Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Tassie has the easiest path with their hydro, good wind resource, small grid demand and population. They still use gas and imports from Victoria. My source is openNem, accessible to anyone. Albo and Chris Bowen will be happy to see some people believe them. Maybe it is possible at a huge cost but if it doesn't work Australia will be stuffed. Aircraft have redundant systems, we are going into this with none. Humans started with fire and increased technology with more and more dense energy sources. What we are trying is now heading in the opposite direction. Attached below is from SA in June this year, supposed to be doing really well. We could double the  intermittent generation in this example and it would still wouldn't be enough. This is the problem, we need a lot more generation and storage to get through times like this. It goes the other way sometimes, but which ever way it goes there is always a lot of underutilised plant. Underutilised plant cost dollars, no-one has actually told us how much. You don't see airlines with many extra aircraft laying around or earthmovers with the odd dozer just sitting in a yard to often. Marked is how much grid size battery SA has, doesn't displace much gas

Open nem.pdf

Edited by Siso
added some spelling and grammer
  • Like 1
Posted

Catastrophic weather has a VERY high cost and IF we don't do our share we can expect to be Penalised by those who do by Imposing a justified TARIF. Rising sea temps increase the energy in weather systems with more severe  extremes, resulting.  Look at the weather in Southern China at the Moment. Doing NOTHING about climate is NOT AN OPTION.  Stand by and under-utilised plant is VERY  costly.  That is also well known by anyone in the business. The GRID is a Reliability issue and a high cost. Nev

  • Agree 1
Posted (edited)

No one has said do nothing. There is just other ways of doing things that more is known about. Obviously the whole intermittent thing is proving to be very expensive and nowhere as easy as the people who are making a lot of money out of it will tell us.

Edited by Siso
  • Informative 1
Posted

There's more people with Coal and Gas Interests and they align wit the Media More. Media is NOT  controlled by those WITHOUT spare money and CONTROL Aspirations. WE have one of the Most lack of diversion and Monopolistic Media in the World. Murdoch is not an Australian and has no concerns other than Keep Labor out, Run a very Right wing NarratIve and stir Hate, Division and Warmongery. News corpse is NOT doing that well either. Praise Dog.   Nev

  • Agree 1
  • Sad 1
Posted

Battery storage is recognised as the answer, but it will be a slow grind to a successful transition away from coal and gas, and personally I don't believe Net Zero is achievable in the tight time frame set.

However, I don't think there's anything wrong with setting a time frame, it just needs to be flexible.

 

I believe more money should be invested in pumped hydro. I see a lot of huge open-pit abandoned mines throughout W.A., that have high piles of overburden (waste dumps) placed alongside them.

Most of those open pits are half full of water. With the major height difference the holes and the tops of the waste dumps, it seems a no-brainer to me to set up pumped hydro on these otherwise worthless holes and dumps.

 

In addition, they're in rural and remote areas, and there are generally power transmission lines nearby, so the existing transmission lines can be utilised to send power back to the high population coastal areas - where no-one wants "ugly" wind turbines or solar farms.

  • Like 3
  • Informative 1
Posted

The Kidston Pumped Hydro project is approaching completion and is one of the largest renewable energy projects in Qld. However, the way they're going about it, seems complex and unnecessarily costly to me.

I can't see why they need to install major tunnels through hard rock, I would have thought large diameter piping would have sufficed. But perhaps the durability of the piping was unsatisfactory for the long-term.

 

https://www.waterpowermagazine.com/analysis/lessons-from-excavating-the-250mw-kidston-pumped-storage-project/?cf-view

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, onetrack said:

The Kidston Pumped Hydro project is approaching completion and is one of the largest renewable energy projects in Qld. However, the way they're going about it, seems complex and unnecessarily costly to me.

I can't see why they need to install major tunnels through hard rock, I would have thought large diameter piping would have sufficed. But perhaps the durability of the piping was unsatisfactory for the long-term.

