An article in Weekend Australian quotes an industry group that affirms
that High Efficiency Low Emission coal fired 2 Gigawatt power station
cost $2 to $3 billion compared to $3billion per year for solar & wind subsidies.
The cost of the coal station's electricity is $40 to $78 a megawatt
hour against over $100 a megawatt hour from renewables.
Why do renewables need subsidies ?
This is very difficult to reconcile against the claims that renewables
are very much cheaper.

There is a further complication in that no one has added the cost of
providing backup batteries for each and every solar/wind installation.
I suspect that cost might well equal or exceed the solar/wind cost.
From the limited search I have done there does not seem to be a
5 gigawatt/hr battery anywhere.
That would seem to be the minimum size as it would keep a 200megawatt
wind or solar farm going for one day.

I suspect that the cost would be totally off the scale.
I have not been able to find a cost of batteries of this type.
Obviously you cannot just ring up and get a quote.
Did anyone see a price for the Sth Aus 100megwat/hr battery ?

There are hundreds of these HELE plants operating throughout the world, but not in stupid Australia. We are just the Third World source of cheap coal for countries which, unlike Australia, want to remain productive and competitive.

Of course coal is cheaper. That is why there is a coal boom with
1600 new plants in 62 countries around the world being built– increasing 43%.

Hell even Germany is building more coal plants, their renewables are just expensive window dressing.

Japan reportedly is building 45 new coal fired stations and using Australian coal.

Australia, once the Lucky Country, now the Stupid Country.

yep we have lined the pockets of those promoting the gw scare while pensioners freeze and fry. By the way congratulations South Australia for having the highest electricity price in the WORLD and third world reliability.

Here are two links that may be of interest:

http://theconversation.com/renewables-are-getting-cheaper-all-the-time-heres-why-64799

And -

http://theconversation.com/australian-coal-v-renewables-how-much-will-it-cost-to-bring-electricity-to-indias-poor-55449

Whether a study finds coal fired or renewable electricity cheaper depends on what assumptions it uses. The real problem is that governments have lost sight of the objective of cheap electricity. The combination of Federal governments ideologically obsessed with privatisation and state governments short of money means that the agenda switched from providing good value for customers to maximising asset values and making as much money as they could get away with.

Foxy that article you linked to brushed aside any costs of batteries.
Finkel asserts that batteries should be included in any solar/wind installation.
As I said somewhere, backup by battery I suspect will be extremely
expensive and may well exceed all other costs in a solar or wind farm.
When I raise the subject of the next day also being overcast & still
it just gets ignored.
The question of when will you recharge the battery and where will you
get the power to recharge it ?
Finkel did not offer a solution, in fact he did not even raise the question !

Did you notice that wind output in SA was less than 50% of normal
earlier this week ?
One suggestion that is made that a widespread network can even it out.
Unfortunately that means that the grid has to be rebuilt to be able
to transmit a lot more power but the backup area's generation has to
be a lot larger than needed so it can step up its output.

There is a lot more to this that many wish to see.

Dear Bazz,

You're right.
That's why if we're going to have a competitive evaluation
process for our energy sources we should ask the relevant
questions and look into what are our viable options.
The same needs to be done with the question of nuclear
submarines.

Electricity high, 1 reason gas price ripoff.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/gas-cartel-is-pushing-gas-prices-up-in-australia/news-story/61acc1864d54fb6eb4801c332e683fbd

‘Gas cartel’ is pushing gas prices up in Australia

A CARTEL has gained control of Australia’s gas and is killing the economy, pushing prices up and sending businesses broke, one expert says.

Australians are grappling with huge increases in electricity and gas bills, with one recycling business saying his electricity bill had increased from about $80,000 to $180,000 a month.

Plastic Granulating Services was forced to close its doors last month, leaving 35 employees out of work, and there are fears more could follow as further increases are expected.

Part of the reason why power prices are shooting up is due to the closure of cheap coal-fired power stations but also because of rising gas prices.

Power companies have already warned of increases of up to 8 per cent for residential customers this year and the Turnbull Government has announced measures to try and get more gas into the Australian market.

