Dutton goes nuclear

[nomadpete]

4 hours ago, octave said:

My last post is electricity 2010 to 2023. It shows a modest fall.

I would expect that - after all, the stats do not report the amount of rooftop electricity that is directly consumed by households. The metering (well, mine anyway) only measures NET energy drawn from or fed to grid. It does not measure how much I consume directly from my rooftop panels.

 

So the grid sees lower consumption.

Edited June 25 by nomadpete

[old man emu]

Let's ignore those dips and rises over the short term. As I said, COVID may have affected the usage, and the explosion in domestic solar installations would likely have dipped the levels.

 

However, I want to ignore the short term and look towards to long term. As more people get to use items that require electricity, and as things such as AI become more commonplace, what sort of crystal ball will answer the question of how much electricity society demands? I reckon that in trying to give an estimate for ten years hence, you can pick any positive number to apply to today's usage to give an estimate of the 2035 usage. If there is one thing that is certain, that number is going to be in the order of tens at least, maybe hundreds.

[octave]

There is no doubt that society's appetite for electricity will increase.   There are factors that will help stem the increase. As you have pointed out rooftop solar is a huge factor. In my case since I have installed solar my monitoring app shows that I have produced 25,4 MWh and I have used 14.8MWh and sent my excess 10.6MWh back to the grid.  Of course, I do need the grid for night and adverse weather unless I get a battery or an EV which could also act as a battery. Basically, I with my small system produce much more than I use.  Recently flying interstate and landing over the city (Adelaide) it was amazing to see how many houses and factories have panels.

 

EVs may pose some challenges but also are a huge benefit.  Overnight the demand for power drops dramatically. There is even a name for it (duck curve)  EVs are an advantage when they charge overnight and with v2g technology can sell some back during peak times. This is not fiction but is starting to happen overseas and can be especially useful to fleet owners who operate 9 to 5.

 

I was going to post some links but you can look it up yourself. It is fascinating even exciting to me at least.

 

Data centres have been mentioned. I know many especially Google are working on this, even if only for monetary reasons.

 

"In 2022 – for the sixth consecutive year – Google matched 100 percent of its global annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy."

 

If we need more power generation then it becomes a question of what methods we adopt.  We certainly want clean electricity but it also has to be cost effective.  My question is, is Nuclear the most economical method when taking into account building running and decommissioning? By the way, look up decommissioning and note the cost and time and the few power stations have been fully decommissioned.

 

I am not totally philosophically opposed to nuclear but it must be shown that it is cheaper and cleaner.   Anyone who is on board with the opposition plan must surely have doubts without those questions being answered.  Other issues are, who will build them? I doubt we have the expertise here.   To those who are totally onboard without knowing the answers to these questions, I would ask them to give me an example of a country similar to Australia so we can see how long it took them to build theirs and how much it cost them and if they have had any challenges.   

 

Even if we do go nuclear we will need other clean methods to use in the meantime and to support nuclear.  France has been aggressively nuclear and now 70% of its power comes from reactors which means 30% comes from somewhere else.  

 

I believe I am being rational by saying I can not decide without knowing the cost, how long will it take to get them online, who will build them and how will waste and decommissioning be handled.

 

[pmccarthy]

I generally agree with Octave. But the risk of not achieving solar+ wind as replacement for coal seems much greater than the risks associated with nuclear. If only because nuclear is the established technology used by most advanced countries, whereas what Australia Is trying to do for base load is a giant experiment. We can all have a view on its chance of success. I put it at about 5%. And Australia has more uranium than any other country, by a long shot.

[Litespeed]

Who will build it?

 

Given everyone currently in the game is losing money by the billions in building reactors, who?

 

Not the Chinese, they are behind and massively overcost. So much so as a partner with the French to build the UK reactors, they have pullout of the contract and taken multi billions in losses.

 

Additionally, the USA has made it clear, no  military subs or other programs if we jump in nuclear bed with China.

 

Not the French, they signed a semi fixed contract for Hinkley and have lost billions. They are also losing billions on their reactors which are already amortised for build cost. They are  74 billion euros in debt.

 

The Koreans are unlikely as they are having serious overruns in time and cost.

 

It won't be Americans as they are going broke building the two way overdue reactors they are finishing.

 

The cost and availability of uranium is almost irrelevant as it's only a tiny percentage of running costs.

 

No grid usable SMR reactors exist, the Russian one is basically a dirty military reactor in a shop, no one will allow it to dock and provide power.

 

The Chinese nor USA  have any and all prototypes have either failed or proven so expensive per power unit, they have stopped research.

 

Dreams do not make reality.

