Resisting Climate Hysteria

[Knobby22]

He has a good way with words.

Meanwhile in Brazil, the government is clearing a swathe of the Amazon rainforest for a road to get 50,000 delegates to the next UN climate change conference – COP30 – to held, weirdly, in the remote city of Belem in November.

Bulldozing the Amazon rainforest is a fitting way to mark 30 years of failure, of annual gabfests that have released colossal amounts of carbon dioxide from the mouths of the well-meaning, and burned tonnes of aviation fuel to get them there, while reducing greenhouse gas emissions not one bit.

In those three decades, human use of fossil fuels has increased 54 per cent.

The withdrawal of America, and the influence that will have on other countries and companies, means the COP30 delegates might as well stay home this year.

The global effort to prevent climate change which began with COP1 in Berlin in 1995 and peaked two years later with a burst of optimism in Kyoto, is pretty much over; it’s dead.

 

[Smurf1976]

I think if I had a few billion bucks and I was putting a big whack of it into massive renewable energy projects then the planetary pay off seems reasonable.

Same rationale for Twiggy swanning around the world and looking to develop multiple green energy projects.

Pitting up with this sort of selective reporting is just part of the price.

The problem is the moment someone chooses to fly in a private jet, they lose all credibility in calling for anyone else to curb their own consumption.

So if the individual is, as is the case with Twiggy, trying to actually develop things and make them work then there's no real conflict there. He's not calling for an end to anything, he's just saying let's see if we can find a better way and he's putting his money where his mouth is.

In contrast Cannon-Brookes has called for things to be ended, quite rapidly so, whilst doing not much to replace them. He's called for an end to specific coal-fired power stations but I sure don't recall him backing any deep storage projects as part of what's required to replace them. That's the opposite of Twiggy's approach that starts with solutions.

So one's doing the equivalent of inventing computers and reasoning that once you've got one of those, you won't actually want a whole range of things anymore so they can be done away with. The other's threatening to take away your typewriter, cassette tapes, CD's, books and the postal service without a replacement.

Unsurprisingly the former's faced no real criticism at all, whilst the latter's faced plenty.

 

[basilio]

In contrast Cannon-Brookes has called for things to be ended, quite rapidly so, whilst doing not much to replace them. He's called for an end to specific coal-fired power stations but I sure don't recall him backing any deep storage projects as part of what's required to replace them. That's the opposite of Twiggy's approach that starts with solutions.

I don't think that is on the money Smurf.

Cannon-Brookes is developing a massive solar farm project in the Northern territory. He is also backing multiple battery banks across Australia to replace coal fired power stations.
And on a smaller level he is supporting a multitude of businesses that are focused on energy transforamtion.

‘Renewable energy superpower’: Major new solar project unveiled​

A major new solar project backed by one of Australia’s tech billionaires will set Australia on a path to becoming a “renewable energy superpower”.
Joseph Olbrycht-Palmer

2 min read
August 21, 2024 - 3:23PM
NewsWire

24 Comments

|


Related content


Anthony Albanese has lauded the approval of Australia’s largest solar project, backed by tech billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes.
SunCable’s Australia-Asia Power Link, a 12,000-hectare solar farm slated for development near the Northern Territory town of Tennant Creek, is estimated to generate 4GW – enough energy to power some three million homes.

Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek on Wednesday announced the approval, hailing it as “a massive step towards making Australia a renewable energy superpower”.

“This massive project is a generation-defining piece of infrastructure,” she said.
“It will be the largest solar precinct in the world and heralds Australia as the world leader in green energy.”

https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/sustainability/renewable-energy-superpower-major-new-solar-project-unveiled/news-story/e2b9072ad04e4f8044607c3eee7548ee

........................................................................................................

Cannon-Brookes backed fund to deliver “coal plant-worth” of big batteries​

A private investment fund whose aim is to underwrite a “coal plant’s-worth” of dispatchable battery storage on the Australian grid has announced its first financial close, backed by deep-pocketed investors including the Cannon-Brookes family’s Grok Ventures and the Jana Diversified Infrastructure Trust.