 

https://www.waterpowermagazine.com/analysis/lessons-from-excavating-the-250mw-kidston-pumped-storage-project/?cf-view

Take a look at Wivenhoe dam / Splityard Ck pumped hydro storage. In Qld.

 

It is piped, was built in 1980 by the forward thinking state owned power station commission. It has a low head I think about 65mtrs at lowest. It has been in service all this time with low ongoing maintenance costs.

It has two turbines totalling 600Mw. Which is available on demand within seconds.

 

Sadly, the governments (& privateers) have made no significant steps to building such infrastructure which is needed to support the renewable power generation.

 

It is foolish and ridiculously expensive to rely solely on privately owned batteries to back up the grid.

 

The only exception might be off grid personal household solar/battery. At present pricing, there is an amortisation of 20 years on this (for my home), which proves that at that level, solar is not only viable, it is financially cheaper than wholesale grid supplied electricity.

 

I don't believe the arguments against solar on cost grounds will stand up in the long term.

 

 

 

Edited by nomadpete
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Posted
1 hour ago, facthunter said:

There's more people with Coal and Gas Interests and they align wit the Media More. Media is NOT  controlled by those WITHOUT spare money and CONTROL Aspirations. WE have one of the Most lack of diversion and Monopolistic Media in the World. Murdoch is not an Australian and has no concerns other than Keep Labor out, Run a very Right wing NarratIve and stir Hate, Division and Warmongery. News corpse is NOT doing that well either. Praise Dog.   Nev

Unfortunately the ABC's concern is to keep LNP out and the worst thing is they are funded by the tax payer. I think the ABC needs some more political diversity.

  • Sad 1
Posted
1 hour ago, onetrack said:

The Kidston Pumped Hydro project is approaching completion and is one of the largest renewable energy projects in Qld. However, the way they're going about it, seems complex and unnecessarily costly to me.

I can't see why they need to install major tunnels through hard rock, I would have thought large diameter piping would have sufficed. But perhaps the durability of the piping was unsatisfactory for the long-term.

 

https://www.waterpowermagazine.com/analysis/lessons-from-excavating-the-250mw-kidston-pumped-storage-project/?cf-view

Love pumped hydro. Unfortunately the one planned for SA wasn't profitable enough

 

https://arena.gov.au/knowledge-bank/cultana-pumped-hydro-energy-storage-project-phase-2/

  • Informative 1
Posted


I wouldn't couple Pumped hydro with Flood Mitigation for which you need a crystal ball. Remember Flooding Rivers are Made from tiny Raindrops or melting snow crystals. WE haven't even tried much YET in the renewables arena. You Need certainty of commitment and ONE side keeps sabotaging it for Political Purposes. Look where THAT got them but they Must obey their MASTERS. The IPA (Reinhart  worth 37 BILLION)and the Mainstream MEDIA(who OWN them). Make the RICH RICHER is their Business Model. It PAYS Better. 

   There's plenty of innovative ways to store energy , IF we put our Mind to it. Nev

  • Agree 3
Posted

The Leader of the Frre World has deigned to give the leader of one of the USA's staunchest allies fifteen minutes of his time in 20 October. Albo was diplomatic in responding to the length of time it has taken for this meeting to be arranged, saying the Trump is busy trying to restrore peace in a troubled world. I wonder if Albo will wear a business suit or opera tails to the meeting, or should he go in national costume: T-shirt, shorts and thongs?

  • Like 2
Posted

More importantly, Albo should go to the meeting with a handful of pieces of paper, and coloured textas, and draw diagrams and pictures for the Donald, as he tries to explain our countries relationship, because Donald doesn't read anything.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

Reneweconomy isn't really an unbiased source when it comes to NP. Its like getting Coal Australia to comment on Renewables. Building NPP has come to a bit of a standstill because of the bad publicity of Chernobyl and Fukushima but as more information is becoming available more is starting to happen. China are developing new NP which will be a large step forward. UK have started the process of building Sizewell C which is going to comprise 2 x 1750MW EPR reactors. Surprising as it is the same type as Hinkley. Canada have started building some 300MW BWRs. France is planning to build more to replace their aging fleet. Sweden are in the process of lifting their as is Denmark. Sweden is sick of Germany affecting the price in the south of country especially since they shut down all their low carbon synchronous generation The remaining unit at Three Mile island is looking at restarting and there is talk of Indian Point in New York restarting as well. Momentum is building.