 

 

[Litespeed]

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/jun/13/farmers-who-graze-sheep-under-solar-panels-say-it-improves-productivity-so-why-dont-we-do-it-more

 

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/may/29/macintyre-turbines-queensland-southern-downs-windfarm-largest-southern-hemisphere

[old man emu]

I live in an area where once it was your typical wheat/wool production. It seems now that the sheep are gone. Maybe it was the drought, or maybe it is that the labour costs of wool production exceed the income from it. Wool growing might be economical in the hilly country that cannot be used for broadacre farming. But hilly country is not so great for solar generation due to shadowing. However, combining sheep and solar does appear to result in more animal product, and the sheep reduce the costs of vegetation control under the panels.

 

Wind turbines have some acceptance problems mainly due to their destruction of the visual environment. There's a lot of NIMBYs in rural areas. That visual problem doesn't really apply to solar panels because they can be hidden below the skyline.

 

I'd say that although nuclear doesn't add to carbon pollution, economically it's too late for Australia to jump on the wagon. We can blame Howard's decision to sell out to the Grens in the 1990s for that.

 

Perhaps it would be cheaper for the government to give away solar panel installations to solve the supply problem, but then we have to safely solve the problem of storing electricity for use overnight.

 

[Litespeed]

OME,

 

It would probably be cheaper than the nukes to give every house free solar and home battery storage. 

 

But I can't do the calcs as Dutton has refused to provide details until after the election.

[pmccarthy]

In Vic there are protest against power lines and offshore wind in particular, which have stalled development. I believe this is true in farming zones generally and hobby farms particularly and probably in the green part of Australia generally. To get anywhere near the renewable uptake needed to meet demand they will need to bring in draconian laws. 

[Marty_d]

As opposed to the laws they'll have to bring in to reverse the ban on nuclear in some states and then force unwilling residents to accept a nuclear power plant next door?

[nomadpete]

11 hours ago, old man emu said:

I reckon that in trying to give an estimate for ten years hence, you can pick any positive number to apply to today's usage to give an estimate of the 2035 usage

As I mentioned, the people skilled at these estimates have a proven track record of good accuracy. Over the period from ww2 until the last couple of years, both the grid and generator capacity has nicely kept just above the demand. This has been due to accurate predictions and timely planning. Australia has historically had less major blackouts than the USA.

 

Recently, there has been dithering with planning. I ascribe that to political dithering by both major parties. Are the lobby groups responsible for this?

[nomadpete]

Regarding the feared approaching shortfall of electrical generation:

 

I personally cannot see how a slow, uncertain construction and high cost solution (nuclear) can fill the expected fast arriving gap in generatin capacity.

 

The problem, if it is as bad as is feared,  will surely start showing up with rolling load shedding next year.

 

None of the solutions (especially nuclear) can fill the gap in time.

 

Maybe the problem is not as high a risk as we think?

 

But then again,  I am only a half informed forumite.

[nomadpete]

9 hours ago, Litespeed said:

OME,

 

It would probably be cheaper than the nukes to give every house free solar and home battery storage. 

 

But I can't do the calcs as Dutton has refused to provide details until after the election.

And community batteries for small towns.

[Marty_d]

1 hour ago, nomadpete said:

Regarding the feared approaching shortfall of electrical generation:

 

I personally cannot see how a slow, uncertain construction and high cost solution (nuclear) can fill the expected fast arriving gap in generatin capacity.

 

The problem, if it is as bad as is feared,  will surely start showing up with rolling load shedding next year.

 

None of the solutions (especially nuclear) can fill the gap in time.

 

Maybe the problem is not as high a risk as we think?

 

But then again,  I am only a half informed forumite.

More informed than most, given your background.

[old man emu]

1 hour ago, nomadpete said:

And community batteries for small towns.

Was thinking about domestic battery storage. Given that the Fire Brigades are warning people to be careful where they charge and store things like electric scooters and bikes in domestic situations, what precautions are required for a domestic storage battery? I've seen pictures of them on internal garage walls. I know that you are going to lambast me about the rarity of battery fires, but they can occur. 

 

I could see a solution being community batteries located in the open serving a small number of houses. Of course putting them there creates an eyesore, but one must compromise. After all, in Adelaide people are decorating those ugly Stobie poles with artworks to brighten the streetscape.

[octave]

In terms of home batteries and safety, I guess it comes down to the a risk-benefit situation.   Houses have been burned down by a gas leak and people have died from carbon monoxide poisoning form inadequately ventilation.  I think the point is what is the track record of home batteries.  

