- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,225
- Reactions
- 12,944
I get what you are saying, but home solar is already causing problems for the grid.
It's lack of planning and no coordinated approach again so it's a big fail by the politicians.
I get what you are saying, but home solar is already causing problems for the grid.Well, if you buy a unit that doesn't fulfil the requirement for your needs and fails, it makes you an industry expert to say it's a big fail. Scientific facts about greenhouse gases don't matter because I go to witch doctors for my cancer treatments.
There's been little foresight under the last consecutive govts, but Australia is overregulated, unfortunately heavy industrialisation is long gone.I get what you are saying, but home solar is already causing problems for the grid.
It's lack of planning and no coordinated approach again so it's a big fail by the politicians.
Scientific facts ROLWell, if you buy a unit that doesn't fulfil the requirement for your needs and fails, it makes you an industry expert to say it's a big fail. Scientific facts about greenhouse gases don't matter because I go to witch doctors for my cancer treatments.
Nothing stopping us from putting an export tax on all gas exported and using that to pay for imports if we need to.On a completely different tack, the media explaining why a gas reservation policy isn't in your best interest.
Explaining why, Australia's gas doesn't belong to the Australian people, they are just holding it it for others.
Is there any wonder Australia gets itself in ridiculous predicaments, we have a welcome mat pinned to our backs IMO, from your ABC.
Taxpayers could be on hook if foreign companies sue over Dutton gas plan
Peter Dutton is under pressure to publish modelling and details of his gas plan, which has faced a barrage of industry condemnation.www.abc.net.au
Companies from allies led by Japan, South Korea, the US and UK could sue the Australian government for lost profits if Peter Dutton's gas reservation scheme is adopted, says a global law expert who warns it also means taxpayers will be effectively subsidising ongoing use of the energy source.
Mr Dutton is facing a barrage of questions and blow-back from the energy industry over his cornerstone election campaign promise to force gas giants to divert up to 20 per cent of existing export supply into the domestic market.
How Japan built a market onselling Australian natural gas
While Japan criticised Australia for diverting gas exports to help cut domestic prices, the Asian power was building its own market with onsold Australian LNG.www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au
We should just do a Trump back to them and claim a national energy emergency; most of the investors are US anyway.On a completely different tack, the media explaining why a gas reservation policy isn't in your best interest.
Explaining why, Australia's gas doesn't belong to the Australian people, they are just holding it it for others.
Is there any wonder Australia gets itself in ridiculous predicaments, we have a welcome mat pinned to our backs IMO, from your ABC.
Taxpayers could be on hook if foreign companies sue over Dutton gas plan
Peter Dutton is under pressure to publish modelling and details of his gas plan, which has faced a barrage of industry condemnation.www.abc.net.au
Companies from allies led by Japan, South Korea, the US and UK could sue the Australian government for lost profits if Peter Dutton's gas reservation scheme is adopted, says a global law expert who warns it also means taxpayers will be effectively subsidising ongoing use of the energy source.
Mr Dutton is facing a barrage of questions and blow-back from the energy industry over his cornerstone election campaign promise to force gas giants to divert up to 20 per cent of existing export supply into the domestic market.
How Japan built a market onselling Australian natural gas
While Japan criticised Australia for diverting gas exports to help cut domestic prices, the Asian power was building its own market with onsold Australian LNG.www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au
Funny how the ABC in its rage against Dutton is playing the big corporations game again...On a completely different tack, the media explaining why a gas reservation policy isn't in your best interest.
Explaining why, Australia's gas doesn't belong to the Australian people, they are just holding it it for others.
Is there any wonder Australia gets itself in ridiculous predicaments, we have a welcome mat pinned to our backs IMO, from your ABC.
Taxpayers could be on hook if foreign companies sue over Dutton gas plan
Peter Dutton is under pressure to publish modelling and details of his gas plan, which has faced a barrage of industry condemnation.www.abc.net.au
Companies from allies led by Japan, South Korea, the US and UK could sue the Australian government for lost profits if Peter Dutton's gas reservation scheme is adopted, says a global law expert who warns it also means taxpayers will be effectively subsidising ongoing use of the energy source.
Mr Dutton is facing a barrage of questions and blow-back from the energy industry over his cornerstone election campaign promise to force gas giants to divert up to 20 per cent of existing export supply into the domestic market.