Specialist infrastructure project financier Infradebt said on Monday that it had reached its undisclosed target for the first capital raise for its Energy Transition Fund (ETF), which will provide senior debt finance to six to eight big battery projects with a total capacity of 1.5-2GW over the coming few years.

The first two investments, as have been reported, are loans to the Neoen Capital Battery in the ACT and Genex Power’s Bouldercombe BESS in Queensland.

Cannon-Brookes backed fund to deliver “coal plant-worth” of big batteries

Fund backed by billionaire green energy supporter closes first tranche of new raising to bankroll long duration battery storage and help kick coal out of Australia’s grid.

reneweconomy.com.au

...................................................................................................................................................

Australia's biggest coal generator teams up with ... - RenewEconomy​

Mar 28, 2024AGL signs MoU with Cannon-Brookes ... which pledges $1 billion in funding to support ... that brings together industries that can make a positive contribution to the energy transition," said AGL ...

 

[IFocus]

4 degrees Gezzus then there will be overshoot oh well game over pointless discussion from here on.

 

[JohnDe]

I don't think that is on the money Smurf.

Cannon-Brookes is developing a massive solar farm project in the Northern territory. He is also backing multiple battery banks across Australia to replace coal fired power stations.

That's a worry. The power generated has been alocated to Singapore. And look at its foot-print.

The SunCable project, backed by Mike Cannon-Brookes, envisions a massive solar farm in the Northern Territory, aiming to export renewable energy to Singapore via a 4,200-kilometer undersea cable, potentially becoming the world's largest solar farm.

Here's a more detailed look at the project:

• Scale and Location:
  The proposed solar farm, officially known as the SunCable Australia-Asia PowerLink (AAPowerLink), would be built on a pastoral station between Elliot and Tennant Creek in the Northern Territory, covering 12,000 hectares.
  
  
• Power Generation and Storage:
  The solar farm is planned to have a capacity of 17-20 gigawatts (GW), with 42GWh of battery storage, capable of generating enough power for 3 million homes.
  
  
• Transmission and Export:
  The generated power would be transmitted via an 800km transmission line to Darwin and then exported to Singapore via a 4,200km underwater cable.
  
  
• Economic Impact:
  The project is expected to deliver more than $20 billion in economic value to the Northern Territory and support an average of 6,800 direct and indirect jobs during construction.
  
  
• Environmental Approval:
  The project received environmental approval from the federal environment minister Tanya Plibersek in August 2024.
  
  
• Vision and Goals:
  The project aims to establish Australia as a leader in renewable energy exports and address Singapore's growing demand for clean energy.
  
  
• Controversy:
  While the project has garnered support, it has also faced scrutiny, with some questioning its long-term profitability and potential environmental impacts.
  
  
• Other Players:
  Andrew "Twiggy" Forrest, another prominent investor, initially backed the project but later expressed doubts about its commercial viability.

 

[mullokintyre]

In the meantime, while there is much hand wringing over Australian not doing enough for Climate Chnge Action, China is just surging ahead with its CO2 emitting.
It is nothing but a religion, and like all religions, its adherents insist that only they have the knowledge to intercede with the climate Gods.
Too blind to even recognise their own hypocrisy.
Mick

 

[macca]

The problem is the moment someone chooses to fly in a private jet, they lose all credibility in calling for anyone else to curb their own consumption.

So if the individual is, as is the case with Twiggy, trying to actually develop things and make them work then there's no real conflict there. He's not calling for an end to anything, he's just saying let's see if we can find a better way and he's putting his money where his mouth is.

In contrast Cannon-Brookes has called for things to be ended, quite rapidly so, whilst doing not much to replace them. He's called for an end to specific coal-fired power stations but I sure don't recall him backing any deep storage projects as part of what's required to replace them. That's the opposite of Twiggy's approach that starts with solutions.

So one's doing the equivalent of inventing computers and reasoning that once you've got one of those, you won't actually want a whole range of things anymore so they can be done away with. The other's threatening to take away your typewriter, cassette tapes, CD's, books and the postal service without a replacement.

