The future of energy generation and storage

[sptrawler]

We owe our present standard of living to China. They dragged us out of and through the 2008 economic crisis by maintaining strong trading relationships, and have been out principal 2-way trading partner for decades.
With respect to renewable energy targets, China will be responsible for the lion's share of global deployment. That include solar, wind turbines and home battery storage.

There is no denying the above statement, but it would be folly to think China dragged us through the economic crisis, rather than China was furthering its own ends and our raw materials were required for their growth.

To think China feels any benevolence toward us, is as fraught with danger as thinking any other major nation does, those that wish to access our minerals all look toward us as a source of supplying their resource needs.

We require at least a modest ability to supply, or quickly be able to supply, critical infrastructure support.

If we purchase all of our renewable equipment from China, which we no doubt will.

The ability to replace failed modules has to be a consideration, China has already shown its willingness to apply punitive justice on Australia over relatively small issues.

 

[rederob]

There is no denying the above statement, but it would be folly to think China dragged us through the economic crisis, rather than China was furthering its own ends and our raw materials were required for their growth.

When you can name a country that would not want to trade its way out of a crisis because it had the means to do so, you might have a point.

We require at least a modest ability to supply, or quickly be able to supply, critical infrastructure support.

Making solar panels does not achieve this end.

The ability to replace failed modules has to be a consideration, China has already shown its willingness to apply punitive justice on Australia over relatively small issues.

If you followed politics you would know that China makes it clear that when other countries act against it unfairly (in their eyes) then they will take compensatory actions. The beginnings of the tit for tat arose after Huawei's 5G was considered a national security threat. 5G was going to be worth $billions, so calling it a "small issue" doesn't cut it.
Moving on to your point, Europe, America and India make modules, so there are many future supply options available to Australia.
The real issue here, as with AUKUS, is why do it when it only makes sense if you are a fanatical nationalist.

On topic, nobody in their right mind would try to make something from scratch when there was not only no local expertise or supply chain, but where there was no market for an uncompetitive product. On this latter point, in the next 2 years Jinkosolar alone will complete a new plant capable of annual production equal to almost 2 times Australia's installed capacity. JinkoSolar - a vertically integrated manufacturer - said it hopes to ship between 100 GW and 110 GW this year.

 

[SirRumpole]

Moving onto to your point, Europe, America and India make modules, so there are many future supply options available to Australia.
The real issue here, as with AUKUS, is why do it when it only makes sense if you are a fanatical nationalist.

All money going out of the country with little benefit here.

Although your economic arguments stack up, all countries subsidise their manufacturing in some way, there is no reason Australia should be any different.

 

[rederob]

All money going out of the country with little benefit here.

To get anyone to buy a local module would require a government - ie taxpayer - contribution greater than 200% of the price of manufacture, and even then it might not be enough. Your points are almost as vapid as the nuclear case which does not fly in Australia.

Although your economic arguments stack up, all countries subsidise their manufacturing in some way, there is no reason Australia should be any different.

There is a big difference between subsidising an industry like automaking which has a strategic benefit (in a military sense) and massive multipliers, plus the capacity to cater for local circumstances at an affordable price point, and subsidising a globally generic solar panel industry with limited employment potential and no viable market.

 

[Smurf1976]

The real issue here, and this has huge implications for energy supply, is simply that the present Australian economic model looks to be at its end.

Simple as that. Change is required and whilst I'm very unconvinced about solar panels being the answer, I've yet to hear any credible plan that doesn't involve something that could broadly be classified as manufacturing, refining or at least processing something.

What's the alternative way forward?

The given is that if the answer is to manufacture something, then doing so requires cost competitive and reliable energy supply. That's the starting point no matter what the end product. Without that, we're doomed to fail.

 

[SirRumpole]

The real issue here, and this has huge implications for energy supply, is simply that the present Australian economic model looks to be at its end.

