The future of energy generation and storage

SirRumpole said:

Looks like Turnbull will have to blame his mates in the NSW Liberal Party for that.

Click to expand...

Why is he sticking his nose into State affairs when he can't get his own act together? he can't even control his temper when someone teases him about his good fortune. Of course there is an election in WA that looks like Labor will have a chance at winning.

Things aren't looking good for NSW tomorrow.

At present it looks like load shedding will be unavoidable between 16:00 and 18:30 (NSW time). This is assuming that nothing breaks down etc.

In addition to that, a high risk period where load shedding will be required in the event of a single generation failure between 14:00 - 16:00 and 18:30 - 20:00.

For SA tomorrow they've got just enough spare to say that the system is in a reasonably secure state as long as everything works. That's with about 700 MW coming from Vic and assuming nothing fails with SA generation. It would need at least two failures in SA, or loss of the AC interconnector to Vic, to bring about a supply shortfall in SA tomorrow - possible but unlikely.

No real concerns in any other state at the present time assuming nothing drastic goes wrong.

moXJO said:

I wouldn't trust anything the SA govt says. We already have smurf filling us in.

Click to expand...

The second unit at Pelican Point power station (SA) which has been unavailable for an extended period has miraculously returned to service this afternoon and is now operating.

Joining the dots there - someone in a high place has been on the phone and some orders have been given. The details will likely never be made public, at least not in full, but it's up and running.

There's 240 MW spare in SA right now, versus demand of 2949 MW, so it's tight but load shedding shouldn't occur today unless something breaks:

Loss of the Vic - SA interconnect would remove 600 MW from SA and lead to a supply shortfall.

Loss of either Pelican Point unit would remove 235 MW. Whilst that leaves 5 MW to spare some load would be shed in practice since that's just too close to risk it with stability of the whole system.

If any of the 4 Torrens Island B station units, 200 MW each, were to fail then that would have the same effect.

So there's a few things which could go wrong and cause a problem but if there's sufficient power in SA right now if nothing breaks. Loss of a smaller generating unit would reduce reserves but not to a critical level although it would come close.

Meanwhile in Tas we got all excited about something that didn't eventuate. Looked like the price in Vic was going to hit $10,000 per MWh and everything was ready to go to maximise supply Tas to Vic. In practice the price in Vic topped out at $290 so was a non-event really.

S.A is really cutting it fine, i wonder what plan B will be?
Will they install more gas plant, or re commission some capacity at Port Augusta, to do nothing wouldn't appear to be an option.
As you have said, Hazelwood is closing, this will put a lot of pressure on State operated generators and political decisions regarding new installations.
IMO the good thing to come out of this event, is it highlights the problem of making political mileage from "Green" decisions, when the politicians have no grasp of the issues.
S.A politicians, will be wishing they hadn't bought the green vote, as they will be having a lot of sleepless nights now.lol

sptrawler said:

S.A is really cutting it fine, i wonder what plan B will be?
Will they install more gas plant, or re commission some capacity at Port Augusta, to do nothing wouldn't appear to be an option.
As you have said, Hazelwood is closing, this will put a lot of pressure on State operated generators and political decisions regarding new installations.
IMO the good thing to come out of this event, is it highlights the problem of making political mileage from "Green" decisions, when the politicians have no grasp of the issues.
S.A politicians, will be wishing they hadn't bought the green vote, as they will be having a lot of sleepless nights now.lol

Click to expand...

Weatherill stated the authorities could have brought gas fired power stations on line when the wind generators failed but he obviously does not know it takes 2 to 3 hours from start to production to produce power.
You can not flip a switch and hey presto you have power.

Loving the updates Smurf. Is there any truth that power providers withhold power to drive the prices up? I thought the role of the AEMO was to prevent just that. From the outside it seems that trying to progress to a grid less dependent on fossil fuels hits a few snags with the nature of the privatised network. Power providers due to policies like the RET and talk of a carbon tax see no financial benefit in performing expensive maintenance because they have no long term prospects and decide it's easier to shut the doors. If it was state owned then at least the government would have more control over the closing of stations and wouldn't be dependent on their profitability.

overhang said:

Loving the updates Smurf. Is there any truth that power providers withhold power to drive the prices up?

Click to expand...

They wouldn't do that, would they ?

sptrawler said:

S.A is really cutting it fine, i wonder what plan B will be?

Click to expand...

Unknown at this stage but the SA government seems to be serious judging by the words they're using. They have a mandate, backing of the SA population and so on. If it were independent country you'd think they were preparing for war judging by the language.

Pure speculation here but I wouldn't be surprised if they go down the track of regulation now, fully aware that in due course that leads to nationalisation with generation owners all to keen to sell their facilities to government if the regulations are tough enough. That would obviously play out over an extended period (years) if it did happen.

If not that then what? They sound like they're planning a war of sorts certainly.

All generation in SA is "privately" owned, the SA government owns absolutely nothing unless you count backup generators at hospitals etc (though even they might be leased?).

I say "privately" because there's some government involvement, just not the SA government. The French and Chinese governments are significantly involved, via various companies of which they are part owners, with the industry in SA both generation and networks.

