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 > Can we afford a renewables-only power supply? > Comments

Can we afford a renewables-only power supply? : Comments

By Geoff Carmody, published 4/4/2018

It's incumbent upon die-hard fans of up to 100% renewables to respond publicly to the multiplied generation and storage capacity arithmetic outlined here.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
No! Unless you're like politicians and big business have someone else pay it for you! Pumped hydro is an essential adjunct to renewables only power, along with a service based economy. And as we export our manufacturing jobs, we also export our security!XXX As predicted, the only ones wanting to invest in our coal fired power are the debt laden expansionist Chinese! And for obvious, gotcha by the short and curlies, reasons. XXX The only renewable that has a snowflakes chance in hell of replacing coal is solar thermal, with heat banks! XXX Domestic power is easier, given every Australian family produces enough wasted waste to power their domiciles 24/7! And given an 80% energy coefficient, for four times less than the best coal fired, 20% energy coefficient, power! XXX And if the methane generated onsite by the 2 tank digestion process, is scrubbed then fed into ceramic fuel cells? There could be at least a 50% saleable surplus! XXX After that there's the energy whose name can't be mentioned and studiously avoided by our politicians! Whose vested interests would like be harmed by the roll out of affordable reliable, safe clean carbon free energy, costing as little as 2 cents, estimated, per KwH. XXX And we all know what that is! But to get it, would require scientifically literate polies able to put the nations economic interests ahead of their own and recalcitrant party political machines, with another undeclared agenda? XXX What other possible explanation could there possibly be and an energy crisis already over a decade old and guaranteed to get worse! Given we are little more than products or commodities to be used and exploited, like the horses on Animal Farm! XXX Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Wednesday, 4 April 2018 10:18:55 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
I can add to Geoff's article by pointing to overseas experience in this area. Where the system already has a lot of hydro (which counts as a renewable) then getting to 100 per cent renewable is much less of a problem. Take New Zealand, where more than 50 per cent of power comes from hydro and another 18 per cent from geothermal (also a renewable). There's already plenty of pumped hydro (the existing dams) and as hydro is very responsive (its typically used to meet unexpected peaks in demand) it fits well with intermittent power.

Australia simply does not have the same geography of rivers and mountains of NZ. Where is all the fresh water for these pumped hydro projects to come from? Use salt water? There has only been one salt water pumped hydro project, in Japan, and that's now decommissioned. Sure you could probably find enough places in, say, the great dividing range or the Blue Mountains to place dams if we're prepared to drown a lot of prime bush and farm land, and can find the fresh water. But as dam projects usually run into environmental objections of one sort or another these days I'm sceptical that anything like enough will be built in, say, the next twenty years, at enormous expense. I won't bother to discuss batteries.

Those are just a few of the road blocks on the way to renewables paradise.
Posted by curmudgeonathome, Wednesday, 4 April 2018 10:37:53 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
What most politicians think of as affordable power, is consistent with a mindset, where someone else pays theirs for them and or retirement pensions around 8 times better than the old age pension. XXX Seriously, these folk live in a bubble filled to overflowing, by comparison, with unearned undeserved self appointed (I'm all right Jack) entitlement! XXX Their idea of hard work is beating the opposition in the (often entirely irrelevant meaningless, he said, she said) gotcha debate. XXX Previous LEADERS faced with a bleak post war economic picture were able to envision a better future! But even though completely unaffordable found a way to fund and build the Snowy Mountain's scheme. XXX Without any question whatsoever, our economic future, food security and national security is predicated on it being a nuclear powered future. XXX And a MSR THORIUM POWERED FUTURE! XXX Especially now we see the predicted unholy alliance of Iran, Turkey and Russia emerging as an economic and military block? XXX Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Wednesday, 4 April 2018 10:41:06 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
Another sleazy, overfed, greedy ex public servant wanting more.
First a limit in ex pollie and public servant welfare. Set it at one hundred thousand a year which is ten times what they are worth. Not one cent more and list everyone on it. I am disgusted with the incompetence and waste we suffer and then these idiots have the hide to say they are not paid enough? Farcical!
Still at least fatty Beasley in on his way to a third untaxed pension and of course no fringe benefits tax for him.
Posted by JBowyer, Wednesday, 4 April 2018 11:22:33 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
The last line of the article "And tell us the bill we'll cop for that." to which I'd add, "...and what is the carbon footprint?"