Unsurprisingly the former's faced no real criticism at all, whilst the latter's faced plenty.

Photo in the paper over the weekend of CB boarding his private plane to fly to the F1 so he could watch the team he sponsors add more pollution to the air

<<The Atlassian co-founder and CEO has picked up a Bombardier 7500 and will use it to travel across his vast business operations, which includes a minority stake in US basketball team Utah Jazz and a sponsorship deal with Formula 1.

In a statement posted to Linkedin, Mr Cannon-Brookes confirmed the purchase of the jet and acknowledged it would be a “carbon-intensive” way to travel.

“I’m not denying I have a deep internal conflict on this,” he said.>>

MSN

 

[Smurf1976]

Cannon-Brookes is developing a massive solar farm project in the Northern territory. He is also backing multiple battery banks across Australia to replace coal fired power stations.

To be fair to Mike Cannon-Brookes I should substantiate my position with facts and will do so.

I am referring specifically to his 2022 somewhat forceful (to put it mildly) demand that AGL shut down the company's coal-fired generation by 2030. Noting that he is of course fully entitled to do so, I'm not suggesting any wrongdoing in a legal sense, although I and many others interpreted it at the time as a clear threat rather than being helpful, since it was a demand to shut the power stations rather than a proposal to simply make them redundant.

To put some figures around that using recent data, for the week of 17 - 23 June 2024, generation was as follows.

Victoria:

Loy Yang A (AGL, coal) = 369.5 GWh

Other coal plant owned by others, older than Loy Yang A and already planned to close prior to 2030 = 182 GWh

Other coal plant newer than Loy Yang A, not owned by AGL and expected to close later than Loy Yang A's present 2035 closure plan = 196 GWh

All gas-fired generation collectively, noting Victoria's fast running out of gas = 129 GWh

Hydro = 77 GWh

Solar = 81 GWh which was 45% below the annual average

Wind = 66 GWh which was 68% below the annual average

Interstate = Victoria exported a net 10 GWh to other states, mostly NSW and SA.

So looking at that in total, Loy Yang A supplied 34% of Victoria's electricity during this week whilst other plant which either has a short remaining lifespan or which is running out of fuel (gas) supplied 28.6%. Wind and solar collectively supplied 13.5% with poor performance due to weather.

Now looing at NSW:

Bayswater (AGL, coal) = 390.7 GWh

Older coal, owned by others already planned to close prior to 2030 = 527 GWh

Other coal, not owned by AGL and planned to close later than Bayswater's present 2033 closure plan = 128 GWh

Gas = 115 GWh

Hydro = 88 GWh

Solar = 198 GWh (37% below average)

Wind = 59 GWh (54% below average)

Diesel = 1.5 GWh

Biomass = 4.8 GWh

Net import from other states, mostly Queensland = 170 GWh

So AGL's Bayswater plant supplied 23.7% of NSW electricity during this week. Older coal plant already closing prior to 2030 plus gas (the supply of which is problematic) supplied 39%. Wind and solar supplied 15.6% with poor performance due to weather.

Now if he was proposing a clear solution to all that so as to make Bayswater and Loy Yang A redundant then I'd take no issue with it whatsoever. You won't find me objecting to phasing out plant that's at the end of its design life anyway, indeed I'd much rather it wasn't being relied upon for that very reason.

In practice however we're hard enough pressed to keep the lights on as it is. We don't need anyone calling for coal to close - what we need is actual replacement for it before it closes. Suffice to say at present we're really struggling to meet the existing schedule let alone an accelerated one.

Demanding that coal closes is a bit like telling a poor person they need to get out more. Yep, great idea, but it's missing the point as to why they're not doing that in the first place.

To the issue of the plane though, well if he hadn't been so aggressive in demanding coal be shut on an unrealistic timeframe then I wouldn't take issue with the plane. But if the argument is that shareholders, government or the general public needs to wear the cost, and potential major disruption, of closing a facility because of climate well then I don't think it's unreasonable to expect anyone calling for that to practice what they preach. It's different if they're just calmly suggesting we ought build x, y and z to replace it or taking Twiggy's approach of just turning over every stone and seeing if there's anything worthwhile under it.

