[url]The Australian was told the report warns of a shortfall [in despatchable electricity] that will worsen over the next decade as old coal-fired power stations are closed and the east coast grid loses huge amounts of “dispatchable” electricity that has been supplied for decades regardless of weather conditions or the time of day.
The government is determined to fix the “dispatchability” issue as well as the “clean energy” demands that come with its stated commitment to meet international targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Driving the agenda is advice to government on the planned closure of the Liddell power station in NSW in 2022 and Vales Point in NSW in 2028. Those closures would take 3200 megawatt hours out of the east coast grid, double the capacity lost when Victoria’s Hazelwood power station shut down in April.[/url]
4.8GWhours is bloody significant! More to come tho:
http://cdn.thinglink.me/api/image/961374298277150721/1024/10/scaletowidth#tl-961374298277150721;1043138249'Some of the findings counter a push from Coalition MPs for a mammoth investment in a new coal-fired power station in Queensland, using more efficient “ultra supercritical” technology being rolled out in Asia.
A new coal-power station would take seven to eight years to build and could face fierce competition from wind and solar by the time it starts generating, given the steady fall in the cost of producing renewable energy. The expansion of an existing coal-fired power station is seen as a more viable option to add baseload power as quickly as possible.
Liberal National Party MP David Littleproud is calling for the expansion of the Kogan Creek power station in his Queensland electorate of Maranoa, a supercritical generator that is linked to a nearby coal mine and could be ramped up from its existing capacity of 700 megawatt hours.
The government is also alive to the potential of new solar farms, given advice that a new facility with a capacity of 800 megawatt hours could be rolled out in less than a year. The latest solar photovoltaic panels can produce 50 per cent more electricity at the same cost as earlier technology, while being combined with battery storage to guarantee reliability.
The government believes the Snowy Hydro scheme expansion can increase its capacity by 50 per cent to 3500 megawatt hours or more, turning a huge amount of solar or other renewable power into baseload electricity to be switched on as needed. While this could take up to six years, the project would add capacity quicker than a new coal-power station.
Longer term the Snowy will have less water to turn the turbines as the southern half of the country dries out. A scheme on Qld rivers will be needed‚ very long term yet we need to plan NOW (survey, buy land for reservoirs etc.)
Neanderthal speaking:
Mr Frydenberg said the report would show that there would have to be “sufficient dispatchability” in the network and that coal was a way to achieve this. “The cheapest form of existing power generation comes from existing coal,” he told Sky News. “It’s also a stable, reliable form of dispatchable power. So if we can keep our coal-fired power stations going for longer then that can provide a good outcome for Australian consumers. We recognise that we need coal in our system and we will ensure that that continues to be the case.”
Renewable energy becoming cheaper than coal, not in Liberal “minds” I guess. We had coal in grand daddy’s day. . . sort of crap.
The latest Newspoll survey highlights the community divide on energy, with 45 per cent of voters expecting an increase in their bills from the shift to renewables while 22 per cent anticipate a decrease and 24 per cent expect no change. In a warning sign to the government, 60 per cent of Coalition voters believe renewables will increase their bills. Only 31 per cent of Labor voters and 31 per cent of Greens voters believe the same. Voters also appear to be turning against the idea of paying higher bills to use renewable power, with 49 per cent saying they would pay “nothing” extra — up from 45 per cent in February and 44 per cent last October.
While 25 per cent said they were willing to pay $100 a year more for renewable power, this was down from 26 per cent in February and 28 per cent last October. Opinions are divided along party lines, with 59 per cent of Coalition voters refusing to pay more for renewable power compared with 38 per cent of Labor voters and 25 per cent of Greens voters.
Will pay in one form or another, just ask the citizens of Houston (and Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Sierra Leone.)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/bill-shock-looms-amid-baseload-power-crisis/news-story/d64617bd271dd4b5d29cf371a93a185bA rare link indeed to the national shit sheet! But a good article on a very current topic!
(Google “business/mining-energy/bill-shock-looms-amid-baseload-power-crisis/news-story/d64617bd271dd4b5d29cf371a93a185b” and click on the first link to see the article.