Modular nuclear is nigh and anything wasted one renewables is money not spent on this.
Posted by Luciferase, Wednesday, 4 April 2018 2:43:36 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
It's not a matter of “Can we afford a renewables-only power supply?” It's a matter of can we continue to exist if we rely on renewables; and the answer to that is, NO.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 4 April 2018 2:59:29 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
Enthusiasts for overbuilding wind and solar say we can use the surplus energy to make electrolytic hydrogen and burn it for power during the calm and dark periods. Hellishly inefficient but.

Storage itself may be curtailed once the battery or pumped hydro dam is full. Build a bigger battery they say. Some say for 100% renewables we need static capacity 10X annual electricity demand. The Hornsdale SA battery of 129 Mwh was said to cost $50m. Call it $400 per kwh about half or less the cost of a home battery. In 2016 Australia used 257 Twh = 257 bn kwh of which 10% is say 26 bn kwh. Times $400 is $10.4 trillion. Those greenies must be rich.
Posted by Taswegian, Wednesday, 4 April 2018 5:48:24 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
The real question is
"Can we NOT afford a renewables only power supply".
Make your choice. Destroy this planet or not.
Posted by ateday, Wednesday, 4 April 2018 10:49:40 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
The short answer is NO! Renewables are the thing of greens and other un-informed, mis-informed or just plain arrogant fools who think they have the answers and understand the problems. They don't! I've said it before; A bunch of self anointed 'gardeners', think they have the smarts and the answers to a problem they have conjured up to elevate themselves into a position of 'experts' in the field, fall way short of the mark. First and foremost, we must be cautious about a bunch of people who have NO political experience and NO policies of any kind. They have appealed to a particular and peculiar group of people who are in fact, child-like in their thinking. I find it difficult to describe them because I cannot think so narrowly. This beat-up on CC is not going to end up killing us and destroying the Earth. So let's just keep throwing money at all these 'con-men' and the problems will all go away. It's an age old ploy. Make up some disaster stories, it never happens, then another excuse/reason is fabricated to justify the prediction never materialising. Just remember the Y2000 bug, mad cow disease and so on. You are trying to squeeze a square peg into a round hole. For renewables to be the most 'viable' source of power generation, we will need wait a little longer as the technology we seek is not yet invented. I desperately need for politics and personal agenda to go and get f#*&ed. We have Alan's passion for thorium as a true candidate for the job, but for the fact these mongrels haven't figured out how they're going to fleece money out the back door into their back pockets if they go down that path. Nuclear is also in with a very good chance. Now this one I think the pollies like because they know how to skim money out of it. Unfortunately, because the greens and other idiots have managed to polarise enough of the population that it is not a vote winner. Ultimately, that is the priority for the pollies. Not us!
Posted by ALTRAV, Friday, 6 April 2018 6:07:25 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
The only guaranteed renewable is the continuing arrival of the power bill needing to be paid
Posted by Special Delivery, Saturday, 7 April 2018 5:30:46 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
Can we afford a Coal-only power supply? The answer to that would also be no.

Apparently we're not a smart as Albania, Iceland, Paraguay and Norway who get most (if not almost all) their energy from renewables.
We're also not like many other countries (Scotland, Sweden..even China) who are moving away from fossil fuels.

It's apparently smarter to dig up rocks and burn them, no matter what the long-term cost and as long as a few people can make an easy dollar out of it.

