This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The future of energy generation and storage

Jump to new
SirRumpole said:
Do you have a view on fracking Smurf if that is in your area ?
Click to expand...

It's not something I'll claim to have any expertise on but my response would be "see what the science says" and that it needs to be considered in the context of how it compares to the alternatives.

That is, the science will definitely say "there's an impact" but how does that compare to anything else? Make a decision on that basis.

It is of course not going to achieve anything at all with domestic supply if it simply means an increase in gas exports. There's no point turning up the taps if you haven't put the plug in the bath.
 

Meanwhile the general public, sit around listening to Dusty Sprinfield singing "wishing and hoping".
Can't wait to see how it goes, when power rationing comes in.
 
As warned of previously in this thread minus the names, it seems to now be out in the public domain:


https://www.afr.com/companies/energ...it-as-grid-congestion-worsens-20191105-p537h7

And another one:

Last month UK-based infrastructure developer John Laing Group took a £66 million ($119.7 million) write-down on renewable energy assets in Australia due to transmission losses on projects and put new renewables investments in the country on hold.
Click to expand...

https://www.afr.com/companies/energ...p-to-smooth-energy-transition-20190829-p52lwq

As I and others have said many times, this is all doable but there's far more to it than just putting things up and hoping it'll work. It's nothing even remotely "plug and play" like setting up a modern computer or sound system where it all just works - this stuff needs "real" engineering right from the start if it's to work as intended.

Be very, very careful where you put your money if you're investing in this area.
 
Hopefully Snowy 2.0 and the Tassie battery are well along the design stage, the sooner they get installed and can soak up some of this generation the better, transmission lines are easier and quicker to install than mega dams and pipework.
 

Here is another article on the same issues smurf, hopefully they are upgrading the transmission where it is needed most.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09...e-holding-back-renewable-energy-boom/11457694

It is quite interesting, that various Governments and businesses were 'bagged' for gold plating the network and costing the public more for electricity. Now similar people are complaining that we need more spent on gold plating transmission.
It all is very familiar, when those with the biggest voice, don't in most cases have the knowledge. It just shows engineering is badly needed, not media and Government intervention. IMO
From the article:
Andrew Dillon from the industry peak body Energy Networks Australia agrees that more transmission lines are needed to cope with the transition to renewable energy.

But the companies building and maintaining the electricity network infrastructure are still dealing with the fallout from spending billions of dollars on so-called 'gold-plated' poles and wires.

"If you go back just two or three years there were a significant number of stakeholders that were complaining we built too much in the energy network space, and many of those same people are now saying we haven't built enough," he told 7.30.

"We can't have it both ways. There's either too much network, or there's not enough."

Mapping by network operator Transgrid shows the capacity to connect new energy to the grid across much of New South Wales is next to zero.

Andrew Dillon says that's a significant challenge.

"Transgrid is one network some people have accused of overbuilding in the past, and yet again many of the main stakeholders are now claiming Transgrid doesn't have enough to connect the new capacity."
 
sptrawler said:
It is quite interesting, that various Governments and businesses were 'bagged' for gold plating the network and costing the public more for electricity. Now similar people are complaining that we need more spent on gold plating transmission.
Click to expand...
The trouble with all this is that it's a subject inherently different to anything that ordinary people have practical experience with. Tell them at 2pm that there's a surplus right now but in 4 hours time the lights will go out due to a shortage and most people do struggle to get their minds around that concept.

Combine that reality with governments having tended to put in charge people from backgrounds where the opposite is true, economics and law, and it explains how we've ended up where we are now.

From an investment perspective it's a situation where there's massive potential for companies to invest in things and for their shareholders to benefit but there's also massive potential to end up toasted.
 
Ross Garnaut: three policies will set Australia on a path to 100% renewable energy
The economist’s new book, Superpower, sets out how the government can embrace low-carbon opportunities in this term


Ross Garnaut has no doubt renewables can meet 100% of electricity requirements by the 2030s, with high degrees of reliability and at lower prices. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images
Australia could set a path to 100% renewable electricity, a highly reliable grid and significantly cheaper wholesale prices than today by introducing a handful of policies consistent with the Morrison government’s election platform, the economist Ross Garnaut says.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...t-australia-on-a-path-to-100-renewable-energy
 
basilio said:
How much do you know about Ross Garnaut and his extensive research in the field?
Click to expand...
Well from the article, all he has done is regurgitate what is already common knowledge, but as long as it is an article in the right direction it can't hurt.
As for how much I know about Ross Garnaut, i would say about as much as you know about the power system and its operation.
 
Ross Garnaut is a professorial research fellow in economics at the University of Melbourne, chairs the international advisory board of the Australian German Energy Transition Hub and is a Distinguished Fellow of the Melbourne Energy Institute. He is chairman of, and a shareholder in, Sunshot Energy and a shareholder in SIMEC ZEN Energy, both of which are engaged in the development and trade of energy. He conducted the 2008 and 2011 climate reviews for the Rudd and Gillard governments. His book Superpower — Australia's Low-Carbon Opportunity, is published today by BlackInc with La Trobe University Press. This article originally appeared on The Conversation.
 
As a concept I totally agree with what he's aiming for.

That said, it's not exactly an original thought since it's pretty much 20th Century Tasmanian style hydro-industrialisation on a national scale and using a different power source. It's the exact same logic however - produce lots of cheap power, shove it down a transmission line to wherever and use it to run industry, doing so as a key economic policy rather than purely an energy one. Set up the power source and so long as you're the cheapest then you'll have no trouble finding someone wanting to use it.

Victoria later replicated that policy albeit without naming it. It did however lead to the state pressing hard for the Snowy to be built, Victoria wanted power whereas NSW was really only interested in the water aspect, and it also lead to the massive scaling up of generation based on coal, most notably the now closed Hazelwood power station followed by Yallourn W and Loy Yang A both of which still operate.

The devil is in the detail however and I'll point there to his bit about splitting Snowy Hydro. You won't get prices down with that sort of 1990's economic thinking indeed that's what has driven prices up in the first place. If he was talking about Snowy buying out the other hydro operations in the Murray catchment then that would make far more sense as a means of lowering costs than to be splitting anything up.
 
Read smurfs post.

Then re read what I said.
Well from the article, all he has done is regurgitate what is already common knowledge, but as long as it is an article in the right direction it can't hurt.
 
We will never go back but it just seems to me that having State governments owning the three areas of generation, distribution, retailing and competing against the other States to deliver the lowest prices was the most efficient (in terms of final price) than the system we have now with the mostly privatised national grid.

What exactly has been gained by the privatisation of national assets ?

One of the highest power prices in the world and a basically stuffed generation system.

But then, I'm just a troglodyte who can't keep up with the times I guess.
 
Well everyone said that Government run organisations were fat and inefficient, I worked in power generation for my whole career, for both Government and private.
What I can say from my experience is, Government was built and run to a standard, as opposed to a price and a commercial outcome.
But having said that, it was also the very argument that everyone used, to force privatisation. So as per usual everyone got what they deserved.
Just my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gen Alpha
Replies
13
Views
2K
moXJO
M
Electricity demand and data centres
Replies
15
Views
2K
farmerge
Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
2K
Smurf1976
Official Microsoft Office 2024 Professional Plus License Key $59 with lifetime free updates ends March 20
Replies
0
Views
1K
bigdog
The Effect of Deepseek on Australian Stocks
Replies
7
Views
2K
Smurf1976
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...