But energy analyst Bruce Robertson of the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, says a gas cartel on the east coast of Australia is also making things worse.

“The Australian gas cartel is restricting supply to the domestic market in order to force up the price,” he said.

“It’s surprising how relaxed the Australian public is about this price gouge. In many other countries, they’d be rioting on the streets.”

Companies were being helped by the secrecy around prices, gas reserves and production costs, which has allowed producers and the owners of pipelines transporting the gas to control the price.

“Prices are too high in Australia because we have given away the ability to control the price

Not quite right Philip, the pipeline company just charges for the
transport, it does not have an interest in the gas itself.

Like coal we do have to look ahead to gas leaving us.
I predict, judging by what I read of the oil companies finances,
that there will be a lot of pressure for anything but nuclear but those
demanding energy will be forced into the nuclear corner.
That will happen I believe by 2030.

When you see oil companies changing their emphases away from oil and
making large cuts in their search budgets it has only one conclusion
for the next 10 years. They do not generally acknowledge it but at
least Shell has owned up and stated that they are planning to leave the oil industry.
Now why do you think that is ?

BHP admits that its excursion into US shale gas was a money losing
experiment and that US shale gas has peaked.
World coal has peaked.

All these things point one way;
Either you hurry up and prove that solar & wind can be made to work
and if not you start a nuclear energy program.

There is no other choice.

Dear Bazz,

Where to start mate.

Okay, you do at least acknowledge that this report was “commissioned by the Minerals Council of Australia and the COAL21 Fund” and that COAL21 has “invested $300 million in low-emission coal technologies”?

Now I have had a bit to do with GHD and they are a reasonably professional mob. I have yet to find them fudging figures but they do write in a manner that reflects the wishes of those paying them. What you will find instead are caveats that give a truer picture than those that make the new releases of their clients.

“GHD does not have access to the PEACE database and cannot comment on the accuracy of the cost estimates.”

“GHD otherwise disclaims responsibility to any person other than SDS arising in connection with this report.”

“GHD has not been involved in the preparation of Solstice Development Service’s Report (SDS Report) and has had no contribution to, or review of the SDS Report other than in this report. GHD shall not be liable to any person for any error in, omission from, or false or misleading statement in, any other part of the SDS Report.”

And one I personally have never seen before in any of the reports I have read;

“The Cost Estimate has been prepared for the purpose of informing debate and must not be used for any other purpose.”

Plus we have a Murdoch rag adding their slant.

The Australian says;
“In its analysis, GHD and Solstice Development Services provides details of how construction costs for a new HELE plant could be driven down by building it at “an existing power plant location”.

The report says;
“there is likely to be only a small savings”...”if a HELE plant was to be constructed near an existing power station”

A very big grain of salt required here me thinks.

Steele, I have seen the denial of responsibility if a projection does
not come up to expectations, the IPCC is possibly one that comes to mind.
No one will go as far as getting quotes for a power station.
They probably can get information from government contracts for
overseas power stations.

>A very big grain of salt required here me thinks.<

Yes indeed, the whole energy thing is drowning in uncertainty.
Uncertainty 1:
Will solar and wind supply the country with electricity ?
Uncertainty 2:
Can Batteries provide backup to solar & wind.
Uncertainty 3:
Can the battery continue supply into the next day if overcast/still ?
Uncertainty 4:
Can a battery of the size needed be recharged or is the grid needed ?
Uncertainty 5:
Can the battery be afforded ?
Uncertainty 6:
Would other areas have enough spare capacity from its solar/wind ?

Wheew, I think that is enough and I suspect no one has really looked
into these uncertainties.
How long can we play around like this before we start on coal fired
stations or nuclear plants.

God the green bull sh#t is deep these days.

The cost of gas is very high because the green ratbags have prevailed on the governments of NSW Victoria & South Australia to ban drilling for coal seam gas, & SA & VIC have banned any gas development.

It is ridiculous to complain that gas from other states is being exported, when these governments where it is needed refuse to harvest their own gas.

If the public ever wake up to just how much green ratbaggery is costing them, it will become quite dangerous to admit to being one.

Hasbeen,

Actually the cost of gas is very high because international demand for it is very high.

