The future of energy generation and storage

This was taken from an article by a consultancy group, I found it really supports what we have been saying, regarding storage and transmission which I feel the Governments both Federal and State need to progress with ASAP.

https://www.pv-magazine-australia.c...renewable-energy-projects-swells-over-130-gw/
From the article:

The recent renewable energy boom, according to the Australian National University (ANU), will see Australia’s carbon emissions decline by as much as 4% over the next few years. Noting that Australia’s solar and wind deployment is 10 times faster per capita than the world average, Professor Andrew Blakers says: “This is a message of hope for reducing our emissions at low cost. Solar and wind energy offers the cheapest way to make deep cuts in emissions because of their low and continually falling cost.”

However, ANU researchers underline the emissions cuts will depend on the support of the federal government and, to a lesser extent, state governments to further expansion of solar and wind by ensuring adequate new electricity transmission and storage. “If the renewable energy pipeline is stopped or slowed down because of insufficient transmission and storage, then emissions may rise again from 2022,” . end


IMO It does look as though projects are starting to come through, which is good news.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...ends-underwriting-scheme-20191017-p531nj.html
If one can keep emotion out of the debate, the article sounds like a sensible approach, for the Government to take.

Here is an interesting article on an experimental fusion reactor, which if successful will answer a lot of the Worlds energy problems.

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2019-iter-nuclear-fusion/?srnd=premium-asia

sptrawler said:

I find it hard to believe they have disabled the governor droops on the units, that is a real recipe for disaster, if the units can't pick up the load relative to their size it wont take much for a domino effect to happen.

Click to expand...

It's true sadly, no joke, and I'm sure you're well aware of the potential consequences across the mainland NEM states all of which are AC interconnected.

There was a near miss last year which resulted in Qld and SA both disconnecting from NSW and Vic respectively at the same time and some residential and general business load was shed in NSW due to that. It could have been far worse as I'm sure you understand.

In layman's terms for everyone else - it's akin to driving a car by deciding that you won't steer, at all, and will only "correct" the position of the car on the road when the right hand wheels hit the centre line or the left hand wheels hit the edge of the road. At all other times your hands are and will remain off the wheel. End result is the car bounces back and forth between the two edges of the lane and should a cop spot you they'll assume drink driving and pull you over to ask some questions. That's pretty close to how the grid's actually being run at the moment - and suffice to say you won't need to go too far to find an engineer, technician or operator who's anything but happy about it. This affects the whole of the mainland NEM so that's Qld, NSW, ACT, Vic and SA if you're on the main grid in those states.

I never thought such silliness would prevail. But then I never thought we'd have a coal-fired power station without any coal either.

On a positive note though, if there's no coal to burn well that's one certain way to address the CO2 issue very effectively. Not without some rather drastic downsides but it fixes one problem.

If the plant that has been damaged isn't back in service for summer, I'm sure the system will have some interesting episodes over summer peak period.

Has the Coalition finally cottoned on ?

New money for clean energy.

Craig Kelly will be ropeable.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-into-clean-energy-projects-to-stabilise-grid

sptrawler said:

If the plant that has been damaged isn't back in service for summer, I'm sure the system will have some interesting episodes over summer peak period.

Click to expand...

Official word from AGL is that Loy Yang A unit 2, the one which had a rather bad incident, should be back in service mid-December on current plans. Capacity is 530 MW and this is steam turbine plant (coal-fired boiler).

Haven’t heard from Origin about Mortlake unit 2 which also had a rather bad incident. This is a gas turbine (open cycle) with capacity nominally 259 MW but goes to about 265 in practice.

Both the above are located in Victoria.

In SA the Barker Inlet station commissioning is still underway with plenty of short test runs occurring. Capacity will be 210 MW from 12 x 17.5 MW internal combustion engines (main fuel is gas but can run diesel).

NSW is the state where there’s lots of capacity offline at the moment indeed about half of all coal plant isn’t running and there’s a current lack of reserve notice from AEMO.

Some of that’s off for maintenance, some due to failure, some because of missing the magic ingredient. Coal power doesn’t go too well if you ain’t got no coal......

Liddell’s still going though. Imperfectly, there’s no chance of getting the old plant up to full capacity these days it’s too worn out for that, but they’ve got plenty of coal and it’s humming away well enough albeit far from perfect. The lights will go out in parts of NSW if it stops so better hope it keeps going.

Liddell, Barker Inlet and Loy Yang A are all fully owned and operated by AGL.

