The future of energy generation and storage

[SirRumpole]

Not having a go personally but it's pretty much a given that anything from an anti-hydro organisation is going to argue that hydro isn't good. And it's not likely the Guardian are going to say anything positive about gas (or hydro or nuclear).

I'll argue that what's needed is the consistent application of science on a project-specific basis.

Because there are some places where hydro would be shockingly bad, others where it's pretty benign, and same can be said for the location of a nuclear plant or wind farm. The impacts aren't generic, it depends on the detail. Pretty much nobody other than those with hard line ideological views are today lamenting that Lake Eildon was created but the same can't be said for the damming of Lagoon of Islands - that was a serious mistake yes.

Much the same with nuclear. Sensibly located, properly designed, built and operated is one thing. Poorly designed, recklessly operated or located next to the ocean in a place prone to tsunamis is quite something else.

Unlike burning gas or diesel that does have a generic impact that's much the same anywhere and is essentially the baseline against which to compare alternatives. Anyone proposing hydro is, in the Australian context at least, proposing it as an alternative to gas or diesel so they're a relevant benchmark.

If you could think of one person in the country who should be in charge of a national grid, the electrical equivalent of the RBA governor, who would it be?

 

[Smurf1976]

If you could think of one person in the country who should be in charge of a national grid, the electrical equivalent of the RBA governor, who would it be?

I'm reluctant to pick names but if I had to name someone then I'd pick Kate Summers. Whether she'd be interested in such a job is of course another matter.

She's professionally competent (extremely so), not bad at public speaking and has a track record of calling it as it is and not being afraid to upset a few.

Bonus that personal attributes mean she's a difficult target especially for the Left and pretty thick skinned in the event anyone tries. That shouldn't be relevant, and it's not the primary reason, but it's not a bad bonus.

Only negative is nuclear advocates will say she's biased toward renewables by virtue of work history. But realistically it's pretty hard to be in the electricity industry without having involvement with a particular technology, so there's going to be a perception of bias no matter who it is.

More generally though if it were up to me I'd bring together an assortment of people encompassing engineering, strategic / national security, business, macroeconomics and real (scientific not political) environmental issues.

 

[SirRumpole]

Christmas lights this year Mr @Smurf1976 ?

 

[Knobby22]

Dealing with Dunkelflaute (when the sun doesn't shine and the winds don't blow).

Excellent examination of energy storage options.

Love her analysis.

Batteries aren't the answer as they can only help a bit.

Pumped hydro is great but in a drought prone land very limited. Compressed air seems very useful, especially for country towns.

If we are serious about emissions nuclear needs to be part of the mix.

Anti matter would be great. One day maybe.

 

[qldfrog]

Love her analysis.

Batteries aren't the answer as they can only help a bit.

Pumped hydro is great but in a drought prone land very limited. Compressed air seems very useful, especially for country towns.

If we are serious about emissions nuclear needs to be part of the mix.

Anti matter would be great. One day maybe.

Fusion is coming, thorium is a reality, options are there, and plenty of coal to close the gap.

 

[Smurf1976]

Pumped hydro is great but in a drought prone land very limited.

That depends on what assumptions you make about future rainfall.

Recorded climate since European settlement isn't a problem so the idea that it doesn't work is essentially an expectation of major climate change occurring, since obviously nobody's sensibly going to propose building pumped hydro in a location that doesn't presently have sufficient water.

I'm not saying that isn't going to happen, just noting that's what it would involve.

As for nuclear, with the exception of Port Augusta all of the sites presently proposed for nuclear by the Coalition are reliant on rainfall for water supply so that needs a major rethink.

 

[SirRumpole]

Fusion is coming, thorium is a reality, options are there, and plenty of coal to close the gap.

Fusion has been coming for a long time, great if it happens but unlikely in our lifetime.

Thorium sounds good, but there a lots of technical problems to solve.

Coal, yes, use it while it's there. Build supercritical stations that emit less GHG.

 

[Smurf1976]

Christmas lights this year Mr @Smurf1976 ?

Yep - although they're flattening the battery.

From a recent day, noting they switch on at 20:30, battery charge level as follows:

19:15 = 100%
19:30 = 99.3%
19:45 = 99.0%
20:00 = 99.0%
20:15 = 97.7%
20:30 = 87.5%
20:45 = 73.5%
21:00 = 58.5%
21:15 = 43.5%
21:30 = 27.8%
21:45 = 15.2%

Noting that the times there are from the battery, which is set centrally (not by me) but I suspect it's 5 - 10 minutes out in practice and that the 20:30 reading was actually more like 20:35 - 20:40 and similar with the rest, they're out by a few minutes.

Reserve is at 15% so discharge stopped at about 21:55 in practice noting the time issue.

Batteries are good for peak power, not so good for bulk energy storage. In terms of discharge, it's basically operating at constant maximum output once the lights go on since they draw slightly more than the battery can discharge, then there's other consumption as well.