The 'renewable' energy thread -

 
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
supermarket car parks are going to be ideal. Previously the supermarkets gave a several cent discount on fuel. Free charging would be  in a similar category
How are supermarket car parks ideal for EV charging? Who spends more than 20-30 minutes in a supermarket? Don't a large proportion of shoppers opt for online shopping with delivery or click and collect these days?
Do a full grocery shop for a family and you'll find out. And then you wander up the street to the next joint....
We had a family of 6. I did it weekly for many years. 20 min in the supermarket on the way home from work (wife did not have a licence) was all I ever needed.
Graham4405
The age of male dominated express shopping is well and truly over.

Sponsored advertisement

  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
As for cars charging your house

https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/f150-lightning/2022/
wobert
There is a bit involved and most EVs dont have this feature and interesting to see how many more offer it. Personally I'd get a home battery.
  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
The age of male dominated express shopping is well and truly over.
RTT_Rules
No male domination involved. My wife did not have a licence, the simplest way was for me to shop for the family. Even now, since my retirement, we shop together. 2 hours with a minimum of 4 shops, 2 of which are driving distance (with bags of groceries etc) from the shopping mall, so 3 stops. The car isn't parked anywhere for long enough to make it worth while hooking up to a charger. My wife is a slow shopper, stops to chat with every second person, looks at all the women's clothing shops, etc and we still get through in a short period.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
The age of male dominated express shopping is well and truly over.
No male domination involved. My wife did not have a licence, the simplest way was for me to shop for the family. Even now, since my retirement, we shop together. 2 hours with a minimum of 4 shops, 2 of which are driving distance (with bags of groceries etc) from the shopping mall, so 3 stops. The car isn't parked anywhere for long enough to make it worth while hooking up to a charger. My wife is a slow shopper, stops to chat with every second person, looks at all the women's clothing shops, etc and we still get through in a short period.
Graham4405
The hazards of living in a small town where you know every second person you bump into...
  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
The age of male dominated express shopping is well and truly over.
No male domination involved. My wife did not have a licence, the simplest way was for me to shop for the family. Even now, since my retirement, we shop together. 2 hours with a minimum of 4 shops, 2 of which are driving distance (with bags of groceries etc) from the shopping mall, so 3 stops. The car isn't parked anywhere for long enough to make it worth while hooking up to a charger. My wife is a slow shopper, stops to chat with every second person, looks at all the women's clothing shops, etc and we still get through in a short period.
The hazards of living in a small town where you know every second person you bump into...
don_dunstan
Do you know our town Don? It's a town of about 12000 people, and a shopping catchment for probably 10000 more. Not that small as country towns go. Anyhow, my point is that the car isn't parked anywhere long enough to get a decent charge (if it was an EV).
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The age of male dominated express shopping is well and truly over.
No male domination involved. My wife did not have a licence, the simplest way was for me to shop for the family. Even now, since my retirement, we shop together. 2 hours with a minimum of 4 shops, 2 of which are driving distance (with bags of groceries etc) from the shopping mall, so 3 stops. The car isn't parked anywhere for long enough to make it worth while hooking up to a charger. My wife is a slow shopper, stops to chat with every second person, looks at all the women's clothing shops, etc and we still get through in a short period.
Graham4405
Graham, it wasn't meant as an isult against you, its a fact of the times. My mum didn't have a license until 1982, when I was in high school. I remember those times waiting for "father" to come home on Thursday night or Saturday to be dragged around shopping. It was in the era of male domination, hence why he had a license and often she didn't.

From what you are decribing your wife shopping habits would be like my mum's before and after getting her license. With dad it was get it in and get it done. on her own its a social outing. So more than likely she would take longer if free of the male company. When my dad retired and became bored, my mum's social life changed again. She's going shopping, "where are you going?, I'll come too". I can tell you my mum has told me her social life has changed dramatically in the last few years and yes shopping has again become a get it in and get it done affair again. For my parents, are we back to the age of male domination in shopping? Very much so.

" and we still get through in a short period." So yes, I wonder if this time frame would be the same if she had her own mode of transport and went solo?