And your claim that SA has banned any gas development is blatantly false. There's plenty of gas development in the NE of the state. They started it decades ago, and it's still very much ongoing.

SA's coal seams are quite remote, and I think it's the commercial reality of that and their relatively small size that prevents them being exploited, not any legal restrictions.

The SA opposition (yes, the Liberals) sensibly want a ban on fracking in SE SA to protect the aquifers. Bt the government don't. And there's near universal support for gas development in the rest of the state.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Bazz,

Why are you so uncertain?

It's clear that wind and solar will supply an increasing amount of electricity to the country. But you seem obsessed with the problems of supply meeting 100% of demand. I say we should cross that bridge when we come to it - when we do, it's likely technology will have resolved most of the current uncertainty.

_________________________________________________________________________________

SteeleRedux,

While I mostly agree with you, I do know of one example of a blatantly fudged report from GHD. Their report investigating (and recommending against) railway bypassing the Adelaide Hills.

Aiden said:
I say we should cross that bridge when we come to it

Errr, we did reach that bridge !

No, Bazz, we're nowhere near it.
What made you think otherwise?

Faith, hope, prayer. The Green/South Australian/Weatherill/Aidan way.

Meanwhile as other nations build coal-fired power stations to use Australian coal....

I wish they would tell us exactly what is the job of the Tesla battery.
They are just letting everyone think that is to fill in when otherwise
there would be a blackout.
I suspect its real purpose, provided the appropriate electronics and
computer software is included, will provide simulated inertia and
black start facilities.
It was the absence of those facilities that caused total blackout
last September.

It just cannot do the job they want us to believe it is for.
Daytime demand in SA approx 1 gwatt.
60/1000megatt/129Megawatt = 7.74 mins.
That time is so short then the battery is not meant to support
Sth Aus in the event of a power failure and is not its purpose.
Its purpose maybe as I suggested above, but maybe not.
Is it's purpose to just backup a particular group of wind generators.
That makes sense, but the implication is that it is the first of many.

Wind turbines are around 80 megawatts each so the battery could backup
one wind turbine for 1 1/2 hours. Hmmm.
So would a windfarm of 20 turbines require 20 of the worlds largest batteries ?
I would just love to know how much it will cost.

Then the tricky question, where will the power to recharge it come from ?

Bazz

It can be cloudy for a couple of weeks up here in the tropics when the rain sets in.

I like you, have wondered how they are going to back the power up, when the weather
fails. I certainly hope our defence systems aren't going to be powered by renewables.

If the battle happened during a cloudy week, we could lose the war.

Our Phones connected to the National Broadband, go down easily in bad weather,
whereas the old copper wire phones took a lot to knock them out.

I often find that those pursuing the reduction of CO2 emissions often do so with religious zeal that sabotages their objectives. They claim that science is on their side, yet reject the science that shows that nuclear and HELE coal stations can reduce emissions just as safely as wind and solar, without the high costs and blackouts.

That coal-fired power is far cheaper than wind or solar is no shocker as wind and solar still need vast subsidies to be able to compete. That the new HELE power stations would be more viable built on the sites of previously closed older power stations is a no brainer, as sites with a ready supply of coal and cooling water is not that common.

If HELE plants could load-follow renewables, that would be acceptable to the renewablistas, I believe. However, neither HELE-coal, nor gas will contribute significantly to mitigation of AGW when coupled to renewables.

Gargantuan storage capacity is what drives the Renewablistas' dream, with gas only a half-way house towards this. It's Finkel's plan.

The immense scale required, hence cost, is not even a consideration to them, because their other dream is that you just print money and, remarkably, the man in the street will feel no pain, nor will our international industrial competitiveness suffer.

It's all win-win-win-win-win!

Dear Hasbeen,

Bloody typical mate.

The multinational gas companies have stitched us Aussies up big time and here you are giving their boots an extra shine. We are in the top 5 gas producers in the world but take by far the least amount of tax from these companies than any other nation. Qatar is probably our closest equivalent, they pulled $23 billion in royalties and taxes and we collect less than a billion for the same amount of export gas.

When Labour tried to introduce a very modest tax of super-profits you were one of the loudest protesters. These companies and the likes of yourself have ripped us off mightily and on you, with absolutely no shame, blaming the ban of fracking for the current crisis.

The Yanks only recently allowed very modest exports of their own reserves while here in the “smart” country the vast majority of our own reserves are sold overseas filling contracts at prices that mean Japanese families can pay less than Aussie families for our own bloody gas.

We are awash with the stuff yet you want farmers to throw the towel in and let productive land get gobbled up and water tables get put at risk just so big multinational can siphon off even more of our gas deliver greater profits for their overseas shareholders.

Shameful. About time you stopped shining their boots and thought about the ordinary Australian for once. “If the public ever wake up to just how much 'boot-licking' ratbaggery is costing them, it will become quite dangerous to admit to being one.”

One of these days Steely you may actually provide a post that is not all half truths & lies.

If you do many of us just may faint with the shock.

Dear Hasbeen,

Oh come on mate that is pretty disingenuous, I provided a hell of a lot more substance in that one post than you have collectively in a year's worth.

Tell you what, this should be easy, name a single thing that was a lie or even a half truth and I will provide the appropriate response. As they say in the classics; put up or shut up.

SR,

Considering that Aus already has a PRRT on oil and gas of 40% plus royalties, I find that your suggestion that Qatar gets 23x the amount of tax from the same volume of gas more than a little hard to swallow.

The way you are ranting, you sound like you are deliberately accusing the gas companies of selling all the gas overseas cheaply just to screw over Australians?

These contracts were put in place years ago when the price of gas was a fraction of what it is today and the demand from Australia was far lower. That pinhead politicians are closing coal-fired stations and have halted all gas exploration (Victorian Labor) and all CSG drilling is why gas demand is spiking as supply is dwindling.

This crisis is entirely man-made by short-sighted politicians.

As per my original comment about being ripped off over gas.

Either a Government official is profiting handsomely or they are completely incompetent. It also appears this may be a problem with the whole mining sector.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/prrt-australia-falls-behind-cameroon-burkina-faso-on-resource-tax-transparency-20170705-gx5927.html

PRRT: Australia falls behind Cameroon, Burkina Faso on resource tax transparency

Australia is set to become the world's largest exporter of gas but its level of resource tax transparency falls behind Burkina Faso, Cameroon and Mongolia, a new global report has found, as the country forfeits billions of dollars in tax to multinational mining giants.

A Senate hearing into the Callaghan review of the petroleum resource rent tax this week heard just how murky our tax data is, with only opaque disclosures from the companies themselves giving us an indication of how much tax they pay.

Australia is set to eclipse Qatar as the largest exporter of gas in the world by 2020 but will receive just a fraction of the revenue, $800 million compared to Qatar's $26.6 billion.

The resource governance index found countries that receive Australian aid funding for programs aimed at improving their resource sectors outperformed Australia on revenue management.

Australia, ranking 32nd, scored lower than Botswana, Niger and the Ivory Coast, according the report from the global Natural Resources Governance Institute.

Turnbull and Co are frantically trying to save peanuts by going after pensioners etc when they ignore BILLIONS going down the drain.

I say corruption and incompetence could be too blame.

Having read the SMH article I now see where there is confusion. The reporter has only told half the story. Either because he is a pinhead with no concept of tax procedures, or because he deliberately wanted to paint a bad picture.

All major plant are allowed to write off most of the costs of construction against profits over the first 5-10 years of production, which means that most large industrial plants pay little to no tax in the first few years. Given that most of these huge gas plants are only a few years old, the tax revenue after using tax credits is minimal. When the tax credits have all been used in about 10 years, the revenue will jump dramatically, probably to equal that of the mature gas fields in Qatar.

More deceit from the left whinge.

Seems like a lot to me.

A time capsule containing 118 trillion cubic feet of gas is buried in northern Australia

http://theconversation.com/a-time-capsule-containing-118-trillion-cubic-feet-of-gas-is-buried-in-northern-australia-80268

Two to three kilometres beneath the surface of Australia’s Northern Territory sits buried energy. The layered rock formations known as the Velkerri Shale were recently estimated to contain over 118 trillion cubic feet of gas.