Tks Hasbeen I must have missed it I'll go back to it.
Does it mean they have reduced costs by 99% ?

Yes Baygon I have read the article, It has worked well but it is not
there for backup of power generators, it is there as a buffer, to fill
in when there is a sudden shortage, lasting perhaps a minute and to
push other generators up in speed if the frequency falls.

Snowy 2.0 is about storing and using renewable energy, not backup for the failure of thermal generation.

The whole deal is supposed to complement other generation, which would be laudable but for the astonishingly poor cost to benefit ratio when all the infrastructure spending needed is taken into account.

Snowy 2.0 is a political appeasement project. The cost of a modular nuclear plant with the capacity of Hazelwood would cost far less initially and over its lifecycle.

Here in South East Queensland it has been hot.

As usual when it is very hot, apart from the odd thunderstorm when it blows trees down, & is far to high wind speed to run windmills, there has been very little wind, definitely not enough to make windmills produce useful power.

Now even I have been running air conditioning. I can't afford it, but it is just too hot to do without it. It is over 2 weeks now, & the forecast shows another week or so still.

Strangely the same thing occurs when it is very cold, the wind just stops.

I doubt the Snowy 0.2 will deliver enough power for such extended periods, & what it does deliver won't have been provided by water pumped by excess wind or solar power. There aint none, & can not be any without trillions of investment in unreliables.

No it will be coal pumped water, with 15% of the power produced being waster in the effort. Thus the Snowy 0.2 will be carbon intensive power, more intensive than direct coal power generation.

Bet idiots like Ant will be unable to understand this.

Hasbeen, not sure I understand you either. I thought Snowy 2 was another water powered generating station which relied on gravity and the weight of water as it passed through the turbines which turned the generators which created the electricity on the way down to the runoff below.

I'm not sure what your argument is. Is it that the Snowy 2 will not produce enough power to satisfy the needs of the community it will serve?

Or is it some other reason?

Can you please clarify for me and others?

Altrav it works like a large battery.
The article yesterday said they could make a return of 8% with it.
The water could be pumped up when there was excess power available
be it from coal fired, solar or wind, just whatever was going at a low enough price.
It is a principle used in many other countries.
According to the article it could have a capacity of 35,000MW/Hrs.
That figure seems to be the Dam full capacity.
That capacity is equal to 350 batteries like Sth Aus's.

I will be interested to see what is Hasbeen's take on this.