One need not be bright to see that FF backup infrastructure must be of the same scale and cost as if renewables did not exist. The only saving from pairing renewables with the FF backup is a little fuel, and not as much as one might expect given load following involves inefficient fuel usage. There's not much joy on the emissions front from pairing either, especially if the FF is gas with consequent methane leakage. I get a giggle out of SA building massive backup diesel generation with little fanfare while hollering its piffling capacity, expensive battery from the rooftops. Not sure the new Lib gov't there is any better, now to subsidize home batteries. What an utter waste of public money.

Of course, we await great storage solutions, like waiting for Godot. Adding these based on known technology blows renewables' LCOE completely out of the water. We are sleepwalking into economic catastrophe.

Scaling from the US to Australia will have significant errors.
To get the wx differentials, however great they might be, it
would just be common sense to take as much advantage as possible of
geographical dispersal.
Sure if our electrical demand is say one twelfth of the US's we just
need roughly the same number of wind and solar farms as the US but
just one twelfth the KW rating.
The problem is if that study is anywhere near correct to get the wx
differential we will need something like the same number as the US needs.
That is 50,000 wind & solar farms !

I note that the Greens now have a proposal to have thirty Wind and
solar farm zones all around Australia.

We keep hearing the wind and solar is cheaper than coal.
I think it is true that a wind turbine's output is cheaper, but
that is at nameplate rating. Over a year they get about 35% of the
nameplate rating. That is why 12 are used to get the nameplate output of one.
If they go ahead the way they seem to expect with 50% target I suspect
they are laying up one hell of a political row when it falls over.

Yeah Bazz, http://reneweconomy.com.au/greens-propose-30-renewable-energy-zones-backed-by-grid-fund-30594/

No mention of storage (presumably unimportant under this grandiose dispersal scheme), but there is this,"Renewable energy is the cheapest form of electricity........".

How can zealots within government and its organizations keep making this ridiculous claim without full accountability? The cost calculation for renewables must include everything required for their 24/7/365 delivery, be it thermal backup or storage. Joe Public is conned by the mantra to believe more renewables means cheaper electricity, without any reference to reliability other than reveries like the Greens 30-zone plan and general splashing about of the term "storage" as some given.

http://energylive.aemo.com.au/News/-/media/FA01D34E19E0484BB3697016B7A58159.ashx has nearly 350 references to "storage" without coherent elaboration.

Luciferase, well it looks like the Greens are starting to realise what
they are taking on with 100% renewables.
Still, if those Americans thought they would need 50,000 wind and solar
sites spread across the US, then there is a big gap between them and
the Greens 30 sites over the same area.

As that article said, Go Nuclear or Go Extinct !

Bazz,

Go nuclear, go clean coal-fired stations, go renewables to obtain reliable power across Australia.

I'm waiting for the Coalition to tell us exactly how it is going to reduce the cost of electricity to businesses and houses in the land.

Slogans of 'We will lower electricity prices' are not good enough without specifics of how this will happen.

I don't plan on holding my breath until it comes.

Or, will that be revealed as an election promise with planned actions before the 2019 elections?

Would one of you be able to give me some technical assistance for this forum?

When I post a URL, like that for my homepage at: http://spencer.gear.dyndns.org/, I'm not able to provide this as a direct link.

I notice a number of you have made posts with direct links to a website. How may I do it?