On a smaller scale there's a minor (1.9 MW) plant owned by Lofty Ranges Power, a subsidiary of Hydro Tasmania (itself owned by the State of Tasmania). Hydro is also active as a retailer in SA (and in Qld, NSW and Vic) under the Momentum Energy brand (100% owned by HT).

There's also some involvement of the Commonwealth, NSW and Victorian governments via their ownership of Snowy Hydro which operates in SA under the names Red Energy (retail) and Lumo (retail and they also own some diesel generation).

So whilst there's some government involvement, it's not the SA government and that involvement of other governments is via "private" for-profit companies and does not take the form of a public service in any way. Only reason any government from France to Tassie is involved with power in SA is on a purely commercial for-profit basis.

Yes I noticed today on a news report, that the new naval building facility will be installing their own generating plant, it certainly makes S.A an expensive place to do business.
We keep talking about a new economy, but it seems very unlikely, if we can't provide reliable power at a reasonable price.

overhang said:

Is there any truth that power providers withhold power to drive the prices up? I thought the role of the AEMO was to prevent just that.

Click to expand...

They generally don't physically withhold, as in an actual refusal to supply, but they certainly can and do adjust pricing upwards when the market is tight. No question there.

AEMO physically dispatches generation. Eg right now there's 865 MW being produced at Torrens Island (SA) and there's 295 MW being produced at Gordon (Tas). In both cases that's because this is the level of generation from those sources with AEMO has dispatched within the limit of capacity made available by the owners of those power stations.

The owners of those power stations, in this case Hydro Tas (Gordon) and AGL (Torrens Island) set prices as they see fit and on that basis AEMO will direct who produces how much at any given time. Same for every other power station, these two are just examples.

In the case of Gordon, being a hydro station not intended for constant maximum output, we can't have AEMO dispatching it flat out 24/7 otherwise we'll end up with no water left (and managing water isn't AEMO's role). There's really only two ways to achieve that in the market. One would be to simply withdraw it intermittently, that is not make it available for use at all, and the other is to set the price to a level that results in it not constantly running (because someone else offered supply at a lower price) but still fully available if demand is such that it's needed and running when demand and price are higher.

Most generators in that situation do the latter, using price, unless they shut down a generating unit completely and there's a long time to restart it (coal, some gas plants are like this for technical reasons) in which case it's simply not available at that time.

Owning a power station is not much different to any other business in a sense. There's no law that says AGL must continue to operate Torrens Island. If they've listed it as available then AEMO can force them to run it. But if AGL decided they were going to demolish it then AEMO can't stop that - all they'd need is to de-register the plant with AEMO, physically disconnect it from the grid and then get the same council etc approvals that anyone else needs to demolish something.

AEMO's role is a bit more complex but you could compare it to the ASX. They run a market, in AEMO's case for the trading of electricity (also gas by the way). They also do the physical dispatch. But AEMO doesn't tell Energy Australia to check the coal mills at Yallourn or that they need to build another gas turbine somewhere. Just as the ASX can't tell Woolworths that they need to keep selling Vegemite or that they ought to replace the roof on one of their shops. Origin, AGL etc can permanently close their power stations and Woolworths can permanently close their shops if they want to. The only real difference in that context is that so long as the power station remains open for business as such, AEMO can direct that it be turned on.

Take anyone completely unfamiliar with all of this and show them how it's done and they'll always make the same observation. "So it's like the stock market" or "it's like a casino". That's largely correct since physical dispatch is on the basis of price, not the reverse.

So in summary:

Physically withholding supply isn't commonly done (but it has happened certainly) other than by means of outright closing a power station (or part of it) as such.

Price most certainly can be adjusted as generation owners see fit. No surprises that someone will put it right up when supply is tight even if it costs them a bit of market share. Different generating companies have very different strategies there - some will try and force the price up, others will just respond to what others are doing, some just run regardless (Hazelwood power station being the extreme case there - just plods along constantly no matter what the price and its closure will have a bigger impact than many are expecting for that reason).

In some cases deliberately pricing generation out of the market when demand is lower is necessary due to that plant not being able to operate constantly. Most (byt not all), hydro, most oil and some gas generation is in this category of having a physically constrained fuel supply which precludes constant running at full output. They can and do run to full output when needed but can't do it 24/7.

A real example of why having reserve capacity at all times in the grid is needed.

Wednesday 8th Feb 2017.

Just after 10:15am (NSW time) Mount Piper power station unit 1 tripped offline from almost full load. Maximum capacity is 660 MW and was operating at 659 MW prior to the sudden failure. Output instantly went to zero.

Response came from a total of 33 power stations across Qld, NSW, Vic, Tas and SA which immediately took up additional load upon the loss of supply from one generator at Mt Piper. This immediate response came from as far away as Gladstone (Qld), south-west Tasmania and Adelaide.

Had there not been reserve plant online and running at the time then two possible scenarios could have occurred:

1. System frequency falls and load shedding of some consumers is automatically triggered.

2. Load shedding fails and a rapid cascade system collapse occurs. In laymans terms that means everything shuts down real quick and then nobody has power. Shouldn't happen in theory but nobody will say it's impossible.

