The future of energy generation and storage

[sptrawler]

Too expensive because Australia is cheap, no foresight and can't see past its own nose.

Hydrogen is in its preliminary stages when it's being used for energy, it can't compete in every application because you already have infrastructure in place for other energies.

Most of the people who speak up against it are heavily invested in fossil fuels.

How much does all the black lung from mining coal cost tax payers? Take away the years of subsidies and see how far fossil fuels would get.

I'm actually a big fan of hydrogen, 50 odd years ago I worked in a power station and we used to have a hydrogen plant and made our own from electrolysis, as far as I know the plant is still in operation.

But until it can be produced at a competitive price, or circumstances arise that make it so that hydrogen has to be used e.g laws are passed, it will struggle to get mainstream traction as a fuel IMO.

I think the most promising technology, for cheap hydrogen production at the moment, is generation 4 nuclear reactors.
With gen 4 reactors, there is an opportunity to produce hydrogen with the waste heat by thermochemical separation, if that is successful then the Hydrogen becomes a byproduct of making electricity which will be brilliant IMO.

At the moment, to make hydrogen it uses a lot more electrical energy' than it produces in the form of hydrogen energy, just the way it is at the moment.

The Chinese are leading the way with generation 4 reactors and as usual, Australia is in the dark ages, such is life.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360319920348175

There are dozens of hydrogen production methods and techniques from many sources such as fossil fuels, renewable energy sources and nuclear energy in the literature. Thermo-chemical methods are more efficient at higher temperatures to produce large quantities of hydrogen. In this study, a comparative overview of Generation VI nuclear reactor types for major hydrogen production methods have been researched in the literature and suggestions have been carried out.

This research work is addressing that both electric power cycle and hydrogen production based on nuclear technologies need to be developed. Generation IV nuclear reactors can provide hydrogen for a worldwide hydrogen economy. Both thermo-chemical and electrolysis (hybrid) processes in hydrogen production have a promising future, especially when integrated with Generation IV nuclear power plants. Efficient heat transfer is required for both high temperature thermodynamic cycles and the high temperature steam electrolysis. Hence, highly efficient heat exchanger designs are one of the key technologies for that purpose

Generation IV Nuclear Reactors - World Nuclear Association

An international task force is developing six nuclear reactor technologies for deployment between 2020 and 2030. Four are fast neutron reactors. All six systems represent advances in sustainability, economics, safety, reliability and proliferation-resistance.

world-nuclear.org

• An international task force is sharing R&D to develop six generation IV nuclear reactor technologies. Four are fast neutron reactors.
• All of these operate at higher temperatures than today's reactors. In particular, four are designated for hydrogen production.
• All six systems represent advances in sustainability, economics, safety, reliability and proliferation-resistance.
• Europe is pushing ahead with three of the fast reactor designs.
• A separate programme set up by regulators aims to develop multinational regulatory standards for Generation IV reactors.

Generation IV International Forum​

 

[qldfrog]

I'm actually a big fan of hydrogen, 50 odd years ago I worked in a power station and we used to have a hydrogen plant and made our own from electrolysis, as far as I know the plant is still in operation.

But until it can be produced at a competitive price, or circumstances arise that make it so that hydrogen has to be used e.g laws are passed, it will struggle to get mainstream traction as a fuel IMO.

I think the most promising technology, for cheap hydrogen production at the moment, is generation 4 nuclear reactors.
With gen 4 reactors, there is an opportunity to produce hydrogen with the waste heat by thermochemical separation, if that is successful then the Hydrogen becomes a byproduct of making electricity which will be brilliant IMO.

At the moment, to make hydrogen it uses a lot more electrical energy' than it produces in the form of hydrogen, just the way it is at the moment.