The so called, "worth while charging". The charging process is cumlative, so yes it would be worth while. 2h on even a low destination charge rate over 4 locations would charge the car for that days trip and others. So yes it is worth while.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Do you know our town Don? It's a town of about 12000 people, and a shopping catchment for probably 10000 more. Not that small as country towns go. Anyhow, my point is that the car isn't parked anywhere long enough to get a decent charge (if it was an EV).
Graham4405
As you may recall, I lived in Gladstone (30,000) before going OS. When I went to the shops or did basically almost anything with a friend who lived there for 50 years, nicked named "have a chat", he was a series of stopping to talk to people he knew. So yes 12,000 is small.

Again your assumptions for how EV charging actually works is incorrect.  Parking in 1 place for 1h or 60 places for 1min each and the net result is basically the same. For some cars it may actually be better as the battery doesn't get time to heat up and slow down the charge rate if not sufficently cooled.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
The age of male dominated express shopping is well and truly over.
No male domination involved. My wife did not have a licence, the simplest way was for me to shop for the family. Even now, since my retirement, we shop together. 2 hours with a minimum of 4 shops, 2 of which are driving distance (with bags of groceries etc) from the shopping mall, so 3 stops. The car isn't parked anywhere for long enough to make it worth while hooking up to a charger. My wife is a slow shopper, stops to chat with every second person, looks at all the women's clothing shops, etc and we still get through in a short period.
The hazards of living in a small town where you know every second person you bump into...
Do you know our town Don? It's a town of about 12000 people, and a shopping catchment for probably 10000 more. Not that small as country towns go. Anyhow, my point is that the car isn't parked anywhere long enough to get a decent charge (if it was an EV).
Graham4405
I've lived in country towns that big, Graham - and that's exactly what its like. The longer you're there the more people you have to stop and talk to or you're considered a snob.

RTT_Rules or whoever mentioned it is right, they're planning 3-phase 'fast chargers' for the public everywhere but the problem is that charging attachments are not standard and 'fast charging' does put a huge strain on the local grid.
  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
I wonder if this time frame would be the same if she had her own mode of transport and went solo?
RTT_Rules
My wife has had her licence since about 1985. She does have her own car. She goes to the shops most days and is gone for some time. I don't do surveillance on her so I don't know what she does!
  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
Again your assumptions for how EV charging actually works is incorrect.  Parking in 1 place for 1h or 60 places for 1min each and the net result is basically the same. For some cars it may actually be better as the battery doesn't get time to heat up and slow down the charge rate if not sufficently cooled.
RTT_Rules
I wasn't really making assumptions at all. Just that I probably wouldn't bother to plug in for a short time. That is analogous to filling the car with fuel at every servo you pass...
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
I've lived in country towns that big, Graham - and that's exactly what its like. The longer you're there the more people you have to stop and talk to or you're considered a snob.

RTT_Rules or whoever mentioned it is right, they're planning 3-phase 'fast chargers' for the public everywhere but the problem is that charging attachments are not standard and 'fast charging' does put a huge strain on the local grid.
don_dunstan
The more people we have have to talk to, the more time the car has to charge.

Fast chargers cannot operate off a standard 3-phase plug. What they are likely looking at is the 7.5 kW or maybe up to 22 kW chargers which are considered destination chargers and place a smaller load on the local supply, which if placed at businesses that cars spend at least 20min can have a significant cumlative effect on battery position. This strategy has been used in parts of EU pre-dating the current large model and range of EV's.

Fast chargers are higher cost technology and not something you leave your car parked at whie inside a mall /shopping centres for 2-3 h.

The 7.5 kW uses a standard plug. I'd be surprised that at this stage of the game there is a deliverate intent to inistall a non-standard outlet for EV's. Also you are likely to see and happens elsewhere moderating control at local supply if there is too much demand, charging rates are limited by total demand.  

As number of EV's in the car fleet will grow at only a few percent per year and won't be significant number until the early 2030's, the local infrastructure will no doubt be upgraded along the way for more reasons than EV's. Don't forget, being the slowest rate of EV take up in the OECD world, means others have already solved the problems you are only now just thinking about.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Again your assumptions for how EV charging actually works is incorrect.  Parking in 1 place for 1h or 60 places for 1min each and the net result is basically the same. For some cars it may actually be better as the battery doesn't get time to heat up and slow down the charge rate if not sufficently cooled.
I wasn't really making assumptions at all. Just that I probably wouldn't bother to plug in for a short time. That is analogous to filling the car with fuel at every servo you pass...
Graham4405
I wouldn't list it the same as filliing a car with petrol at every petrol station you pass.