Simple as that. Change is required and whilst I'm very unconvinced about solar panels being the answer, I've yet to hear any credible plan that doesn't involve something that could broadly be classified as manufacturing, refining or at least processing something.

What's the alternative way forward?

The given is that if the answer is to manufacture something, then doing so requires cost competitive and reliable energy supply. That's the starting point no matter what the end product. Without that, we're doomed to fail.

Maybe we should take a lesson from China and go b ack to cheap coal.

 

[sptrawler]

When you can name a country that would not want to trade its way out of a crisis because it had the means to do so, you might have a point.

Making solar panels does not achieve this end.

If you followed politics you would know that China makes it clear that when other countries act against it unfairly (in their eyes) then they will take compensatory actions. The beginnings of the tit for tat arose after Huawei's 5G was considered a national security threat. 5G was going to be worth $billions, so calling it a "small issue" doesn't cut it.
Moving on to your point, Europe, America and India make modules, so there are many future supply options available to Australia.
The real issue here, as with AUKUS, is why do it when it only makes sense if you are a fanatical nationalist.

On topic, nobody in their right mind would try to make something from scratch when there was not only no local expertise or supply chain, but where there was no market for an uncompetitive product. On this latter point, in the next 2 years Jinkosolar alone will complete a new plant capable of annual production equal to almost 2 times Australia's installed capacity. JinkoSolar - a vertically integrated manufacturer - said it hopes to ship between 100 GW and 110 GW this year.

The alternative, of just continuing down the path of dig and ship, is the road to ruin, IMO
It just shows a lack of vision, or a self serving attitude by our politicians.

If as you know, automation and AI is going to reduce the dependence on employing labour, our advantage of processing the ore at the point of extraction becomes more attractive, it really just takes strong leadership and a vision to the longer term.
We actually did do that in the early years of developing our raw materials, that is exactly how Whyalla. Newcastle, Kwinana etc were developed.
Indonesia is actually jumping over us employing our past methods.
They said you can't have the raw materials unless you value add here and as China need them, they are conforming to Indonesia wishes.
Way too many vested interests in politics IMO, no one wants to upset the apple cart and ruin their retirement plan.
All you seem to be doing is giving us an expose on how we got in this mess and adding no input on how we get out of it.
The EU is talking about putting tariffs on Chinese EV's, the US is already putting heavy tariffs on Chinese imports, at the end of the day if the West tariffs negate the cheap labor component then China's advantage gets nullied.
Then they have to increase the wages of their own citizens, to be able to supply the consumer base.
We just need to work out how to stop our own slide.

 

[rederob]

The alternative, of just continuing down the path of dig and ship, is the road to ruin, IMO
It just shows a lack of vision, or a self serving attitude by our politicians.

The idea of producing solar panels that would be unaffordable is hardly a path to prosperity.

All you seem to be doing is giving us an expose on how we got in this mess and adding no input on how we get out of it.

There are literally thousands of products that can be manufactured.
So why choose one that has zero local skill base, technical expertise, supply chain, or viable market?
The purpose of value adding is to put in place a product that is, ultimately, both wanted and competitive in the market.

The EU is talking about putting tariffs on Chinese EV's, the US is already putting heavy tariffs on Chinese imports, at the end of the day if the West tariffs negate the cheap labor component then China's advantage gets nullied.

China's BRI was put in place to tap into developing markets, and all your actions are suggesting is that China diverts supply from the cashed up west to more populous developing nations.
It was never a problem in the past to buy cheaper products from India or China or other low wage nations. But now China is a "threat". This is an unusual proposition because China is nowhere near as restrictive in trade as is America, and militarily has just a few border skirmishes instead of unsanctioned wholesale invasions of nations and extrajudicial killings to its credit.
All this talk of a rules based order from the west is bunkum. America determines the rules it wants everyone else to follow while maintaining its record in the UN as being signatory to the fewest international accords and treaties.

