green power solar is

[coljones]

They'll always charge more for what they sell than what they buy.Last month I was charged $96.02 for the 143 kWh I bought from the grid, but only paid $25.30 for the 248 kWh I fed back into the grid.

You are buying retail and selling wholesale and then the power company has to load up what you have supplied and onsell it to, say, South Australia which, so we have been told, is incapable of producing it's own power (always cloudy and no wind)

 

 

[coljones]

bruce close on two hundred years ago wind power alone was not a good idea think before you bite neil

Dear Neal, it wasn't coal power that delivered the first (white) fleet to this wide brown land, it was wind power.

 

 

[red750]

Interesting image from FB today.

 

1915 - today.

 

[ATTACH]49563._xfImport[/ATTACH]

 

[storchy neil]

They'll always charge more for what they sell than what they buy.

 

Last month I was charged $96.02 for the 143 kWh I bought from the grid, but only paid $25.30 for the 248 kWh I fed back into the grid.

 

LAST MONTH CHARGED FROM GRID $0.36 kwh PAID for putting BACK TO GRID $0.713 kwh WHAT PART OF THAT DONT YOU UNDERSTAND neil

 

 

[nomadpete]

Neil, we all do understand that you got a great "introductory deal", which was only available for a short time. Lucky you. But your deal is not what is the policy for the vast majority of us.

 

It doesn't make sense to bag out all solar energy systems just because a lucky few got a great deal in the early days of promoting solar panels.

 

But even though we won't ever get the feed in payments that you do, it still works out profitable for us. And that's in spite of your belief that we are government subsidised, our feed-in deals are not costing the taxpayer anything.

 

 

[Marty_d]

What I don't get is that Neil is getting a fantastic deal on his solar but he still hates it!

 

 

[red750]

I see Clive Palmer is planning to build a low emission coal powered generator.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I wonder what advances in thermal conversion technology or scrubbing technology he will be relying on?

 

 

[storchy neil]

why I hate solar wind cause you are getting ripped off and told a complete lie as to why you need it

 

that garbage that the labour told you sheep how it will save the planet sheet for brains Gillard and rudd and Malcolm turn to shit bull are making money out off you suckers ask turnbulls son the oxgen theif

 

get a new calculator and work out the true cost off your so called new cheep power your taxes are paying for it nomadpete that is fact

 

my figures are about what they are paying me for my excess power

 

again I state that the state of Victoria covered on solar panels and wind towers you may enough power to charge a couple off torch batteries that's if the wind blows at about a steady 25 to 35 knots and the panels are kept spotless

 

keep up the crap that we need renewables and you wont have a job to go to neil

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I see where you're coming from Storchy, but there is more to it than the cash cost. Firstly, all energy sources cost - its a question of whether the individual, the taxpayer or someone/something else covers it. All energy we consume for our needs is derived from potential energy sources. As an example, conventional fossil generation is, on average, 35% efficient (ironaically as were petrol combustion engines - I think they are now about 38% efficient). That means for every 1KW that goes into producing the enegy in its usable form, 0.35Kw comes out. Forgetting all other costs associated with it (people, safety, insurance, commercial, etc), in theory, one has to charge 2.85 times the pure conversion costs to break even.. And that is just to get the electricity outside the turbines to the T&D stations. The cost isn't cash though.. for example, the fumes, heat, etc, friction wear, etc are all a cost, that if we were to leave the energy system as it was before the process, would have to be borne through regenerating the original inputs and cleansing the air. So, our environment pays the cost. This is also some, albeit less, of the cost of renewables.. The air passes through the blades of a windmill, for example, with a degree of kinetic energy and some of that is aborbed that spins a shaft that, with some resistance, produces electricty. I am not siure of the numbers, but my guess would be 50 - 65% efficiency.

 

Of course, some of this energy cost is also born by maintenance, but my point is the monetary cost is only a proportion of the total cost of electricity (or other energy) and the full cost is born by the environment, meduical treatment of ailments as a result, etc. The montary economy is but a poor artificial simulation of the allocation of scarce resources, and this is a perfect example.. Our money is only part of the cost equation, but getting that equation right on balance has to be the higher aim of energy policy.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...conventional fossil generation is, on average, 35% efficient (ironaically as were petrol combustion engines - I think they are now about 38% efficient). That means for every 1KW that goes into producing the enegy in its usable form, 0.35Kw comes out...

I mostly agree with your post, Jerry, but your take on energy efficiency differs from mine.

 

I'd always assumed that "35% efficiency" meant that only 35% of the potential energy locked in the coal is converted to usable electrical energy.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

To be honest, I couldn't give you the thermal conversion efficiency of coal - and it would depend on grade anyway.. but form the point of steam pushing those tubines around, we are talking 35% - from (an alcohol-depleted) memory..

 

Either way, the point I am making is that there is a cost that is always born outside the artificial system of money....