Coal comes in part from the remains of dinosaurs and so do some modern attitudes toward the future.
Posted by rache, Saturday, 7 April 2018 8:06:12 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
rache, your position is an old one and quite frankly, out of date. The CC is a beat-up and time will prove this. The world is going through one of it's growing periods. The Earth has been doing this for millions of years. How long do you have to wait and see that CC is just another con. People see something and along comes a 'motor-mouth' who can see a good con and gives this thing a reason, an explanation that the plebs all nod and agree, as if they are familiar with the science and technology of the implied problem. The same people wanting to not look as stupid as they really are, don't have the stones to say, 'I have no idea what he's talking about', so they all go around espousing the virtues of the con-men, all the while nodding to each other and agreeing with each other as if they have any idea about what the dirty little con-man said.
rache, try thinking outside the box. Take the box and crush it, then burn it. Then start questioning these claims. Don't take people's word as gospel. For a balanced discussion, you need both sides of an argument. Only then will you find flaws in these arguments which hopefully will get you looking for answers. And that is the best advise I can offer anyone.
Posted by ALTRAV, Saturday, 7 April 2018 8:51:13 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
We're not smart enough to have mighty fjords and rivers for HEP, demanding an inquiry into our stupidity. The Chinese, Scots and Swedes are abandoning coal and nuclear, and will soon run on solar-panels, windmills and tread-wheels 24/7/365, like South Australia. AGW isn't happening and we should be doing something to make it happen.

Bored.
Posted by Luciferase, Saturday, 7 April 2018 9:06:59 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
Luciferace, don't believe the BS. Renewables are a childish dream. For renewables to be even partly effective we will need a lot more smarts. Even when it might happen in the future they will be the most expensive power ever conceived. Wind is grossly inefficient. Solar equally so. Natural hydro, geo-thermal, nuclear and even thorium salt are workable and reliable, cheap forms of energy. The other thing no-one wants to talk about is we are trading one pollutant for another. Many agree with me, the visual pollution we will have to endure to have to tolerate all those bloody windmills and solar panels. No-one has had the stones to broadcast the true acreage involved in wind and solar farms. They're footprint will be many times greater than the area they provide power to. This is idiotic. The maintenance/repair/upkeep costs make them an absolute idiots folly. The cost to consumers will be disgustingly high, and we will be told that it will eventually come down. It never does. I am forever frustrated at how gullible and naive people are. What is even worse is that they refuse to admit it. This the major reason we are where we are, today.
Posted by ALTRAV, Saturday, 7 April 2018 10:05:48 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
Well at last I am not a voice in the wilderness on batteries.
A study was done on the UK system for January 2016,
The UK grid of course has some nuclear backup so that is useful.
However it turned out that the UK grid would need, wait for it
14,000 batteries the same size as the Sth Australian battery.

Taking into account that we have no nuclear component and proportioning
to the Australian grid, we would need about 6000 batteries.
The cost 6000 x $120,000,000 = $720,000,000.
The battery cost is a state secret but strongly rumoured to be
$1 a watt so the whole system including upgraded interlinks would
not be less than a $1trillion.

Storage both hydro and battery is about 70% efficient.
Effectively batteries are out of the question but Malcolm's hydro
scheme would be a big help, although more needed, but does this
country have the geological and water available.
We need to make the hot rocks scheme work as aside from nuclear it is
our only option.

We do not have a lot of time. The Energy Return on Energy Invested
has been falling for years and coal 80 down to 10, and oil 100 to approx 10.

Once they fall to about 7 they are finished no matter what price
you put on them, there is just no point.
Posted by Bazz, Sunday, 8 April 2018 11:24:10 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
The politicians do not seem to realise that the 100% renewables
argument is over and are unable to accept that what they have been
preaching for years is just plain nonsense.
Our difficulty is that the fossil fuels have a limited time also.
Except in Australia coal has a limited time and oil world wide is
starting to see the end. Even tight oil is showing worrying signs.

Nuclear and fusion are our only real firm possibility.
Sooner or later the greenies will have to be swept aside.
It is either that or starve. It was no accident that the number of
aborigines in 1788 only numbered several hundred thousand.

Remove the power system from political control and give it to the engineers.
Posted by Bazz, Sunday, 8 April 2018 11:52:52 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
I can't agree with the general thrust of thust article. For example, in respect of them being "unfair to the poor", rooftop PV has actually decreased the cost of electricity for everyone by around $3.3 billion in the year to April 2017 because the suppliers didn't need to use very costly gas fired peakers to fill the demand gap.