The Chinese are leading the way with generation 4 reactors and as usual, Australia is in the dark ages, such is life.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360319920348175

Do not play the Dutton mr @sptrawler or you will get the visit of our enlightened left.
Going so would mean nuclear reactors..triple win: electricity, H2 and nuke materials
Doubt it is achievable in this country

 

[sptrawler]

Do not play the Dutton mr @sptrawler or you will get the visit of our enlightened left.
Going so would mean nuclear reactors..triple win: electricity, H2 and nuke materials
Doubt it is achievable in this country

I don't think we should be charging ahead with nuclear, BUT we should be developing an industry in nuclear technology, with a view to eventually adopting some generation especially if type4 technology come to fruition.

It just makes sense, especially when we are going to be using nuclear subs and have a lot of readily available nuclear fuel, plus if hydrogen is a byproduct of electrical generation and we don't have the technology, we will be left in the wake of other countries as they actually become hydrogen superpowers, not us.

But as usual in Australia Ideology and tribal politics beats common sense every time, especially when you a dumb media that are puppets to their chosen overlords IMO.

 

[SirRumpole]

I don't think we should be charging ahead with nuclear, BUT we should be developing an industry in nuclear technology, with a view to eventually adopting some generation especially if type4 technology come to fruition.

Yes, the total ban on nuclear seems short sighted if we want to develope nuclear subs for one thing.

We should start re-educating nuclear scientists here then maybe start build a small research reactor (thorium?) , and proceed from there.

 

[qldfrog]

Yes, the total ban on nuclear seems short sighted if we want to develope nuclear subs for one thing.

We should start re-educating nuclear scientists here then maybe start build a small research reactor (thorium?) , and proceed from there.

Ahh Mr SirRumpole, the 2 of us would be able to make a multi partisan future for this country including a working grid instead of the space vacuum we now have on both sides

 

[sptrawler]

Yes, the total ban on nuclear seems short sighted if we want to develope nuclear subs for one thing.

We should start re-educating nuclear scientists here then maybe start build a small research reactor (thorium?) , and proceed from there.

On that very subject, even Wiki can show how poorly informed the Australian public are, with regard nuclear energy.
The majority of the Australian public think of pictures of 50 year old nuclear power stations and think nothing is changing, but as with renewables and most other technologies they are constantly being explored developed and tested.

From Wiki:
No precise definition of a Generation IV reactor exists. The term refers to nuclear reactor technologies under development as of approximately 2000, and whose designs were intended to represent 'the future shape of nuclear energy', at least at that time.[4] The six designs selected were: the gas-cooled fast reactor (GFR), the lead-cooled fast reactor (LFR), the molten salt reactor (MSR), the sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR), the supercritical-water-cooled reactor (SCWR) and the very high-temperature reactor (VHTR).[1][2]

The sodium fast reactor has received the greatest share of funding that supports demonstration facilities. Moir and Teller consider the molten-salt reactor, a less developed technology, as potentially having the greatest inherent safety of the six models.[5][6] The very-high-temperature reactor designs operate at much higher temperatures than prior generations. This allows for high temperature electrolysis or for sulfur–iodine cycle for the efficient production of hydrogen and the synthesis of carbon-neutral fuels.[2]

The majority of reactors in operation around the world are considered second generation and third generation reactor systems, as the majority of the first generation systems have been retired. China was the first country to operate a demonstration generation-IV reactor, the HTR-PM in Shidaowan, Shandong,[7][8] which is a pebble-bed type high-temperature gas-cooled reactor. It was connected to the grid in December 2023, making it the world's first Gen IV reactor to enter commercial operation.[9][10][11] In 2024, it was reported that China would also build the world’s first thorium molten salt nuclear power station, scheduled to be operational by 2029.[12]

China’s Breakthrough: Thorium Discovery Promises 60,000 Years of Clean Energy

Discover China's groundbreaking 1M-tonne thorium find: A potential 60,000-year limitless energy solution revolutionizing global nuclear technology.

discoveryalert.com.au

 

[sptrawler]

Interesting article supporting what I said a couple of years ago, storage is going to be the problem and the Governments are probably going to have to fund the big projects.

