While I don't know why you are doing it, that's for you two to explain I guess. The fact is you have once again misrepresented what the plan is.
Are you hoping that people will not actually read the plan?

To give people at home an example for two battery systems.

Computer rooms generally are feed by multiple power feeds from the grid to ensure supply. however they also have a back generator. Normally diesel but sometimes gas depending on the location. They also have a battery bank. now the batter is not big enough to power the computer room for very long, just long enough to either get the generator on line or shut down the computers in a orderly fashion.

Another arrangement is a remote power supply used by farmers and others off the grid for many years. You have solar power and some times wind that feeds a large battery bank. The battery bank is big enough to power the farm for between three and five days, so that if there is not sunshine and no wind they power will still work. Most of these setups also have a diesel generator.

What the SA government have proposed is the first example. A battery bank big enough to smooth out power supply variability so that other options can be brought to bare. Not the later, although that may come in time as energy store options are explored and get cheaper.

God, isn't it expensive when the plan is to buy ratbag green votes, rather than a sensible power generation system.

From the article, ".....if a complete shutdown of the sort experienced on 28 September 2016 occurred again then some 7 GWh of storage would be needed as well as the two 250 MW power stations."

So, Cobber, are Heywood and Murraylink needed for shortfalls, or not?
Are you suggesting diesel backup?

Where is the great carbon saving bonanza in all of it. It's as if AGW has nothing to do with it now, just Weatherill's desire to claim, "Look Mum, no carbon!

The Riverland project is for 330 MW realtime peak PV with 100 MW X 4 hours battery. I think two other PV/battery projects are proposed for SA plus a possible solar thermal for which Xenophon got a cheap loan. From memory that would be 110 MW peak realtime output with up to 8 hours storage. The Cultana seawater pumped hydro was to be 6 or 8 hours at 100 MW but the joint builder AGL is now out of favour with Weatherill.

Since SA had few problems when the 540 MW Northern coal station was operating I think they should sign up for the NuScale modular mini-nuke under development. It's not clear if the RET abolition by 2020 gets bipartisan approval whether wind and solar can cut in to baseload generation. If so make it 'must run'.

There's a bit of inconsistency over the need for interstate connection. Originally windy SA was supposed to export power to less windy Qld helped by a national RET. Now self sufficiency seems to be the goal.

Weatherill is a complete dill and will spend a shed load of other people's money on appearing "Green". What he needs is a proper power station that is reliable and cheap. Like the brown coal power plant being built in Pakistan by the Chinese.
Buggerlugs Andrews of Victoria will also be shutting down our reliable power and forestry industries again to appear green
My solution is to explain what is taken away from us punters can be taken back. New system for PS and pollie pensions. They get a tax free amount and then they bear the brunt of budget repair. As in pensions up to $60k taxed as now but over $60K a special levey of lets say 94% of the value.
Before anyone asks this was the highest rate of tax the last century so do not say that is unfair OK?

Quirk and Miskelly seem to have done the sums which Wetherall should have done before he started talking to Elon Musk. Having the state government build two new 250 MW gas fired power station would be a much better bet. The unwashed multitude out there don't know the difference between 100 Megawatts of generating capacity and 100 megawatt hours of storage capacity.