Its been labeled "oppurtunity" or "destination" charging for a reason. You park your car like normal and rather than just walk away you plug it in. While you are doing your thing your car is being slowly recharged. The longer you take, the more charge it gets. Yes, you may feel 20 - 40min, whats the point and many cases thats probably true. But for others it 5, 10, 15% recharge for their car they may need. So why not multi task? As others have stated, there is also the option to get free power as part of supermarket coupon like they issue for petrol.

The current approach is you park your car then fill up seperately. Yes, this takes 5 - 10min, but its still 5 - 10min, not always convient. All adds up.

Now if you are retired, then maybe not worth your while as your car is being recharged at home, likely off your roof for free. My neighbour charges his car at night, hasn't been to a petrol station here in years. Car spends less time in getting serviced.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
The 7.5 kW uses a standard plug.
RTT_Rules
No, it doesn't. There are three main plug types presently in use in Australia - discussed further in this Car Sales article.

This comes back to the very prescient fact that you don't Google things before you write about them. If you want me to to read what you've written AND take it seriously you need to at least do basic research on things BEFORE you comment - it really isn't that hard.
  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
Its been labeled "oppurtunity" or "destination" charging for a reason. You park your car like normal and rather than just walk away you plug it in. While you are doing your thing your car is being slowly recharged. The longer you take, the more charge it gets. Yes, you may feel 20 - 40min, whats the point and many cases thats probably true. But for others it 5, 10, 15% recharge for their car they may need. So why not multi task? As others have stated, there is also the option to get free power as part of supermarket coupon like they issue for petrol.
RTT_Rules
So here's a great idea, you dock your car as you park and it charges without having to plug in...

Now if you are retired, then maybe not worth your while as your car is being recharged at home, likely off your roof for free.
RTT_Rules
Why do you have to be retired to charge your car at home? Are you suggesting that a worker isn't at home long enough to recharge the car there? If it takes longer than the average worker spends at home to recharge an EV I don't want one.
  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
There are three main plug types presently in use in Australia - discussed further in this Car Sales article.
don_dunstan
I'm not sure what to make of that article. It's dated March 21, 2021, but has comments made 2 years ago. It must be hard to comment on an article that will be written in the future! Anyhow, I'm not sure it can be trusted as a reliable source.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
The overall cost of Australia going to 'net zero' by 2050 is costed by journalist Kenneth Schultz at $1.15 trillion - he's basing that figure on a Commonwealth report from last year  ‘Australian Energy Update, Commonwealth of Australia 2020 – Guide to the Australian Energy Statistics 2020’. He outlines the steps that would be necessary in order to go 'net zero' - you might not agree with his conclusion that nuclear electricity will have to be part of the mix but as I've been pointing out repeatedly we probably won't be able to operate our grids any longer without them.

The steps to take are:

  1. Decommission an amount of fossil fuel-burning generators, vehicles and equipment that collectively consume 1,085,000 gigawatt hours of fossil fuel annually and replace with zero emission equipment.
  2. Install 119,000 wind turbines over an area of 60,000 square kilometres, an area as large as the area of 3 million MCG stadiums. Construction and installation of the turbines will consume 36 million tonnes of steel and 145 million tonnes of concrete.
  3. Install 6 million rooftop solar systems.
  4. Build 22,000 solar farms.
  5. For the 516,000 gigawatt-hours of fossil fuel-burning equipment that cannot be replaced, provide carbon offsets by planting 17 billion trees per annum for a total cost of $238 billion and a total land requirement of 201 million hectares, an area equivalent to 50 per cent of Australia’s total agricultural and grazing land.
  6. Build 6 nuclear power stations at a cost of $92 billion
  7. Emit 670 million tonnes of carbon dioxide during the manufacture and construction of the infrastructure
  8. Spend an estimated total of $1.13 trillion

I'm also curious as I think he has left out the significant HV transmission structures that will be required in order to hook up the 119,000 new wind turbines and the 22,000 new solar farms to the grid - that will be VERY expensive in its own right and will blight the landscape across the nation. That cost alone would be at least another few hundred billion - but it comes out of the income from 'network improvement charges' (already a huge part of your bill) so grid users must directly pay for that themselves.