Do eight-hour big batteries stack up? One developer says it’s tough enough to fund projects half the size

Developer of the biggest battery yet in South Australia says the company has struggled to make projects with four-hours of storage “commercially viable,” let alone eight.

reneweconomy.com.au

 

[sptrawler]

Another great article, explaining the difficulties.

Australia’s solar panel boom is pushing the grid to its breaking point

Australia is widely regarded as a global leader in renewable energy, especially in the realm of solar power. However, the country’s rapid adoption of rooftop solar ... Continue Reading →

jasondeegan.com

 

[SirRumpole]

Another great article, explaining the difficulties.

Australia’s solar panel boom is pushing the grid to its breaking point

Australia is widely regarded as a global leader in renewable energy, especially in the realm of solar power. However, the country’s rapid adoption of rooftop solar ... Continue Reading →

jasondeegan.com

To a non engineer like me this is a ridiculous situation, having "too much energy" at particular times. It indicates a lack of planning to construct appropriate storage along with generation capacity.

OK, hydro takes years to build, but batteries don't usually, so where is the investment in these, or isn't battery technology yet up to the job?

 

[sptrawler]

To a non engineer like me this is a ridiculous situation, having "too much energy" at particular times. It indicates a lack of planning to construct appropriate storage along with generation capacity.

OK, hydro takes years to build, but batteries don't usually, so where is the investment in these, or isn't battery technology yet up to the job?

The problem is companies will only want to put in what is required, but as has been explained a lot of excess has to be put in, because not only does it have to supply the system demand it has to charge the storage.

Storage to get through the night and maybe the next day, but what if the next five days are crap days and the storage all gets used, how do you charge it?
So you need a lot of storage and a lot of extra renewables to charge the extra storage.
But what if for ten weeks straight you have great weather and a lot of the extra generation and storage isn't required? How does it make money when it isn't needed.
So who wants to pay to put it in? That’s the problem.

 

[SirRumpole]

So who wants to pay to put it in?

If it's necessary and private enterprise won't do it, then governments have to.

 

[TimeISmoney]

I'm actually a big fan of hydrogen, 50 odd years ago I worked in a power station and we used to have a hydrogen plant and made our own from electrolysis, as far as I know the plant is still in operation.

But until it can be produced at a competitive price, or circumstances arise that make it so that hydrogen has to be used e.g laws are passed, it will struggle to get mainstream traction as a fuel IMO.

I think the most promising technology, for cheap hydrogen production at the moment, is generation 4 nuclear reactors.
With gen 4 reactors, there is an opportunity to produce hydrogen with the waste heat by thermochemical separation, if that is successful then the Hydrogen becomes a byproduct of making electricity which will be brilliant IMO.

At the moment, to make hydrogen it uses a lot more electrical energy' than it produces in the form of hydrogen energy, just the way it is at the moment.

The Chinese are leading the way with generation 4 reactors and as usual, Australia is in the dark ages, such is life.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360319920348175

There are dozens of hydrogen production methods and techniques from many sources such as fossil fuels, renewable energy sources and nuclear energy in the literature. Thermo-chemical methods are more efficient at higher temperatures to produce large quantities of hydrogen. In this study, a comparative overview of Generation VI nuclear reactor types for major hydrogen production methods have been researched in the literature and suggestions have been carried out.

This research work is addressing that both electric power cycle and hydrogen production based on nuclear technologies need to be developed. Generation IV nuclear reactors can provide hydrogen for a worldwide hydrogen economy. Both thermo-chemical and electrolysis (hybrid) processes in hydrogen production have a promising future, especially when integrated with Generation IV nuclear power plants. Efficient heat transfer is required for both high temperature thermodynamic cycles and the high temperature steam electrolysis. Hence, highly efficient heat exchanger designs are one of the key technologies for that purpose

Generation IV Nuclear Reactors - World Nuclear Association

An international task force is developing six nuclear reactor technologies for deployment between 2020 and 2030. Four are fast neutron reactors. All six systems represent advances in sustainability, economics, safety, reliability and proliferation-resistance.

world-nuclear.org

• An international task force is sharing R&D to develop six generation IV nuclear reactor technologies. Four are fast neutron reactors.
• All of these operate at higher temperatures than today's reactors. In particular, four are designated for hydrogen production.
• All six systems represent advances in sustainability, economics, safety, reliability and proliferation-resistance.
• Europe is pushing ahead with three of the fast reactor designs.
• A separate programme set up by regulators aims to develop multinational regulatory standards for Generation IV reactors.