Putting the above politics aside, China now leads in both technology and quality in most areas of manufacturing. This includes solar panels and wind turbines. Turning our back on the best products available when they are also the most competitively priced would just make the renewable transition more costly and less efficient.

(An area where Australia could make big waves is in remote plasma chemical vapor deposition (RPCVD) for GaN laser diodes. Or in WA where you are, actually contract OEC to manufacture drone engines at scale for many government agencies, including Border Force. That's just 2 ideas for improving manufacturing where we already have world class operations but minimal investment. There are dozens more.)

 

[sptrawler]

The idea of producing solar panels that would be unaffordable is hardly a path to prosperity.

There are literally thousands of products that can be manufactured.
So why choose one that has zero local skill base, technical expertise, supply chain, or viable market?
The purpose of value adding is to put in place a product that is, ultimately, both wanted and competitive in the market.

China's BRI was put in place to tap into developing markets, and all your actions are suggesting is that China diverts supply from the cashed up west to more populous developing nations.
It was never a problem in the past to buy cheaper products from India or China or other low wage nations. But now China is a "threat". This is an unusual proposition because China is nowhere near as restrictive in trade as is America, and militarily has just a few border skirmishes instead of unsanctioned wholesale invasions of nations and extrajudicial killings to its credit.
All this talk of a rules based order from the west is bunkum. America determines the rules it wants everyone else to follow while maintaining its record in the UN as being signatory to the fewest international accords and treaties.

Putting the above politics aside, China now leads in both technology and quality in most areas of manufacturing. This includes solar panels and wind turbines. Turning our back on the best products available when they are also the most competitively priced would just make the renewable transition more costly and less efficient.

(An area where Australia could make big waves is in remote plasma chemical vapor deposition (RPCVD) for GaN laser diodes. Or in WA where you are, actually contract OEC to manufacture drone engines at scale for many government agencies, including Border Force. That's just 2 ideas for improving manufacturing where we already have world class operations but minimal investment. There are dozens more.)

I agree, I don't think I've ever said build solar panels, I said if we were serious about it, the Government in 2009 would have supported the Homebush plant in Sydney, which was one of the biggest plants in the World at that time and was exporting panels.
That horse is done, we have to start small scale and build up a degree of self sufficiency, that is the only way we can possibly grow our manufacturing base, we can't possibly build a competitive base competing with China, the U.S and EU will even struggle with that.
We have to think niche and build a skill base, you know exactly opposite to what the brain fart brigade are doing with the solar panel flatulence.
Mark McGowan actually nailed it, as the Perth metro rail network is growing, in 2018 he re launched the Midland rail workshops.
Not huge like 30 years ago where they employed 800 apprentices a year, but started manufacturing our replacement rolling stock, for the aging stock.

This is the problem in Australia, way too many people giving reasons why we can't , one wonders if a lot of people in power are making way too much money leaving things as they are and importing wage slaves, to keep it that way.

The kids were promised a better future by making them all go to uni, because technology was where the jobs were going to be, now 30 years later we haven't enough skilled tradesmen, we are still digging holes and we are still eaiting for the bonanza in technology jobs.
Some might think they have been sold a bunny.
I personally think a Japanese or South Korean battery manufacturer woud jump at the opportunity to build a grid battery plant here, if the incentives were right, container battery banks standard sizes with all the materials here that would have to be competitive with the right settings IMO.
But you would probably find China wouldn't be happy with it.

