How Australia Perfected Solar Power and Then Went Back to Coal

[Old Koreelah]

OK!! How can you denigrate our "beloved leader" like that. If he hadn't got rid of that crippling tax, we'd be paying $100 for our lamb roasts! You know it's true, because he said so.

My humble apologies, Marty. How could I have been so thoughtless after all the efforts made by our Dear Leader to bring us back to the path of righteousness and fossil fuels.

 

 

[Teckair]

Which bits?

This is the first one

 

How Australia Perfected Solar Power and Then Went Back to Coal

 

 

Who mentioned them?

Take a look in the mirror.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

I do not use power from the grid and we make our own how many of you experts can say that?

Actually I'm quite happy with the structure of society that sees those types of tasks appointed to respective groups so I can spend my time talking crap on the internet instead.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

This is the first one How Australia Perfected Solar Power and Then Went Back to Coal.

I totally agree (as I have already said) that we are still far from perfecting solar power.

 

Which other ones were stupid?

 

Take a look in the mirror.

Sorry Teck. I've looked back and can't see where I've said that. My best friend is a LNP politician and I have great respect for several LNP parliamentarians. I agree with quite a lot of their political platform, but even they have difficulty supporting some of the loony ideas of our current PM.

 

 

[facthunter]

tecky the experts or should I say specialists give details and figures to back up their assertions. People don't have to make their own electricity. There is little point in discussion if all others say is stupid. I hate being misquoted which happens a lot on subjects such as this on this site. Would you have the opinion of experts if you were going to have brain surgery or ask the person you voted in to parliament what to do?. So many current pollies opinions are paid for. Just look who supports them financially and THEY shape the policies. Not the people of Australia. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...and I actually agree with this outspoken politician:

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29679312

 

Like she says, they should be on top of buildings, not covering up good farmland.

 

 

[geoffreywh]

• It's not that we like electricity produced by burning coal ( or burning anything) BUT there is no viable alternative. At This Time.....Solar's no good for most and it's not sufficiently efficient yet. Wind and wave are investmentally difficult to manage. Plus coal fired electric is what comes out of the wires. Now, today................. If you don't like it then don't use it.....Solar power is not perfected, yet. Battery storage is not there either. Australia has Lots of coal and Lots of gas. and it has to suffer the tranny of distance....I can't see a politically acceptable alternative on the horizon, yet. If a government in power says "We are going to have solar/whatever electric generation, But it's going to cost you 2 (or 4 ) grand extra a year, they will not be on power for long......The opposition will quickly jump on the opposition bandwagon with "If you vote us in we'll repeal that expensive / alternative energy" And win in a landslide.....Did not that very thing happen to Dr. John H? So the solution has to be politically acceptable or it wont fly...Governments are there to remain in power, Not to kite expensive alternatives, they'll just be shooting themselves in the foot and will be unable to govern (their ultimate goal)
   
  

 

 

[facthunter]

They shouldn't be on arable land. If valuable land can be used the electricity price must be enough to cover that. It is still a silly idea. Rooftops are ideal I believe in the cheapest site and Australia has lot of arid land. It is said the a small portion of the Sahara could power ALL Europe easily. (and no pollution )

 

Geoffrey, thee figures for today's technology are good enough now, and getting better all the time. Panels are about 1/4 of what they used to cost. Unfortunately in Australia we have gone from being technology leaders to being actively vilified and discouraged, to help COAL interests make more money. The gas goes overseas at overseas prices and most of the profit does too, (bar a small%.). Nev

 

 

[geoffreywh]

I agree that solar is lovely............ BUT without support it still does not work....You have to have that "fill-in" for non sunny times .(Melb. Av. 3 hours sunlight per day in July) ..I personally don't use much power during daylight hours..I will reiterate! ..Stand alone Solar does not work! You must use the necessary back up and it will. Now that, at the moment is coal fired power stations....

 

 

[Teckair]

Actually I'm quite happy with the structure of society that sees those types of tasks appointed to respective groups so I can spend my time talking crap on the internet instead.

Not sure what you mean there if you are insinuating that I am lying about our power supply then you are wrong.

 

 

[facthunter]

No one is saying stand alone solar works 24 hours but there are other more sophisticated developments with extremely high temp energy storage and things like landfill abattoire methane, garbage incineration. Batteries are being developed, But WE are not part of this now since the current government believes COAL is the answer to a maiden's prayer, and is making us look foolish world wide , China has put import duties on our lovely coal. COALition not just in name. Coal worshipping is their game. There's a quid in it mate, and you can all get fumigated. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I agree that solar is lovely............ BUT ...Stand alone Solar does not work! You must use the necessary back up and it will. Now that, at the moment is coal fired power stations....

..."at the moment" - Australia's energy system will be frozen in time unless Governments stop protecting the vested interests of the fossil fuel lobby. Time to let new, clean, locally-owned players in and give them the sort of support that coal has always enjoyed.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Not sure what you mean there if you are insinuating that I am lying about our power supply then you are wrong.