Generation IV International Forum​

I'm not sure you'll see large scale nuclear reactors here for a very long time, if ever. They're too costly to build and maintain, and the build timeframe is lengthy.

Hydrogen's been around for a long time, but hasn't been utilised for energy consumption very well. Ironically, they use it to crack different types of existing fuels and make ammonia for different uses. Electolysers will become cheaper over time, and they'll find a better way to transport hydrogen as it's well known that hydrogen is prone to leaking due to its characteristics

Many large corporations are starting to use it for logistic handling, because it's cheaper in the long run as there's less downtime of equipment over the electric counterpart, hence many corporations are using it for forklifts. It's not going to work for every energy application, but I think it will become more popular than what it is.

I

 

[SirRumpole]

I'm not sure you'll see nuclear reactors here for a very long time, if ever. They're too costly to build and maintain, and the build timeframe is lengthy.

I wouldn't write off nuclear forever. All technology improves over time and there may come a time where it's appropriate for us.

With our small population at the moment, nuclear doesn't make much sense economically, if we get to 50 million it may get more cost effective.

Of course, other technology may make nuclear redundant, who knows?

 

[TimeISmoney]

I wouldn't write off nuclear forever. All technology improves over time and there may come a time where it's appropriate for us.

With our small population at the moment, nuclear doesn't make much sense economically, if we get to 50 million it may get more cost effective.

Of course, other technology may make nuclear redundant, who knows?

I happen to know one of the guys that's involved with costing for Canberra in the energy division. It's actually been said to me that it's smoke and mirrors as Dutton will cancel any green initiatives by delaying them, and you'll never see any nuclear as he'll keep on running fossils as long as he can.

Apparently, at this point in time, it's still cheaper to go with green energy and batteries.

Nuclear is very expensive to build and run at the same time, it requires a lot of manpower for the continual maintenance. Even in the US the budgets and time delays in builds have been blown right out. It's certainly great for large power outputs on demand for industry.

 

[sptrawler]

If it's necessary and private enterprise won't do it, then governments have to.

The problem is, they don't want to do it, it took the Governments 40 years to get out of actually directly building anything and employing the people to do it.
The last thing politicians want to actually be responsible for is delivering anything, they only want to be responsible for finding more tax to pay someone else to be responsible for delivering the service, so how this East Coast electricity grid ends up is anyone's guess IMO.
I don't think the politicians have a clue, but I do think the enormity of the problem, is starting to dawn on them.

Like the NBN, in the end the Government may be forced into providing the infrastructure and the private sector will be able to charge for our use of it.
Then eventually when it is superseded the private sector don't have to wear the loss, that's why the privates aren't jumping in, there isn't enough ROE to warrant the expenditure.

 

[sptrawler]

Something to read, for those who are interested:

World Energy Outlook 2024 – Analysis - IEA

World Energy Outlook 2024 - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.

www.iea.org

The cost of electricity by country:

Electricity price by country 2024 | Statista

The cheapest electricity prices in the world could be found in Iran in 2023, whereas the cost of electricity per kwh was highest in Europe.

www.statista.com

From the post, it may be worth keeping the cost of electricity for future reference:

 

[sptrawler]

This article highlights the problems associated with splashing cash around and causes a lot of scepticism around the huge push regarding energy, it also highlights the importance of doing your own research.

MSN

From the article:

The boss of hydrogen hopeful Infinite Green Energy has claimed WA Premier Roger Cook can help the company plug a multimillion-dollar debt while attempting to stave off the company’s collapse.

For five weeks, IGE has been quietly fighting a Supreme Court bid by Queensland-based entity DD Investment to have accountants Hall Chadwick appointed liquidators over its failure to repay a $3.85 million debt.

The application came just three months after the investor secured a judgment to recover the debt, which stemmed from a May 2023 investment deal inked before the relationship between the two parties soured.

IGE chief executive Stephen Gauld, who represented the company before engaging lawyers Edwards Mac Scovell, told the court this month that challenging global markets were to blame for delays in settling the debt.

Gauld insisted repaying the debt was a priority, before claiming he could call the premier and obtain $5 million from a taxpayer fund for economic diversification.

“If I need to go to Roger Cook tomorrow or Monday next week and say, ‘Roger, listen’ because he has got $60 million right now for renewable energy projects … Roger could give us $5 million from the [investment] attraction fund,” Gauld told the court, according to transcripts of the proceedings.

“I can go back to him next week and say, ‘Listen, we’ve got an urgent commitment, I need another $5 million’, and we will get this all done. It’s not an issue.”

But DD Investment’s lawyer Martin Bennett rubbished those claims, pointing out the funds could not be used for that purpose and their release hinged on its projects reaching certain milestones.

“This idea that Mr Gauld has such a relationship that he can ring up the premier and say, ‘Can you give me $5 million to settle a debt?’ is just imaginary,” Bennett told the court.

This masthead understands a second investor has since raised concerns about the financial health of the company.

Gauld declined to answer questions when contacted by WAtoday, stating only that IGE intended to settle the matter within days.

The clean hydrogen hopeful, formerly Infinite Blue Energy, is behind several projects earmarked for Western Australia worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

IGE and partners Samsung C&T and Doral Energy have been trying to secure approval to build a $127 million small-scale hydrogen production facility in Northam, which was backed by the WA government in 2023 to the tune of $5 million but has struggled to garner support from planning authorities.

The stoush comes as the state’s environmental watchdog pores over IGE’s Arrowsmith Hydrogen Plant plans, which involve the construction of a wind and solar-powered hydrogen production facility across a 1929 hectare property about 30 kilometres south of Dongara.


IGE hopes to produce first gas in the second half of 2026.

The company has also joined forces with Swiss energy giant Axpo on the Valle Peligna project in central Italy, which, if successful, would be one of the largest commercial-scale hydrogen plants in Southern Europe.

The project received the backing of the federal government’s investment commission Austrade and the Australian Embassy.

But there are mounting concerns about plans to make Australia a hub for the production of “clean” hydrogen, an emissions-free product which uses renewable energy rather than gas to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen.

Sections of the industry had hung their hopes on the fuel as a substitute for fossil fuels in hard-to-abate industries, but proponents are struggling to make its production commercially viable.

 

[basilio]

Perhaps the AFL or other sporting bodies could take a leaf from this book.
Apart from powering all it's own needs the project has a 3.4MWH battery system to feed into surrounding industry and help stabilise the grid. Maybe Hobart ?

World’s largest stadium solar roof with 11,000 panels to power lights for 1,000 matches​

The JA Solar solar panel system, will produce over 4 Megawatt Hours of electricity per year.​

Updated: Mar 28, 2025 10:46 AM EST

Aman Tripathi
3 days ago

An extensive solar array is planned for the roof of Borussia Dortmund's SIGNAL IDUNA PARK.
RWE
Borussia Dortmund, a leading soccer club in Germany’s Bundesliga, is set to construct the world’s largest stadium solar roof with 11,000 photovoltaic panels and a 4.2 MW energy capacity.

In a partnership with energy giant RWE and China-based leading PV module manufacturer JA SOLAR, Borussia Dortmund will install the extensive solar array on the roof of SIGNAL IDUNA PARK, its iconic stadium.

