Siso

I am considering a hybrid. Its not that I can't make up my mind. Its that the distance we live from our capital city, a full electric car would be marginal on range. I don't like sitting around a city waiting or looking for a place to but an extra 100km worth of power in my car. Different people have different needs.

Please don't speak for me. Would have been better if you said "I" or maybe "some of us".

Exactly my point. These scientist mislead the government into believing power would be $275 cheaper. We could also say NP is unsafe because the OLD CHERNOBYL,FUKASHIMA and THREE MILE ISLAND "years ago". Accidents that would not happen today! Also not science based. Unless of course old Albo just flat out lied to the Australian people, your choice. Remember the gas and oil prices spiked and than came down again when the Ukraine war started. What else have they got wrong? Bit like the NPP only last 30 years. May help the system but takes people out of paying for infrastructure making the bills more expensive for those that can't afford them or are paying most of there income on rent already. And they say that fossil fuels are subsidised.

Batterys paid for by subsidies, all well and good if you can afford it. Catastrophic if you can't! And there is a lot more people around that can't even buy a house let alone worry about solar and batterys!

If the whole grid is running on several synchronous generation it gets the capacity factor up and they aren't underutilised. If it needs to ramp quickly every plant just needs to change a little bit and the system load follows quickly. It also has a large amount of inertia. Obviously they can ramp back at night as has been done for many years with controled loads like hot water.. Intermittent generation can't ramp up if there is no extra wind or sun. This is where the batterys come into it as long as they have charge and the people that trade the electricity haven't made a wrong call and emptied them previously. Remember the companys that generate our powers number 1 priority is to make money, not to keep power on to our homes and workplaces. There is definitely a place for batterys in a modern grid for sure as there is for some intermittent generators. We also need to remember these people that are selling this type of grid also convinced the government that the power was going to $275 cheaper. Definitely not dearer. 37% this year I heard. Luckily I have solar and don't feel it yet. I still standby "No-one anywhere in the world has run a large grid on intermittent weather dependent generation." Australia is running an experiment. It may work but at what cost and what help will it do to the environment.(make absolutely no difference.) We saw what happened in Spain when a solar inverter started to fail and put stupid frequencys on the grid. Are we willing to risk it.

The new stuff is huge, 330KV, possibly 500kV- Very expensive to build to only be used at low capacity factors. Remember, underutilised equipment is expensive. You don't see Qantas just having aircraft sitting around. An intermittent grid is going to have a lot of plant "laying" around for that once or twice a year when needed.

I disagree- I disagree:-https://www.re-alliance.org.au/where_are_the_lines_to_be_built plus the transmission lines needed from each farm to the closest major line. all these projects will be over budget as well. This is all extra because of the intermittency of our new generation. But at least we are being told the actual electricity is the cheapest form of electricity generation. Just the extras that make it expensive. We can see the price of coal fired generation rise as the capacity factor decreases. Do you reckon the same thing will happen with the intermittent generation as the overbuild eats into their capacity factors. During the months of high generation we can expect these generators to bid higher prices as their CF decreases due to oversupply. There is only so much extra energy that can be stored. This will also change during the year, pushing up the price of stored energy. Basic economics.

The transmission is not already there. Easily information found.SA has completed energy connect to the NSW border. Still waiting for NSW to do its half. Hume link is still being built and every time its mentioned its about another cost blowout. Plus all the large transmission needed to connect the renewable energy zones to the major centres. A fair bit of local resistance is happening for this projects. Would fix a lot of it if they actually put some WTG's in and around the citys. These are just the ones I know of off the top of my head. I heard a figure of 10,000km. Not just the transmission. see Snowy 2 is up to 12 billion, started at 2 and they are talking it may reach 20 billion. Traditional hydro is not the same as run of the river hydro. I love pumped hydro but it is only storage and when its empty that it. I think someone is playing the system with sun cable to Asia. Is Twiggy Forrest involved?

Pumped hydro does not make electricty, Iceland → virtually 100% renewables, advanced grid- Geo thermal. While Australia has some it is not accessible easily Norway → >95% renewables- Huge amount of traditional hydro Uruguay → ~95% renewables, stable and wealthy by South American standards-Huge amount of traditional hydro for size of grid approx 1.5GW Portugal → frequently >80% monthly renewable generation- interconnected, small demand/grid- looks like Max demand of 6MW Scotland → >100% wind generation equivalent to demand- interconnected with the UK, Australia has only about 7% traditional Hydro. A country of 26 million people is going to have to pay and build the Transmission infrastructure. I stand by: No One has ever done what Australia is trying to do with weather dependent intermittent generation on a grid the size of Australia. Gen cost has very rubbery figures. Give NP a life of 30 years. not true and easily founnd not to be true. A lot of NPP are having life extensions to 60 years, no reason not to believe new builds won't last 80- 100 years. France exports a lot more than it imports. UK imports more than it exports. Saying a region makes enough energy to support itself is also misleading. have a look at open nem shot from June this year, We weren't doing any where near 70% intermittents in SA but the publicity says we are for the year. See energymaps

That's OK then, we should "usually" have electricity then. Check out the wind drought around April to June 2024. https://wattclarity.com.au/articles/2024/06/13june-lowwind/ How much transmission are we going to have to build to Power Victoria from Queensland.

Denmark is not relevant for Australia. Australia has no France or Sweden. All these other countrys have small grids and are third world countrys. Would you like to live in Ethiopia or the Congo. I think not. Or there grids are majority conventional hydro. Australia has only 7% traditional hydro and not likely to get more. No One has ever done what Australia is trying to do with weather dependent intermittent generation on a grid the size of Australia. You are correct, we don't want coal, so the obvious answer is nuclear. We should start looking at it very seriously. We may have to work with coal again. Look how Germany is doing. France currently exporting approx. 12.5GW. Windy in UK, it is exporting 885MW to france and is exporting slightly more than it is importing exporting 3 importing 2

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,

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

Intermittents are killing it in SA at the moment. Lots of wind and sun. Attached is from June this year. As you can see not so good. We need to build enough storage infrastructure to cover these times. A lot of this extra infrastructure we need will be sitting idle during this time of year. Do you think the owners will just say sht happens and just wear the loss or will they increase the price during the time when they will run. We use to have about 60GW of synchronous generation installed for about 30GW of max demand. When needed the reasonably cheap coal would look after it. Every thing would just load follow and during peak time the more expensive gas would cut in. Simple stable energy. If a PowerStation dropped out the rest had the inertia to ride through and throw a bit more power on the grid. We are already at 30GWs of intermittent generation and only at about a total of 40% intermittents and hydro. It is going to get harder and a lot more expensive as penetration increases. How come if intermittents are so much cheaper than traditional sources has SA got the dearest electricity in the country with the greatest number of intermittents? I realise it always has been dearer because of gas, surely it should have come down to at least be the same price. Open nem (1).pdf

Ho Hum, power bills up by 37%. Csiro also gave NP 40 year life, a big lie. Coal unreliablre because of demoniosation. Bad publicity for generators if they support it. Unfortunatley we still need it. Intermittent energy is cheap, its just all the underutised supporting infrastructure that is not. Will the last person out of Australia please turn off the lights.