Australia use to have some of the cheapest electricity in the world and know it is getting towards the most expensive. This is not including the billions of dollars the government is throwing at it. Some more last weekend for the capacity investment scheme. We may or may not be being left behind. Do we really want all our eggs in one basket with weather dependent intermittent generation when no-one in the world has done it? .

 

 

  • Informative 1
Posted

The GRID is the MAJOR expense and will be Needed NO Matter what form of generation is Used. WE are a sparsely settled country except for the Major cities so THAT cost is Higher per person Disposal of waste is a WORLD Problem Radioactive waste is Not like other poisons. It is life shortening and DNA destroying and causes Cancer.  We try to reduce exposure to Radioactivity always. Nuclear IS EXPENSIVE and produces Wasted Heat. Australia is an idea place for Solar and wind and wave and tidal as it's surrounded by water and many live near the Coast.  No Need to Import any fuel from an overseas source, ether. Nev

  • Informative 1
Posted

Our grid is ok for centralised generation already. So with gas, coal or nuclear we would not have the new grid costs and environmental destruction.

  • Like 1
Posted

One of the major problems with nuclear power plants is the need for vast amounts of cooling water. That means nuclear power plants must be sited close to the coast, to enable the use of seawater cooling. There are no major bodies of water in the interior of Australia, anywhere, that can provide the necessary amounts of cooling water for a nuclear power plant.

 

And when you use seawater for cooling, everything in the system must be stainless, or special alloys that resist chloride stress corrosion. That adds huge costs to the nuclear plant.

Plus, everything in the system must be foolproof, with double and triple redundancy, and automated shutdown if something unexpected goes wrong. All this keeps adding up and up.

 

There are plenty of nuclear power plants that have been in the construction stage for over 20 years, and are still not completed. And as the construction time becomes more and more drawn-out, so the costs just keep on mounting.

 

South Africa's only nuclear power plant is still suffering from major problems with aging steam generators, and plans to construct a new nuclear power plant a few years ago were scrapped, due to massive corruption in that deal.

They are talking about SMR's for new energy generation, but nothing has come of those talks, and no-one has come forward with any viable deal to deliver economically sound, working SMR's, to suit the South Africans needs. 

 

 

  • Informative 1
Posted

NP has pretty well the same water use as a coal plant. Used fuel can be managed and it will get easier as technology improves. Tidal has been tries in Australia and has not been very successful a tide power generator sunk off the coast of adelaide https://adelaideaz.com/articles/wave-energy-generator-becomes-an-artificial-reef-after-sinking-off-carrickalinga--south-of-adelaide_copy Solar is good during the day, gets really expensive at night-storage artificial inertia. We import battery, solar panels, wind turbines. One thing about NP is we pretty well know the supply chains for the fuel and you need so little you can keep years in a small storage area. Unused nuclear fuel is harmless (would not eat it) and a fuel pellet can be held in your hand. we know some of the supply chains for minerals needed in weather dependent renewables is not really ideal, both environmentally and worker safety.  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-24/cobalt-mining-in-the-congo-green-energy/100802588

Posted

WE KNOW you are a FAN  Siso. Aluminium and copper refining could use their own NUCLEAR, IF it's so good and not EXPECT the rest of US to subsidise their Power as has been done in the Past. Think BIG. We have Plenty of Bauxite. IF it's OK. Private Enterprise would do it.  Nev

  • Agree 1
Posted

We are already subsidising intermittent generation, GT's running for inetia, syn cons, transmission for the dispersed generation and loss of industry(jobs for our kids)

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...