Footnote: The Israelis are growing price competitive bananas, in their desert, utilising sea water!
Never say never.
The proven Chilean project, didn't ever claim 24/7 power supply.
But it did mesh rather nicely with daylight peak demand, and it did supply power at less than the cost of coal fired power.
And it did reduce demand on increasingly expensive gas/coal/diesel?
And it produced/is producing a marginal profit.
[We do need to slow down the rate with which we extract and use fossil fuel!]
Simply writing something off, because it was a pilot plant, in order to dismiss it; does not compute, or follow logic's rites!
The object of a pilot plant is to prove a concept, before committing large outlays! Nothing more, nothing less.
Having proved a concept, it is usual to expect future economies of scale, will invariably bring the unit, or kilowatt hour, price down.
Something around four square kilometres of solar thermal arrays, in our 50C plus sunlit central desert, would reportedly match current Australian demand; and indeed, save our aluminium smelting industry; and or, reinvigorate our steel smelting industry, using huge electric arc furnaces, waste plastic/rubber/cooking oil, and the Australian invented, direct reduction method?
[When lightening strikes the ground, it fuses everything in its path, and the point of contact, with the ground, produces heat hotter than the centre of the sun; and some of our Pilbra iron ore is so pure, that lumps of it can be welded together.]
Rhrosty.

As is often the case ask the wrong question and you will get the wrong answer.

The question should be is solar power part of a viable mix of power sources which can supply Australia needs? The answer is yes, peek power needs in SE Australia typically occur on very hot days with strong northerly winds these are the conditions where solar and wind are going to work best.

As for the broader question as to whether Australia could provide all its electrical power needs from renewable sources? I have no doubt we could.

The list goes roughly like this in order of cost
Hydro
Geothermal (from the Great Artesian Basin not hot rocks)
Wind (Location is important)
Solar thermal and photovoltaic
Biomass
Tidal
Plus numerous other potential sources are theoretically possible.

The next question is do we want to change our present energy mix to using predominately the list above. The answer is yes we should, If we continue with current mix of energy sources we will inject five times more CO2 into the atmosphere than the climate scientists tell us is safe. Choosing not to believe the scientists is not an option, even if there there is a very faint chance they have got it wrong, would you take off in plane that crashes 9 times out of ten?

The biggest problem is that the fossil fuel companies would stand to lose an incredible amount of money if we were to take the renewable approach. The known reserves of oil are around 1300 billion barrels which at today's prices works out at about $ 110,500,000,000,000. ( you can probably multiply by that 4 to get the total for all fossil fuels) This is a huge incentive, to discredit any reasons anyone puts up, that we should take an alternative path.

Warmair, the only reason some want a variable mix of power supplies is that their favoured system is not viable, & can't compete with sensible generation systems.

Please explain how you have no doubt we can supply oz with Micky Mouse power systems. Every country who jumped into this make believe is now backing out of it, just as fast as they can go, with out falling over.

Spain has had the stupidity belted out of them, the Germans won't say out loud, but it is sending them broke too, hence their retreat. Even the fool poms are waking up. The public don't like paying to stop the windmills, when they are going to break the grid.

The Danes have to give, [yes give], their wind power to Sweden, who can use it to pump water back up hill, isolated from their grid. When ever it is actually working, their grid is in danger.

Do try some reading somewhere other than green sites.

Hasbeen

Hydro power is not a micky mouse system of power generation. The the 3 gorges dam in China produces more power than any other fossil power or nuclear power anywhere in the the world.

Wind power is capable of providing up to 30% of out needs.
Denmark provides 25% of its power from wind again hardly micky mouse.
various forms solar power perhaps another 30%
It is not unusual in Australia for the solar thermal power reaching the surface to reach 1Kw per sq meter hardly micky mouse stuff.

We can fill in the balance with traditional geothermal. The great artesian basin holds some 64,900 cubic kilometres of water and a fair proportion of that is at or close to boiling point.

Yes it will cost to make to the change over but would you rather trash the planet instead ? Sorry that is not a gamble which should be even contemplated.

Unfortunately as I pointed out above the potential value of the fossil fuels is so great that spending millions on a misinformation campaign makes a lot of sense to those without a conscience.

Well Warmair, good luck with trying to get any dams built in western countries, even the water we have gained by damming is now being sent uselessly down to the sea, to satisfy the ratbags.

Even if you could get it past the greenies, where are you going to find some wet mountains to build the things?

Didn't you see, the Danes are having to give their wind power to the Swedes to get rid of it, before it destroys their grid. No fools the Swedes, they know the Danes have to get rid of it, so refuse to buy it.

Oh & people are ending up in psychiatric wards, from the noise of these damn things. Wind power is a very bad joke, making a few very rich, & the rest much poorer.

Geothermal only works if you live beside an active volcano, so no thanks mate, & even you appear to realise solar is another joke, useful only for hot water, & power only if nothing else is available. Ask my brother in law, who is just so happy to get rid of those batteries, & solar cells.

As I suggested to someone else, try reading something other than greenie propaganda, or papers by government funded academics, that is if you want the real facts.

Please advise where I get my oil company money, I've never been able to find it.

One day we'll be able to run our grid off renewable sources but that day is not today. Until we've developed renewable technology to the point where it is viable the obvious choice is nuclear.

Cheers,

Tony