The climate change debate continues.

[octave]

4 minutes ago, Siso said:

Contribute to the grid by supplying power to it but don't really contribute to the cost of it if you export enough to cover off what you draw. Someone has to pay for it and unfortunately that will be people who can't afford it, renters and industry. The grid is getting larger as well that needs to built and maintained by these people.

I am not quite clear what you are saying here, but here is my understanding of it.    During the day I am using my own electricity.  My excess is sold to the grid for a tiny 8 cents a kWh, which they resell for 30ish cents a kWh.  I appreciate that I am using the network; however, I would expect that the large disparity between the price they by my KWh and the price they resell takes into account the cost of the network of this transaction.

[facthunter]

That Spanish incident was a special case. Synchronisation of a multitude of sources is difficult  Community  batteries are a Better idea by far. In a Lot of Places a grid Connection would not be necessary A Grid is a weakness and costly with any form of Power and the More centralised and LARGE the worse it is Baseload power is an outdated concept, used a lot by those who wish to confuse the Issues.  In all these Matters. FACTS will speak for themselves  (if allowed).Nev

[octave]

18 minutes ago, Siso said:

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

It helps to stabilise the grid for everybody.

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?

[facthunter]

China is Probably doing the Sensible and Responsible thing more effectively than Most. Rent seekers in Corrupted Capitalist Places put a Brake on it to maintain their Profits They don't want competition which is what makes capitalism efficient and keeps costs down.   Nev

[octave]

43 minutes ago, Siso said:

Inverters don't contribute to the grid.

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

[facthunter]

There's Phase Balancing considerations also Lot's of Lost efficiency Possible there.. We have only just begun this Journey . Remember we used to have Horses and Carts or walk and only the very Rich had Cars . Now they are regarded as essential. Nev

[Jerry_Atrick]

4 minutes ago, facthunter said:

China is Probably doing the Sensible and Responsible thing more effectively than Most. Rent seekers in Corrupted Capitalist Places put a Brake on it to maintain their Profits They don't want competition which is what makes capitalism efficient and keeps costs down.   Nev

 

That is one of the advantages of a communist country - the govenment sets the agenda and people either comply or not, and there are real consequences for not complying. Of course, for it to work, there has to be a benevolent central control, etc, I am not saying it is the best way by any means, but capitalism in its purest form is no better, either. Which is why he have interventions. And one of those interventions is to get the market off its arse and move to more sustainable energy sources, yet leave the incentives of captialism in place to let the private sector take its place. 

 

Whether one likes it or not, technological progress will move things forward. Intial investments and costs are high, but the long term benefits are massive. 

 

 

What each country/region has to do is work out the best mix for their circumstances. 

 

In some cases, that will be fossil fuel (though I struggle to think of aplace that would not be able to use renewables at least in some of the mix). 

 

In other places, nuclear would be a good option for the majority of the power. 

 

In other places, renewables between "intermittents" and base load (or moree accurately, "constants") is a good alternative. 

 

In Australia's case, the mix of hydro, nuclear, and wind is an achievable. The cost of wind is only marginally more expensive than solar, and much cheaper than nuclear. Existing coal plants cost a touch more than new offshore wind, which still has to amortise.  Just google it as I can't be bothered reposting what has already been posted here (I think by Octave). 

 

Australia has enough renewable "intermittent" capacity to use with capcitors (aka batteries) to smooth match supply and demand. It will take a while to get there; Rome wasn't built in a day. 

 

I haven't looked into it yet, but I am guessing the question will be, grid-wise, how to match what may well be different distribution models. It does not make sense (though resistance alone) to distribute electrons many miles when you have distributed generation and hopefully storage. This will (or should) be the consumer/residential/light commerical model. It owuld make sense to have a lot of micro-grids , interconnected to manage demand and supply should one microgrid have an issue, iuf this is not already in place.

 

But a lot of heavy usage industry is a long way from major centres - mines, smelters (but, not refineries for some reason). These use massive amounts of electrons, so what is the answer? Naturally, there can be local renewables and storage, but they will need some backup/topup. They will have their own microgrid, but will probably rely one feed ins from ither area. Even if these were, say gas fired generators, the result will be a hell of a lot less CO2 and cost than remaining on fossil or going nuclear. 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

6 minutes ago, facthunter said:

There's Phase Balancing considerations also Lot's of Lost efficiency Possible there.. We have only just begun this Journey . Remember we used to have Horses and Carts or walk and only the very Rich had Cars . Now they are regarded as essential. Nev

And the same with almost any other technology.

• Calculators, then computers
• Emulsion film, now digital
• B&W TVs, then Colour
• Landlines and mobile phones (OK, Australia stuffed that one up - ironic given wi-fi is an Australian invention). 

