The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Assault and batteries > Comments

Assault and batteries : Comments

By Geoff Carmody, published 17/4/2018

The Victorian batteries can power 39,200 homes for one hour. Ignoring industry, for homes this is a drop in the power demand bucket.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Battery FCAS provides a few seconds interim power before the big generators can cut in. Then they are spent until they can recharge perhaps a day later. If they can make money doing that without special rules in their favour well and good.

If as some claim the Hornsdale battery cost $50m for 129 Mwh the unit capex is nearly $400 per kwh. Opinions differ on how much energy storage is required for a 100% renewable grid. Some say storage needs to be 10% of annual demand so for Australia call 10% of 257 Twh as 26 Twh or 26 bn kwh. Times $400 per kwh is $10.4 trillion. Play around with the figures but you'll always get an astronomical result.

What with essential aircon, population growth and millions of EVs Australia will need to get at least 60% of its low carbon power from nuclear. We can grasp that now or later when the panic sets in.
Posted by Taswegian, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 8:18:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What a joke! What fools we are! Once we had reliable, cheap electricity powered by coal. We could have also had nuclear power plants. But now, well we have ugly great structures relying on wind - much as they did to grind grain in the Middle Ages. We also have ugly, shiny things on roofs to attract the Sun God. And there are batteries in case the Gods deny us power, but we have to keep praying to the Sun and Wind God's that their magic starts working before the batteries run down because there is no way to recharge them.

When are we going to copy the old Cargo Cults of Papua New Guinea, and build more airstrips so that big birds will come out of the sky and disgorge supplies?
Posted by ttbn, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 10:20:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What about a generating system of a few million "numb rays" in an aquarium system stretching across the Australian continent.

At a capacitor discharge rate of six hundred volts each ray, my experience with these lively generators over the years, tells me they could definately light a few suburban households during peak hours.

(And no doubt there will be clowns that think this is a stupid idea: But stupid by comparison to what)?
Posted by diver dan, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 10:32:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A vote for renewables is a vote for gas.

Scalable, viable storage is the Achilles heel of the ideology. Belief that it will come is religious.

For all the good the supposedly inevitable "Transition" will achieve HELE is just as good, not that I am advocate as zero emissions is the aim.

Under the proposed NEG, retailers and generators must sign contracts that create a 26 per cent reduction in their emissions by 2030 with a reliability obligation. This can be achieved with renewables plus gas or HELE, neither of which will bring us any closer to zero emissions.

Instead of pussying about with half-measures involving gas and HELE, the nuclear question should be raised as the only true solution. Australia has just as great a natural advantage with nuclear energy as it does with coal, and this should be exploited
Posted by Luciferase, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 10:59:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A cost analysis that fails to recognise that batteries are charged when power is cheap and used at the times it's more expensive (and would be more expensive still were it not for the batteries).

Garbage in, garbage out!
Posted by Aidan, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 11:49:29 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I read some time ago, about a massive private enterprise solar thermal power project, in California. That more than matched coal for price per MWh and dispatchable baseload power. XXX Ostensibly, by the use of giant vacuum flasks that retained white-hot, molten salt that retained boiler heat for up to seven days. Another in Arizona, that applied similar principles. XXX One thing we have plenty of is sundrenched deserts. XXX Moreover, we're informed a square kilometre of solar thermal arrays would power all of Australia if the project included heat retaining salt banks and automated production of the polished steel mirrors. XXX And using the California example for no more than a comparable coal-fired plant! Always providing you're prepared to wear the transmission lines and their losses. XXX More later. XXX Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Tuesday, 17 April 2018 12:13:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If that was such a big deal, Aidan, people would buy subsidised batteries to arbitrage the cost of off-peak and peak coal power. Removing subsidies makes it even less attractive.

100% renewables on grid, bar hydro, doesn't stack up by any remotely sensible analysis, with scalable, viable storage being the problem. But nothing shakes the belief of zealots who continue to dupe the public in believing the storage issue is already licked.

We'll end up with gas replacing coal should the enthusiasts win the politics, and that's where it will all end.
Posted by Luciferase, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 3:55:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As Carmody says, we have three potential aims as regards electricity supply- that it be cheap, reliable and have low emissions.

Unfortunately, we can only have, at most two of those three.

Cheap and reliable - ie Australia last decade.
Cheap and green - but that can't be reliable.
Reliable and green - by throwing enormous sums are batteries and pumped hydro etc ie not even close to cheap.

So we have to decide which of the three we'll forego. But in today's Australia, no government (or opposition) is in the business of telling people they can't have everything they want.

So the aim is simply to muddy the water sufficiently to get to the next election. Power to expensive? Well fear not, we're gunna put in x numbers of batteries and pump some water uphill and then it'll be cheaper. And that'll work until the next election whereupon another placebo solution will be rolled out.

