The future of energy generation and storage

[qldfrog]

Can you lock your driveway?

Yes it is and will be from now on.
..they can go thru the easement, they are allowed and I do not care but no track..., just walk over fence

 

[Smurf1976]

no legal right, just because they always did it , and we were nice enough to let them, and they recorded it in their procedures.

Old days = a state-owned Commission that most had the occasional grumble about when the bill turned up but which overall was seen as getting the job done and the general public were mostly on side with and thus had no real objection to a line strung across the farm or behind the back fence or wherever. Worth noting even the business lobby, which will naturally tend to favour private ownership over government, generally took no issues with state-owned utilities in the Australian context simply because they stacked up pretty well by international standards.

Today = a chaotic arrangement of countless companies, price has roughly doubled in real terms, and the public's fed up with the whole thing from retail pricing through to resource development.

The modern structure is making all this far harder than it needs to be. The industry has gone from being a national strength to a national weakness.

 

[SirRumpole]

Old days = a state-owned Commission that most had the occasional grumble about when the bill turned up but which overall was seen as getting the job done and the general public were mostly on side with and thus had no real objection to a line strung across the farm or behind the back fence or wherever. Worth noting even the business lobby, which will naturally tend to favour private ownership over government, generally took no issues with state-owned utilities in the Australian context simply because they stacked up pretty well by international standards.

Today = a chaotic arrangement of countless companies, price has roughly doubled in real terms, and the public's fed up with the whole thing from retail pricing through to resource development.

The modern structure is making all this far harder than it needs to be. The industry has gone from being a national strength to a national weakness.

In addition I would suggest that when power companies were owned by States that there was a positive incentive to keep prices down to attract business, industry and therefore jobs and revenue to that State. Competition actually worked for the consumer.

Now with a free for all, the incentive is to rip the consumer off as much as possible, evidenced as you say by increased prices.

Could a move back to State ownership be achieved? I doubt it the genie is out of the bottle, but governments can start putting feet in the door as with Snowy Hydro and Kurri Kurri.

I hope they continue to do so.

 

[sptrawler]

In addition I would suggest that when power companies were owned by States that there was a positive incentive to keep prices down to attract business, industry and therefore jobs and revenue to that State. Competition actually worked for the consumer.

Now with a free for all, the incentive is to rip the consumer off as much as possible, evidenced as you say by increased prices.

Could a move back to State ownership be achieved? I doubt it the genie is out of the bottle, but governments can start putting feet in the door as with Snowy Hydro and Kurri Kurri.

I hope they continue to do so.

I tend to think they are going to have no option, the return on investment from renewables will be marginal, as the excess capacity required to charge storage will be a benign and lack lustre income and will be dependent on how much storage requires charging.

I just can't see the compelling argument for the investment from the private sector and I tend to think that is where the the Government is lining up the super funds and future fund.
It is just becoming a shambles, as indeed the NBN did, expensive questionable outcomes and no doubt will have a lot of value written off.
Unfortunately we have to go through the process, as usual.

It's a shame they don't ever ask the experts to come up with a plan, but then they wouldn't be politicians would they, listening isn't their strong suite.

 

[Smurf1976]

Could a move back to State ownership be achieved?

Those who don't want it or politicians will always say no, it's irreversible.

In truth in most states it's been done before anyway. If we look back to the beginning, electricity has gone from private to public and back to private and the problems we're seeing now are very similar to those which prompted the move to state utilities in the first place.

It won't happen without a trigger though and if we look back then they were basically all products of wars or other crises.

WA, Tas - just before WW1

Vic - immediately after WW1

Qld - late 1930's after the Great Depression and before WW2

NSW, SA and the Snowy scheme - in the aftermath of WW2 and the post-war reconstruction period, indeed the War Act was used to make it happen in the case of Snowy.

So all were either when a crisis seemed imminent or shortly after a crisis had occurred. That's not a coincidence and my guess is history somewhat repeats there, the only question being the nature and timing of the crisis that triggers it.

 

[IFocus]

Economic Rationalism started the sell off didn't it?

Thatcher and Reagan.

Here we are most states and Federal government heavily underwater carrying huge debt with not much to show for it.

Ideology overruling common sense always wins until it doesn't.

 

[sptrawler]

Absolutely correct.

Economic Rationalism started the sell off didn't it?