This is because, during times of greatest need for cooling, the sun was shining and PV owners used that to power their A/C. Check out this RenewEconomy article from October 2017: https://reneweconomy.com.au/how-rooftop-solar-is-saving-billions-on-energy-bills-for-all-consumers-56676/
Posted by GJOESQ, Monday, 9 April 2018 1:46:10 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
GJOESQ, a personal friend had solar panels installed very early on when they were first released. He is quite proud of the fact he was getting a discount and it was highlighted in his power bill. Some years later he had some more installed. I'm not sure if he missed the lecture on solar panels and their cost benefits, but, as I recall, he found out later that the discount rate had a shelf life and it would therefore run out. The second lot of solar panels had a much smaller discount rate. And no-one has been able to give a 'reasonable' time for the replacement of his current panels when they begin to fail, which they eventually will. Now the game plan from the energy providers was always going to be a con-job. You see, eventually a lot of people will have SP's because they do help in producing power. What no-one has considered is that eventually the public will be supplying power, for free, to a commercial profit taking entity like synergy and so on. So to recap; the private sector will harvest the energy at their expense, and pass it on to the energy providers for free. Any maintenance and on going repairs are ALL at the expense of the public or private sector or the 'owners' of the SP's on their roof/property. So eventually the energy suppliers will be collecting money for electricity they did not pay for and contribute nothing towards their maintenance or up-keep. And people say that pollies and their mates are not evil, disgusting, corrupt mongrels. I'd like to know if I can set up an electricity supply company? Not a chance, all the scum have taken the available openings.
Posted by ALTRAV, Monday, 9 April 2018 5:25:06 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
ALTRAV, communities can form their own co-ops and provide their own electricity for distribution within their membership and export excess at market rates. Have a look at Saturday's ABC Landline program: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-07/people-power:-communities-funding-their-own-wind/9630150 :-)
Posted by GJOESQ, Monday, 9 April 2018 10:08:58 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
ALTRAV, regarding your opinion about solar PV owners losing out on the monetary equation, I'd like to point you to this article published in the Finder on March 7, 2018: https://www.finder.com.au/9500-solar-panels-installed-every-day-in-australia :-)
Posted by GJOESQ, Monday, 9 April 2018 10:38:59 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
In order to achieve a balance, as requested by the originator, I am posting links to three recent article in the RenewEconomy that specifically address issues raised here:

https://reneweconomy.com.au/tesla-big-battery-is-changing-the-way-people-think-about-the-grid-15923/
https://reneweconomy.com.au/low-income-and-disadvantaged-households-should-be-priority-for-clean-energy-68313/
https://reneweconomy.com.au/solar-pv-wind-track-replace-coal-oil-gas-within-two-decades-21333/

I encourage all of you who answer "No" to Geoff Carmody's question, "Can we afford a renewables-only power supply?" take the time to read the articles above for a balanced perspective. Thanx. :-)
Posted by GJOESQ, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 12:28:37 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
GJOESQ, these articles are skewed towards renewables. We are nowhere near relying on renewables yet. I totally reject any comments/articles/surveys promoting renewables. The current technology is ideologically driven by un-informed and mis-informed people. The latest attempt at pushing sh!t up-hill is ridiculous. Lets look at the current state of the dreamers plans. We begin with wind. Total failures. Any form of machinery used in this fashion is going to fail. And they are, constantly. Solar also a failure but for different reasons. Now they want to throw another bad decision after so many before them. The best way to describe why these are not viable is; imagine an aircraft where the engines are the size of the fuselage and it could only carry four passengers at a time, because the engines were so heavy that it could only carry the weight of four people. That's a reasonable comparison of the efficiency of renewables at present. Then the idea of batteries. A band-aid solution at best. The type of power generation we want/need has to be continuous and at base load levels. The other negative is visual pollution. No one has talked about the size of these wind and solar farms. They will be, at least, double the size of the area/city they will service. You can read, link and refer as much as you like, you and your clan are on a road to nowhere. So, NO! We cannot afford a renewables-only power supply.
Posted by ALTRAV, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 1:36:52 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
GJOESQ, as for your comment on 'selling the excess power to the community at market rates'. You cannot just come 'off the grid', because you say so. Like your sewerage system, once the service goes past your front gate, you start paying. The one thing everyone must pay is for the privilege of having the service 'just being there'. Whether you connect to it or not, you may not pay a 'usage' fee but you pay none-the-less. And as for selling it to the community. Not in this country. You cannot have it both ways. Either you stay on the grid and get nothing other than a cheaper electricity bill. Or you try and get off the grid and find out you can't. Again dreaming. I've explained that you will be subsidising the energy provider by injecting free power into the grid which they will on-sell. You might get a cheaper power bill some months, but they get free power from your SP's and on-sell it to consumers. They will not repair or replace your SP's, you do at your expense. So you will not benefit financially with your extra power. This was the plan from the start.
Big market push, offer big incentives in the form of financial refunds or rebates. Making sure there is a sunset clause and they will cease the incentives. When that happens, the electricity providers will be getting free power from your SP's which they will on-sell to the community. I don't think people thought that one through.
Posted by ALTRAV, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 2:03:36 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
GJOESQ,
The problem with batteries is that they cost a lot more than
the renewables they are designed to support.
At $1 trillion plus they do not generate 1 watt of electricity and in
fact they lose 30% of what they are charged with.
That will never improve more than a tiny amount because the laws of
physics says that when you change energy from one form to another you lose some.
Do you have any idea of the size of the task to install 6000+ of those batteries ?

