Thread: Grid can go 75% renewable

Originally Posted by PhilipA

Er how many billions in taxation revenue does coal generate?

That is why we will still be digging it out of the ground for many decades to come.
There is really no other option.

I see the federal budget contains funding for 400 community batteries, so that's a good start towards having a battery in every electricity sub-station, storing surplus solar and releasing it when needed.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

I see the federal budget contains funding for 400 community batteries, so that's a good start towards having a battery in every electricity sub-station, storing surplus solar and releasing it when needed.

I'm sorry but this is a truck load of horse Do-Do.

So far these batteries are good for a few hours at best.

We will not need hours of emergency power, we will need weeks or even months of emergency power.

When the rain stops, we will be in fore a HUGE drought.

Because of the low wind capacity during a drought, wind generators will be next to useless.

Solar has a major problem in that the hotter it gets, the less power a solar panel generates. So at the very time when we need solar, it will be at its worst.

And the biggest problem for renewables, is the lack of water.

This will mean the biggest producer of renewable energy, HYDRO, will not have the water it needs to produce the electricity we will desperately be needing it.

Thanks to the gang-green party and all its dumb followers, we will be short of coal fired power stations.

If you think I am just ****ing into the wind, this is exactly what is happening in California RIGHT NOW.

Their prolonged drought means they can not use their Hydro and they have shut down some of the nuclear power stations.

Europe, specifically Germany, has started reactivating their coal fired power stations.

Coal fired power stations are here and are here to stay.

Drought and lack of wind do not necessarily go together - I suspect you are extrapolating from North America, which is topographically and climatically very different from Eastern Australia, where most electricity in Australia is required.

And Australia does not and never will be in a position to use hydro as a major energy source - there is simply not enough water or variation in elevation, whether we are in drought or not.

Similarly, yes, solar efficiency does decrease with increase in temperature, but the effect is relatively minor, and more than compensated for by the longer periods of sunlight which accompany hot weahter and droughts.

It is absolutely clear that there is no good reason why Australia can not stop using coal in the relatively near future, even if it requires some use of gas in the interim as the solar and wind capability is increased, if only to provide enough generator capability that can react instantly to power demand (which is the main reason for needing battery/hydro).

Australia stopping thermal coal exports* (or for that matter gas exports) is a completely different kettle of fish - it is not a technical problem, it is an economic one. Not only does the coal industry support a lot of Australians directly and indirectly, but it is a major factor in supporting the $A exchange rate and hence the Australian standard of living**. And in addition, royalties and taxes both directly and indirectly from coal and gas exports are a major revenue source for the Commonwealth, NSW, Qld, and WA governments, and to a lesser extent NT.

*Currently there is no real substitute for metallurgical coal. In theory hydrogen can be used instead, but putting this into practice requires replacing almost the entire steelmaking infrastructure at enormous expense. And coal is a lot cheaper than hydrogen, even hydrogen from natural gas, which is a lot cheaper than hydrogen from electrolysis using green power.

** If coal exports cease, the $A will decline in value, meaning that everything imported gets more expensive. OK, you say, make it here! Right, but the only reason it becomes practical to do this is because it can be sold for a higher price. So it still raises the cost of living. This is not to say that there is no reason to support stopping coal exports, but don't pretend it is a costless exercise!

Thank heavens the rest of the world is not as stupid as some are here.

Just before Christmas last year, a coal mining company in Queensland changed its long term supply contract from 2.8 million tonnes of coal for 45 years to 3.2 million tonnes over 75 years.

Australia will be benefiting from the sale of coal long after we are all dead.

Wind power works so well. Just look at the UK.

The winter was so mild last year that their huge investment in wind generators not only failed to meet their BASIC needs, because of the shortage of electricity supply, the average power bill rose by 800%.

Yep bring it on Australia.

The problem is so bad in the UK, they are now planning to build one new nuclear power station every year, for the next ten years.

Nah the poms can import more woodchips from the USA (on diesel? trains then diesel? ships) and classify them as renewables they do for 10% of their power now.
Figures cannot lie but liars can figure.
Regards PhilipA

Originally Posted by JDNSW

Drought and lack of wind do not necessarily go together - I suspect you are extrapolating from North America, which is topographically and climatically very different from Eastern Australia, where most electricity in Australia is required.

And Australia does not and never will be in a position to use hydro as a major energy source - there is simply not enough water or variation in elevation, whether we are in drought or not.

Similarly, yes, solar efficiency does decrease with increase in temperature, but the effect is relatively minor, and more than compensated for by the longer periods of sunlight which accompany hot weahter and droughts.

It is absolutely clear that there is no good reason why Australia can not stop using coal in the relatively near future, even if it requires some use of gas in the interim as the solar and wind capability is increased, if only to provide enough generator capability that can react instantly to power demand (which is the main reason for needing battery/hydro).

Australia stopping thermal coal exports* (or for that matter gas exports) is a completely different kettle of fish - it is not a technical problem, it is an economic one. Not only does the coal industry support a lot of Australians directly and indirectly, but it is a major factor in supporting the $A exchange rate and hence the Australian standard of living**. And in addition, royalties and taxes both directly and indirectly from coal and gas exports are a major revenue source for the Commonwealth, NSW, Qld, and WA governments, and to a lesser extent NT.

*Currently there is no real substitute for metallurgical coal. In theory hydrogen can be used instead, but putting this into practice requires replacing almost the entire steelmaking infrastructure at enormous expense. And coal is a lot cheaper than hydrogen, even hydrogen from natural gas, which is a lot cheaper than hydrogen from electrolysis using green power.

** If coal exports cease, the $A will decline in value, meaning that everything imported gets more expensive. OK, you say, make it here! Right, but the only reason it becomes practical to do this is because it can be sold for a higher price. So it still raises the cost of living. This is not to say that there is no reason to support stopping coal exports, but don't pretend it is a costless exercise!

We do have the most u308 in the entire world and the 3rd biggest miner by u308 volume who hides that fact very well

Coal is and will die in time. Not yet but give it a while.

I agree Batteries are largely small short term feel good money wasters- NOT talking about my whole Building UPS and many small off grid applications or even the important grid stabilization function the so called big batteries do well enough for some of the time just not all of the time every time.

PS everything is getting more expensive due to inflation and nothing to do with our coal exports

A company I like "PV1 provaris energy ltd" NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE is making a good go of shipping c02 free Hydrogen "developing a 26,000 cu m compressed hydrogen carrier dubbed H2Neo, which is targeting approval for construction in mid-2023"

Note a Fleet of them is needed not one ship! (Hint there are 810 very large crude oil carriers now)

Money is a key and lots floating Money in this area via some sane and some insane project and ideas A lot are just HOT AIR. Grid scale lithium batteries are hot air! Some others just might help yet proof is required not just theory.