The future of energy generation and storage

[sptrawler]

I think the the big issue is, to not waste what we have and use it wisely.

 

[SirRumpole]

My view = crunch the numbers.

Take a hard headed look at the whole thing based on facts and credible scenarios, not ideology, and act accordingly.

Facts = costs, engineering and things like a proposed site genuinely being the only known habitat for whatever species.

Haven't the numbers already been crunched in the Australian context?

I'm thinking of the original Finkel report, then various reports brought out by AEMO.

Arre these reports legit or are they clouded by politics?

 

[Jeda]

 

[SirRumpole]

If they do this to vulnerable people, they obviously can't be trusted to run an essential service.

AGL apologises for overcharging 'vulnerable' welfare recipients but says it may appeal $25m fine​

One of Australia's biggest power companies fined $25m for overcharging welfare recipients

AGL apologises but says it may appeal a $25 million fine for a Centrepay scandal that saw it overcharge "vulnerable" people on welfare without their knowledge.

www.abc.net.au

 

[farmerge]

If they do this to vulnerable people, they obviously can't be trusted to run an essential service.

AGL apologises for overcharging 'vulnerable' welfare recipients but says it may appeal $25m fine​

One of Australia's biggest power companies fined $25m for overcharging welfare recipients

AGL apologises but says it may appeal a $25 million fine for a Centrepay scandal that saw it overcharge "vulnerable" people on welfare without their knowledge.

www.abc.net.au

AGL got caught out on this one, but how many times before, I wonder.
If they lose the appeal, then AGL should be fined double, make them pull their collective heads in and start looking after their customers.

 

[SirRumpole]

Some of the problems of wind turbines and some solutions.

 

[sptrawler]

Some of the problems of wind turbines and some solutions.

The problem is, apparently they don't have a problem, just ask those who are putting them in and those who have been singing their praise.

They are problem free, clean energy devices, that give years of trouble free generation.

 

[basilio]

Maybe this is why Duttons Nuclear Story makes no sense whatsoever.
Mind you his refusal to recognize that a renewable energy based economy is quite achievable in the next 15-20 years sticks out like a sore thumb.

Coalition ‘not serious’ about nuclear policy and Dutton’s plan is ‘political fix’, Matt Canavan says​

Nationals senator questions his own party’s policy, saying ‘all sides of politics are deciding their energy based on focus group’

• Follow our Australia news live blog for latest updates
• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

Josh Butler
Fri 20 Dec 2024 15.08 AEDT

Nationals senator Matt Canavan has doubled down on concerns about the Coalition’s nuclear power plan, saying attempting to run a modern economy through nuclear or renewable power was “equally unachievable” after a video showed him claiming his colleagues are “not serious” about the idea.
In a podcast interview from August uncovered by the ABC, Canavan said the Coalition was backing nuclear power “because it fixes a political issue for us”.

In further comments to Guardian Australia, the Queensland senator claimed political leaders in Australia on all sides of the debate were making energy policy decisions “based on focus groups” and said nuclear wouldn’t help fix looming warnings of blackouts due to energy grid shortfalls.

Coalition ‘not serious’ about nuclear policy and Dutton’s plan is ‘political fix’, Matt Canavan says

Nationals senator questions his own party’s policy, saying ‘all sides of politics are deciding their energy based on focus group’

www.theguardian.com

 

[SirRumpole]

Maybe this is why Duttons Nuclear Story makes no sense whatsoever.
Mind you his refusal to recognize that a renewable energy based economy is quite achievable in the next 15-20 years sticks out like a sore thumb.

Coalition ‘not serious’ about nuclear policy and Dutton’s plan is ‘political fix’, Matt Canavan says​

Nationals senator questions his own party’s policy, saying ‘all sides of politics are deciding their energy based on focus group’

• Follow our Australia news live blog for latest updates
• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

Josh Butler
Fri 20 Dec 2024 15.08 AEDT

Nationals senator Matt Canavan has doubled down on concerns about the Coalition’s nuclear power plan, saying attempting to run a modern economy through nuclear or renewable power was “equally unachievable” after a video showed him claiming his colleagues are “not serious” about the idea.
In a podcast interview from August uncovered by the ABC, Canavan said the Coalition was backing nuclear power “because it fixes a political issue for us”.

In further comments to Guardian Australia, the Queensland senator claimed political leaders in Australia on all sides of the debate were making energy policy decisions “based on focus groups” and said nuclear wouldn’t help fix looming warnings of blackouts due to energy grid shortfalls.

Coalition ‘not serious’ about nuclear policy and Dutton’s plan is ‘political fix’, Matt Canavan says

Nationals senator questions his own party’s policy, saying ‘all sides of politics are deciding their energy based on focus group’

www.theguardian.com

Seems to be about the only honest person in Parliament at the moment, even though he is pushing the coal barrow.

 

[sptrawler]

Seems to be about the only honest person in Parliament at the moment, even though he is pushing the coal barrow.

Yes another expert in the mix. Lol

 

[SirRumpole]

Yes another expert in the mix. Lol

Gina loves him.

 

[SirRumpole]

Not much is heard about tidal power, but maybe more will be.

 

[qldfrog]

Not much is heard about tidal power, but maybe more will be.

Nothing new with tidal power, France has had one for 50y.
Obviously you need to have the right site... But then what all these greenies living in city highriseddo not know ...while us, yacht Club members and seafront penthouse owners realise is that ocean environment destroys everything on turbo speed
Mussels clogging pipes, rust and corrosion, need to wash and clean with freshwater, etc
Sea cooled nuclear plants face the same issue BTW, and i am looking forward to the disaster stories from the offshore wind farms sprouting and soon collapsing every where.
Nice weekenders with unbeatable views

 

[SirRumpole]

The good, the bad and the ugly of hydro power.