 

Should we have stopped with each of the older technology - my dog, think of the cost of rolling out all those mobile towers and satellites. 

Sadly, aeroplanes seems to be the outllier. 🙂

 

Edited 22 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick

[facthunter]

Flights are cheaper than is sustainable. . Make the Most of it if that's your thing. The Main purpose is to Appreciate where you Left. No one's interested to know where you've been or see your selfies. Lots of Places are ruined by Tourists especially from BIG UGLY Monster Cruise ships.. Nev

[octave]

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Flights are cheaper than is sustainable.

 

 

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.

[octave]

22 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

hould we have stopped with each of the older technology - my dog, think of the cost of rolling out all those mobile towers and satellites. 

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.

 

[kgwilson]

13 hours ago, octave said:

 

 

 

 

 

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.

Yes but not sustainable. If all the seats were this price all the time the total revenue would probably not even cover the total cost of fuel let alone the rest of the business, assets and airport costs. Plenty of routes run at a loss and the high volume profitable ones subsidise them. Loss leaders are standard business practice everywhere from supemarkets to hotels, airlines, cruise ships etc. 

[facthunter]

The Opportunity  to Lose money fast exists with Commercial aircraft. High cash Flow and Low profit Margins. It's Unique in that aspect. Planes need to be FULL.. and Flying.   Nev

[Siso]

Meant to say inverters don't contribute to the stability of the grid. 

 

if people manage their battery systems properly they won't have and electricity bills so aren't contributing to the construction and maintenance costs of the grid.

 

You are right about the progression of cars. Electricty has seen a similar path. More people are getting access to it and up and to recently it the generation was getting more energy dense and more controllable, now we are heading back 200 years when work was done with windmills whenever the wind happened to blow. Base load is only dead because of parasitic intermittent generation which is causing us to have to use traditional base load generators as peakers. I am not anti intermittent generation but trying to run a whole grid on it in an industrilised country is expensive and probably wont work. Germany has a 160GW of installed wind and solar and are still importing from France and Sweden. How much of an overbuild do you need. Germanys max demand goes somewhere between 40 and 60 GW. France is exporting 15GW into into countrys all around it at the moment. Writing and punctuation isn't my strong suit, but I can lift heavy things though(use to be able to.)

 

[facthunter]

Everything SEEMS Heavier as you get Older.   Australia is More suited to CHEAPer  by far, sources of Non Polluting electricity than Most Countries in the World but are area wise sparsely settled.  Any grid is unreliable & Costly and can end up being Most of the Cost Particularly in REMOTE areas.Tidal would Have to Be pretty reliable. Intermittent diesel is terribly expensive.  About 85%live in Coastal big cities. Nev

[octave]

19 minutes ago, Siso said:

if people manage their battery systems properly they won't have and electricity bills so aren't contributing to the construction and maintenance costs of the grid.

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.

[facthunter]

At the Moment it would not pay to go Off grid but everyone who is connected PAYS for the Privilege so no one is Bludging.  That charge will Probably go Higher in the future..  Nev

[Siso]

What I am saying is that some people (me included) still have their grid connection and end up getting a cheque a couple of times a year. I don't pay for my grid connection. My energy company does and I am pretty sure they would pass the cost onto others. e.g industry, those that rent and have no solar and people living in apartments and people that can't afford to buy a house. (I have kids in the last category) This energy system is expensive for those that can least afford it. These are politicians constituents who they are suppose to look after, not make life hard for those that can least afford for a policy(ideaology) that is going to make no difference to the problem it is supposed to fix until the big players catch up. 

[octave]

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.

[nomadpete]

19 hours ago, kgwilson said:

am now a VPP (virtual power plant) & buy & sell energy on the wholesale market.

Interesting concept. Tell me, how do I go about this? 

Is there any data available to find out what options are out there?

At present, I am waiting for my new smart meter. I guess I'll have to look into setting up timed usage somehow. 

[Siso]

They do charge it but if you make enough of the power you put in the grid you don't pay it, it gets absorbed in your energy payment, but someone pays it!

[Siso]

45 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Interesting concept. Tell me, how do I go about this? 

Is there any data available to find out what options are out there?

At present, I am waiting for my new smart meter. I guess I'll have to look into setting up timed usage somehow. 

try amber.com.au

[octave]

Just now, Siso said:

They do charge it but if you make enough of the power you put in the grid you don't pay it, it gets absorbed in your energy payment, but someone pays it!

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.

[Siso]

Just now, octave said:

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.

Yes, but someone pays it. the retailer adds more to someone elses bid. people that can least afford it. The retailers are going to be out of pocket.

[octave]

2 minutes ago, Siso said:

Yes, but someone pays it. the retailer adds more to someone elses bid. people that can least afford it. The retailers are going to be out of pocket.

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.