Scenario 1 is the intended response but there's always a non-zero chance of ending up with scenario 2. Having reserve plant online avoids either scenario occurring and is thus standard practice everywhere in the world that has a significant power grid.

Now, to have reserve plant online and running ("spinning reserve" in industry speak) you obviously need to have spare generating capacity in the first place. You can't have spare plant already running if it doesn't even exist in the first place.

The other relevant point in this example is that things can and do break down. Nothing mechanical is 100% reliable, failure is always a possibility, so it's unwise to assume that every generating unit will be available to run at any given time. That's the other reason there needs to be more capacity built than the actual demand on the system.

So what's going to happen tomorrow? The latest forecast from AEMO for NSW is:

*High risk period, the system cannot cope with a single failure of generation, from 14:00 to 20:00

*Load shedding will be required from 16:00 to 18:30 even with no failures of generating plant

All times are NSW time.

That's AEMO's "official" forecast at the present time and looks right to me. Situation will improve if demand is lower or intermittent (wind, solar) generation works better than expected. Situation will become worse if demand is higher than forecast or if something breaks down (eg like what happened at Mt Piper on Wednesday).

Forecast demand peak is 14,610 MW. Available generation in NSW is 12,966 MW. Supply available from other states, primarily Qld, expected to be 1256 MW. Shortfall of 388 MW so someone's going to lose power.

SA tomorrow = forecast peak demand 2730 MW. Available generation in SA = 2434 MW. Available supply from Vic = 716 MW. Surplus of 420 MW so OK as long as nothing breaks.

Other states no issues at the moment.

Smurf1976 said:

They generally don't physically withhold, as in an actual refusal to supply, but they certainly can and do adjust pricing upwards when the market is tight. No question there.

Click to expand...

I take it there would be no barrier to governments either State or Federal building and running power stations to add to the supply and therefore stabilise prices ?

If it was a State owned station though they could not guarantee under the current regulations that their stations power would always go to their own State, which could be a political barrier to building one.

sptrawler said:

Yes I noticed today on a news report, that the new naval building facility will be installing their own generating plant, it certainly makes S.A an expensive place to do business.
We keep talking about a new economy, but it seems very unlikely, if we can't provide reliable power at a reasonable price.

Click to expand...

I saw Chris Pyne talking about that half an hour before Malcolm blew his poofer valve. I hope we taxpayers aren't paying for a consortium's responsibility

Watched David on ABC24 a short while ago about the farce and politics of SA blackouts. Very good interview and something Turnbull wouldn't like being splashed across the media.

Gas and solar mix a possibility for SA to reduce reliance on National Electricity Market, experts say

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-10/gas-and-solar-mix-a-possibility-for-sa/8259768

SirRumpole said:

Gas and solar mix a possibility for SA to reduce reliance on National Electricity Market, experts say

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-10/gas-and-solar-mix-a-possibility-for-sa/8259768

Click to expand...

So basically they are saying "We relied on renewable energy to much, and the wind didn't blow an we were screwed, so now we are going to add more gas generators"

sptrawler said:

Yes I noticed today on a news report, that the new naval building facility will be installing their own generating plant, it certainly makes S.A an expensive place to do business.
We keep talking about a new economy, but it seems very unlikely, if we can't provide reliable power at a reasonable price.

Click to expand...

So much for renewable energy.....The Naval building facility does not seem to have any confidence in the Wetherill Labor Government.

Value Collector said:

So basically they are saying "We relied on renewable energy to much, and the wind didn't blow an we were screwed, so now we are going to add more gas generators"

Click to expand...

Possibly yes. It shows the folly of letting politicians think they are engineers and letting them decide what's in or not.

Smurf1976 said:

Response came from a total of 33 power stations across Qld, NSW, Vic, Tas and SA which immediately took up additional load upon the loss of supply from one generator at Mt Piper. This immediate response came from as far away as Gladstone (Qld), south-west Tasmania and Adelaide.

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


Forecast demand peak is 14,610 MW. Available generation in NSW is 12,966 MW. Supply available from other states, primarily Qld, expected to be 1256 MW. Shortfall of 388 MW so someone's going to lose power.

SA tomorrow = forecast peak demand 2730 MW. Available generation in SA = 2434 MW. Available supply from Vic = 716 MW. Surplus of 420 MW so OK as long as nothing breaks.

Click to expand...

The fact that the system works as described in the first paragraph amazes me.

Ofcourse everyone in the industry knows it, but wouldn't large scale storage of electrical energy be awesome, imagine if we could store 3 days of power, and power plants just had to run at their most efficient work / maintenance cycles just to keep the battery topped up.

Value Collector said:

Ofcourse everyone in the industry knows it, but wouldn't large scale storage of electrical energy be awesome, imagine if we could store 3 days of power, and power plants just had to run at their most efficient work / maintenance cycles just to keep the battery topped up.

Click to expand...

Best way of doing that is pumped hydro. Batteries are going to be expensive and will wear out. Hydro is initially expensive but will last for decades.