It is just the way it is !
You are right in that it is possible to go off grid on the scale of
domestic housing and even small factories, but I presume you will
still want to eat. The processing of food and refrigeration are
beyond a few solar panels and batteries for supermarkets.
And that is just one industry, what about all the others ?

It is these fundamentals of physics that has doomed the dream.
Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 11:19:24 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
Bazz, I don't know if you can go 'off grid' in the metropolitan areas. Some years ago it was attempted but they still charged the 'service' fee. The main reason I would like to see 'everyone' off grid is so that the scheming bastards who 'own' the electricity supply companies, would go broke and die for being so greedy in the first place. But if it were possible it is a great idea because they thought they were so smart as to get free electricity when all the subsidies ran out and they would profit quite enormously by the fact that the average household was collecting free power for them to on-sell. They would make a fortune. The householder would still not get free power and on top of all that would be paying for service, maintenance, repairs and eventually, replacement of the solar panels. All at the householders expense. So yes I really wish that ALL householders could go off grid in the metropolitan area. Oh what a day that would be. But yes you are also right in suggesting that we could not justify the huge size of all the infrastructure needed, (let alone the cost) for all these renewables. Now is not the time especially with this current technology. A fools folly.
Posted by ALTRAV, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 11:41:59 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
Greetings ALTRAV. It's clear that we cannot have a reasonable discussion here because of your, self-confessed closed mind. I quote from your own post where you unequivocally state, "I totally reject any comments/articles/surveys promoting renewables."

Prithee, how can I hope to influence a mind so shut against the approaching storm of enlightenment? You accuse supporters of renewables as being "ideologically driven by un-informed and mis-informed people" yet provide no evidence of this.

I provide a link to this article that lends weight to my understanding of the facts: http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-04-06/solar-power-most-backed-fuel-technology/9612976?section=technology

Indeed, I will always provide a source for the points I make in any forum. Sadly though, you have rejected any such evidence before you even read it as per your earlier statement. I contend that your attitude is proof of your own ideologically driven point of view.

Another example, you make an unsubstantiated claim that wind turbines are "total failures". Can you please provide me with any evidence? Regarding your claim that "Solar also a failure but for different reasons", can you please provide any evidence?

I'd like to make the further point that the big batteries being installed around Australia currently are providing a huge service to Australian electricity consumers as evidenced by this SHM article. Please read it in spite of your stated prejudices: https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/tesla-claims-it-s-being-shortchanged-for-providing-power-too-quickly-20180321-p4z5hw.html
Posted by GJOESQ, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 4:58:45 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
GJOESQ, I come from a base of technology and reliability. My negativity is towards the current technology. It is in-efficient. My background is engineering, I have been in the engineering environment from birth. I am 67 years old and have many designs and products to my name and in my history both nationally and internationally. Now that I have blown my own horn against my better judgement, I do this to say that I have followed the birth and growth of the renewable event. It was founded on lies and promoted on the back of more lies. Enhanced and given cred by way of grants led by the marketing of more lies. I don't care what you read or researched, unless it is to expose and tell the truth about renewables, lies and more lies. You are a dreamer and you desperately want this renewable story to take hold and succeed, as do I. But I will not countenance anything based on lies. Now to bring you back to earth or reality. WHEN, the technology is at a level of reliability and affordability that we won't be complaining about the cost of electricity, it's reliability and so on, I will be the first to report on it and not before all these criteria are met. Once I am satisfied we have a reliable affordable power supply I will report accordingly. Until then neither you nor any other gullable, naive halfwit out there has anything constructive or technical to offer me, links included, that will change the performance and reliability of the current lack-luster examples on offer. No matter how you sugar coat them. Oh and BTW, you ask for proof. My proof is out there and has always been there for everyone to see. You and those like you are too biased to see it. You want proof? Look back at the evidence and the truth will suddenly appear. Just follow the money.
Posted by ALTRAV, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 6:47:35 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
ALTRAV, my comment 'selling the excess power to the community at market rates’ does NOT infer going off-grid whatsoever. Indeed, we need to keep the grid as we move to a fossil fuel free future.