You can read his report here.

One absurdity that I find interesting is the fact that there are some kinds of machinery that simply can't be converted to 'carbon neutral' because they require too much energy - and the only way to get them that energy is hydrocarbons. For example:

Not all fossil fuel devices can be decommissioned. A problem arises with converting large trucks and industrial machinery to electric.

For example, the Caterpillar 797F dump truck is powered by a 4,000 horsepower turbocharged diesel engine. At full power it will require 2.98 megawatts of energy. Assume the truck runs at 50 per cent of maximum power for an eight-hour shift. It would consume around 12 megawatt-hours of electricity. It would need 120 of Tesla’s latest automotive batteries to power it. The batteries would weigh 64 tonnes

This is just an example of the impossibility of converting large machinery to electric. Not to mention converting a Boeing 787.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
There are three main plug types presently in use in Australia - discussed further in this Car Sales article.
I'm not sure what to make of that article. It's dated March 21, 2021, but has comments made 2 years ago. It must be hard to comment on an article that will be written in the future! Anyhow, I'm not sure it can be trusted as a reliable source.
Graham4405
Suggests that it was originally written in 2019 but updated this year.

EV charging stations in Australia definitely have multiple plugs for different kinds of cars - I had a look at one in central Ballarat recently and I counted four different heads.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The 7.5 kW uses a standard plug.
No, it doesn't. There are three main plug types presently in use in Australia - discussed further in this Car Sales article.

This comes back to the very prescient fact that you don't Google things before you write about them. If you want me to to read what you've written AND take it seriously you need to at least do basic research on things BEFORE you comment - it really isn't that hard.
don_dunstan
Maybe actually read what you post Don and yes I standing my my previous comments.

Early model EV's often had their own manufacturers plug and Tesla's still do prior to standardisation, however all cars can with an adpator if required plug into a CCS charging station.  
In addition to those three main types, there is also the [color=#1b83c4]Combined Charging System (CCS) which allows for both AC and DC charging and is available with either Type 1 or Type 2 configurations.[/color]
CCS has become the default connection for public charging stations, and companies such as [color=#1b83c4]JET Charge are building a wide network of public charging outlets in Australia that cater for both J1772 and Mennekes adapters.[/color]


Tesla cars can charge via Type 2 public charging stations, vehicles from other brands cannot use a Tesla Supercharger
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Its been labeled "oppurtunity" or "destination" charging for a reason. You park your car like normal and rather than just walk away you plug it in. While you are doing your thing your car is being slowly recharged. The longer you take, the more charge it gets. Yes, you may feel 20 - 40min, whats the point and many cases thats probably true. But for others it 5, 10, 15% recharge for their car they may need. So why not multi task? As others have stated, there is also the option to get free power as part of supermarket coupon like they issue for petrol.
So here's a great idea, you dock your car as you park and it charges without having to plug in...

Graham4405
Good idea, currently in development by a few companies. Issues include the receiving coil needs to be basically on the road and the charge rate is slow compared to hard connection and also considering the relatively minimal effort it takes to connect a cable. However I'm sure something will happen.

Why do you have to be retired to charge your car at home?

Are you suggesting that a worker isn't at home long enough to recharge the car there? If it takes longer than the average worker spends at home to recharge an EV I don't want one.
'4405
You don't, But I thought you were.

Average car drives 375 km/week, obviously 50% drive more. The larger more recent EV models can easily go a week on a single charge, however the most practical approach for most would be simply to top up at night on off-peak. You can easily program car on how much charge your car gets and leave a big charge to Sat or Sun if you so choose. So for example you may wish to ensure at 7am each day you always have 200km of range, but on the weekend when charging off the roof it goes full.