If you make high profile demands that others must do things then it's to be expected you'll be criticised if you act contrary to that yourself.

 

[basilio]

Smurf I think your presentation of Cannon-Brookes on AGL is not as complete as it could be.

CB did buy a 11.28% share in AGL and called the company out for attempting to sell off its Coal plants. Instead he wanted the company to go full bore of decarbonisation to tackle global warming as per the Paris agreement and the overwhelming need to tackle the climate problem decisively. He believed the company needed to control and exit the coal fired stations while making a swift transition.

Since that decision and with the support of CCB AGL has changed strategy and is moving very rapidly into battery projects and practically supporting the Australian governments electrification program.

This process has been exceptionally profitable for the company.

I also included a reference to the many other energy transition projects that AGL is now supporting through CB at the Liddell Plant site.

None of this would have happened without CB's financial input and determination to see real change in moving from coal to firmed renewables.

AGL targets another five big battery projects amid falling costs and grid price volatility

AGL details plans to lock in another 1.4 gigawatts (GW) of grid scale battery storage projects over the coming year, in the race to transform its electricity mix from roughly 80 per cent coal to fi…

reneweconomy.com.au

Australia’s biggest coal generator teams up with SunDrive to make solar at Liddell​

Sophie Vorrath
Mar 28, 2024


Renewables, Solar

Australia’s biggest coal generator AGL Energy has teamed up with local solar innovator SunDrive to explore the joint development of a “first of its kind” solar manufacturing facility at the site of AGL’s former coal power precinct in the New South Wales Hunter Region.

The memorandum of understanding between the two companies was announced on Thursday, alongside the unveiling of the federal government’s Solar Sunshot program, which pledges $1 billion in funding to support the establishment of a solar supply chain in Australia, including through production subsidies and grants.

For AGL, it is the latest in a series of deals the gentailer has signed as part of plans to transform the sites of its shuttered Liddell coal power station and Bayswater Power Station into a low carbon integrated energy hub.

Australia’s biggest coal generator teams up with SunDrive to make solar at Liddell

AGL signs MoU with Cannon-Brookes backed PV innovator SunDrive to explore “first of its kind” solar manufacturing at site of the shuttered Liddell plant.

reneweconomy.com.au

 

[Smurf1976]

Smurf I think your presentation of Cannon-Brookes on AGL is not as complete as it could be.

CB did buy a 11.28% share in AGL and called the company out for attempting to sell off its Coal plants. Instead he wanted the company to go full bore of decarbonisation to tackle global warming as per the Paris agreement and the overwhelming need to tackle the climate problem decisively. He believed the company needed to control and exit the coal fired stations while making a swift transition.

Since that decision and with the support of CCB AGL has changed strategy and is moving very rapidly into battery projects and practically supporting the Australian governments electrification program.

Ultimately what AGL is doing is running Loy Yang until the end of its economic life and running Bayswater to one inspection cycle short of its economic life.

The latter being widely assumed to be on the basis that they can then offer to run it 4 more years if government asks them to, an uncertain but plausible scenario.

Building anything new is somewhat separate to that, there's only one electricity system and no fundamental reason why a company that owns existing generation needs to own its replacement. There are obvious commercial reasons to want to do so, but no fundamental requirement technically or legally. What matters is that someone builds and operates it.

That being so, CB hasn't changed AGL's plans for Bayswater and Loy Yang that he was so forcefully on about.

Had he suggested building the replacement in the first place rather than demanding the closures be brought forward he wouldn't have got so many offside indeed the opposite would be true.

As background I should point out that if there's one thing everyone in or otherwise connected with the industry is well and truly fed up with it's someone calling to close coal. That's not anything about climate science but simply that it's a done deal and has been for a long time and that being so, anyone "calling" for it is at best ignorant, more likely playing games.