Another issue is that battery chemistry is progressing fast.   Sodium shows great promise especially for static use although these batteries are in some cars already.    First sodium-ion battery EVs go into serial production in China

 

Here is an interesting home "battery" that is available right now  https://www.lavo.com.au/lavo-hydrogen/  This is a unit that uses excess solar to produce hydrogen and oxygen by electrolysis and then when needed recombines them in a fuel cell. I know what you are thinking hydrogen could explode. The hydrogen is stored not under pressure but within a metal hydride.   The downside at this point in time is that it is more expensive than a traditional battery.

 

I foresee a time when each house will power itself. I guess the power retailers will hate that.   

 

There are country towns that already have community batteries. One to look at is the town of Yackandandah or Yack as the locals call it.  

 

To me, these are interesting times 

 

 

 

[nomadpete]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

I've seen pictures of them on internal garage walls. I know that you are going to lambast me about the rarity of battery fires, but they can occur. 

Not at all, OME.

 

I personally would never put my battery storage on a wall of my dwelling, no matter what chemistry it is. The stored energy is a risk if for any reason it all gets out quickly.

 

I have the same view about diesel or petrol gensets.

 

Obviously others are happy to take the risk. That is their choice.

[nomadpete]

Actually there is a related risk with nuclear power plants. If all the energy gets out at once, you have a real problem. Luckily the control systems minimise this but isn't that what Boeing said about their instrument redundancy 'preventing' disasters?

[old man emu]

1 hour ago, nomadpete said:

If all the energy gets out at once, you have a real problem

But I think that procedures to prevent that due to problems caused by humans, software or mechanical failures have been pretty well worked out. You can't control things like earthquakes, but at least we have a pretty stable geology to build on.

[pmccarthy]

7 hours ago, nomadpete said:

And community batteries for small towns.

Grid batteries last minutes not hours or half a day. They are for smoothing.

[nomadpete]

1 minute ago, pmccarthy said:

Grid batteries last minutes not hours or half a day. They are for smoothing.

Yes, that is what GRID batteries do.

So far, they are not storage batteries in the usual sense of the word.

 

Community batteries and individual home batteries are storage that last a useful period. Mentioned before by others, a EV sized battery stores sufficient to last a couple of days.

 

Something that size, if more widespread, could supplement the existing grid enormously, and would collectively serve as a grid size distributed energy store. It would greatly reduce individual electricity bills for the individual as well.

[pmccarthy]

I looked up the Yackandandah story. If the battery itself cost $200,000 as reported, then the installed cost would be around $300,000.

It is a 274 kWH battery. It would keep ten houses going for a day, or 20 houses going for 12 hours. Yackandandah has 1800 people, say 450 houses, so a 12-hour supply would require 22.5 of those batteries at a cost of $6.75M.

I guess it can be done but a diesel generator would keep going as long as you kept the fuel up to it.

[octave]

13 minutes ago, pmccarthy said:

It would keep ten houses going for a day, or 20 houses going for 12 hours.

Yep, overnight night.  I lived in a house on a property with no mains power and my battery bank was similar except with more capacity. I was able to power my house overnight. Most days I had the solar capacity to run my house and charge my batteries. This is not a one-off there are plenty of community batteries installed and proposed.  it is not just about independence from the grid. Some of these towns have unreliable power due to infrastructure (poles and wires etc) 

 

Although a diesel generator may have a lower upfront cost it is also loud smelly and carcinogenic.

Benefits of community batteries

• Allows more rooftop solar and electric devices, such as electric vehicle chargers to be connected.
• They will strengthen the grid reducing the need to limit (curtail) solar exports and help customers maximise their solar investment.
• Helps share more solar within the local area, including to households without solar.
• Creates a positive impact on wholesale electricity prices that could eventually flow through to reduced electricity prices
• Helps to regulate voltage on the network and improves network quality in the local area.
• Offers a flexible alternative to traditional poles and wires investment and helps lower network costs.
• Access to an online information hub where the community can see how much energy was stored and used daily.

 

 

 

[old man emu]

We've come a long way with storing the electricity produced by solar panel.

 

Twenty-odd years ago, one of my son's cricket team lived with solar panels. The house could have been connected to the grid, but possibly the cost of the poles from the road to the house was prohibitive. Anyway, I remember that they had a shed filled with lead-acid batteries. I suppose I could say that those batteries were less of a fire risk than modern lithium ones. But then, if I said that, I would feel the weight of a tonne of bricks falling on me from a great height.

[red750]

58 minutes ago, pmccarthy said:

a diesel generator would keep going as long as you kept the fuel up to it.

 

26 minutes ago, octave said:

it is also loud smelly and carcinogenic.

Harking  back about 60 years to when I was a high school student in Deniliquin, the town had a diesel generator about two miles from our house. You could often hear it thumping away at night.