Made in WA: METRONET railcars to be proudly built in WA

Made in WA: METRONET railcars to be proudly built in WA Sunday, 18 August 2019 •McGowan Government election commitment to bring railcar manufacturing back to WA takes a major step forward •Alstom today announced as the preferred proponent to build 246 new METRONET railcars and a...

www.pta.wa.gov.au

WA Railcar Program

After 27 years, railcar manufacturing has returned to Western Australia at the purpose-built Bellevue Railcar Manufacturing and Maintenance Facility, operated by Alstom Australia.

www.metronet.wa.gov.au

 

[sptrawler]

Then on a Federal level, politics comes into it, just when offshore wind is going to take off with huge demand.
Surprise, surprise, the terrific on Chinese wind turbines is lifted, but so is the Chinese tariffs on our wine.
So I guess there goes our wind turbine manufacturing.
2013

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://reneweconomy.com.au/keppel-prince-wins-bid-anti-dumping-review-wind-towers-40188/&ved=2ahUKEwjIndnmrJ6FAxVJia8BHW4VBGU4ChAWegQICxAB&usg=AOvVaw1fQAt1KY-fY4jzWQFTBxws

2024

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/australian-wind-farm-makers-fear-they-have-been-sold-out-for-china-wine-deal/news-story/ba298793726df0a2fc23e68d716b89c7&ved=2ahUKEwj3g7j6q56FAxW_kq8BHRyRAV4QFnoECDcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw02GlQakbQIWGyuZe0Dc2yl

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.globalaustralia.gov.au/industries/net-zero/wind-energy&ved=2ahUKEwjIndnmrJ6FAxVJia8BHW4VBGU4ChAWegQIGhAB&usg=AOvVaw3WbvPdU8YcdbdakvSdQvPM

I guess when all the heavy lifting has been done and the wind farms are up and running, with Chinese equipment, we will then have an announcement about how we should be building them here?
It's all about the optics, but I'm sure you are well aware of that. Lol

 

[mullokintyre]

Australia, once the can do country, is now the country of why we can't do.
A nation of barriers, of protestors, of negatives.
Knackered.
Mick

 

[SirRumpole]

Australia, once the can do country, is now the country of why we can't do.
A nation of barriers, of protestors, of negatives.
Knackered.
Mick

All embodied in one particular poster.

 

[sptrawler]

I see in my last post auto correct changed tariffs, to terriffic.
Well it isn't terrific. Lol

 

[sptrawler]

All embodied in one particular poster.

Come on Rumpy, group hug. Lol

 

[mullokintyre]

Mick

 

[sptrawler]

Well at last common sense is breaking through. Tony Woods from the Gratton Institute have a pragmatic approach.

The US and Japan have 'tripled down on nuclear', could it be time for Australia to shift its attitude?

For decades, Australians have been hesitant to embrace nuclear power – but there are signs attitudes might be shifting as younger Australians see climate change as their generation's existential threat.

www.abc.net.au

 

[SirRumpole]

Well at last common sense is breaking through. Tony Woods from the Gratton Institute have a pragmatic approach.

The US and Japan have 'tripled down on nuclear', could it be time for Australia to shift its attitude?

For decades, Australians have been hesitant to embrace nuclear power – but there are signs attitudes might be shifting as younger Australians see climate change as their generation's existential threat.

www.abc.net.au

Do you think you will still be alive to see our first power reactor?

I don't think I will be.

But if our population gets to 50 million at some stage it might be viable.

 

[sptrawler]

Do you think you will still be alive to see our first power reactor?

I don't think I will be.

But if our population gets to 50 million at some stage it might be viable.

I'm 69 this year and no I don't think I will see a nuclear plant built, I don't think we will need one to cover domestic usage, as I said a while back it may be required if H2 eventually is the goto replacement for a lot of the fossil fuel application that can't be realistically converted to an electrical powered process.

It will work itself out as the transition unfolds, if nuclear isn't required it wont be used, it really is a huge outlay and wont make sense if it can't make money.
Also it isn't suitable for cycling, so until we find the limit of renewables IMO it would be crazy to install nuclear, much more sensible and suitable to install gas turbines and maybe down the track consider the situation.