Mortlake is fully owned by Origin Energy.

I haven’t named who’s got no coal as I’m not sure how public that info is. It’s in NSW though.

AGL to install some decent size batteries.

https://www.theage.com.au/business/...in-time-for-liddell-exit-20191030-p535mf.html

Some realities about the global hydrogen market.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-31/hydrogen-strategy-fossil-fuels-versus-renewables/11653336

SirRumpole said:

Some realities about the global hydrogen market.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-31/hydrogen-strategy-fossil-fuels-versus-renewables/11653336

Click to expand...

I could not access the thread this morning, i highly recommend the article especially once past the usual ABC anti coal tirade.some interesting facts on how uncompetitive we are even in producing H2

qldfrog said:

I could not access the thread this morning, i highly recommend the article especially once past the usual ABC anti coal tirade.some interesting facts on how uncompetitive we are even in producing H2

Click to expand...

The thing is as VC says there is no sense in using fossil fuels to make hydrogen, the loss in efficiency is astronomical, in reality it is only viable from renewables. IMO
The other issue for a lot of Countries like the U.S is, their domestic requirement, would make the possibility of exporting excess highly unlikely. Again just my opinion.
That is unless they come up with a clean way of making power, in large quantities, that can be used to supplement renewables and both supply the load and produce hydrogen.

It sounds as though a very big solar/storage facility project, destined for Kilcoy Qld, is facing wind up action in the Supreme Court, another one that didn't make it maybe.

https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/sunshine-energy-solar-stoush-mb0950/

https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/projects/sea-kilcoy-solar-farm-australia/

I did mention to rederob, that there will be a lot of public backlash against all these proposed 'solar farms'. I think it is like a lot of things, it's all good, as long as it isn't in my backyard.
https://www.change.org/p/somerset-regional-council-reduce-size-of-massive-solar-farm

IMV this is an exceptionally clever way to use the energy intensive aluminium industry to balance the fluctuating energy demands of a renewable energy grid.

Well worth reading.

Australia's aluminium sector is on life support. It can and should be saved
Simon Holmes à Court
Technology and leadership could save thousands of jobs and accelerate Australia’s energy transition

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...is-on-life-support-it-can-and-should-be-saved

Very good article.
It would be tragic to lose the plant.

basilio said:

IMV this is an exceptionally clever way to use the energy intensive aluminium industry to balance the fluctuating energy demands of a renewable energy grid.

Click to expand...

The presence of large loads which can endure short term interruptions without major drama is of huge value in operating the system regardless of what energy source is used.

Lose that load permanently and then we've got two options basically. Either we focus on much firmer security of supply or we use some other large load block, which realistically would be entire suburbs of the capital cities (because there's not much else that could be used) to perform that role.

Lack of industrial load is already a problem in SA, the sum total of all heavy industrial load in SA being considerably less than the other states, and is part of the reason why costs have always been higher in SA. That's also a chicken and egg thing since higher costs = lack of industry = higher costs = lack of industry.

Queensland and Tas are at the other end of the scale in terms of their main grid so no surprise to see them doing it cheaper and more reliably. The two issues are linked and interdependent. Big constant loads drive down costs and add stability from a technical perspective which then encourages more big constant loads which keeps costs down and stability up. A chicken and egg situation.

Much has been said about the towers falling over and the system black in SA three years ago but what is often missed is that Qld and Tas have also both suffered effectively the same incident, a sudden and total failure of transmission linkage to NSW and Victoria respectively, on more than one occasion but neither suffered a system collapse resulting from that. Indeed there was no loss of residential or general business load at all, the problem being completely contained within generation and a few major industries and then promptly rectified.

Big, stable loads which can be instantly tripped in an emergency, and by that I mean it's off before any human even realises something's gone wrong, then restarted in an orderly manner based upon a grid that's already stabilised itself following whatever went wrong and all without causing disruption to the general public has a huge value no matter what source of energy is being used.

Interesting article from Industry Super Australia. It brings up some taboo subjects.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-26/industry-super-funds-consider-the-nuclear-option/11248202

From the article:
In addition to nuclear, the report argued technologies such as solar, wind, coal, gas generation and carbon capture and storage need to be considered.

The study also raised concerns about battery schemes, finding that using Tesla batteries to achieve 1.5 days power backup would cost $6.5 trillion, or the cost of building around 1,000 nuclear reactors .
It warned that generating power for a renewable energy system in the same period would require 100 Snowy Hyrdo 2.0 schemes at a cost of $700 billion .

