green power solar is

[Bruce]

Tasmania should be able to operate really well from a combination of solar, wind and hydro. They should be the state with the cheapest power by far.

 

Similarly with new Zealand, at least the south island. I wonder why not?

 

Nuclear is still better for mainland Australia, but the ignorance of the population is astounding in this matter. Why did they applaud two nuclear power reactors in the heart of Melbourne while they ban a much safer power station south of Broken Hill?

 

Maybe they are afraid of tsunamis getting it there, while Port Melbourne is safe that way?

 

 

[storchy neil]

nev that's what they were doing while people were on the operating table and you need a piece paper that you are qualified to do that job of checking the back up power neil

 

 

[coljones]

nev that's what they were doing while people were on the operating table and you need a piece paper that you are qualified to do that job of checking the back up power neil

would you like the power in the OR to be tested and tagged by a politician, or would you prefer a qualified and licenced electrician?

 

 

[facthunter]

When things get politicised, stand by for a disaster. Funny how "small" government gets into everything when they are preoccupied with getting re elected. Nev

 

 

[coljones]

There was the case of a hospital reusing breathing tubes with inadequate sterilisation. Who should bring the hospital into line - the insurance company who will make a decision on economics, the hospital who will make a decision based on PR or the government bused on their responsibility to the community? Just a thought.

 

 

[kgwilson]

Tasmania should be able to operate really well from a combination of solar, wind and hydro. They should be the state with the cheapest power by far.Similarly with new Zealand, at least the south island. I wonder why not?

 

Nuclear is still better for mainland Australia, but the ignorance of the population is astounding in this matter. Why did they applaud two nuclear power reactors in the heart of Melbourne while they ban a much safer power station south of Broken Hill?

 

Maybe they are afraid of tsunamis getting it there, while Port Melbourne is safe that way?

In 2015 81% of electricity generated in NZ came from renewable sources, mainly hydro & geothermal. The South island exports a lot of its hydro generated power to the North island. The SI is lucky to have lots of snow fed lakes that send water east in easily dammed rivers. Add a bit of wind & solar to the mix & they won't be far of 100% in a few years. Similarly Tasmania has plenty of scope with Hydro power plus solar & wind.

 

Mainland Australia is one of the sunniest places on the planet. The potential for solar power is massive and there are numerous projects underway. There are also wind farms with many more under way or planned. You need to add battery storage to the mix but also pumped hydro. If you produce a heap of solar & wind power & can't use it due to low demand then use it to pump water up hill so when the sun & wind stop you generate power by sending the water down hill. A study identified 22,000 potential pumped hydro sites in Australia & that only about 30 would be required to transition the country to 100% renewables within 20 years. Nuclear on the other hand is very expensive, requiring huge energy input and is time consuming to build. Then there are the risks with operation (not too bad these days) but the problem with de-commissioning at the end of its useful life and more importantly where to put the radioactive waste.

 

The federal government is still doing nothing with no policy. South Australia is doing its own thing & getting renewables going in a big way which will see the state self sufficient. Meanwhile Frydenburg & other right wing Libs pay lip service to the whole issue in the vain hope a rabbit will pop out of the hat while the old inefficient, decaying & polluting coal fired power stations trundle on to their closure needing more and more bandaid maintenance to keep them going till then.

 

 

[Bruce]

Good stuff there kg but wrong about costs of nuclear..

 

The cost of pumped hydro is very high. Nuclear ( especially the coming hybrid fission/fusion stuff ) will be much cheaper, even with the artificial cost extras added.

 

 

[coljones]

Good stuff there kg but wrong about costs of nuclear..The cost of pumped hydro is very high. Nuclear ( especially the coming hybrid fission/fusion stuff ) will be much cheaper, even with the artificial cost extras added.

There is a large and increasing gap between what might be and what can be. Check out Ziggy's comments at Australia has 'missed the boat' on nuclear power There are also questions about energy security with uranium ore being exported and nuclear fuel bring imported, some sources are very concerned that a substantial portion of our liquid fuel is imported as a finished product. Would you like 100LL with that?

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I have to declare a conflict of interest in that I used to work in the nuclear power sector and, since taking the aluminum handshake (no where near golden), I find myself thinking about looking to returning to nuclear days as Hinkley Point is only a few miles from where I live (although I know the bloke would is running the section I would be working in and I can't seem myself working for him).