Meanwhile prices will rise, the climate will be utterly unaffected and jobs will be shed. Truly we have the worst ruling class in out history.
Posted by mhaze, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 4:42:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As long as thorium is the energy source that dare not speak its name! Thorium will remain the most promising dispatchable, base-load power we never ever allowed. And as long as R+D into thorium remains officially forbidden! It will never ever be considered. XXX We're around seven short years away from decommissioning some of our ageing coal-fired power stations and need to replace them with a carbon-free alternative! XXX Seven years enough time to iron out the few bugs they found when this fifty-year-old technology was successfully field trialled without accident or incident. XXX How many more Emmas of Australian story, have to die with curable cancer? Curable with Miracle cancer cure, Bismuth 213! Before we, rather than the fossil fuel barons and their tame pollies get the hell out of the way and just change the rules and regulations. (theirs) That effectively forbid R+D into thorium, the most energy dense material on the planet! What will it take for the naysayers (those that can't see aanything but coal or some renewables) to take a good long an unbiased impartial view at the discoverable facts that leave no other option as RELIABLE, AFFORDABLE CLEAN SAFE, CARBON-FREE DISPATCHABLE BASELOAD POWER And regardless of any prevailing weather or climate conditions! XXX Alan B
Posted by Alan B., Tuesday, 17 April 2018 5:05:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As always, Aidan comes to the party with nothing to contribute. If these magical batteries have contributed their few minutes of extra energy and now need recharging because there is no wind and no sun, the option for selecting a "cheap" recharging period doesn't exist. Unless, of course, Aidan thinks people should go without lighting, aircon, TV and internet, cooking and hot water for a few days. Hang on, that's what he IS thinking, isn't it?
Posted by calwest, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 5:09:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Luciferase,
"If that was such a big deal, Aidan, people would buy subsidised batteries to arbitrage the cost of off-peak and peak coal power"
That argument relies on the false assumption that consumers have access to the wholesale electricity market.

_______________________________________________________________________________

calwest,
"As always, Aidan comes to the party with nothing to contribute."
So you regard identifying a fundamental flaw in the analysis as contributing nothing?
Struth, no wonder your own arguments are so vacuous!

" If these magical batteries..."
Magical? I certainly don't regard it that way, but I suppose you could.
See http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff300/fv00255.htm

"have contributed their few minutes of extra energy and now need recharging because there is no wind and no sun, the option for selecting a "cheap" recharging period doesn't exist."
Days with no wind and no sun are pretty rare. as high pressure conditions are usually sunny and low pressure conditions usually windy. Obviously there are some days when a cheap recharging period doesn't exist, and those should be accounted for. But they certainly shouldn't be treated as the norm.

You don't seem to have any trouble imagining idiotic scenarios to misattribute to me, so it's a shame you're so utterly lacking in imagination when it comes to solutions!
Posted by Aidan, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 6:59:00 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aidan, say it to loudly the people, there is no scalable, viable storage. Tell them that you really hope there will be one great day but it's not here yet and you are living in hope that there will be, one day.

Let's say the hypothetical "Transition" is complete. There is sufficient generation and storage by individual households, businesses and public and private providers for everyone's needs. It'll be a market, like any other, to supply the needs of those without storage. There is no coal-power in this scenario, and there is no reason therefore to input data concerning coal-power pricing into any scenario leading up to the attainment of this hypothetical state.

Garbage in, garbage out.
Posted by Luciferase, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 7:59:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Luciferase,
All storage is scalable to some degree, and most is viable to some degree. Batteries are likely to become viable for much more widespread use in the future, as billions are being spent on R&D to increase the effectiveness and reduce the cost. Meanwhile there's Snowy 2.0 and the potential to do similar at some of our other hydro dams. But the technology to boost our storage capacity most quickly (and quite cheaply) is solar thermal with molten salt storage.

So it's not a matter of living in hope; it's a matter of recognising that technology is improving but there's a lot we can do already.

As for your hypothetical scenario, you are the one making the reasoning error that the cost of coal power can be ignored during its phaseout. I have not made any similar assumptions.
Posted by Aidan, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 9:32:22 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If we could just get Adian to trade places with Emma of Australian story. And dying of cancer? He'd become nuclear's newest convert and find all the reasons we could roll out a few MSR reactors.so he could get a shot at the only hope Emmas of this world have. Bismuth 213 An alpha particle isotope, that is attached to an antibody to go directly to the cancer cells killing them without touching or damaging the healthy cells. As good as broad-scale solar thermal is! It can't make Bismuth213. Only a nuclear reactor does that and none better or more productive than MSR thorium. XXX Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Tuesday, 17 April 2018 10:38:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alan B.,
It does damage healthy cells. What made you think otherwise?
Is there a shortage of 213Bi?

BTW even if we do decide to go with nuclear, it would still make sense to invest heavily in storage.
Posted by Aidan, Tuesday, 17 April 2018 11:18:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Diver Dan...forget about the Numb Rays - collect the hot air from the numb skull pollies.
Posted by Albie Manton in Darwin, Wednesday, 18 April 2018 9:17:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Geoff, I did not see in your article any reference to the battery
losses involved in the charge/discharge cycle.
The figure for all batteries is around 30%.

I have only seen one study that calculated the amount of battery
backup needed to support a wind/solar/nuclear grid.

http://tinyurl.com/y86l6keo

For the UK grid with nuclear backup 14,000 batteries the size of
Sth Australia's would be needed.
Proportion it against Australia and some 6000 batteries would be needed.

I think $1 per watt hour is more like the real price.
Better batteries are like fusion power always coming.
A study was made of all elements in the table and we appear to have
been using the best available for some time.
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 19 April 2018 9:14:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy