octave

But then aren't you part of the problem? You could take the ethical stand and disconnect your panels for the good of the grid. Here is the issue as I see it. Twenty years ago, we had an "old grid" which was well-suited to "old generation" methods. We now have "new generation' and an "old grid" I think you are saying we should match the generation method to the old grid. What I and pretty much every authoritative source are saying is to match the grid to the new, lower-cost sources. If we were to halt all new renewables and storage, what would we do? We could build new coal or nuclear. You must surely realise that this would be incredibly expensive, and if you think electricity is expensive now, you would not like what this would add to bills. I do actually have the predictions, and I am happy to post them. Another issue is this. What if we said no new renewables? People would still be installing solar and batteries. The technology is only getting cheaper day by day. An example I use is the system I designed and installed on my bush house in 1990. I still have the receipts for the panels. I installed 60watt panels at a cost of $595 per panel. That was a lot in 1990 dollars (adjusted for inflation, that would be $1515 today). For that price, you can now get a 700W panel. People will have an incentive to have their own residential power system to save the increased cost of building new coal or nuclear, and I suspect disconnecting from the grid might become more popular. Here, we do have some points of agreement. I believe we have to ensure some equity. As I posted earlier, balcony solar is coming. Buying into a shared panel installation is also a thing that is being done. When it comes to the new scheme to make electricity free for 3 hours a day, you will probably again say "it's not really free" I would suggest you knock on your neighbour's door and say, "if you were able to use electricity for 3 hours a day and not be charged " I suspect they would (will) love that. This scheme is taking electricity from solar panels that would ordinarily be "curtailed" and thus wasted. Surely this is a good thing. I can't think of many countries that are not adopting more and more renewables, and I don't believe this is purely for ideological reasons. Of course, there might be glitches along the way, as there have been with all developing technologies. Aviation is only safe and cheap now because in earlier times, people saw the potential and pushed on solving problems as they went. Going back to 20th-century technology is not the way to go. We can argue points back and forth here, but the point is renewables are growing, and will continue to grow.

So why do you have panels on your roof? If you are actually getting 50 cents a kWh, then your retailer is making a loss with every kWh you export. Who is paying for this?

A little vague and perhaps misleading. Yes, the government will take investment from super funds that wish to invest. My super fund Ethical Investments does not invest in military areas. It does raise the question of what returns could be expected if your Super fund decides to invest in defence areas. Igf returns are poor, people will vote with their feet. When the above post says "the government wants to tap in to $4+ trillion dollars of super" it makes it sound like they are going to rip out this money from your super. As far as I can see, they are offering opportunities to invest and it is up to the various super funds to make a commercial decision as to whether that is the best way to invest., Areas of investment are likely to be shipyards and submarine infrastructure, Ports and logistics, advanced manufacturing AI etc.

I think that is a little optimistic. As far as we know the Ayatollah's more hard line son is now in charge. The Iranian people are still suffering. The Straights of Hormuz that used to be open is now closed it restricted possibly triggering a world recession. Trumps approval rating plummeting.

Oil Refinery Fires in Australia 2026 – Geelong Oil Refinery (Viva Energy) Large fire with explosions; burned ~13 hours; no injuries. 2018 – Kwinana Oil Refinery (BP) Fire in processing unit; contained; no major injuries. 2004 – Kwinana Oil Refinery (BP) Fire and explosion during maintenance; several injuries. 1994 – Clyde Refinery (Shell) Processing unit fire; limited injuries. 1984 – Port Stanvac Refinery (ExxonMobil) Operational fire; contained. 1970s–2010s – Altona Refinery (ExxonMobil) Multiple minor fires; no major catastrophic event.

Spot prices being zero or even negative are not just a thing since renewables. Negative spot prices are not new and actually occurred regularly before the rise of renewables. While renewables are now the primary driver of their frequency, the core cause has always been system inflexibility—the inability of certain power plants to shut down when demand is low. www.agora-energiewende.org +2 Why Negative Prices Occurred Before Renewables Historically, negative prices typically happened at night when demand was at its lowest. Coal Plant Inflexibility: Large coal-fired power stations have a "minimum generation" level they must maintain to keep their turbines spinning. Cost of Restarting: It is often cheaper for a coal plant to pay to stay online (selling at a negative price) than to undergo the slow and expensive process of shutting down and restarting a boiler. Technical Necessity: Some "must-run" units are required to stay online to provide grid stability or heat for local networks, forcing them to bid negatively during low-demand periods just to guarantee they aren't turned off. Australian Energy Council +4

How is it grid mismanagement?

I believe there was an explosion and fire at this refinery in 1961 (before my time). 2 fatalities and 2 injuries

Interesting article regarding feed in tariffs. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-16/australian-solar-feed-in-tariffs-have-plunged-99-per-cent/104986534

There are schemes that are making electricity free for everyone for 3 hours a day whether they have solar or not. I don't know about the rest of the country but in Vic I think this starts in October. This is courtesy of home rooftop solar and it's benefits go to everyone including people who can't afford solar or who rent Starting from July and October 2026, millions of Australian households (specifically NSW, QLD, SA, and VIC) can opt into new energy plans offering 3 hours of free electricity daily, generally around 11 am – 2 pm or 12 pm – 3 pm. The initiative leverages excess solar power, enabling savings on appliances, heating, and electric vehicle charging. Premier of Victoria +5 Key Details on Free Electricity Offers When: Federal Solar Sharer Offer (SSO) begins 1 July 2026 in NSW, SA, and SE Queensland. The Victorian Midday Power Saver begins 1 October 2026. How it Works: The "free" window is typically in the middle of the day (e.g., 11 am - 2 pm). It is an opt-in, voluntary scheme that requires a smart meter. Who is Eligible: Households with or without solar panels, including renters, can sign up. Savings: Projections suggest annual savings of up to $300, or more if electric vehicle (EV) charging or battery storage is shifted to these hours. Caps: Some plans, such as those discussed in the SSO, may cap free electricity usage at roughly 24 kWh per day. Existing Options: Some retailers already offer similar, specialized plans, such as OVO Energy's "Free 3" plan (11 AM to 2 PM) and GloBird Energy's "FOUR4FREE" plan. How to Maximize the 3 Free Hours Shift Usage: Run dishwashers, washing machines, and dryers during the free window. Pre-cool/Heat: Use air conditioning or heating to adjust home temperatures when it's free. Charge Devices: Charge electric vehicles (EVs) and portable batteries during this time. Hot Water: Use a timer on electric hot water systems to heat during the free period. Time Out +4

That is pretty lucky for you. I would suggest that the majority of systems are on a much worse deal. The fact is that in early days of roof top solar the grid really needed as much as could get. Now there is more rooftop solar than often is required. This is where batteries or EVs come in. My electricity bills are kept low by utilizing solar electricity during the day. Dishwasher, washing machine, hot water are all scheduled for day time. Next year I intend to get an EV so my excess will go into the vehicle and also I can draw back with V2L. Back to your main point. Because I and most recent rooftop installations are only getting a few cents a kWh and have export limits I would suggest that these people are paying the network costs. If you are getting 50 cents a kWh then you are an example of the problem you illustrating.

Solar export limits "Solar export limits are caps placed by network distributors on the amount of excess solar electricity your rooftop system can send back to the grid, typically capped around 5kW per phase. These limits prevent grid overload, meaning any excess energy produced above the limit is capped or wasted rather than sold. Energy.gov.au +3 What Export Limits Mean for Your Solar System: System "Throttling": When your solar generation exceeds your home’s energy usage plus the allowed export limit, special equipment limits (curtails) your inverter, capping the output. Reduced Feed-in Tariffs: Since you cannot send as much electricity back, you receive lower credits for your solar energy, reducing your income. Increased Self-Consumption: These limits make it more economical to use solar energy directly (running appliances during the day) or to store it in a battery for later use, rather than exporting it. Approval Conditions: Many households must install this technology to get approval for larger solar installations. Flexible Exports: Some areas are moving to "flexible" limits, which allow higher exports during low-demand periods but lower exports when the network is congested, say local providers like AusNet and Essential Energy. Even with export limits, rooftop solar remains a strong investment for households to reduce electricity bills through self-consumption

Oh also nowadays there are export limits per month so it is quite difficult to sell enough kWh to negate network fees.

How do you figure that? The retailers are making a profit from my solar input. They buy it from me at 8 cents and sell it for 30 cents. Back when solar imports paid better sometimes I would get a negative bill. This would mean that the network fee would be zero. This does not mean it is not being paid for. In this case I would be paying for the network fee with kWhs which has a value. I am not getting connection to the grid for nothing.