 

However, while I agree with Ziggy's comments (although his ability to roll out NBN???), it is based on large scale reactor tech, which is so yesterday - except for the French. There is a lot of work and research into scaling small module reactors (I have written about this before), which can be plumbed into existing nuclear sites or where smaller scale generation sites can be located. Australia may have missed the boat on AGRs, PWRs and now EPRs, but SMRs may (and I say may as I haven't spent the requisite time coming to grips with all their operational information) offer the all weather top-up to a balanced mix.

 

I am not sure where we get our enriched uranium for Lucas Heights.. but I would be surprised if we imported it. What is wrong with Australia processing Uranium locally if we have a big enough distributed SMR generation capability? The question of waste is always a vexing one, but technology has moved positively in this regard, although admittedly still expensive as is decomissioning. But with SMRs, as I understand, there is a case that plant life could be a lot longer, more constrained around the acquaduct systems than the reactors as each module is self contained and simply slots out.

 

So, in short (if I can ever be short), yep missed the boat on the old technology but still has an opportunity with the latest technology.

 

 

[facthunter]

Small nuclear reactors would enable the grid to be more localised. A national grid is by definition unreliable and expensive. To get rid of it would make cheaper power inevitable. The grid is a failed concept in a large area . Nev

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Certainly inefficient in a large area...

 

 

[Bruce]

Yes, the 2 reactors in Melbourne were on a visiting US carrier. ( They need "shore leave" every 6 weeks or the sailors start answering the officers back. Gosh they need a gender balance on those things )

 

Why did the greens not protest? At the nuclear reactors I mean.

 

 

[facthunter]

Who knows. They get uptight about some things but let others go through to the keeper. I'm a bit of a greeny myself, but 1/2 of something is better than the lot of nothing but concepts.. If we turn the whole place to $#!t, we will ALL be standing in it, with standing room only. Nev

 

 

[nomadpete]

Nev, why do you think that the grid is unreliable? A failure of the grid will result in major loss of power to very large areas - maybe a whole city. Such events are very rare in Australia because the grid is duplicated. This duplication is not 'gold plating', as the duplicate paths greatly reduce the power losses (whilst both paths are active). Our grid is very reliable. Most 'blackouts' are localised to poles and wires at street level, which is not part of the 'grid'. This is part of the local distribution system. The only way to avoid failure of local distribution, is to force every house to supply it's own power, which means that individual consumers have lower reliability, but each failure is only going to inconvenience one consumer. Taking into account that most people just want their electricity to work without having to be responsible for maintaining it, it's unlikely that MOST people want their own power generation. And that model ONLY works when EVERYONE opts to buy and operate their own energy supply.

 

 

[facthunter]

Cost and maintenance mitigate against the grid concept.. About 1/4 of America went out with high sunspot activity some years ago. Haiti may never get it's power grid back.. Power losses over large distances requiring transformers to up voltages . Grid is nearly 50% of the cost of delivered power, on average. The cable went out to Tasmania so we duplicate it? The total l power from Tasmania wouldn't power Geelong so is it worth it.? I suggest NO. Standby generation by coal and gas means this must be surplus to normal requirements to be available and therefore extremely costly as well as the considerable time to bring it on line.. Gas turbine and batteries are the quickest response, plus diesel, and next hydro but stopping and starting large columns of water aren't that simple either, as well as damage by debris ingested into turbines.. Equipment gets dated and a failure may not be able to be rectified at all efficiently... Load shedding is one way of balance. It has to be selective and effective. (Smart meters anyone) Lightning took out my power pole and the next one to it a little while back (TWO TRANSFORMERES) and did considerable damage to the houses they were connected to. About 3 days off line and 50 Plus thousand dollars with lightning protection THIS TIME. fitted. I still haven't; sorted out my wiring. I want 240 volts NOT millions of volts. like I got.

 

Pete I'm NOT suggesting everyone goes off grid. When transmission poles go over, NO electricity flows. In remote areas how can these be fixed while the storms still rage?. When this is politicised you get BS, as I'm sure you've noticed.. Saying Liddell can just be kept going a few years longer is ridiculous. Coal and gas fail when it's very hot, and a cyclone will knock out the system for weeks.. The GRID was gold plated at one time as it was cost plus no questions asked back then. That was an irresponsible policy. Failed power lines start bushfires. Inspecting the lines is dangerous especially in hilly country.. Most of this infrastructure is foreign owned. The grid in Victoria hasn't had a coat of paint in years . We don't own it. Hong Kong does and they bought it to make money .. Nev

 

 

[nomadpete]

Nev you have rolled many things into one story.

 

For instance , when lightning destroyed a pole transformer near you, what would have been the result of that lightning strike on your alternative stand alone solar/battery system? How would you cope personally with the sudden need to replace your expensive (now cooked) unduplicated solar regulators, battery charger, and inverter?

 

How long would it take for you to arrange a private contractor to attend, assess, requisition, install the replacement components?

 

With the present poles and wires system, it is all done for you. At no extra personal expense.

 

You mentioned failed power lines starting bush fires. Well, actually it was penny pinching of tree management that caused bush fires. Because of public pressure to cut electricity prices, resulting in outsourced vegetation control budgets being reduced. When branches rub against overhead conductors, they shave off glowing embers which then fall to the ground. I have seen it happen. Instant fire starters. Nothing to do with alleged 'gold plating'.

 

Hydro Pump Storage in Queensland is not slow to come online to fill the gap when there is a grid shortfall. It can be online within split seconds. Because the turbine is constantly spinning ( it doesn't take much water when it's not loaded). So it is already matched to grid voltage and phase, and to bring it on line only requires the throw of a switch at the same moment as opening the gates. Virtually instantaneous. Nobody ever notices. You can't afford that kind of backup for your home system unless you buy two sets of batteries, two sets of inverters and two sets of battery chargers and a (duplicated lightning proof) smart controller.

 

Going off grid won't save you from damage to your appliances from a lightning strike anywhere near your home.

 

Finally (I probably missed a few), the major grid failure in USA back then was mainly due to longitudinal induced DC on their grid (comes from solar flares) combined with grid stability issues (since reduced). These DC inductions primarily occur on east-west conductors. The USA grid is mostly east-west. Since Australia has a grid oriented predominantly north-south, we have minimal solar induced DC in our grid so it doesn't affect us much. However, we do have monitoring on it so the grid managers can avoid a similar cascading grid failure that happened on that occassion in USA.

 

Victoria and South Australia have lead the way with privatisation of their grid and their interstate interconnectors. Coincidentally they also have the highest consumer prices for electricity.

 

Also seem to have the least of that 'gold plating', but coincidentally also the worst reliability. This is a separate argument.

 

 

[nomadpete]

Nev, you mention dated technology, and failures. I can't see what gets dated about a 1980 low head hydro turbine weighing 300 tonnes, spinning on a pair of plain bearings. That is essentially what powers one of the Wivenhoe generators. There are two of these devices so that if one requires repair, the other is available. Of course, for the rest of the time when both are available twice the power is available and the grid managers factor that into their plans. These have been operating successfully for about 37years. They use surplus (otherwise wasted) energy to force water up to the top dam. Then trickle it back down to keep the turbines spinning at the correct speed, ready to generate electricity.

 

Just like a battery.

 

By the way, I have seen a piece of wood the size of the end of a power pole emerge from a turbine without any ill effects (on the turbine). And not heard of any damage due to debris. They are very simple, robust devices.

 

As for Hong Kong owning any of our profitable assets, why the hell did we sell them if they were so damned good?

 

 

[Bruce]

So what is the cost of pumped storage hydro nomad?

 

The cost of electricity in SA is so high now it might be viable.

 

 

[nomadpete]

In Qld, it is almost free. But it is not set up to provide base load. It is there to provide upto 600Mw of instant 'stop gap' power when a power station unit suffers an unforeseen sudden failure. The real savings result from a big reduction in 'spinning reserve' that would otherwise be burning coal for the sole purpose of insurance against blackouts that would result it a power station unit tripped off line. But since the concept only uses surplus generator energy to pump the water uphill, it really doesn't matter that the overall energy efficiency is rather low(can't recall the figure).

 

The spinning reserve generally means that maybe one power station is up to operating speed, ready to come online quickly if needed. That might be one unit for Qld. To get the same 'insurance' with my stand-alone home power system, I would have to duplicate everything. It is one of the advantages of a grid system that (in conjunction with keeping the generators running at their optimal efficiency), helps offset the 40% transmission & distribution losses. I don't like coal. The slightly good news is that over the last 10yrs or so there have been a lot of old inefficient power stations shut down &replaced by higher efficiency ones.