But to try and turn the public against it is counter productive IMO, we should be open minded about all forms of clean energy

 

[mullokintyre]

Twiggy Forrest misses another deadline for its Final investment Decision, and leaves the supplier of the green solar power up in the air.
From Renew Economy

The fate of one of the biggest solar projects in Australia remains in limbo, after Andrew Forrest’s Fortescue Metals missed another deadline for reaching financial closer on the key Gibson Island green hydrogen plant in Queensland.

has blown through its extended deadline, sending electricity supplier Genex scrambling for new offtakers for the proposed Bulli Creek solar farm.

The Gibson island ammonia plant in Queensland is Fortescue’s first big green hydrogen production project in Australia, but it has now missed three deadlines for FID – the end of December, the end of February and now the end of March.

The Gibson Island component is key to the future of Genex Power’s proposed Bulli Creek solar project, as it had signed up to take 337 MW of output from that project.

That power purchase agreement (PPA) underpinned the proposed 450MW Bulli Creek solar farm and encouraged Genex to try and boost the farm’s capacity to 775MW by locking in other PPAs – which would have made it the largest grid-connected solar power project in Australia.

The latest deadline miss on Gibson Island – believed to be centred around concerns over electrolyser costs and the logistics challenge of the plant near Brisbane – prompted the same comment provided to RenewEconomy when the company delayed a decision in February.

“We are progressing our Gibson Island project, but we have more work to do. We are approaching this project with the same financial discipline Fortescue has shown for 20 years,” they told RenewEconomy again.

On Tuesday, Genex said that while the PPA is still on, Fortescue’s share of the project is now no longer locked and the renewable energy company is talking to other potential off-takers for the Bulli Creek farm.

“Genex is continuing discussions with external parties for further solar offtake which would allow the initial capacity of the project to be increased to up to 775MW,” the company said today.

“The size of Bulli Creek Solar [should be] confirmed by mid-2024 which will support the target of a final investment decision for the first stage project in 2H CY2024.

“Genex continues to support Fortescue as needed, as it works toward satisfying the buyer condition precedent as soon as possible.”

Huge scale, huge challenges​

The scale of the Gibson Island project that Fortescue is attempting is ambitious, with a 550 MW green hydrogen electrolyser facility.

It needs a lot of very low cost electricity – the Genex deal would only supply part of the project’s needs – so Fortescue needs to either secure more green power to a challenging site, which sits in a central part of Brisbane, or government assistance to help fund the cost of energy.

In January, Fortescue head of green energy Mark Hutchinson alluded to the energy problem, saying it was the “most important part of the equation” and they needed to weigh up the economics.

He said that was why the company is also pursuing green hydrogen projects in Brazil, Namibia and Morocco where energy costs are lower than in Australia.

At the time, he expected a decision to be made in February.

Other key costs are for electrolysers as the over-hyped global industry moves into survival mode.

Shares in US and European electrolyser companies are falling as the twin challenges of scaling and growing a customer base in an industry that still barely exists while rapidly reducing the cost of the key technology hits revenue and profitability.

Bid moving ahead​

Meanwhile, the proposed $380 million bid for Genex from its Bulli Creek partner J-Power is also moving ahead, with the Japanese electricity company saying over the weekend that it’s finished due diligence.

The companies are negotiating a “mutually acceptable Implementation Agreement” but J-Power has asked for an extension of the exclusivity period until April 8 in order to bed that down.

The 27.5c a share offer was initially lobbed in early March, having started at 24c a share.

J-Power already holds a 7.72 per cent stake in Genex and has provided it with a $35 million loan.

Mick

 

[Smurf1976]

Twiggy Forrest misses another deadline for its Final investment Decision

In my view the expected and entirely foreseeable outcome.

He's given it a decent shot, so have others, but the bottom line is we've far too many fundamental problems in this industry to be in a position to supply ~500MW to what is effectively a factory of sorts and to do that at an internationally competitive price.

There's entrenched inefficiency leading to higher than necessary costs and until such time as we face and address that reality there's not likely to be overly much success with this sort of thing.