can be seen below, from the past few year's data, new coal generation capacity is less than half that from other sources:
Click to expand...
In terms of nameplate rating it is.

In terms of annual energy output capacity though well the wind and solar will definitely have a much lower design capacity factor than coal plant that's a given.

Hydro can be designed for pretty much any CF from very low to very high but for economic reasons it's normally 50% or below except in systems where it's the sole or at least predominant means of generation which isn't the case in China.

Nuclear's the only one that in practice might exceed real world CF for new coal plant.
 

Labor’s reform of safeguard mechanism will fail unless changed, say Greens

Party will oppose the changes after the government refused to rule out banning new coal and gas projects
www.theguardian.com

Speaking earlier, Greens leader Adam Bandt said an analysis by RepuTex – a consultancy that Labor used to model its climate policies before the 2022 federal election – had found there would be an emissions “blowout” under the safeguard.

The report, commissioned by the Climate Council and the Australian Conservation Foundation, found that if proposed fossil fuel projects that had already reached financial commitment stage went ahead and emitted at expected levels, the government would still meet its emissions target for the scheme, but if production at those developments was higher than forecast due to greater than expected demand for exports, it could push pollution beyond the government’s goal.
The climate change minister, Chris Bowen, has said the government was open to changes to the safeguard that were not at odds with Labor’s election commitments, which included not banning privately financed coal and gas developments that met local environmental requirements.

The Greens said they were open to other ways of dealing with coal and gas other than an outright ban, including pausing new fossil fuel developments until separate changes to national environment laws were considered later this year. They want to include a climate trigger, which would require the environment minister to formally consider a project’s climate impact before approving a major development.
 
sptrawler said:
Greens leader Adam Bandt said an analysis by RepuTex – a consultancy that Labor used to model its climate policies before the 2022 federal election – had found there would be an emissions “blowout” under the safeguard.
Click to expand...
The big problem with the Greens is that, and I'll be quite blunt in saying this, they're playing everyone for fools.

Origin Energy Shelves the Shoalhaven hydro expansion project

Greens candidates Tonia Gray for Kiama and Mayor Amanda Findley for the South Coast, have welcomed the announcement that Origin Energy will not be ...
www.2st.com.au


And there we have it. The Greens are dead against any move to a 100% renewable electricity system in practice, having opposed almost every hydro project proposed since the party's inception.

If we don't build more hydro then, with present technology, we're left with a choice between gas and diesel to provide deep firming to wind and solar. Batteries work fine for daily peak demand but they're nowhere close to being able to cope with multiple consecutive days of low wind and sun, a situation that has arisen each and every year for as long as there's been wind and solar on the grid. That's not only my conclusion but it's AEMO's as well.

The Greens state support for renewables in principle but in practice they don't support what's needed to make it work. Not just hydro but they opposed interconnection between NSW and SA when it was first proposed, they opposed interconnection between Vic and Tas too.

If society wants to go fully renewable then big storage and transmission projects are exactly what we desperately need more of and quickly. If not, if we don't want those, then gas turbines are here to stay for the long term.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gen Alpha
Replies
13
Views
811
moXJO
M
Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
573
Smurf1976
The Effect of Deepseek on Australian Stocks
Replies
7
Views
650
Smurf1976
SS1 - Sun Silver
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
Sean K
PGTX - Platinum Global Transition Fund
Replies
1
Views
651
Dona Ferentes
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...