It's been clear simply be because new construction dried up long ago. No new large scale coal-fired generation construction having commenced from scratch since:

SA = late 1970's (completed 1985, since closed and demolished)

Victoria = 1988

NSW = 1994 although that was a tiny one, the last big one was about 1979 for the decision to build.

Qld = 2004

WA = 2005

For other states NT effectively abandoned plans to use coal in 1981 and Tasmania did so in 1997.

The last coal-fired generation construction anywhere in Australia wrapped up in 2009, and for the south-eastern states nothing apart from the small Redbank plant in NSW (completed 2001) has been under construction since 1996.

Hence people in the industry don't talk about a need to close coal but rather about the need to replace it. Because unless there's a major change in approach, coal's closing that's a given.

In SA the coal industry has already gone kaput in terms of mining and use for electricity generation. Apart from a rail line everything related to it is not only shut but also demolished - the power stations are gone, the mining town's mostly gone, etc.

In WA it continues only due to technical necessity, being financially propped up by government as a less bad alternative to sitting in the dark.

Victoria and NSW are both expected to have only a single facility each, capacity 1170 and 1430 MW respectively, after 2035 and 33 respectively based on current plans, although even that's generally regarded as somewhat uncertain given the questionable financial viability. Plus I should add 30MW of that in NSW is actually from a waste-fired boiler at the same site not actual coal (though for technical reasons that waste-fired boiler can't run without the associated coal boiler also running).

That leaves Queensland as the only state where coal isn't clearly on the way out in the relatively near term. Noting that AGL has no involvement with coal-fired generation in Queensland.

So what has or could've been achieved by all that excited demanding that AGL shut Loy Yang 5 years earlier and Baywater 3 years earlier? It was never going to happen without a replacement, so it would've made far more sense to demand building a replacement in the first place.

Overall as I see it, and I'm not blaming any particular individual for this but rather a long list of people collectively, the whole issue at this point is cooked. The public's heard so many claims that haven't matched reality that confidence has been lost.

Personally well I'm no climate scientist though logic does tell me that altering the composition of the earth's atmosphere is a dangerous experiment that isn't wise. Practical reality however is the issue's been monumentally botched by the political class to the point it's nigh on irredeemable in my view.

From the February 2025 Ipsos Issues monitor survey "cost of living" was raised as an issue by 65% of those surveyed whilst "environment" scored 12%, placing it in 7th place behind cost of living, housing, healthcare, the economy, crime and poverty.

So if the public's to be convinced as to the merits of any particular solution, one thing it needs to address in price.

 

[moXJO]

He has a good way with words.

Meanwhile in Brazil, the government is clearing a swathe of the Amazon rainforest for a road to get 50,000 delegates to the next UN climate change conference – COP30 – to held, weirdly, in the remote city of Belem in November.

Bulldozing the Amazon rainforest is a fitting way to mark 30 years of failure, of annual gabfests that have released colossal amounts of carbon dioxide from the mouths of the well-meaning, and burned tonnes of aviation fuel to get them there, while reducing greenhouse gas emissions not one bit.

In those three decades, human use of fossil fuels has increased 54 per cent.

The withdrawal of America, and the influence that will have on other countries and companies, means the COP30 delegates might as well stay home this year.

The global effort to prevent climate change which began with COP1 in Berlin in 1995 and peaked two years later with a burst of optimism in Kyoto, is pretty much over; it’s dead.

Well written. Sums it up to a T

 

[Smurf1976]

Meanwhile in Brazil, the government is clearing a swathe of the Amazon rainforest for a road to get 50,000 delegates to the next UN climate change conference – COP30 – to held, weirdly, in the remote city of Belem in November.

This alone sums up what's wrong.

50,000 people physically travelling to the one place and causing a disproportionate amount of environmental destruction by doing so.

Now I'd love to know the credentials of these 50k people. Scientists and engineers? Presidents and Prime Ministers at least? I have some doubts.....