 

 

[Bruce]

The figure of 26% for IC engines comes to mind. Thermal efficiency is quite a low figure. Then transmission losses are about 50% for grid electricity. So the total efficiency is about 13% from the energy in the fuel to electricity... But wait, the efficiency of the usage is not 100%. Overall efficiency of 10% would be normal.

 

None of this matters much except for the damage done to the atmosphere which notices the original amount.

 

Personally, I am doubtful if our species is capable of saving the planet. We have evolved to be short-term thinkers, and its asking a lot for people to make sacrifices for longer-term goals. The average person doesn't pay their credit card off each month, even though this would get them the most value in a six-month timeframe. Asking these people to pay heed to something years away? A big ask, say I.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

The figure of 26% for IC engines comes to mind. Thermal efficiency is quite a low figure. Then transmission losses are about 50% for grid electricity. So the total efficiency is about 13% from the energy in the fuel to electricity... But wait, the efficiency of the usage is not 100%. Overall efficiency of 10% would be normal.None of this matters much except for the damage done to the atmosphere which notices the original amount.

 

Personally, I am doubtful if our species is capable of saving the planet. We have evolved to be short-term thinkers, and its asking a lot for people to make sacrifices for longer-term goals. The average person doesn't pay their credit card off each month, even though this would get them the most value in a six-month timeframe. Asking these people to pay heed to something years away? A big ask, say I.

I am not going to argue your numbers and apart from the efficiency of usage, we are about aligned...

 

But I do agree that as a species, we are not able to save our planet - I was thinking about MY habits and what I could do to arrest the slide - and the reality is that Iwasnot willing to give up much.. even though the generation I am doing it for may pay a hell of a price!

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Our species is consuming our planet's resources at an unsustainable rate. For everyone to live as well as we in rich countries do, nature loses, big time.

 

In my youth there was a popular slogan: Live simply, so that others can simply live.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I wonder what advances in thermal conversion technology or scrubbing technology he will be relying on?

I suspect that, once again, Clive Palmer will be relying on us mug taxpayers to subsidise his business.

 

 

[spacesailor]

I think today's energy use is much better than prewar, NO smog lately no smelly coal fires in your home And those ugly GASOMETER,S

 

are long gone, evenout of grandchildren,s knowledge.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Marty_d]

Interesting review of the SA Tesla battery. Wouldn't be the first time that ScoMo was proved to be dead wrong, and won't be the last (remembering he voted against the banking royal commission 26 times, too).

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-02/tesla-battery-proves-a-leading-source-of-dispatchable-power/10326420

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Since when did a pollie do or say something they know about?

 

Hmmm.. thinking about it.. all the tine... nothing!

 

 

[nomadpete]

This thread is titled 'Green power is'

 

The title itself is confrontational because all electrical power has an impact on the environment in which we live.

 

The debate seems to revolve around what negative side effects each kind of power will affect us during our individual lifetimes.

 

This is a rather short sided perspective.

 

The big debate should not be about which individuals get a short benefit (such as Neil has fortuitously got), but what will work best for the long term.

 

But nobody seems to think beyond their own grave. This saddens me.

 

 

[Bruce]

Nomad, most people don't think beyond the next week or so. They wouldn't blow out their bankcards if they did.

 

But I liked something Dick Smith said..." either you don't understand the science or you don't care about the kids"

 

Personally, I find the argument that nuclear power is the least worst to be convincing, but that puts me in a minority even on this forum.

 

 

[facthunter]

It (Nuclear) may be useful but so far it's not making any great comeback. Japan and Chernobyle and tidy up costs are all out there. Renewables are cheaper. Population and tree clearing continue and plastic and chemical run off. Plenty of work to be done. Morrison just doesn't mention it so there must be NO problem. So relax and it will go away. Nev

 

 

[spacesailor]

Green power electricity.

 

The most wonderful advancement in history!.

 

Cooking over a coal burning oven, or even a wood fired cooker, Stinks

 

Kerosene lamps or candles, burnt more houses than Was counted.

 

And digging out the pit under the coal fire place, took Me a week with a dustbin of ash to discard.

 

And I couldn't live without my Electric blanket, hot water bottles, hot stones or bedpans, never last a winters night.

 

Burning your bum while your knees freeze, turn to roast your other side while most of the heat goes up the chimney,

 

Give me Air conditioning anyday, over what my grandparents lived through.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[facthunter]

Hot water on demand. If you have that you are probably in the top 1 %. Nev

 

 

[spacesailor]

facthunter

 

True, but my grandparents had the hot water on the other side of the fire place,to the oven.

 

[ATTACH]49597._xfImport[/ATTACH]

 

and with a hook to hang the stew pot over the coals. underneath the fire is a deep pit to keep the ash from falling onto the kitchen floor.

 

spaceailor