How Japan built a market onselling Australian natural gas
While Japan criticised Australia for diverting gas exports to help cut domestic prices, the Asian power was building its own market with onsold Australian LNG.www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au
No disrespect to you Qldfrog, but there are people who have dedicated their life studies to climate control, there's more for than against.Scientific facts ROL
Get a degree in sciences, some thermodynamics, a bit of chemistry at the molecular level and a bit of geology knowledge would not be unhelpful.. otherwise be a sucker parroting "co2 is creating global warming"
Who are the flat earthers?
I can not believe the arrogance of ignorance.
The same would have burnt Copernicus because the church said so.
And what has all that to do with roof panels issues with the grid?
No issues because you said so, of course it is too successful for its own good.
And this need to be addressed , the status quo is not good for anyone
That post is so true and is why I try and be pragmatic and open minded about energy sources, all of them solar PV, wind, coal, gas and nuclear, all of them have an upside and a downside, so it is a case of looking at it holistically IMO.No disrespect to you Qldfrog, but there are people who have dedicated their life studies to climate control, there's more for than against.
I've read many studies over the years formed my own opinion. I don't usually involve myself with these types of conversations online as they go around in circles.
I've personally seen parts of this country where no one ever goes and other nations where large Corps ignore environmental protection acts and it renders the land unusable to anyone, all in the cause to make a quick buck. You can survive without anything but water and food, once you screw that up it's all over.
The Western Green Energy Hub would build 3000 wind turbines and six million solar panels in WA to power production of hydrogen and ammonia, mostly for export, though potentially leaving some for local use.That post is so true and is why I try and be pragmatic and open minded about energy sources, all of them solar PV, wind, coal, gas and nuclear, all of them have an upside and a downside, so it is a case of looking at it holistically IMO.
They all need to be weighed up on all aspects, not just on one aspect, as is being done at the moment, so that the outcome fits the narrative.
Take for example the idea of of massive solar/wind farm out in the middle of nowhere, the land isn't really suitable for agriculture and ticks most of the boxes as it affects minimal people.
We are so busy finding reasons not use something, that we are actually not doing anything, which eventually will lead to panic decisions having to be made.
Massive 70 GW wind and solar project that straddles Nullarbor seeks federal green tick
The world’s biggest wind, solar and green ammonia project joins queue seeking federal environmental approval to install up to 60 million PV panels and 3,000 turbines.reneweconomy.com.au
Yet.
WA’s $100 billion ‘green’ project will destroy ‘spectacular hidden world’: scientists
A $100 billion wind, solar and hydrogen project has been proposed for Western Australia. But scientists say it will destroy an irreplaceable and precious area.www.watoday.com.au
A mega energy project would bring 8,000 workers to the outback. What are the odds of it going ahead?
Plans lodged with WA's Environmental Protection Authority this month will bring wild transformation to an ancient desert landscape. Experts, who note the proposed scale is "incredible", say the idea has a lot going for it.www.abc.net.au
Scientist concerned massive green energy hub could cause widespread damage to Nullarbor
The new South Coast Marine Park has a hole in it to facilitate a yet-to-be-approved renewables project in a region some scientists believe warrants inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage List.www.abc.net.au
That post is so true and is why I try and be pragmatic and open minded about energy sources, all of them solar PV, wind, coal, gas and nuclear, all of them have an upside and a downside, so it is a case of looking at it holistically IMO.
They all need to be weighed up on all aspects, not just on one aspect, as is being done at the moment, so that the outcome fits the narrative.
Take for example the idea of of massive solar/wind farm out in the middle of nowhere, the land isn't really suitable for agriculture and ticks most of the boxes as it affects minimal people.
We are so busy finding reasons not use something, that we are actually not doing anything, which eventually will lead to panic decisions having to be made.
Massive 70 GW wind and solar project that straddles Nullarbor seeks federal green tick
The world’s biggest wind, solar and green ammonia project joins queue seeking federal environmental approval to install up to 60 million PV panels and 3,000 turbines.reneweconomy.com.au
Yet.
WA’s $100 billion ‘green’ project will destroy ‘spectacular hidden world’: scientists
A $100 billion wind, solar and hydrogen project has been proposed for Western Australia. But scientists say it will destroy an irreplaceable and precious area.www.watoday.com.au
A mega energy project would bring 8,000 workers to the outback. What are the odds of it going ahead?