The problem with all this, as with private jets as per previous posts, is that by any reasonable measure they're extremely low priority uses of fossil fuels. That being so, if even the activists can justify such low priority uses then there's no chance anyone's going to be convinced to cut back on more normal things like a house in the suburbs, cars, heating and so on. In other words it completely rules out behaviour change as a solution whilst calling into question just how serious those responsible consider the issue to be.

 

[macca]

From the NOAA sunspot predictions after 2030 looks like we better build a nuclear power station or we are all going to freeze.

This month we had 132 sunspots flare, 10 years from now they are predicting just 1, obviously a massive drop off in the activity of the sun, just like the last time when the Thames froze over

Predicted Sunspot Number And Radio Flux | NOAA / NWS Space Weather Prediction Center

www.swpc.noaa.gov

 

[mullokintyre]

From the NOAA sunspot predictions after 2030 looks like we better build a nuclear power station or we are all going to freeze.

This month we had 132 sunspots flare, 10 years from now they are predicting just 1, obviously a massive drop off in the activity of the sun, just like the last time when the Thames froze over

Predicted Sunspot Number And Radio Flux | NOAA / NWS Space Weather Prediction Center

www.swpc.noaa.gov

Problem is, their sunspot predictions are like so many of their other predictions, at best unreliable, at worst fake.
Mick

 

[sptrawler]

On the subject of Sun Cable, I can't wait to see it get started, before it gets "white anted" by Indonesia.

$35blllion sounds like a lot of money, let's see if it gets off the ground.

They may well have a new purpose for our feral camels, keeping the vegetation down, between the solar panels, it's not really sheep country.

Sept 2024

Sun Cable undaunted as Indonesia cuts in on Singapore exports

Singapore has granted conditional approvals for several Indonesian clean electricity export ventures, but also increased its target for imports.

www.afr.com

The $35 billion Sun Cable venture planning to export solar power from Australia to Singapore said it is working “constructively” with Singapore’s Energy Market Authority, as Singapore eyes imports from much-closer Indonesia.

The EMA late last week granted five conditional licences to prospective clean energy export ventures in Indonesia, involving two gigawatts of electricity. The ventures aim to start commercial operations in 2028

It also granted conditional approvals for two ventures – involving giant energy players Shell and TotalEnergies – to send 1.4GW of low-carbon electricity from Indonesia to Singapore. The granting of conditional approvals comes at an earlier stage in the regulatory process than the award of conditional licences

The development signals that more rapid progress is being made by Singapore to firm up low-carbon electricity exports from its much nearer neighbour than from the Sun Cable venture owned by tech billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes.

Sun Cable is targeting a final investment decision in 2027 for its Australia-Asia Power Link project, which would supply up to 4GW of firm renewable energy supply for Darwin and 2GW for Singapore, through a proposed 4200-kilometre subsea power cable. Sun Cable secured environmental approval for the Australian part of the mega-venture last month. It is only targeting exports to Singapore in the 2030s.

Maximizing reciprocal benefits from Indonesia's green electricity export to Singapore

Renewable electricity imports from Indonesia are expected to help Singapore achieve its emission targets. However, Indonesia would like to understand the reciprocal benefits that would be offered before issuing a green electricity export permit.

ieefa.org

Significant potential benefits for Indonesia

Indonesia could generate significant revenue by exporting electricity to Singapore. In the second quarter of 2024, the regulated electricity tariff in Singapore was SGD29.8 cents per kilowatt hour (¢/kWh) (approximately USD22.2¢/kWh) — higher than the Indonesian electricity tariff of USD9.9¢/kWh in the third quarter of 2024. While a state-of-the-art high-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission link between Indonesia and Singapore would entail considerable costs, the potential profit margins for companies selling electricity to Singapore could be substantial, generating significant revenue for Indonesia.

If Indonesia were to export 3.4GW of electricity, assuming an agreed tariff ranging from USD14¢/kWh to USD20¢/kWh, the annual foreign exchange addition could amount to approximately USD4.2 billion (bn) to USD6bn (IDR67 trillion [tn] to IDR95tn) per year. Over 25 years, this would total around USD105bn to USD150bn (IDR1,675tn to IDR2,375tn). Furthermore, the country could earn around USD210 million (mn) to USD600mn annually through a direct tax revenue benefit with no state investment. GOI could also potentially implement a royalty cost per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity transferred to Singapore, further enhancing its revenue.