 

I suspect that consumer resistance will prevent the wholesale implementation of self powered homes, so we will be stuck with the grid system for the foreseeable future. Unless there is some major calamity that destroys our present distributed power generation model.

 

 

[coljones]

Who knows. They get uptight about some things but let others go through to the keeper. I'm a bit of a greeny myself, but 1/2 of something is better than the lot of nothing but concepts.. If we turn the whole place to $#!t, we will ALL be standing in it, with standing room only. Nev

Then they whistle "times up, back on your heads!!!"

 

 

[spacesailor]

Nomadpete

 

"I suspect that consumer resistance will prevent the wholesale implementation of self powered homes, so we will be stuck with the grid system for the foreseeable future. Unless there is some major calamity that destroys our present distributed power generation model"

 

WHY, The consumer does every-thing to lower their bill, only to have the Supplier charge more for less product, (Smart-meter to bump up the tariff) .

 

If less homes and industry fell off the reticulated supply It should leave more for those enjoying that system.

 

Instead we get penalized for reducing our usage.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Marty_d]

If less homes and industry fell off the reticulated supply It should leave more for those enjoying that system.

When more people fall off the grid it raises the price for the rest. Less customers for same fixed costs mean higher price per customer.

 

I think we're arguing about 2 different things. To me the current definition of a "grid" is the entire power network - large power stations & associated hardware with millions of users, joined up by thousands of kilometres of power lines.

 

I like the idea of mini-grids like the one they're planning in SA. 50,000 homes which are all relatively close to each other, powered by solar on every roof with batteries on every house. I'm assuming some sort of smart tech will balance out the usage - houses not using as much power will export more to the rest of the grid while those using more will draw more. Power price is about 30% less than current (pardon the pun) which will provide a return on investment for the capital outlay and (again I'm assuming) maintenance for the system.

 

The advantage of having many isolated systems, as opposed to an interconnected grid, is that you don't have transmission losses where the lines go hundreds of kilometres to a few users, which despite them costing many times the average, still pay the same for their power. Also you don't have failures like the recent one in SA where power for the whole state goes out for 4 or 5 days.

 

As has been stated we're the sunniest continent on Earth. How bloody silly are we if we can't use this free energy.

 

 

[facthunter]

It doesn't add to the total energy equation either. That sunlight would fall on earth anyhow. They have calculated that a tiny segment of the Sahara would power all of Europe. ALL we have to do is get our act together. "Vested " interests don't want that. to happen.

 

Individual control means they lose essentially a monopoly situation. Competition is a myth like it is in the OIL and GAS Industry. and Banks. Nev

 

 

[nomadpete]

Sure, the present system is a monopoly. Sometimes a monopoly makes sense.

 

Can you imagine a world where we build three or more highways or railways side by side, just to allow 'competition'? So customers can choose which provider they think will be cheapest?

 

So we then spend (overall) triple the amount von infrastructure, which makes the consumer pay triple, but at least he feels he had a choice!

 

Same applies to all essential services.

 

Unfortunately the unthinking public have swallowed this crap hook Line and sinker. For instance after a big PR propaganda campaign by vested interests, the public believed that paying for multiple telephone infrastructure, phone's would be cheaper. In reality it should be obvious that erecting three separate carriers mobile phone towers costs three times as much as erecting one. Likewise, three lots of retail shopfronts, three times the CEO and administration staff.

 

The only thing that helped keeping costs down, was the march of technology.

 

 

[facthunter]

Not suggesting duplication. as a choice. Size , SCALE reduces costs usually. The powers that be are trying to keep coal going virtually forever. You can't breathe the air in Delhi. It takes 10 years on average off the locals lifespan.

 

When you have a freeway you are supposed to be able to go another way but it's not maintained or has weight limits or is cut off by the freeway. A tollway becomes a monopoly really and you just PAY whatever regardless of whether it's moving at a crawl or whatever and the Owners make exorbitant profit. The CAR Insurance Industry has become similar. Mostly owned by the same people. You have a choice of names (Brands ) but the owners are the same . ACCC hasn't done it's job there. Nev