Plans lodged with WA's Environmental Protection Authority this month will bring wild transformation to an ancient desert landscape. Experts, who note the proposed scale is "incredible", say the idea has a lot going for it.www.abc.net.au
Scientist concerned massive green energy hub could cause widespread damage to Nullarbor
The new South Coast Marine Park has a hole in it to facilitate a yet-to-be-approved renewables project in a region some scientists believe warrants inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage List.www.abc.net.au
On that basis, you really want something that has as small a footprint as possible, the bigger the footprint the more chance there is of primary or secondary contamination. Nothing is ever black or white, there is usually a lot of grey in power systems.I've seen the NIMBYS protest about renewables but the problem with things like windmills is that they need to be in windy areas, so whoever farms they land on gets paid millions and rest around make BS excuses to reject them because they get nothing.
IMO, chopping up a few birds or having an eyesore is still far better than continuing to dig huge holes everywhere.
My comment referred more to things like fracking LNG and destroying water tables in near by farms and tailing dams overflowing and killing everything kms down the river it flowed into.
Lithium is infinitely recyclable, unlike coal and gas, one use. Yes, everything has an effect on the environment that we dig out of the ground.On that basis, you really want something that has as small a footprint as possible, the bigger the footprint the more chance there is of primary or secondary contamination. Nothing is ever black or white, there is usually a lot of grey in power systems.
For example:
The Harmful Effects of our Lithium Batteries
In this article we’ll explore why lithium batteries come with their own heavy environmental cost, and why they’re not necessarily the environmentally friendly alternative we’ve been led to believe.greenly.earth
Lithium giant 'deeply regrets' impact mine has had on Greenbushes locals
Talison Lithium says it underestimated the impacts of dust, noise and light pollution from its Greenbushes mine expansion project on the local community in WA's South West.www.abc.net.au
Risks Rise as Indonesia Nickel Booms | SRK News | Battery Metals
As capital pours into nickel projects, companies face increasing challenges when attempting to develop nickel laterite mines or source offtake agreements in Indonesia.www.srk.com
Processing technologies currently in use in the country include the well-established rotary kiln electric furnace (RKEF), which produces nickel pig iron, and the more recent adoption of high-pressure acid leaching (HPAL).
HPAL, a capital-intensive technology, has historically been associated with failed nickel projects in Australia and elsewhere. The technology has subsequently been applied to large HPAL facilities to recover nickel and cobalt from the low-grade limonite-nickel mineralisation that often overlies the saprolite mineralisation used as feedstock for the RKEF plants.
Another challenge to Western miners hoping to operate in Indonesia concerns the poor environmental practices and difficulties of obtaining social license to operate. In fact, the situation is bad enough that listed mining companies could find their ESG ratings impacted by Indonesian nickel projects unless they take steps to address these issues early in the mine development process.
I do hold lithium shares.
I'll claim no credentials on climate science. I've read plenty, I've done my own experiments to see what happens, but that doesn't make me an expert.there are people who have dedicated their life studies to climate control, there's more for than against.
From a technical and economic point of view I'm sure your argument iare sound, but there is the individual vs big business argument and the desire for households to be independent (or so they think) of the greedy corpoations.I'll claim no credentials on climate science. I've read plenty, I've done my own experiments to see what happens, but that doesn't make me an expert.
That said, from my own experiments I recommend not filling the atmosphere with sulphur hexafluoride or dichlorodifluoromethane as they did produce definite warming in my experiments. But that's just mucking about - the real sun isn't a 1500 Watt halogen lamp and the real planet isn't an aquarium.
What I can say though is if we take the CO2 causes warming argument as true, setting aside all argument about whether or not it is true and just supposing that it is, then it's counterproductive to resolving that problem to not embrace solutions that are low cost and effective. Because in practice society has limited material, labour and financial resources and isn't likely to accept major failures of energy supply.
From there well I do see that those who claim to be concerned about the issue (in society generally, not referring specifically to this forum) do themselves a disservice by failing to support workable solutions and/or advocating things that are unnecessarily expensive or ineffective.
In that context I'll note the apparent obsession with small scale, in particular household, approaches is out of step for a number of reasons.
First is simply that all other things being equal, economies of scale are a very real thing. A single large solar farm or battery is cheaper per unit than a large number of individually tiny ones.
Second is simply that 71% of electricity, 74% of gas and 88% of energy in total is not used by households. That figure being an Australian Government statistic for 2022-23, noting that other statistics generally put the residential portion slightly lower (about 25% for electricity).
