"....batteries are the only short term solution...." forgot to mention the extra windmills and solar panels needed to charge them that also must be quickly erected. It's a real boondoggle!

...or they'll be charged with Victorian electricity, I suppose, no need for more wind/solar.

Victoria is reluctant to supply SA with more power as the interconnect or will not handle it . That is the problem since day one.

doog, the interconnector was upgraded last year. But once Hazelwood closes, the main direction of flow's likely to be reversed.

Luciferase, where did you get the idea that "batteries are the only short term solution"? What about gas turbines?

"In the meantime, there is methane already in the ground while hydrogen has to be generated and stored."
True, but apart from the environmental disadvantage of using methane, methane is readily useful for more other things, and more expensive because of that.

"There are so many approaches we can dream up, but affordable, dispatchable renewable energy 24/7/365 is dream too far."
Just dismissing it like that shows lack of thought.
Too far for what purpose in what location in what timeframe?

SA needs a fix before next summer. If they can get a gas plant and gas supply up before that I dips my lid. Batteries can be done quickly.

Affordable, 100% renewable dispatchable energy 24/7/365 is a dream too far because the storage issue will never go away. How much of it is ever enough to meet all contingencies, while noting the word "affordable"? If you want gas, not storage, the emissions reduction is insignificant in the fight against CAGW, which the aim of it all. You may just as well use "clean" coal baseload for the same effect.

Dreaming is not rational thought. You continue to dismiss EROEI. It is this determining how massive the generation and storage infrastructure must be (hence cost) to meet power and transport needs, while reducing emissions to an extent sufficient to solve CAGW in the time-frame we have.

We are all capable of dreaming (as we have demonstrated in our posts above), but the problem at hand needs a pragmatic solution, not far away dreams.

You plead that you are not anti-nuke but that it's unsuitable for Australia's sparse population while have sunshine and wind to plunder. Please explain. Wouldn't a reactor or two in the south-east supplant a lot of coal-fired power and maintain SA needs as well? Just what is your objection to it now SA is up SC? (BTW, are you suggesting the interconnector is more for Victorian needs than SA's?)

Your lot got SA into its mess. Why should anybody expect you to get SA out of it? Weatherill's desperate blame shifting prank will not deter enough astute SA electors from sacking his mob at the next election.