“With JA SOLAR’s modules, which will power the largest photovoltaic system on any stadium roof, we are setting the course for a more environmentally friendly future,” said Carsten Cramer, Managing Director of Borussia Dortmund.

The club aims to complete the ambitious project by the end of summer 2025, which will be a significant step towards sustainable sports operations.

To power stadium’s operations​

The system, featuring sleek black modules from JA Solar, will generate over 4 MWh of electricity annually.

“This unique combination brings unparalleled black-and-yellow energy — on the pitch, in the stands, and now on the roof — setting a new standard for the energy transition,” explained JA SOLAR in a press release.

This output is sufficient to power the stadium’s floodlights for an impressive 1,000 matches per year.

The club intends to utilize all generated electricity on-site and significantly reduce its carbon footprint. The initiative is expected to cut carbon dioxide emissions by approximately 1,800 metric tons annually.

To further enhance energy efficiency, a 3.4 MWh battery storage system will be integrated, which will ensure a stable and reliable power supply.

Feeding excess energy into power grid​

Germany to house world's largest stadium solar roof with 11,000 panels

Dortmund is building the world's largest stadium solar roof with 11,000 panels, generating 4.2MW of energy.

interestingengineering.com

 

[Smurf1976]

To a non engineer like me this is a ridiculous situation, having "too much energy" at particular times. It indicates a lack of planning to construct appropriate storage along with generation capacity.

OK, hydro takes years to build, but batteries don't usually, so where is the investment in these, or isn't battery technology yet up to the job?

The real problem is that we don't actually have a plan.

Closest it gets is "theoretical" plans from AEMO, CSIRO and an assortment of others that calculate what's possible and what's required to achieve it but without authority to actually implement them, or what amount to "weather forecasts" from AEMO and others forecasting what they expect others to do, but again without the authority to force anything.

AEMO is running a market, they're not compelled to ensure economical or even physically adequate supply. They're compelled to keep the power system in a secure operating state - but if high prices kill demand well that's still a secure operating state. Much like saying a plane sitting on the ground is perfectly safe - that the passengers are stranded is a technicality, but the plane won't crash sitting on the ground so the obligation of safety is being met, and getting to your destination is someone else's problem.

Same goes for industry participants. AGL, Origin, Snowy and so on have a responsibility to comply with regulations both those relating to the electricity industry and more generally (eg corporate governance, workplace safety, every other law that applies to anyone) but they're not obligated to invest in anything. Nobody can force them to ensure adequate supply is available, the furthest it goes is an obligation to operate plant if it's physically capable of being operated and if directed by AEMO to do so (which will only occur if they're not already operating it anyway and there's an actual need for it).

Directions are moderately common, like this:

To be clear that's a direction to do something but that's all. It's not a fine, penalty or anything of that nature - it's an instruction, issued with authority, to do what's been requested.

AGL's obligations are however limited to doing what's been requested so long as the plant's physically capable of doing so. That is, nothing compels them to have that or any other facility in the first place and same applies to all companies. A direction can only be issued in the context of plant that already exists and is capable of being run.

So on the building side it's much like housing, restaurants or hotel rooms. Nobody's actually responsible for ensuring society has adequate supply by means of building more. Closest it gets is forecasts, models and the ability to compel the use of what already exists but nobody can actually force someone to build a battery or anything else.

Biggest trouble with all this is it's an expensive way to go about it, it leads to outcomes that are well short of optimal.

 

[Smurf1976]

Hydrogen's been around for a long time, but hasn't been utilised for energy consumption very well.

As a case in point, there used to be a plant in Tasmania manufacturing fertilizer using hydrogen from electrolysis as the starting point.

This was a significant operation, product was sold into markets in other states not just locally.

Now this idea isn't a new one, the plant opened in 1953 after all. and was successful until in due course economics killed it during the 1980's.

The technology's nothing new, we had it up and running in Australia 72 years ago. Economics is the problem.