Thanks Graham. In the real world, in nations worldwide, the more you have renewables, the steeper the power costs. Hence, net-zero religion always employs hypotheticals or counterfactuals. Ah yes they say, but here is this study which "proves" that costs "woodabeen" steeper still, were it not for the joyful influence of said renewables.

And apparently the ISP is based on some very poor assumptions for its modelling. The upshot is that the grid won't be reliable. The reaction of the government? Hide the report!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ1PTEX-OEg

The article is based on a basic, fatal misunderstanding of how power systems work. You can't treat 12 GW of coal generation to 50 GW of renewables as though they were equivalents.

Coal provides capacity on demand. Solar and wind provide energy when available, so planners deliberately build more total capacity to deliver the same reliability. That’s not "four systems doing the same job," it’s one integrated system doing the job differently.

The "four-fold increase for zero-fold output" is a false comparison, so every cost claim that follows from it is meaningless.

In the real world: Where is the real world ?
AU stands alone for sunshine and wind.
Solar power will be exported to Singapore.
Roof top power is above power so far supplied by independent suppliers.
4 million + house holds supplying power to the grid day and night.
Big time suppliers need to have battery storage to compete.
Costs for generation is in negative figures for solar + wind.
So where is the problem with power supply.
Power retailers need obliterating and taken back by state govt:
If retailing was true they would be paying the consumers to consume power.
The power system as it is evolving needs one distribution body only / state.

It's a mess doog. All along we've been promised cheaper power with renewables and all along prices have risen. Now we have a saturated grid which means that you either waste the power, build transmission lines to take it elsewhere or build storage. All these options mean higher prices. And Singapore? Looks as if they will go nuclear. Sun Cable, like all the green steel and green hydrogen projects, will scam taxpayers of billions and come to nothing. The pub servants can see the train wreck and are warning the government to save themselves from copping the blame, and going by the heavily redacted briefing that came out the other day there is a lot of awful stuff that is being hidden from the peanut gallery.

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/health-environment/article/3331109/atomic-ambitions-singapore-eyes-nuclear-option-net-zero-future

Wind and solar are poison for the grid and deny us the cheap and reliable power we'd have with coal or nuclear.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power

Wind and solar scammers are fleecing this nation and sending us to oblivion.

Fester,

You’re layering emotional claims onto a misunderstanding that’s already been addressed. You again say the grid is "saturated," power is "wasted," and that renewables are "poison." But what you're describing is exactly what happens when you confuse variability with failure.

Yes, solar and wind can flood the grid at times of high output and low demand. That’s not a flaw, it’s a known feature of variable generation, which is why modern grid design incorporates demand response, storage, and export. You can’t claim the system is broken just because it isn’t behaving like a coal plant.

On prices: energy markets globally are complex. The price rises we've seen are overwhelmingly driven by fossil fuel volatility (see: the 2022 gas price spike), not renewables. In fact, new solar and wind are the cheapest form of generation according to CSIRO, AEMO, IEA, Lazard - and even your own World Nuclear Association link shows that nuclear is not cheap without subsidies or government underwriting.

As for Sun Cable and green hydrogen - not every project succeeds, but the idea that they’re all "scams" is just a lazy smear. If every ambitious infrastructure idea that didn’t pan out was a scam, we’d have to add NBN, Snowy Hydro, and nuclear SMRs to that list too.

Your entire post feels like it’s trying to whip up outrage rather than engage in actual system analysis. There’s plenty to debate in energy policy - but starting with technical misunderstandings and layering on conspiracies just misleads people who deserve better.