I disagree. The retailer buys my excess kWhs for 8 cents and resells it for 30ish cents per kWh. Out of this I am guessing the retailer pays it's network expenses and reaps a profit.

Absolutely, I don't know how anyone consumes that volume of liquid. Give me 1 schooner of a cheeky extra hoppy IPA any day or perhaps a Sour beer in summer.

Obviously the fire was started by radical leftist EV owners seeking to overthrow the capitalist system....... or a faulty valve.

The 9 pints reference comes from a good friend of mine who teases (in a friendly way) for liking craft beer. He once said that the problem with craft beer was due to the intense flavours and the price he could not drink more than one or two. In time this became exaggerated and if he teased me I would accuse him of not liking craft beer because he couldn't manage 9 pints in one sitting. I don't know why 9 pints in particular but it just sounds right.

I don't know of any electricity retailers who only charge a kWh and not a network fee but I am happy to be enlightened. Certainly every retailer I have have looked at charges a network charge. If you have a battery and can supply all of your own power needs but are still connected to the grid as a backup then you are paying your fair share. If you are able to disconnect from the grid then why should you pay for a grid you don't use? If you have a house on tank water you should not have to pay water rates.

I think, unless you can go off-grid, you are still financially supporting the grid. My last bill comprised of for the net kWh I used $19.56. In addition to this, I also had to pay a Supply Charge of $28.16 and a membership fee of $14.72. It could be argued that someone who is managing their battery so as not to draw from the grid, but who is still connected and therefore paying fixed monthly fees is paying money whilst not actually using the services of the grid, except as a standby. I would suspect there would not be many suburban homes that actually go off the grid.

I think this has changed with the advent of craft beer pubs. My local before I moved was called "Two Birds Brewery" I heard the owners interviewed and they talked about how in this type of pub there were more female customers. Rather than being a down 9 pints type of place, there are now often a vast range of beers, and they tend not to be served onto a soggy bar towel. When at a new location, we always look for the local craft beer establishment, and usually we find a more or less equal gender balance. https://shedefined.com.au/international-womens-day/meet-the-women-breaking-the-gender-divide-in-the-beer-industry/

Indeed. I think back to the early eighties, when my most sophisticated means of communication was the humble telephone. A call interstate had to wait till Sunday evening, when it would be less expensive. If someone had told me that one day everyone would have a phone in their pocket that was also a powerful computer I would have had trouble believing them. Likewise, the idea that the majority of the world would be connected by this internet thingy would have seemed absurd. Technological development has not suddenly stopped. The rapid development of telecommunications systems over the last 20 to 30 years is an indicator of what is possible. There is no reason that the power grid we have today is the endpoint of technological development. It is all too easy to believe everything that can be done has been done.

You are not wrong there. I booked a flight from Avalon to Adelaide return for $108. There was an even cheaper option, one way for $44. I did book this before the fuel crisis, though. This is obscenely cheap.

I am by no means an expert in this, however, everything I read suggests that home batteries that are part of a VPP can help maintain grid frequency. Understanding the Types of Grid Support the Battery Provides When a home battery joins a VPP, it can play very different roles depending on what the grid needs. Some of the most common use cases today are described as follows. Frequency Regulation The electric grid must keep its alternating-current frequency within tight limits (in AU, around 50 Hz). If demand suddenly rises or a generator trips, frequency may drop. A battery participating in frequency regulation can respond almost instant, charging or discharging quickly to restore balance. Frequency regulation often commands relatively high compensation per unit of energy or service provided. Demand Response (DR) via Storage Demand response in AU/NZ refers to any action that reduces net demand on the grid during tight supply conditions or high-price periods, either by curtailing or shifting flexible loads, or by using behind-the-meter resources such as batteries so a site draws less electricity from the grid when called upon. Depending on the programs, homeowners get predictable compensation for simply being available, or the payment to homeowners in DR-type programs is typically linked to how much energy is saved or how much load power is reduced. https://www.franklinwh.com/au/blog/how-virtual-power-plants-are-changing-home-battery-use

Inverters don't contribute to the grid. Batteries help the grid because they smooth out peaks in consumption. There is a huge peak around the time people get home from work and cook dinner. Those people with their own batteries are helping by not contributing to this peak, and those who sell a portion of their stored electricity back to the grid are reducing the need to ramp up power stations or peaker plants. Most of the world is moving in this direction; can they all be wrong?