However, the grid needs to be remoulded to suit 21st century energy technology, not 19th century, as was the case in its initial concept and implementation. Millions of dollars has been wasted by
"poles and wires" upgrades that pandered to the fossil fuel industry’s call for new “base load” electricity, a concept that is outdated and irrelevant: https://reneweconomy.com.au/base-load-power-a-myth-used-to-defend-the-fossil-fuel-industry-96007/

The future is decentralised, locally dispatchable renewable energy generation, with battery storage, all connected to a 21st grid that supports the whole network. Smart mini-grids will be the standard within the decade. This is beginning to happen in Australia: https://reneweconomy.com.au/30mw-battery-to-create-renewables-based-mini-grid-in-south-australia-63304/

You say, "as for selling it to the community. Not in this country.” This is totally wrong. Reposit Power, and other companies, are deploying the technology to solar panel and battery owners that allows them to trade, in real time, on the NEM to sell their excess electricity generation: https://repositpower.com/

Have you looked at the various solar power calculators available today? They show exactly how much of a financial benefit installing solar PVs on your rooftop can be. Check out this website and be amazed. Returns of 30% in the initial investment are not uncommon. Break out of your prejudice and be informed: https://solarcalculator.com.au/
Posted by GJOESQ, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 11:25:36 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
Bazz, battery prices are dropping. That’s a fact. Big batteries are playing a very important role to provide "back-up energy when generators fail or fall short. This is known as Frequency Controlled Ancillary Services”: https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/tesla-claims-it-s-being-shortchanged-for-providing-power-too-quickly-20180321-p4z5hw.html

The intention of battery storage is not at all what you are laying out here. Where is the evidence that this is so? Please have a read of tis article to disabuse yourself of those ideas: https://reneweconomy.com.au/coal-dies-super-cheap-renewables-plus-battery-storage-82743/

Finally, I, nor anyone else I know in the leading edge of renewable energy technology, wants to leave the grid. The grid is an essential element to a secure and reliable electricity future for Australia: https://reneweconomy.com.au/aemo-plans-for-future-clean-grid-with-no-mention-of-base-load-71052/

Your opinions on these matters are, sadly, just opinions. The facts show them to be so. I’m sorry that you have bedded down with the wrong camp, but so be it. I trust in your intelligence to have a look at what the real experts are saying. It’s not too late for anyone to get on board the renewable future for Australia. :-)
Posted by GJOESQ, Tuesday, 10 April 2018 11:26:02 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
GJOESQ, to clarify,I did not advocate going off-grid. You may not be able to go off-grid in the metro area. In so doing the consumers will still be using more power than they generate through their SP's. Now another point was, the power suppliers schemed a plan whereby you were only allowed to have 5K max SP's. At this rate the consumer will rarely get zero consumption readings. Only at times when the house is dormant will there be a positive flow on effect into the grid. The consumer pays for the installation, service, maintenance and repairs of same SP's. When they will need replacing, (and they will), he pays. The power company get the power for free and on-sell it to the consumer. Now if everyone had SP's and allowed to run, say, a 10K system, then OK. The power companies would have all this power and no one to buy it. Personally I favour a 10K system and EVERYONE goes off the grid. The power companies would immediately implode. I would not be surprised if, like the sewerage system, once it goes past your door you start getting a 'service' charge then when you connect you get a 'service' and 'usage' charge. Don't presume to know me or my prejudices I look at the viability and reliability factor, and if you cared to read my post rather than presume a pre-determined outcome you would have read the part where the current technology is not viable, irrespective of your opinions and links. From a technical stand point. Wind is a joke, a most inefficient folly on a grand scale. The visual polution alone is catastrophic. As is it's solar cousin. You completely missed the part where I state that the footprint of these mediums will be many times greater than the area they are supposed to supply power to. Remember also, batteries are only a storage medium. That stupid con job of a futile excersize in SA is pathetic when it can only supply power to a handful homes for a matter of minutes.
Posted by ALTRAV, Wednesday, 11 April 2018 2:47:54 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
GCQesq,
People have gone off grid sucessfully but I am not sure how
good it actually is, especially financially.