Thatcher and Reagan.

Here we are most states and Federal government heavily underwater carrying huge debt with not much to show for it.

Ideology overruling common sense always wins until it doesn't.

How Paul Keating transformed the economy and the nation

Charismatic, controversial and witty, Paul Keating, along with Bob Hawke, modernised the Australian economy and opened it up to Asia.

theconversation.com

Keating played a major role in transforming Australian political debate. He highlighted the role of markets in restructuring the economy, engagement with Asia, Australian national identity and the economic benefits of social inclusion.

Economic rationalism​

Keating is remembered most for his eloquent advocacy of so-called “economic rationalism” both as treasurer and later as prime minister.

Under Hawke and Keating, Labor advocated free markets, globalisation, deregulation and privatisation, albeit in a less extreme form than the Liberals advocated. For example, while Labor introduced major public sector cuts, it attempted to use means tests to target the cuts and protect those most in need. Nonetheless, Hawke and Keating embraced the market far more than previous Labor leaders had.

Along with New Zealand Labour, Australian Labor became one of the international pioneers of a rapprochement between social democracy and a watered-down form of free-market neoliberalism. Years later, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who had visited Australia during the Hawke and Keating years, was to acknowledge the influence of Australian Labor on his own “Third Way” approach to politics.

Keating justified his economic rationalism on the grounds that the Australian economy needed to transform to be internationally competitive in a changing world. To avoid becoming one of the world’s “economic museums” or “banana republics”, in Keating’s view, there was no alternative but to embrace his economic rationalist agenda.

Trade unions and the ‘social wage’​

At the same time, Keating argued that his economic policies would avoid social injustices. This contrasted with the outcomes of the extreme economic rationalism of the Thatcher and Reagan governments.

Unlike in the UK or US, where anti-union policies were pursued, the Labor government was prepared to work with the trade union movement to introduce its economic policies. Under the Accord agreements, trade unions agreed to wage restraint, and eventually real wage cuts, in return for government services and benefits.

Hawke and Keating referred to this as the “social wage”. They claimed the resulting increased business profits would encourage economic growth and rising standards of living.

 

[qldfrog]

Absolutely correct.

How Paul Keating transformed the economy and the nation

Charismatic, controversial and witty, Paul Keating, along with Bob Hawke, modernised the Australian economy and opened it up to Asia.

theconversation.com

Keating played a major role in transforming Australian political debate. He highlighted the role of markets in restructuring the economy, engagement with Asia, Australian national identity and the economic benefits of social inclusion.

Economic rationalism​

Keating is remembered most for his eloquent advocacy of so-called “economic rationalism” both as treasurer and later as prime minister.

Under Hawke and Keating, Labor advocated free markets, globalisation, deregulation and privatisation, albeit in a less extreme form than the Liberals advocated. For example, while Labor introduced major public sector cuts, it attempted to use means tests to target the cuts and protect those most in need. Nonetheless, Hawke and Keating embraced the market far more than previous Labor leaders had.

Along with New Zealand Labour, Australian Labor became one of the international pioneers of a rapprochement between social democracy and a watered-down form of free-market neoliberalism. Years later, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who had visited Australia during the Hawke and Keating years, was to acknowledge the influence of Australian Labor on his own “Third Way” approach to politics.

Keating justified his economic rationalism on the grounds that the Australian economy needed to transform to be internationally competitive in a changing world. To avoid becoming one of the world’s “economic museums” or “banana republics”, in Keating’s view, there was no alternative but to embrace his economic rationalist agenda.

Trade unions and the ‘social wage’​

At the same time, Keating argued that his economic policies would avoid social injustices. This contrasted with the outcomes of the extreme economic rationalism of the Thatcher and Reagan governments.

Unlike in the UK or US, where anti-union policies were pursued, the Labor government was prepared to work with the trade union movement to introduce its economic policies. Under the Accord agreements, trade unions agreed to wage restraint, and eventually real wage cuts, in return for government services and benefits.

Hawke and Keating referred to this as the “social wage”. They claimed the resulting increased business profits would encourage economic growth and rising standards of living.

