The climate change debate continues.

[nomadpete]

The big problem that I see is lack of timely pumped storage.

 

Queensland put in 600MW of pumped storage way back when the state gov't owned all generators.

 

But since then none of subsequent governments want to spend on big social essential infrastructure. There has not been any more such projects. Hence we have a nationwide lack of energy storage. Rising prices are mostly a result of lack of proper planning and commitment by governments. Had they planned over the years, there would already be storage in place that would minimise the power generation gas bills.

 

I give up.

 

I am costing up a private solar plus battery. For me, it's an investment. Even if I die (or move) before it pays for itself, the resale value of the house will be higher.

 

Meantime, I am insulating myself from the problem.

 

 

Edited 11 hours ago by nomadpete
I am avoiding a Grammer Police attack.

[Siso]

intermittents are cheap, SA should be closing the gap compared to other states. We are using less gas and we are at 70+% intermittents. Fossil fuels are yesterdays tech, but will need them for a while, ask Germany

 

France exporting 13GW at the moment  https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/FR/live/fifteen_minutes

[Jerry_Atrick]

As @octave mentione, the wholesale prices are down, and a lot of what is being paid is infrastructre. Remeber, SA is what, the third largest state/terriroty  in Australia, and has 1.8m people scattered over it, far less than the other states, and bigger than the NT and ACT.  That requires a decent amount of infrastructure to maintain, which will reduce with a full transition to renewables with batteries. 

 

France exports a lot of its energy to the UK. Why? Because, since before I was involved in the UK electricity industry, way back in 1996, the government was paralysed 2with its energy policy,. Then some bright sparkdaid gas is cheap.. Let's build a bunch of gass fired generation plants with a 15 year life span, and not have to maintain them in that time (largely not maintain, anyway). At the same time, the same bright spark said let's privatise Nuclear Electric (client of the company I worked for) and Scottish Nuclear (not a client of ours) and form British Energy and float it on the stock exchange. 

 

No prizes for guessing what was going to, and did happen to British Energy. It virtuallywent bust because the gas plants could churn out electricity at next to nothing.. At the same time, there were something like 8 operating plantes for British Energy - all due to decommission within the then next 15 - 20 years. 

 

At the time, with renewables technology where it was, nuclear was still the best technology. Some plants of other companies were tconverted to biomass burners, but they have their own problems. And, in reality, they are anly renewable after a 20 year cycle or thereabouts. 

 

However, renewable technology has come leaps and bounds, but the problem in the UK is planning laws are archaic, dreadfully painful and slow. This didn't impact the gas plants as these were built on existing decomiossioned sites. But, if you want to build capacity in a new site, the planning process can take years. Hinkley Point C, the new build at an existing generation site for the now decomissioned Hinkley Point A and B took over 15 months. Greenfield bew build planning permissions can take years.. The Sizewell C plant had been locked up in planning 26 months.. again at an existing plant. 

 

Renewablesin the UK has been deployed - a mix of solar and wind. Plannign takes forever, even for offshore stuff. Coal plants have been decomissioned as have been the expired gas plants. Nothing new has been built, so the UK for many years has been importing from France. However, since renewables have come online, remebering not a single new nuclear or fossil fuel plant has been built in the UK since 2012 (fossil, I think nuclear was 1996). But since renewables have been being installed, on an annualised basis, the UK was a net exporter of Electricity to France in 2022. 

 

This may seem o blip, but there are a lot of factors in electricity demand. And the UK has been reducing its reliance on imports over the last 5 or so years, since the UK has been bringing online more and more renewable generation capacity. 

[octave]

4 minutes ago, Siso said:

Fossil fuels are yesterdays tech, but will need them for a while,

I have no problem with that statement.

 

A key issue with power prices is that the savings from cleaner technologies often follow upfront investment. My rooftop solar looked expensive at first, but once the installation cost was paid off, my electricity became extremely cheap. The same applies to buying a more efficient car.

No matter how we generate power, Australia needs to build a modern grid. That cost doesn’t disappear if we choose coal.

It’s also worth noting that existing coal stations were built by governments — effectively, taxpayers. If we wanted new or upgraded coal plants today, the bill would again fall on taxpayers or consumers through higher tariffs.

Meanwhile, real-world data shows the transition is already lowering costs. AEMO’s Q3 2025 report shows wholesale prices in South Australia have fallen, with renewables, storage and interconnectors putting clear downward pressure on prices.

So the argument is simple: upfront investment can look costly, but over time it delivers cheaper, cleaner and more reliable power.

[onetrack]

The miners in the W.A. Outback and remote regions are showing the way.

 

https://reneweconomy.com.au/off-grid-gold-miner-achieves-record-renewables-with-101-consecutive-hours-with-engines-off/

[octave]

Just now, onetrack said:

The miners in the W.A. Outback and remote regions are showing the way.

 

https://reneweconomy.com.au/off-grid-gold-miner-achieves-record-renewables-with-101-consecutive-hours-with-engines-off/

 

Yes indeed. I have read a lot of articles lately about how the mining industry, in many ways, is leading the way. 

[Siso]

So where SA loses in having the cheapest form of energy, we will lose the savings in uderutilised infrastructure. We still dont know if it will work before the country goes broke. No one has ever built a grid on intermittent weather dependant renewables. It is criminal to even try when we have other proven options. Pity there wasnt a way to hold politicians to account for bad uninformed decisions they make while in power,

[octave]

3 minutes ago, Siso said:

So where SA loses in having the cheapest form of energy, we will lose the savings in uderutilised infrastructure.

 

To use the example of my rooftop solar SA (and Australia generally) is still at the stage of absorbing the cost of changing to a system that will be cheaper.   If you want an instant reduction in your power bills, then what is your solution?   No businesses want to build new fossil fuel power, and those companies that are in fossil fuels are moving away from it. AGL has a commitment to move away from fossil fuels by 2035.   This is not because they are green hippies, but it is the rational business way to go.   The rest of the world is moving in this direction again not from ideology but from financial pragmatism.

12 minutes ago, Siso said:

We still dont know if it will work before the country goes broke.

As a country, we are not at the leading edge.  The transition is quite slow and steady.  The Middle East has become immensely wealthy because of its oil.  Australia is well placed for the next energy revolution. We have vast amounts of uninhabited land, and we have the minerals required for batteries, etc.  I am in no way saying it is all easy.    

 

20 minutes ago, Siso said:

No one has ever built a grid on intermittent weather dependant renewables.

So far.   Many countries are 100% renewable, but they rely on hydro or geothermal energy.   The thing about being weather-dependent is that in Australia, it is usually sunny or windy somewhere. This is why we need a smart grid.  

 

24 minutes ago, Siso said:

It is criminal to even try when we have other proven options.

So what are these other options?  Do you want AGL to be forced to refurbish or build new coal infrastructure?    Do you think this would bring you cheaper bills?   If, as you say, moving towards renewables is a recipe for disaster, then you would expect this to reveal itself through countries like Denmark (70% wind). What could be criminal is if we go in the opposite direction to the rest of the world. We could end up as a quaint backwater.

 

Coal plants in Australia are aging and need to be replaced with something. Replacing coal plants is far more expensive than renewables plus firming.  Coal is now the most expensive form of new energy.

I personally am not totally against nuclear; however, the 2 problems I see are the economics and the time required to build. Gas is useful at the moment for peaking, but it is very expensive.