 

[sptrawler]

That reminds me of one of my previous posts.

That's the problem, we have to be open minded about stuff, be it dams, windfarms, solar farms, nuclear, gas, biofuels etc.
Hopefully technology fixes the failings and shortcomings of everything, then everyone will be happy.

As I keep saying people need to be open minded, because usually those with the open mouths are the first ones to be proven wrong.

This is a hugely technical problem that IMO there is no simple answers, those with the most to say and are definitive in the answers, are usually those with the least knowledge at the moment.

It wasn't long back that some posters were saying just shut the coal down, because they believed it was possible, now the Government that wants it shut down is actually using taxpayers money to keep it open.

So the chorus moves on to a new verse and the circus keeps rolling on.

What the loonies have to realise is, the only thing that is paying our pensions, our dole, our NDIS, our lifestyle, is what we make from resources plus students and the fact that money is only having to supporting a population of 27million people.

If that money was supporting a population of 50million people, we probably wouldn't be able to pay for that welfare.

So Australia really has to make itself an attractive place to open up a business, that means reasonably priced electricity and very secure electricity, if we don't achieve that well we had better stop bringing in people.

Most of the hydrogen super power plans have been abandoned, because they can't secure cheap reliable power and process industries will be testing if they can actually change over from fossil fuel process to renewable electric process, if they can't they will no doubt weigh up their options.

As we keep saying this isn't rocket science, I would love to see all the politicians pensions being in someway linked to outcomes, so that if it fails they go down the same as the general public will no doubt go down.
That would make them all, a bit more circumspect in their decision making and ramping IMO.

 

[sptrawler]

Renewables are great and hopefully we can pull it off, in three years time we will probably know one way or the other.

So IMO it is worth keeping going on this track, three years wont be the make or break of it, but it will no doubt add clarity to it.

If Snowy 2.0 is close to finished and Kurri Kurri is running, then some coal can be removed, things will start and become more clear.

 

[Smurf1976]

The good, the bad and the ugly of hydro power.

I've seen some one-sided media reports on various subjects over the years but that one's right up there.

Every possible argument, and some outright lies, on one side and most of the other side of the argument, the reasons why someone would want to build hydro, simply omitted completely.

The equivalent for nuclear would be a documentary on Chernobyl and saying this is what all nuclear plants do and without mentioning that they generate electricity.

The equivalent for coal would be to show a coal mine explosion with miners trapped underground then some vision of a coal-fired power plant with no precipitators or fabric filters.

Etc. There are arguments for or against but there's a very heavy emphasis on one side there.

 

[qldfrog]

Was thinking:
I hope the pro solar/wind vs nuclear will take into account the fact each wind or solar farm will need to be fully rebuild 4 times during the lifetime of a nuclear power plant, as well as the fact nuclear can be installed where coal power station are and do not need extra transmission..a few billions saved here as well

 

[SirRumpole]

I've seen some one-sided media reports on various subjects over the years but that one's right up there.

Every possible argument, and some outright lies, on one side and most of the other side of the argument, the reasons why someone would want to build hydro, simply omitted completely.

The equivalent for nuclear would be a documentary on Chernobyl and saying this is what all nuclear plants do and without mentioning that they generate electricity.

The equivalent for coal would be to show a coal mine explosion with miners trapped underground then some vision of a coal-fired power plant with no precipitators or fabric filters.

Etc. There are arguments for or against but there's a very heavy emphasis on one side there.

They did say that we need more hydro.

The problems appeared to occur in under developed nations where standards are lower than we expect.

If we have ironed out the environmental impacts of large hydro dams then someone should tell the Greens, and better still the entire public and start getting support for more hydro, otherwise a lot of solar power will go to waste as solar panel are shut down when they should be storing energy.

 

[Smurf1976]

If we have ironed out the environmental impacts of large hydro dams then someone should tell the Greens, and better still the entire public and start getting support for more hydro, otherwise a lot of solar power will go to waste as solar panel are shut down when they should be storing energy.

The issue I take is simply with the one sided reporting.

Correctly pointing out that some hydro projects are controversial but failing to mention this is by no means unique to hydro, since professional activism is a thing.

Pointing out that hydro production tends to drop in a drought but failing to mention that it goes up when rainfall is high. Or that large storage overcomes this problem.

Pointing to corruption in the construction of hydro projects but failing to mention this is an attribute of any major project in those countries, it's a function of the country not because it happens to be a hydro project.

Correctly pointing to the environmental impact of hydro, but not giving equal weight to the environmental impacts of not building it. Because as I've said many times "all power pollutes" so to the extent there's an argument against anything specific, it always ought be seen in the context of what the alternatives are.

Etc. My argument's simply for laying all the cards on the table face up. With the problem that a layperson seeing a report like that is left thinking OK, hydro is bad so just use solar then, failing to grasp the flaws in that logic.

Double red flag as soon as the word "community" is mentioned. I've seen enough debates to know where that one goes. About the last people to accept the wishes of the community are the Greens - they're firmly in the category of yes means yes, no means yes when it comes to that one. Either the community agrees with what they want or they'll force it anyway.

It's the politics, game playing and owed favours that make the whole thing so problematic. From a strictly technical perspective it's not that hard, it's just that politics stands in the way.