Problem is that since Julia, none of this economic commonsense plus leftist hearty side has been shown by Labor.
Labor and lnp in Australia are both playing the same game as wef peon: look at their positions on Covid, private liberties and individual rights, freedom of speech, immigrations, the scam of global warming and CO2 and the push to EVs.
The differences are minimal, just to let the peons pretendsthere is a debate and get agitated.
So do not expect any difference for power grid:
Both push for low carbon, lack of sovereignty, private wind and solar farms where costs are taxpayers but profits overseas private company, and the absolute crushing of prices with no competition.
Why am I not able to source my power only from a coal station day in day out, one price only?
Yet can buy for a premium , green energy only.....must be very green at 3am btw.
No free enterprise, just big corporatism and Soviet economy.
Only one certainty, it will collapse in pieces but in the meantime, pain and wasted...

 

[Smurf1976]

Economic Rationalism started the sell off didn't it?

The big problem was actually really simple. A failure to look at both sides of the ledger.

Proponents of the new approach correctly identified that it would bring about efficiencies in specific areas, and they were also mostly correct in identifying where those efficiencies would arise.

What they completely failed to do was consider the other side of the ledger, the costs associated with implementing what were commonly known at the time as the "reforms". In particular, that in some instances the benefits exceeded the costs and in other cases the costs exceeded the benefits.

It wasn't ideology that saw many predicting 30 years ago that we'd end up in a situation roughly like that which we actually have today. It was just maths, that's all.

One one hand the competitive private market has, with a couple of exceptions, mostly done a better job of running thermal generation than the state utilities did. In practical terms they've achieved longer plant lifetimes and higher availability.

The private sector has also been good in terms of not building excess capacity, another problem that plagued the state-owned utilities in particular NSW which effectively built and entire surplus power station then tried to hide it.

What they haven't been good at is planning on what they should build and the outcome has been insufficient building overall and a generally poorly planned, unnecessarily expensive approach to what has been done.

Also not good has been the dispatch process with many silly outcomes incurring unnecessary costs both economic and environmental. Shutting down CCGT plant after the evening peak whilst OCGT's are still running is a class example and still happens today. It's burning gas for the sake of burning gas - even someone with zero concerns about CO2 is going to struggle to find any logic in that one.

Then there's the huge financial overheads added on top which historically were either cheap back office functions or simply non-existent. An entire industry of "retail", costing ~$150 per customer per year, has been created where previously it cost stuff all to send the invoices out and receive payment. A classic case of illusory benefits - consumers get a choice of supplier, but they're all more expensive than a monopoly due to the cost of implementing competition exceeding the cost of running the former monopoly.

So it's a case of a "one size fits all" approach having been applied, failing to grasp that in some cases that was a step forward and in others it was a step backward.

The baby was thrown out with the bath water and overall it was one step forward, two steps backward. However imperfect the previous approach, bottom line is it was cheaper than the present one and more technically efficient, relative to international peers, too.

 

[mullokintyre]

You often hear ideological arguments about the various paths that leaders followed, but the simplist thing to do is ask yourself one question,
Did they leave the country in a better condition than when they they took office?
Mick

 

[qldfrog]

You often hear ideological arguments about the various paths that leaders followed, but the simplist thing to do is ask yourself one question,
Did they leave the country in a better condition than when they they took office?
Mick

Or: do you actually genuinely work to improve the country ( and we understand this could mean slightly different things but not that different between a nationalist and a leftist)
For the grid, I am sure no-one in power has cared the least for at least 2 decades, both sides..willingly or by incompetence

 

[sptrawler]

An article highlighting the issue of storage, that really is the hidden elephant in the room, when it comes to renewables.

Also it highlights the issue of why aren't we encouraging a major battery manufacturer to build a giga plant here, at the moment all these grid batteries will be sourced from China, who are using Indonesian raw materials, just seems like another lost opportunity to me.

Tesla has build a giga factory in a couple of years, so it isn't as though it wont be ready by the time we need it and we have all the raw materials here, so what is the issue?

Storage needs still 'enormous' despite British-owned company's plans for 30ha battery park in regional Victoria

An expert says current battery developments only just scratch the surface of Victoria's energy storage needs, as Pacific Green Australia announces plans to construct a 30-hectare grid-scale battery park in Portland.

www.abc.net.au

British-owned energy company Pacific Green Australia has plans to construct a 1-gigawatt, 30-hectare grid-scale battery park in Portland, Victoria.

Once built, it will be one of the largest batteries in the nation.