 

[macca]

Problem is, their sunspot predictions are like so many of their other predictions, at best unreliable, at worst fake.
Mick

Seems to me that most of these predictions are brain farts but if we are going to fund those who predict warming then we should also fund those who disagree.

That is what used to happen, now it is all one way and anyone who digs deep and questions "the narrative" usually gets sacked or unfunded PDQ

Plenty of examples in CC and Covid of how that works and as we know, time rolls on and it becomes obvious that some folk are BS artists

But after saying that, there have been long range weather forecasters using sunspots as a base and they are surprisingly accurate

 

[Smurf1976]

assuming an agreed tariff ranging from USD14¢/kWh to USD20¢/kWh

The energy cost component of Singapore's present retail tariffs is USD 17.3c/kWh based on an exchange rate of 1 SGD = 0.75 USD

EMA | SES Chapter 5: Energy Prices

The Energy Prices Chapter contains statistics on Uniform Singapore Energy Price, electricity and town gas tariffs.

www.ema.gov.sg

Intermittent supply has an inherent value somewhat lower than the average due to its nature that it's saving fuel but it's not saving the capital cost of providing firm dispatchable generation.

14c/kWh is plausible assuming that includes payment for the cable, the revenue for the actual generation would be somewhat less.

 

[sptrawler]

The energy cost component of Singapore's present retail tariffs is USD 17.3c/kWh based on an exchange rate of 1 SGD = 0.75 USD

EMA | SES Chapter 5: Energy Prices

The Energy Prices Chapter contains statistics on Uniform Singapore Energy Price, electricity and town gas tariffs.

www.ema.gov.sg

Intermittent supply has an inherent value somewhat lower than the average due to its nature that it's saving fuel but it's not saving the capital cost of providing firm dispatchable generation.

14c/kWh is plausible assuming that includes payment for the cable, the revenue for the actual generation would be somewhat less.

It really doesn't sound like a huge return on equity, from a cost base analysis, when you consider the distance, risk/cost and only 2GW of export.

It will be interesting to see if it goes ahead, IMO he would be better pushing it SE into the Eastern States grid, less sovereign/ infrastructure risk and probably an Aust Government guaranteed income.

 

[mullokintyre]

In another example of the "all talk no action' policies of the climate alarmists, it seems that barely 8% of the nations who signed up to the Paris Accord submitted their new plans by the deadline.
The top 6 emitters of CO2, who betwen them make up 65% of all global emissions, did not mange to make the cut.
Japan, who emits in 7th place was the highest ranking country to make the deadline.
Australia did not.
The lucky list can be found here
From The Conversation

The hosts of COP30, Brazil, had to make a submission, lest it be accused of hypocrisy.
The same nation that is bulldozing swathes of rainforest to buld a road so the attendees have an easy path to travel from their private jets to
the hosting resort.

of course the even if they do put out targets to reduce carbon emissions, there is no penalty if they don't make it.
According to World Economic forum , just six countries have managed net zero.
But all but two e of them achieved that result by getting carbon credits for their large rainforrests.
Mick

 

[Sean K]

of course the even if they do put out targets to reduce carbon emissions, there is no penalty if they don't make it.
According to World Economic forum , just six countries have managed net zero.
But all but two e of them achieved that result by getting carbon credits for their large rainforrests.
Mick

Have we tried to get or use carbon credits for our forests and bushland? For a population of 30m we must have a lot of vegetation per person and per tn CO2 emitted. I read somewhere a while ago that Tassie was already net zero. Also another report by a scientist in agriculture that come up with some study that concluded Australia was net zero as well due to being a carbon sink. That hasn't seemed to have developed any legs because I can't find anything more being done on it. Maybe a study on such a thing wouldn't get funded.