I haven't a clue about you or your life's doings to form any judgments.

 

I, and also the World's majority, are happy to pay money and allocate the tasks to others just as getting water to my sink and gas to my heater are also. Beats bucketing water from the creek or worrying about rain filling the tanks, building that wind power or solar system and chopping wood and gives me more time to chat on the net and talk crap, me, not you.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Unfortunately it's not a simple "replace coal with X" but rather "replace coal with X,Y,Z and a few others, design smarter, support innovation, get behind companies that are developing sustainable alternatives, stop propping up polluters..."

 

Kevin tried. If the Greens had been willing to compromise we would have had a working emissions trading scheme well before this lot had come to power. Not a matter of "LNP bashing" Teckair, if someone with brains and vision had been leading the party (ie Malcolm Turnbull) instead of an ideologically driven throwback to the 50's, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

China has put import duties on our lovely coal.

China is ramping up it's fight against inflation, expect it to get worse.

 

And we're lucky, Oz is on the "preferred country" list.

 

 

[biggles]

It appears that energy generated in a typical domestic solar panel array , surplus to the requirements of the owner , is fed back into the system , for which the owner receives , or will soon receive , around 8 cents/ kW hour . The energy retailer then on sells this energy to some consumer for around 30 cents/kW hour . These figures are typical and disregard those fortunate individuals receiving Premium feed-in tariffs . Seems to me that the energy retailers are making considerable profits out of individuals installing solar panels , without having to spend one cent .

 

Bob

 

 

[Methusala]

Many posters have given an array of possible (with a little investment) and existing solutions to the question of ,"What if the sun doesn't shine", (like at night ). The posters for the negative case choose to disregard this so that (presumably) they can hang on to their one thread arguments. This thread has become a perpetual circle and has very little point continuing. As they say...just my opinion. Regards, Don

 

 

[Teckair]

No one is saying stand alone solar works 24 hours

There seems to some confusion about this, stand alone does work 24 hours because batteries are used, it is the system that feeds into the grid which does not. The problem is stand alone only suits some people and cannot replace the grid.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

There seems to some confusion about this, stand alone does work 24 hours because batteries are used, it is the system that feeds into the grid which does not. The problem is stand alone only suits some people and cannot replace the grid.

I know of new home builders very keen to go off grid- in the suburbs. That must have the power companies a might concerned; some already have limited the amount of roof-top solar you can feed back into the grid.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Many country towns have a hidden asset that no-one can steal from them: a nearby abandoned underground mine. If the mine was built in the last thirty years or so and has reasonably extensive workings, then there may be scope for a local energy storage scheme based on hydro power. Intermittent solar or wind energy, or cheap off-peak power, could be used to pump water to a surface storage, with the water returned to underground turbines when the power is needed. Because a very high head is available, the volume of water need not be great. To generate 20MW for 8 hours at 500m head requires less than 100,000 tonnes of extracted rock void.

 

In aggregate, abandoned mines may offer a significant opportunity to smooth out the power needs of the grid as a whole. Or they may allow robust off-grid developments. The power industry outside the USA has generally not considered this opportunity because they are ignorant of the condition and extent of underground mines, and the relatively modest cost needed to re-access the main decline or shaft for this purpose. The cost per unit of energy stored may be small in comparison with the cost of a new surface pumped storage scheme.

 

 

[Peter008]

I imagine that there would be as much as 50% loss of energy during the conversion from the pumping.

 

 

[facthunter]

It would be better to have a real figure rather than imagine. If we deal in facts we will get somewhere. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I imagine that there would be as much as 50% loss of energy during the conversion from the pumping.

...similar to the losses involved in pumping electricity over long distances.

 

 

[facthunter]

The larger than expected uptake of solar has put us into a situation where we have a surplus of electricity with the current number of OLD generators. We didn't have to build More power stations to cover the demand. The peak demands now are associated with airconditioner usage which are used when the sun shines the most. Perfect fix. I delayed putting an airconditioner in until I had panels, because the high energy use would lead to the need for more generators.

 

OK..... not just the losses involving constant use of transformers to maintain required voltages it's the capital cost and reliability of the wires poles etc. Nev

 

 

[eightyknots]

I agree that solar is lovely............ BUT without support it still does not work....You have to have that "fill-in" for non sunny times .(Melb. Av. 3 hours sunlight per day in July) ..I personally don't use much power during daylight hours..I will reiterate! ..Stand alone Solar does not work! You must use the necessary back up and it will. Now that, at the moment is coal fired power stations....

 

Many posters have given an array of possible (with a little investment) and existing solutions to the question of ,"What if the sun doesn't shine", (like at night ). The posters for the negative case choose to disregard this so that (presumably) they can hang on to their one thread arguments. This thread has become a perpetual circle and has very little point continuing. As they say...just my opinion. Regards, Don

I think the government should spend a billion dollars developing lunacy cells, a photo-voltaic alternative which will be able to capture moonlight for night time electricity consumption.