I found that article bewildering in the extreme. I havn't read the full story but the excerpts published on the ABC don't make sense.

Firstly no-one is suggesting that Australia should create a battery bank to last 36 hours. This is an extreme straw man argument. Batteries or pumped hydro are short term stabilising energy sources to be used in conjunction with widespread solar and wind power. They are never intended to supply all the energy requirements for 36 hours

Other energy sources like tidal or wave energy would never be capable of meeting the entire energy needs of Australia. They are always going to be niche suppliers in favorable locations - if the technology is sorted.

The overwhelming reason why nuclear is off the table is financial. A nuclear power plant will take many years to get off the ground and is still far more expensive than comparable solar/wind/battery/pumped hydro combinations.

There is a detailed breakdown of the figures behind the ISA Report. Destroys the argument comprehensively.

There’s no discussion in the ISA report about the opportunity costs of going nuclear, neatly summarised by Peter Farley, a fellow of the Australian Institution of Engineers, in RenewEconomy earlier this year:

“As for nuclear the 2,200 MW Plant Vogtle is costing US$25 billion plus financing costs, insurance and long term waste storage. … For the full cost of US$30 billion, we could build 7,000 MW of wind, 7,000 MW of tracking solar, 10,000 MW of rooftop solar, 5,000MW of pumped hydro and 5,000 MW of batteries. … That is why nuclear is irrelevant in Australia. It has nothing to do with greenies, it’s just about cost and reliability.”

https://reneweconomy.com.au/nuclear-war-erupts-between-australian-super-funds-47766/

Another excellent analysis of the cost benefits of renewables over fossil fuel and nuclear.
https://reneweconomy.com.au/how-did-wind-and-solar-perform-in-the-recent-heat-wave-40479/

basilio said:

Firstly no-one is suggesting that Australia should create a battery bank to last 36 hours. This is an extreme straw man argument. Batteries or pumped hydro are short term stabilising energy sources to be used in conjunction with widespread solar and wind power. They are never intended to supply all the energy requirements for 36 hours

Click to expand...

Where the issue arises is that there's a portion of the population, and I'm referring to the general public here not anyone on this thread, which does seem to think that if we just put up some solar panels, wind farms and batteries then that's it, all our energy problems are fixed forever.

Have a look at the Facebook page of any of the major energy companies. They're full of comments from people to that effect - why on earth are you guys stuffing about with gas or hydro when we can just use solar and batteries?

In reality batteries with present and near term foreseeable technology have an application for peak capacity, frequency control and as short term backup at the fringes of the network but that's about it.

Looking at wind and solar data the reality is both good and bad.

The good bit is there's plenty of it and it works.

The bad bit is the poor seasonal alignment with overall energy consumption and in particular heating loads. At the same time as total energy (not just electricity but all forms) consumption peaks in the southern parts of the country, solar is at its seasonal minimum and wind is subject to all too frequent "droughts" which see low output in all states for a week or more.

Therein arises the requirement that we have something which isn't wind, solar or batteries which is capable of carrying serious load for a week or more constantly.

Hydro is one option and the obvious one if the aim is to use renewable energy. Failing that, large scale hydrogen production and storage could work but does involve a lot of losses - it could well be part of the solution though.

Beyond that though, well pragmatic reality is that there are 5 LNG import proposals and numerous gas-fired power generation proposals across NSW, Vic and SA with the Barker Inlet power station (gas) opened in SA today (more info about that in the AGL thread).

That's the divide basically. Private enterprise favours wind, solar and gas with a few batteries here and there. Under that model gas provides around half the total supply.

On the other side, the two big hydro operators propose themselves building big pumped hydro schemes, others building more wind and solar and smaller hydro and battery systems, and in due course minimal use of gas.

Something needs to be done though. If you went to Yallourn right now you'd find three quarters of the plant's idle and the rest's struggling along. No Sir, it ain't going at all well not in the slightest. Not to worry though - the politicians of all colours will have already rehearsed their speech for when old grandpa tries to run another marathon this summer and keels over in the heat. "Not our fault" they'll scream whilst throwing a few stones at the other side of politics.

Smurf1976 said:

Beyond that though, well pragmatic reality is that there are 5 LNG import proposals and numerous gas-fired power generation proposals across NSW, Vic and SA with the Barker Inlet power station (gas) opened in SA today (more info about that in the AGL thread).

Click to expand...

Do you have a view on fracking Smurf if that is in your area ?