Anyway, read this;
http://tinyurl.com/y86l6keo

Anyone who thinks batteries are the answer must consider these points;
Batteries do not generate power
They are a heavy user of power
Study of element table shows we have the best already in use
Any improvement is going to be marginal

We are destined to have blackouts, more power generation can not be
installed in time to avoid it.
Politicians have no idea of the scale of the problem.
I wonder how many of them have ever been in a power station.
Posted by Bazz, Wednesday, 11 April 2018 5:09:09 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
This is coming to a head now. When there are a couple of power cuts and it is realised how the renewables are fake expect the following. The media and then the politicians will turn on you but both are too stupid to get out of their own way. The greens will bob under the swamp as they have done after causing our bushfires. Politicians will go the foreign route and the Japs, Chines or Germans will make a killing building the coal fired power stations we blew up! Wait and see!
Posted by JBowyer, Wednesday, 11 April 2018 7:36:20 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
ALTRAV, I apologise for misinterpreting you earlier comment about going off-grid. I don’t advocate it either because of the wasted electricity generated that is not used. It’s far better to be on grid and get paid the FiT of up to 16c kWh.

Consumers will not be using more than they generate is the use the grid as a virtual battery by producing at least three times more than they use. This is what I do. My earnings from my exported electricity are enuff to pay, not only, for my electricity use when the sun don’t shine, but I also for my LPG gas that I use for hot water. I am a living proof that your opinion is quite wrong on this matter.

You are also wrong about the the 5Kw PV system limit. The limit was increased in NSW, halfway through 2017, to 10kW per phase. You are also quite wrong when you stated, "Only at times when the house is dormant will there be a positive flow on effect into the grid”. At the summer peak, my 7kW system was producing 45kWh. I was using 5kWh so 40kWh was being exported.

No power company gets exported electricity for free. Once again you are wrong, very wrong. Frankly. ALTRAV, you really need to review your information sources. They are false in the extreme. But I digress.

I expect to have to replace my inverter about halfway through my system’s life of 25 years. That is factored into the financial calculations I have made and I still manage a 25% return on my investment of 25 years, contrary to your opinion. You stated, "Now if everyone had SP's and allowed to run, say, a 10K system, then OK.” Well, that is the case as I type. So go for it, old boy and reap the rewards!!

Your statement, "Personally I favour a 10K system and EVERYONE goes off the grid.” contradicts your early clarification that you do "not advocate going off-grid”. Could you please clarify which of those two statements are your real opinion?
Posted by GJOESQ, Thursday, 12 April 2018 1:59:55 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
Furthermore, ALTRAV, you claim about yourself, "I look at the viability and reliability factor, and if you cared to read my post rather than presume a pre-determined outcome you would have read the part where the current technology is not viable, irrespective of your opinions and links.” I can only presume that these are your opinions because you haven’t provided any supporting links, articles or research. Until you do, I will treat what you post as such.

You further claim, "From a technical stand point. Wind is a joke, a most inefficient folly on a grand scale.” Where is the evidence to support your opinion?

Once again, you have provided no support for your claim that, "the footprint of these mediums will be many times greater than the area they are supposed to supply power to”. Where is the evidence for that. Please provide it or I can’t take what you post as valid or worth considering.