A large EV has a 100kW battery, assume you need 90 %, 90 kW, charging off a home standard 7.5 kW charger = 12kW
You can get bigger but most houses will easily accomdate this without a wiring upgrade, some houses especially if wired 3 phase can go 22 kW without much effort. Charging off a standard 2.4kW GPO is however a bit slow and unlikely to be ideal. 3.5 kW  (15 amp plug) would be sort of minimum plugged when the car is not in use. My neighbour has a Tesla S 100kW D and was on 2.4kW, but decided to pay for the installation for a 7.5kW outlet even though he is renting which was fairly cheap as the main breaker box is next to where he parks his car.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The overall cost of Australia going to 'net zero' by 2050 is costed by journalist Kenneth Schultz at $1.15 trillion - he's basing that figure on a Commonwealth report from last year  ‘Australian Energy Update, Commonwealth of Australia 2020 – Guide to the Australian Energy Statistics 2020’. He outlines the steps that would be necessary in order to go 'net zero' - you might not agree with his conclusion that nuclear electricity will have to be part of the mix but as I've been pointing out repeatedly we probably won't be able to operate our grids any longer without them.

The steps to take are:

  1. Decommission an amount of fossil fuel-burning generators, vehicles and equipment that collectively consume 1,085,000 gigawatt hours of fossil fuel annually and replace with zero emission equipment.
  2. Install 119,000 wind turbines over an area of 60,000 square kilometres, an area as large as the area of 3 million MCG stadiums. Construction and installation of the turbines will consume 36 million tonnes of steel and 145 million tonnes of concrete.
  3. Install 6 million rooftop solar systems.
  4. Build 22,000 solar farms.
  5. For the 516,000 gigawatt-hours of fossil fuel-burning equipment that cannot be replaced, provide carbon offsets by planting 17 billion trees per annum for a total cost of $238 billion and a total land requirement of 201 million hectares, an area equivalent to 50 per cent of Australia’s total agricultural and grazing land.
  6. Build 6 nuclear power stations at a cost of $92 billion
  7. Emit 670 million tonnes of carbon dioxide during the manufacture and construction of the infrastructure
  8. Spend an estimated total of $1.13 trillion

I'm also curious as I think he has left out the significant HV transmission structures that will be required in order to hook up the 119,000 new wind turbines and the 22,000 new solar farms to the grid - that will be VERY expensive in its own right and will blight the landscape across the nation. That cost alone would be at least another few hundred billion - but it comes out of the income from 'network improvement charges' (already a huge part of your bill) so grid users must directly pay for that themselves.

You can read his report here.

One absurdity that I find interesting is the fact that there are some kinds of machinery that simply can't be converted to 'carbon neutral' because they require too much energy - and the only way to get them that energy is hydrocarbons. For example:

Not all fossil fuel devices can be decommissioned. A problem arises with converting large trucks and industrial machinery to electric.

For example, the Caterpillar 797F dump truck is powered by a 4,000 horsepower turbocharged diesel engine. At full power it will require 2.98 megawatts of energy. Assume the truck runs at 50 per cent of maximum power for an eight-hour shift. It would consume around 12 megawatt-hours of electricity. It would need 120 of Tesla’s latest automotive batteries to power it. The batteries would weigh 64 tonnes

This is just an example of the impossibility of converting large machinery to electric. Not to mention converting a Boeing 787.
don_dunstan

He's dreaming
1. All those aging coal and gas turbine power stations will at some point need replacement and decommissing regardless of what is happening.

2. HV upgrades were mostly required anyway as the new coal power stations would not always be built at an existing site as we have seen in the past for a number of reasons and as HV equipment gets life expired.

3. The steel, concrete and CO2 emissions required to build RE is similar to that required to build coal or gas.

4. The $1.13 trillion estimate is a complete pile of Bull$hit, most of the cost is being undertaken at end of life replacement of existing capacity and other upgrades. And even if RE wasn't on the agenda, things like Northern Power station would have been retired and not replaced as it was a high cost option for which there are more modern efficent options.

5. Currently 1 in 5 Australian houses has solar PV, some of them older smaller systems that need upgrading to 6.6kW systems in the future including my FIL. Combined the current PV roof top is providing 7.5% of demand and some of its curtailed, so potentially 8-10%. If every house to have a 6.6 kW system on average would therefore push the out put to closde to 50% of the total NEM grid demand, on average.

