Hi TTBN,
“No energy has been produced without taxpayer subsidies anywhere in the world.”
You got that right given fossil fuels get over half a trillion in subsidies a year!
So, $500 billion to go renewables right? It’s a good thing they chose wind and solar then – imagine if they’d gone for something more expensive?

“The fourth GenCost Report (2021-22) considers the costs of storage technologies and transmission network investment that would be needed to support different energy sources. It shows that wind and solar will continue to be the cheapest sources of new electricity generation in Australia through to 2050, even taking into account the cost of storage and new network infrastructure.”
That includes oil, which is replaced by electric vehicles and some hydrogen modelling.
https://publications.csiro.au/publications/publication/PIcsiro:EP2021-3374

It means we’ll finally have independence from the oil barons of the world including Russia and the Middle East and will be good for national security.
I thought you’d be into a bit of that? Or are you recommending that we stay nice and VULNERABLE to Putin and his friends pulling on our oil chain!

Max, "It means we’ll finally have independence from the oil barons of the world".

Now at last we see why this bloke is trying so hard to convince himself, & us, of the usefulness of wind & solar, he hates real industry making a profit.

So Hasbeen - Do you know how much oil is a national infrastructure risk to Australian life? You saying you really don't care about Australia's national security? It seems you don't know and don't care - so why would I listen to a cheap jibe from you?
As the Foreign Investment Review Board says:

Liquid fuels
Liquid fuels (including crude oil and condensate, petrol, diesel and jet fuels) are essential to Australia’s energy security. A compromise or prolonged disruption to Australia’s liquid fuel sector would have a significant impact on individuals, communities, businesses and national security capabilities.
http://firb.gov.au/sites/firb.gov.au/files/guidance-notes/GN08_NationalSecurity.pdf

But hey - being addicted to some petty tyrant's oil or gas never hurt the world economy!
(Facepalms!)

Fester,
Exactly what energy loss are you referring to? Could you have somehow confused the efficiency figure for the loss figure? Or are you referring to the proposals for the later stages of the hydrogen economy, involving conversion of hydrogen to ammonia for transporting it before it's converted back to hydrogen?

If the latter, it's a red herring for three reasons: firstly there's a huge demand for ammonia. It does not make sense to convert it back to hydrogen at the moment (apart from experimental and proof of concept purposes). And there's also plenty of applications for hydrogen that don't require shipping, chief among them being production of sponge iron.

Secondly, technology is advancing rapidly. In the lab, electrolyser efficiency has reached 95% and the Haber process has been replaced by far more efficient membrane based processes. 'Tis only a matter of time before the huge efficiency gains are commercialised.

Thirdly, ammonia to hydrogen conversion is more likely to be combined with refrigeration than in stand alone facilities. Failure to include that in the calculations would give a deceptively low efficiency rating.

Hi Aidan,

Yes it might work as you say, although it still would not be as efficient as battery or pumped hydro, and you would have to design and build the infrastructure.

Another point is that wind and solar are erratic and intermittent power sources, and with that comes inefficiency. With nuclear power you can run a plant 24/7 as you have dispatchable power. With wind and solar you would have your plant operating intermittently, which makes it less productive and the output more expensive. The Europeans have discovered as much from using conventional generation to fill in the gaps for renewables to provide dispatchable power. There is a price to pay for using things piecemeal.

There are good reasons why systems need to be developed and tested before they are put into operation. Prove the product first. You would not release an untested drug on a population no matter how well you thought it might work. It should be no different for a national power grid.

Told you it was coming...

EU approves CO2 tax on heating and transport, softened by new social climate fund
http://tinyurl.com/3bt5a2k7