"That stupid con job of a futile excersize in SA is pathetic when it can only supply power to a handful homes for a matter of minutes.” shows a lack of understanding of the role of that battery. Please read this to disabuse yourself of your errant opinions: https://reneweconomy.com.au/faster-smarter-grid-operator-hails-performance-tesla-big-battery/

No more excuses for not being informed, ALTRAV. :-)
Posted by GJOESQ, Thursday, 12 April 2018 2:00:40 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
Bazz, thanx for your reply. :-)

Going off-grid is the best way to go in new, country sites, where the cost of grid connection is too expensive. It’s far better that households stay on-grid to share the love of their excess electricity generation.

BTW, the link you gave me failed. :-(

Regarding ‘big batteries’, I disagree with you there. The Tesla battery in SA has been a huge success, exceeding its expectations in the role for which it was designed and installed. Please have a read of this article: https://reneweconomy.com.au/faster-smarter-grid-operator-hails-performance-tesla-big-battery/

You may be right about more blackouts being unavoidable. Sadly, this is the result of inept energy policy in federal space for over a decade. I agree with your comment about our pollies. Hopeless at best, dangerous at worse. :-)
Posted by GJOESQ, Thursday, 12 April 2018 2:10:17 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
GJESQ, I have said all I need to say on this topic. As my comments are based on historical facts and articles, they are there for all to see. As you have a clear mindset on this topic, I suggest if you wish confirmation of my comments, they are available even for you to see. And BTW, my comments on the SA battery folly is also a matter of record as every idiot was quick to endorse a system which gave a 'handfull' of houses power for 40 mins or so. Big deal. As I said, long way to go. And so it is that 'we cannot afford a renewables only power supply', just yet. My comments about off-grid has to do with facilitating a greedy and selfish power company. My point is that consumers will be paying for everything from the installation to the on-going service, maintenance and repairs to their SP's. The power company pays nothing, gets the power for free and on-sells it to consumers, even SP households. The bastards had that planned from the start. That is why I am for off-grid, (ok, MAIN grid) power distribution, so these mongrels cannot profit at our expense. Sweet deal if you can get it. I wonder if I would be allowed to start a power company?
Posted by ALTRAV, Thursday, 12 April 2018 5:56:32 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
ALTRAV, clearly, since you are unwilling to share we me, and the good readers of this site, any links, facts, research, peer reviewed articles etc supporting your assertions, I can only assume there is no evidence to back them up. Therefore there’s really no way I can conduct a meaningful conversation with you.

Sadly, your refusal to do so actually absents you from any credible input on this topic, no matter how strongly you hold your opinion. Good day to you, Sir. :-)
Posted by GJOESQ, Thursday, 12 April 2018 11:24:03 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
GCQesq;
Sorry about that I gave it my own m/c's storage location by mistake.
This should work;

http://tinyurl.com/yb85rk8o

Lots of other interesting bits on that site.
Yep, it does work.
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 12 April 2018 4:20:44 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
GJOESQ, your dismissive attitude is at best arrogant, at worst is one of extreme bias. You are not in a position of authority on this topic. I have told you repeatedly, my evidence is historic and broadcast for all to see. These 'facts' I quote are from articles and publications of past. If you think your continual badgering for evidence gives you some kind of intellectual high ground, you are mistakenly delusional. It appears it is you who are set in your views. Sadly it is you who should be absent from this topic, as your input is biased towards renewables. Mine is neutral because the evidence I have garnished over the years clearly demonstrates a need for further development. Finally I agree with you, there is no way I can conduct a meaningful conversation with you, until YOU have read both sides of the argument and not your biased version. Sadly, YOUR refusal to do so actually absents YOU from any credible input on this topic, no matter how strongly you hold your opinion. Good day to YOU Sir!
Posted by ALTRAV, Thursday, 12 April 2018 7:39:07 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
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435118300485?via%3Dihub

The renewablistas and their glee club publications would have us believe we don't need nuclear, just gas backup for solar and wind (with some quaintly referring to biomass, as if that has a show in hell). This will keep us in a holding pattern, emitting GHGs, while amazing breakthroughs are made in scalable, viable storage, after which we'll all live happily ever after. (and that's without addressing transport fuels)

That's not a plan, it's a shot of hope in the dark, with less chance of success than fusion, which is always claimed to be just around the corner (then the next corner, then the next, then......).
Posted by Luciferase, Friday, 13 April 2018 8:13:14 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

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