The commerical solar farms are around 4%, again partly curtialed during peak out put periods. It wouldn't be hard to push these to 5 - 10 x in capacity which is not even 1% of the 22,000 farms to be claimed to be required. So 1/3 to 1/2 of the NEM grid demand.

To improve reliability, increasing wind from current 10% (again curtailed during periods of high output) wouldn't be hard to get up to 10 x more wind, especially as older turbines reach end of life and are replaced with bigger. His claims on number and area needed are most likely also BULL$hit.

6. Trees need to be planted for reasons other than RE or off-set

7. No one ever said every consumption of fossil fuel needs to replaced. The clear target is on big impacts items for which practical affordable solutions are progressively coming on stream such as power generation and transport. Aviation and mining type machinery are longer term outlook problems.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
There are three main plug types presently in use in Australia - discussed further in this Car Sales article.
I'm not sure what to make of that article. It's dated March 21, 2021, but has comments made 2 years ago. It must be hard to comment on an article that will be written in the future! Anyhow, I'm not sure it can be trusted as a reliable source.
Suggests that it was originally written in 2019 but updated this year.

EV charging stations in Australia definitely have multiple plugs for different kinds of cars - I had a look at one in central Ballarat recently and I counted four different heads.
don_dunstan
Most legacy or manufacturer only plugs. CCS type 2 has been the standard for sometime for AC charging.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
He's dreaming
1. All those aging coal and gas turbine power stations will at some point need replacement and decommissing regardless of what is happening.
RTT_Rules
Really has nothing at all to do with what's being discussed, we're talking about the capital cost of replacing established centralised grid systems with a 'diffuse' grid desperately trying to get power from where-ever it can. So automatically we're talking about the construction of hundreds of billions worth of new HV lines pretty much everywhere.
2. HV upgrades were mostly required anyway as the new coal power stations would not always be built at an existing site as we have seen in the past for a number of reasons and as HV equipment gets life expired.
RTT_Rules
No sorry just not true, what you're saying is that they'd have to build (for example) the Latrobe Valley power stations somewhere that's physically distant from the mines... for some reason that you don't identify. That's just plain stupid, why would they do that?
3. The steel, concrete and CO2 emissions required to build RE is similar to that required to build coal or gas.
RTT_Rules
Evidence? Links?

Anything at all?
4. The $1.13 trillion estimate is a complete pile of Bull$hit, most of the cost is being undertaken at end of life replacement of existing capacity and other upgrades. And even if RE wasn't on the agenda, things like Northern Power station would have been retired and not replaced as it was a high cost option for which there are more modern efficent options.
RTT_Rules
Rubbish! At the very least can you tell me the cost of a new high efficiency low emission (HELE) power plant in Australia?

No of course you can't - because you haven't researched and you don't know.

This goes back to your core problem, which I've had to lecture on for the second time today - which is that you run off at the cuff without Googling things. Try looking at places like Germany and Japan that are still building brand new coal-fired power plants and tell us what a cutting edge technological process can do with old fashioned coal-burning power plants in 2021 and how much it really costs.
5. Currently 1 in 5 Australian houses has solar PV, some of them older smaller systems that need upgrading to 6.6kW systems in the future including my FIL. Combined the current PV roof top is providing 7.5% of demand and some of its curtailed, so potentially 8-10%. If every house to have a 6.6 kW system on average would therefore push the out put to closde to 50% of the total NEM grid demand, on average. The commerical solar farms are around 4%, again partly curtialed during peak out put periods. It wouldn't be hard to push these to 5 - 10 x in capacity which is not even 1% of the 22,000 farms to be claimed to be required. So 1/3 to 1/2 of the NEM grid demand.
RTT_Rules
Again, there's so much wrong with just that one paragraph that I hardly know where to start.

Existing solar rooftop installations are heavily subsidised by other grid users who are generally captive to the grid - those people are generally renters and are poor, but I'm guessing you're going to get around that by using public money to put a 6.6k/w system on the roof of every single household in Australia. What you're asking is for the huge grid-user and taxpayer gouge to be extended even further by not only upgrading existing private plant at public expense - including private landlords apparently - and then also subsidise their feed-in with poor people who are grid captive. Right?

