Paul, and anyone interested,
sometime when you have nothing to do go to the AEMO web site
and find what was the highest ever demand for electricity.
The size of wind turbines is around 500 to 750 Kwatt. Seems to vary.
Assume 1000Kw or 1 Mwatt to make it easy.
Then I have been told and I think the figures are available that a
wind turbine produces 35% of its nameplate rating in a year.
So divide Max demand by say 1 Mwatt and that tells you how many
1 Mwatt turbines are needed if the wind blew at 25 knots 24 hours a day x 365days.
Then multiply that number by 3 = total turbines needed.
However you cannot put them alongside the first ones, but on more than
two extra sites, because you can be sure the wind would be calm on
two sites at any time. Many sites would be needed.

See the problem ? $ $ $
BTW, no point counting in solar as the peak time in winter is around
5pm to 8pm long after sunset.

Yes Bazz. Capacity factor is the killer for renewables if you want to replace conventional power generation, as has been discussed on OLO. So $30 per MWH might look cheap, but to supply this for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year you must multiply the figure by at least six, then add the cost of storage, transmission and other supply infrastructure. Even at about 20% of supply, Germany's renewable power is about triple the cost of French nuclear power.

I'm not opposed to renewable energy, but compared to nuclear energy it is far more expensive. A bit more problematic than Alan B contends, but it might be an option before Julian Assange gets out of prison.

Fester,
The reason French nuclear power is so cheap is mainly due to the time it was built: most of the capital cost was inflated away in the 1970s. Northern Europe's high population density and low winter sunlight levels make it difficult to serve with renewables alone, so nuclear power can be cost effective there. But it is not a cheap option and even France is investing heavily in renewables now.

Meanwhile in Australia the economics are very different. With hindsight we should've invested in nuclear power in the 1990s, but it's far too late now – it will never be cost effective against solar and wind. Bazz's calculations are worthless because they ignore the benefits of storage.

Please also note that most fossil fuelled power stations have a lower capacity factor than the wind turbines. And SA, with its high reliance on renewables, has the most reliable electricity supply of any Australian state.

France was investing in renewables as part of government policy. The fact that renewable energy compares so poorly to nuclear has led to such policy being revised. Most nuclear reactor closures are political: Keeping them going would provide high capacity carbon free energy. Anti-nukes still rule apparently.

"Please also note that most fossil fuelled power stations have a lower capacity factor than the wind turbines."

Yes, but that is not by design (~70%), which is around twice that of wind and nearly three times that of solar. Also, the capacity of wind and solar is highly variable, whereas for coal fired power downtime is for the most part planned.

" it will never be cost effective against solar and wind"

24/7 renewables would cost many times that of nuclear and will never be built. We will likely see solar with storage as viable for remote locations and personal transportation. I hope that the renewable energy disaster hits Europe hard very soon so that policy might shift to viable alternatives.

How about a few tidal power stations, they run reliably 22 hours out of 24 average (guesstimate) but the Greens and fellow travellers don’t like them.
Tidal power ia inexhaustible till the Moon falls out of orbit and/or the Earth stops rotating. an’ the Sun don’t shine.
Why bother with undependable wind and solar when there is such a free force as the.tides, those tideless areas could use the renewables with a boost from the neighbours tidal stations.
There are tidal mills that have been running for hundreds of years.

Issy, you must stop making false claims about the Greens. Look at those Shooters and Hooters and their coalition partner the One Nutters all that dosh from the NRA of America being channelled through the Australian chapter the SSAA. How is that mate of yours Steve "Dicko" Dickson, did you not claim you two are best buddies?