Elsewhere in the region, Origin Energy last week approved a smaller 300-megawatt battery at their Mortlake Power Station.

But the developments don't even scratch the surface in terms of what the state will require in the transition to net zero, according to renewables market expert.

Mr Alexander said grid-scale batteries like the one proposed, and another planned for the nearby Limestone Coast in South Australia, would be essential for the country's transition away from fossil fuels.

"We want our battery storage to be full of renewable power from the sun and from the wind," Mr Alexander said.

"So putting a battery park in an area where there's planned to be more renewables is a good thing."

Bruce Mountain, who heads up the Victoria Energy Policy Centre at Victoria University, said despite the growing number of proposals for huge battery parks, the state would need to brace itself for a whole lot more.

"The lithium battery storage market is booming in Victoria and South Australia," Dr Mountain said.

"It's scratching the surface to be perfectly honest."
He said the amount of storage needed to re-use renewable energy surplus would rise exponentially as the state decreased fossil fuel generation.
"We've done various studies on this," Dr Mountain said.

"Absolutely enormous amounts of storage are needed once you get to 90 per cent wind and solar, as a proportion of your energy mix.

"There are other massive battery developments much closer to Melbourne.

"But we will need in the order of 100s to 1000s more to fully decarbonise energy supply, just in Victoria."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And to highlight how little the media and even the politicians understand about the issues, here is another article on the same day, not a murmur about storage only solar/wind and transmission lines.
The penny really hasn't dropped IMO.

Call to cancel renewable rollout, Nationals declare bush is full

Nationals Leader David Littleproud said renewable development in regional Australia is at saturation point.

www.watoday.com.au

Regional communities and farmland cannot cope with more wind and solar farms, as well as transmission lines, Littleproud said, arguing that renewable energy should be delivered with more solar panels on the roofs of big commercial buildings.
The Nationals’ zero tolerance for renewables poses a challenge for the Liberals, with division between the Coalition partners a stumbling block at the 2022 election, where voters backed the Albanese government’s more ambitious climate policies.

Loading
The government has committed to nearly double the volume of renewable energy in the grid to 82 per cent by 2030, a key measure of its legally binding climate target to cut emissions by 43 per cent by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050.

It has pledged billions of dollars to spur a massive renewable energy rollout under its Capacity Investment Scheme, which will support private companies building wind and solar farms, as well as the thousands of kilometres of transmission lines to bring electricity to population centres.

 

[qldfrog]

About the fact our solar and wind farms attached to batteries are more CO2 producing than our fossil fuel plants, I am trying hard to find back the study I found a couple of months ago:
Not lucky so far which is not surprising, I got this so far:

Estimating The Carbon Footprint Of Utility-Scale Battery Storage

As utilities combine renewable energy with large battery storage systems, there has been increasing interest in the carbon footprint of such systems. In this article, I attempt to make that calculation.

www.forbes.com

But the study I read was for an Australian specific wind and solar farm coupled with battery to provide continuous power, so need to cover the dark windless days.
Anyone else? Australia was taken as a best case scenario for solar so the surprising result

 

[sptrawler]

About the fact our solar and wind farms attached to batteries are more CO2 producing than our fossil fuel plants, I am trying hard to find back the study I found a couple of months ago:
Not lucky so far which is not surprising, I got this so far:

Estimating The Carbon Footprint Of Utility-Scale Battery Storage

As utilities combine renewable energy with large battery storage systems, there has been increasing interest in the carbon footprint of such systems. In this article, I attempt to make that calculation.

www.forbes.com

But the study I read was for an Australian specific wind and solar farm coupled with battery to provide continuous power, so need to cover the dark windless days.
Anyone else? Australia was taken as a best case scenario for solar so the surprising result

Whether it makes sense or not has become a mute point, it has been legislated it is happening, until it either falls on its butt or works out only time will tell, but there is no turning back now.
The time required, to design and build a replacement major fossil fueled power station before 2030, is over IMO.
Therefore the renewable installations either work, or don't, whether they produce CO2 or not makes no difference and if they don't work the last thing the general public will be worried about will be CO2. Trust me, that is guaranteed.

 

[qldfrog]

Whether it makes sense or not has become a mute point, it has been legislated it is happening, until it either falls on its butt or works out only time will tell, but there is no turning back now.
The time required, to design and build a replacement major fossil fueled power station before 2030, is over IMO.
Therefore the renewable installations either work, or don't, whether they produce CO2 or not makes no difference and if they don't work the last thing the general public will be worried about will be CO2. Trust me, that is guaranteed.

But not working AND not even reducing our CO2 balance while costing us the earth..literally..( and our industry and the jobs) will really piss people.
WEF and government will really need a war to put the blame on.

 

[qldfrog]

Whether it makes sense or not has become a mute point, it has been legislated it is happening, until it either falls on its butt or works out only time will tell, but there is no turning back now.
The time required, to design and build a replacement major fossil fueled power station before 2030, is over IMO.
Therefore the renewable installations either work, or don't, whether they produce CO2 or not makes no difference and if they don't work the last thing the general public will be worried about will be CO2. Trust me, that is guaranteed.

As for being legislated ...we can legislate that every Australian will own a 6 bedrooms mansion, or no child will live in poverty...:, that does not make it either true or do-able, or even possible

 

[sptrawler]

As for being legislated ...we can legislate that every Australian will own a 6 bedrooms mansion, or no child will live in poverty...:, that does not make it either true or do-able, or even possible

No, being legislated can be overturned, but it does show a lot of money is going to be spent trying to achieve the goal, even if you can prove that renewables are no cleaner, do you really think it is going to change anything?

Do you think VC would buy an ICE car even if you prove they are just as clean, do you think anyone is going to fund a new coal fired power station at the moment, do you think raising the funding for a coal fired power station would be possible, even if someone wanted to?

Until this ideologically driven renewable swing, has run out of steam and money it will keep rolling along, if and when there starts to be major outages on a regular basis, then the narrative will change.
Until then it wont, simple really.
Everyone loves a blue sky feel good story, until the reality turns it into a nightmare. Then it proves the old saying, "the road to hell is paved with good intent".
Hopefully it all works out well, time will tell, but I personally don't think many people are aware of the enormity of the issue.

 

[sptrawler]

But not working AND not even reducing our CO2 balance while costing us the earth..literally..( and our industry and the jobs) will really piss people.
WEF and government will really need a war to put the blame on.

How much has a collapsed education system cost us in lost time and opportunity for young people and an economy that is struggling due to lack of skilled workers extending completion times on everything?
Just add it to the list of brain farts.

You're obviously still young enough to give a crap, when you get older and see history repeat over and over, you don't get too worked up about it.
You just think here we go again, while the younger keener ranters and chanters espouse the benefits and why this time it is the most important thing in history, yet again.

If it works out, that's great, if it doesn't it will be another one of those issues quietly slipped under the carpet, while the ranters and chanters find someone else to blame for the failure and re write history. Lol

 

[qldfrog]

How much has a collapsed education system cost us in lost time and opportunity for young people and an economy that is struggling due to lack of skilled workers extending completion times on everything?
Just add it to the list of brain farts.

You're obviously still young enough to give a crap, when you get older and see history repeat over and over, you don't get too worked up about it.
You just think here we go again, while the younger keener ranters and chanters espouse the benefits and why this time it is the most important thing in history, yet again.

If it works out, that's great, if it doesn't it will be another one of those issues quietly slipped under the carpet.

Fully agree, and until people starve, they will keep repeating the mantras..even so, millions have been sick with the mRNA jabs, but with good propaganda, and suppression, I bet a huge majority are ready to redo the same mistakes..so Pfizer,green energy,
Whatever you want to sell can be bought.
I blame a very low level of education in history, sciences, a will by media and politicians to obscure and an Australian psyche of no worries/easy past and docile convict non revolutionary mind.
But yes, birth country is well past saving, and seeing Australia my new(30y plus) place falling apart with predictable, already witnessed abroad causes and consequences is making me sad and angry .
Maybe one day I will be happy to be on cruise ships and visit DisneyWorld, or drive a tesla but not yet there.
Anyway, you are definitively right, my actions, facts, numbers, truth are irrelevant.
We live in a new USSR and Pravda is truth.
I have own food ,water,power and roof over my head...should be happy enough but I do worry for my son..

 

[sptrawler]

...should be happy enough but I do worry for my son..

As long as your son is happy, that's really all that matters, he has his own life choices to make, no matter how much you try to steer them.