You have a real cash figure for all that of course. And it's apparently substantially less than the $1.1 trillion cited in this article - because that's what you said at the start? What about the plant that's life-expired - much of it is 10+ years old and will need replacing soon - are you factoring that into the equation or just winging it? Nah you really have no idea do you...

And you're quoting MAXIMUM capacity of all those solar installations - which they almost never achieve - ever. The very essence of the problem with 'renewable' energy is that it very seldom runs to any sort of plated capacity because its entirely dependent on the vagaries of the weather and at any moment the supply could fall off a cliff. I'm guessing that's why the author had to throw the six nuclear power plants into the report because we can't possibly run a nation of 23+ million (in the NEM area) on renewables alone. It simply can't be done, not even for $1.13 trillion.
7. No one ever said every consumption of fossil fuel needs to replaced. The clear target is on big impacts items for which practical affordable solutions are progressively coming on stream such as power generation and transport. Aviation and mining type machinery are longer term outlook problems.
RTT_Rules
Of course they have to be replaced, that's the whole point of ZERO NET emissions - almost all the dirty old carbon spewing industries and vehicles will have to go. Unless you rely on the complete bullsh*t that is planting trees in lieu of having your guilty pleasure of a V8 Landcruiser or an international flight - that stuff is just a middle class guilt abrogation.

Zero is zero is zero, I don't believe in the capacity of planting trees to allow you to fly halfway across the planet - that's a cop out and completely unscientific.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
He's dreaming
1. All those aging coal and gas turbine power stations will at some point need replacement and decommissing regardless of what is happening.
Really has nothing at all to do with what's being discussed, we're talking about the capital cost of replacing established centralised grid systems with a 'diffuse' grid desperately trying to get power from where-ever it can. So automatically we're talking about the construction of hundreds of billions worth of new HV lines pretty much everywhere.
2. HV upgrades were mostly required anyway as the new coal power stations would not always be built at an existing site as we have seen in the past for a number of reasons and as HV equipment gets life expired.
No sorry just not true, what you're saying is that they'd have to build (for example) the Latrobe Valley power stations somewhere that's physically distant from the mines... for some reason that you don't identify. That's just plain stupid, why would they do that?
3. The steel, concrete and CO2 emissions required to build RE is similar to that required to build coal or gas.
Evidence? Links?

Anything at all?
4. The $1.13 trillion estimate is a complete pile of Bull$hit, most of the cost is being undertaken at end of life replacement of existing capacity and other upgrades. And even if RE wasn't on the agenda, things like Northern Power station would have been retired and not replaced as it was a high cost option for which there are more modern efficent options.
Rubbish! At the very least can you tell me the cost of a new high efficiency low emission (HELE) power plant in Australia?

No of course you can't - because you haven't researched and you don't know.

This goes back to your core problem, which I've had to lecture on for the second time today - which is that you run off at the cuff without Googling things. Try looking at places like Germany and Japan that are still building brand new coal-fired power plants and tell us what a cutting edge technological process can do with old fashioned coal-burning power plants in 2021 and how much it really costs.
5. Currently 1 in 5 Australian houses has solar PV, some of them older smaller systems that need upgrading to 6.6kW systems in the future including my FIL. Combined the current PV roof top is providing 7.5% of demand and some of its curtailed, so potentially 8-10%. If every house to have a 6.6 kW system on average would therefore push the out put to closde to 50% of the total NEM grid demand, on average. The commerical solar farms are around 4%, again partly curtialed during peak out put periods. It wouldn't be hard to push these to 5 - 10 x in capacity which is not even 1% of the 22,000 farms to be claimed to be required. So 1/3 to 1/2 of the NEM grid demand.
Again, there's so much wrong with just that one paragraph that I hardly know where to start.

Existing solar rooftop installations are heavily subsidised by other grid users who are generally captive to the grid - those people are generally renters and are poor, but I'm guessing you're going to get around that by using public money to put a 6.6k/w system on the roof of every single household in Australia. What you're asking is for the huge grid-user and taxpayer gouge to be extended even further by not only upgrading existing private plant at public expense - including private landlords apparently - and then also subsidise their feed-in with poor people who are grid captive. Right?