So there's no rational reason for what seems to be an obsession with doing things at the household level. The logic of doing so was simply that it uses an existing structure (the house) and an existing electrical connection, thus avoiding the need to purpose build those, and could thus be done economically. That's true up to a point certainly, but there's no reason to go beyond that point in a country that isn't exactly short on land.
If the aim is to move away from fossil fuels then what actually makes sense is to go with whatever's cheapest and most effective. Rooftop solar is that to a point beyond which it isn't.
House roofs have the same problem as all resources - grade. Starting from scratch it's dead easy to find an easily accessible roof of a simple design with no shade on which to put the first rooftop solar installation.
As more are installed however, things start to change. Roofs that are easily accessed with a ladder from the ground, can be walked on without breaking, are of a simple design to facilitate installing the panels and which have no shade get scarcer and scarcer as they're used up. That's one problem.
The other problem is that beyond a point distributed solar starts causing first voltage problems with distribution networks, then if installation continues hard capacity limits are reached.
Put those two factors together and the cost of installation goes up, the energy yield goes down, and the cost of supporting infrastructure goes up. A point comes where it just isn't the best option anymore.
Same happens with all resources, not just energy. Start with the best and inevitably the remaining options gradually get worse.
Collecting oil from natural seeps is easy enough. Drilling a shallow vertical axis well on flat land near an existing town won't upset anyone indeed quite the opposite historically. Keep going though and a point comes where you're drilling technically complex wells offshore in rough seas, or you're doing it in the middle of an active war zone, or you're trying to convince authorities to let you drill in a conservation reserve, etc. As the best options are used up, it just gets harder in every way.
Now looking at some real data, this is for today.
Rooftop solar, whole of NEM:
View attachment 196686
Large scale solar, whole of NEM:
View attachment 196687
So looking at that we have rooftop solar with a peak power output of 9266MW an an average output over 24 hours of 2630MW. So the average is 28.38% of the peak.
For large scale solar peak power was 4546MW with the average over 24 hours being 1505MW. So the average is 33.106% of the peak.
In short we're at the point where large scale has the edge in terms of lower requirements for storage. Or in other words, the grade of roofs has declined - there's a lot of solar going on less than ideal roofs these days, those with shading and so on, that tends to produce a very peaky output profile centred on midday (as per the chart). That being so, large scale would be preferable unless costs, eg transmission, are sufficiently high as to tip the balance (which is site specific).
That's not an ideological argument, it's just data.
There will have been many political careers shot to pieces, because of stepping on the toes of big business and that is on both sides of the house.From a technical and economic point of view I'm sure your argument iare sound, but there is the individual vs big business argument and the desire for households to be independent (or so they think) of the greedy corpoations.
No public discussion has ever been held to my knowledge of the points you have raised, more evidence of a poiitical coverup, its all too hard for them to allow a proper debate.
Oh yes, and if Dutton gets in and effectively delays any action for 10 years, Gina will make a lot more money.There will have been many political careers shot to pieces, because of stepping on the toes of big business and that is on both sides of the house.
This transition, is making some sectors and people, a lot of money.
Whether Dutton gets in or not, won't change the outcome very much IMO, the grid is too critical to have chaos a lot of what is going on is theatre, politics and ideology.Oh yes, and if Dutton gets in and effectively delays any action for 10 years, Gina will make a lot more money.
Cynical. no?
It would not be bad imho for the LNP to let the **** hit the fan, i have said that already but let a nice collapse happens otherwise nothing will change, we have been going down the drain for 12y from memory, taxes have never been that high, government so inefficient and bloated.Whether Dutton gets in or not, won't change the outcome very much IMO, the grid is too critical to have chaos a lot of what is going on is theatre, politics and ideology.
All that gets thrown out the window when the manure hits the fan, my call is Albo gets in and Labor get one more term, then its heave ho as the usual disasters start to unfold.
Gina will make money, no matter who is in, Albo wasn't short of high flying mates at the last election and it hasn't hurt him.
Dutton is like Shorten unelectable, unfortunately that's the way things go IMO.
The other thing of course, does Dutton really want to win this election, inflation has cranked housing and rents into orbit, the grid is a basket case and no extra projects have been started to mitigate the issue, Snowy and Kurri Kurri are still not available.
It really is a poison chalice for Dutton, maybe he doesn't want to pick it up.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?