[url]The Australian was told the report warns of a shortfall [in despatchable electricity] that will worsen over the next decade as old coal-fired power stations are closed and the east coast grid loses huge amounts of “dispatchable” electricity that has been supplied for decades regardless of weather conditions or the time of day.
The government is determined to fix the “dispatchability” issue as well as the “clean energy” demands that come with its stated commitment to meet international targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Driving the agenda is advice to government on the planned closure of the Liddell power station in NSW in 2022 and Vales Point in NSW in 2028. Those closures would take 3200 megawatt hours out of the east coast grid, double the capacity lost when Victoria’s Hazelwood power station shut down in April.[/url]
4.8GWhours is bloody significant! More to come tho:
[url]http://cdn.thinglink.me/api/image/961374298277150721/1024/10/scaletowidth#tl-961374298277150721;1043138249'[/url]
[quote]Some of the findings counter a push from Coalition MPs for a mammoth investment in a new coal-fired power station in Queensland, using more efficient “ultra supercritical” technology being rolled out in Asia.
A new coal-power station would take seven to eight years to build and could face fierce competition from wind and solar by the time it starts generating, given the steady fall in the cost of producing renewable energy. The expansion of an existing coal-fired power station is seen as a more viable option to add baseload power as quickly as possible.
Liberal National Party MP David Littleproud is calling for the expansion of the Kogan Creek power station in his Queensland electorate of Maranoa, a supercritical generator that is linked to a nearby coal mine and could be ramped up from its existing capacity of 700 megawatt hours.
The government is also alive to the potential of new solar farms, given advice that a new facility with a capacity of 800 megawatt hours could be rolled out in less than a year. The latest solar photovoltaic panels can produce 50 per cent more electricity at the same cost as earlier technology, while being combined with battery storage to guarantee reliability.
The government believes the Snowy Hydro scheme expansion can increase its capacity by 50 per cent to 3500 megawatt hours or more, turning a huge amount of solar or other renewable power into baseload electricity to be switched on as needed. While this could take up to six years, the project would add capacity quicker than a new coal-power station.[/quote]
Longer term the Snowy will have less water to turn the turbines as the southern half of the country dries out. A scheme on Qld rivers will be needed‚ very long term yet we need to plan NOW (survey, buy land for reservoirs etc.)
Neanderthal speaking:
[quote]Mr Frydenberg said the report would show that there would have to be “sufficient dispatchability” in the network and that coal was a way to achieve this. “The cheapest form of existing power generation comes from existing coal,” he told Sky News. “It’s also a stable, reliable form of dispatchable power. So if we can keep our coal-fired power stations going for longer then that can provide a good outcome for Australian consumers. We recognise that we need coal in our system and we will ensure that that continues to be the case.”[/quote]
Renewable energy becoming cheaper than coal, not in Liberal “minds” I guess. We had coal in grand daddy’s day. . . sort of crap.
[quote]The latest Newspoll survey highlights the community divide on energy, with 45 per cent of voters expecting an increase in their bills from the shift to renewables while 22 per cent anticipate a decrease and 24 per cent expect no change. In a warning sign to the government, 60 per cent of Coalition voters believe renewables will increase their bills. Only 31 per cent of Labor voters and 31 per cent of Greens voters believe the same. Voters also appear to be turning against the idea of paying higher bills to use renewable power, with 49 per cent saying they would pay “nothing” extra — up from 45 per cent in February and 44 per cent last October.
While 25 per cent said they were willing to pay $100 a year more for renewable power, this was down from 26 per cent in February and 28 per cent last October. Opinions are divided along party lines, with 59 per cent of Coalition voters refusing to pay more for renewable power compared with 38 per cent of Labor voters and 25 per cent of Greens voters.[/quote]
Will pay in one form or another, just ask the citizens of Houston (and Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Sierra Leone.)
[url]http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/bill-shock-looms-amid-baseload-power-crisis/news-story/d64617bd271dd4b5d29cf371a93a185b[/url]
A rare link indeed to the national shit sheet! But a good article on a very current topic!
(Google “business/mining-energy/bill-shock-looms-amid-baseload-power-crisis/news-story/d64617bd271dd4b5d29cf371a93a185b” and click on the first link to see the article.