You have a real cash figure for all that of course. And it's apparently substantially less than the $1.1 trillion cited in this article - because that's what you said at the start? What about the plant that's life-expired - much of it is 10+ years old and will need replacing soon - are you factoring that into the equation or just winging it? Nah you really have no idea do you...

And you're quoting MAXIMUM capacity of all those solar installations - which they almost never achieve - ever. The very essence of the problem with 'renewable' energy is that it very seldom runs to any sort of plated capacity because its entirely dependent on the vagaries of the weather and at any moment the supply could fall off a cliff. I'm guessing that's why the author had to throw the six nuclear power plants into the report because we can't possibly run a nation of 23+ million (in the NEM area) on renewables alone. It simply can't be done, not even for $1.13 trillion.
7. No one ever said every consumption of fossil fuel needs to replaced. The clear target is on big impacts items for which practical affordable solutions are progressively coming on stream such as power generation and transport. Aviation and mining type machinery are longer term outlook problems.
Of course they have to be replaced, that's the whole point of ZERO NET emissions - almost all the dirty old carbon spewing industries and vehicles will have to go. Unless you rely on the complete bullsh*t that is planting trees in lieu of having your guilty pleasure of a V8 Landcruiser or an international flight - that stuff is just a middle class guilt abrogation.

Zero is zero is zero, I don't believe in the capacity of planting trees to allow you to fly halfway across the planet - that's a cop out and completely unscientific.
don_dunstan
1) Yes you posted same in #1 "replace and decommission"

2)  The grid was never truely centralised, some states more than others. Qld has 8000 MW of generating capacity spread over 1700 km. Most of the RE being built in Qld to date are being built in the same location.

Most of the RE solar farms in Vic and NSW were built never existing HV lines and sized to the capacity of the HV line.

The largest investments to date and have nothing to do with RE was the progressive uprading of the inter state connections and there were nuemous reasons to do this long before RE. And of the money spent to date, IS DOES NOT EQUAL ANYWHERE NEAR $100B. Again Don's gross over the top numbers being thrown around without reference or meaning.

3) Most of the current generation of coal fired power stations were not built near or ontop of previous ones. Their replacements are by no means guarenteed to be all in the same place. Latrobe valley maybe an exception but they won't be built along side retired ones and HV lines will need upgrading as new power stations replace multi older ones.

4) Blind Freddy can tell you a new coal power station rated at aroudn 2GW is around $3-4B based on over seas projects.

But DOn, your stupid parroting is your downfall. $1.13 T, are you serioius? I mean have you even turned your brain on when posting this number?

5) Cost of power generation construction per MW is related to the materials you use. The more you use, the more it costs. Surprise coal is one of the more expensive. Statistica, wiki and numerous other resources will tell you this is because of the high amount of concrete and steel being used.

So time for some thing Don, how long did it take to return to greenfield Northen Power station and/or Hazelwood? Now how long would it take to demolish 2000 MW of 5 MW wind turbines? Might give an idea on amount of stuff used and hence cost.

6)   JApan and Germany built the coal power stations because of a commitment to phase out nuclear in lieu of a practical alternative.

7) There are about the equivalent of 1,000,000 x 6,6 kW PV systems. If installed new without subsidy tomorrow this would be less than $6-8 B. The older mostly smaller systems were heavly subsidised, the newer ones far less so and declining over the coming few years. The feed in tariff is being normalised with the grid prices.

Never said I agreed with the subsidies from day 1. The transition to RE must be based on commerical rates or return.

I was quoting actual grid feed data which doesn't include power generated not reported to the grid on older systems.

8) Replacement of D9's diesel engine is hardly a major focus at this time is it Don? Again focus on the practical and obvious solutions and power and large volume transport.
  wobert Chief Commissioner

Location: Half way between Propodolla and Kinimakatka
Ummm just a point, whatever it costs to get to NET zero, the vast majority of the money will be provided by  business. and not the taxpayer.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
Ummm just a point, whatever it costs to get to NET zero, the vast majority of the money will be provided by  business. and not the taxpayer.
wobert
Almost all the money to date has been provided by either taxpayers or grid users - usually the very poorest grid users who can't afford the middle class boondoggle of a home solar plant.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: bevans, RTT_Rules

Display from: