Solar Panel Feed in Tariff

[Chris Parks]

I am in NSW so things may be different in other states but the other day I received a email saying that our feed in tariff was being reduced to 9.5c/kw (Energy Australia) due to the fall in wholesale prices. I may hold a simplistic view on this but if the wholesale buying price is dropping shouldn't the retail rate be dropping as well? I would also be interested in what others are being paid and what energy company they are with.

[woodPixel]

I'm paying using Origin energy in Canberra, only 17.224 cents per kWh - that's for USAGE!

In feeds are generous when looked at in this light... 11 cents and 20 cents... Solar feed-in tariffs - ACT NSW QLD SA VIC - Origin Energy (https://www.originenergy.com.au/solar/feed-in-tariff-rates.html)


Keep in mind this is Canberra. We are accustomed to others paying for our luxuries via their taxes :)

[BobL]

We had our PV system for about 10 months and only get 7c/kWh. Here in WA systems installed after Aug 31 2020 only get 3c!

WA is looking at supply tariffs during the day of just 8c/kWh between 9am and 3pm and 55c/kWh between 3 and 9pm!

Guess what we'll be doing - sealing the house and running ACs flat out between 9am and 3pm, and then turning off some of the systems after that.

[Warb]

I am in NSW so things may be different in other states but the other day I received a email saying that our feed in tariff was being reduced to 9.5c/kw (Energy Australia) due to the fall in wholesale prices. I may hold a simplistic view on this but if the wholesale buying price is dropping shouldn't the retail rate be dropping as well? I would also be interested in what others are being paid and what energy company they are with.

LOL! Retail prices are totally unrelated to wholesale prices, whether we're discussing electricity or anything else. Selling price is determined by greed, and "what can we get away with charging", which is why the power companies, like every other company, offer (at least on the surface) better deals to attract new customers whilst leaving the existing customers on the higher prices.

With electricity it's even more complicated, because the wholesale price of the power is a relatively small part of the retail price of electricity - the "poles and wires" charges far outweigh the actual cost of the power, or at least they did the last time I checked. Wholesale electricity was less than 3c/kWh last I checked, which makes the feed-in tariff seem pretty good, whilst the poles and wires charges ("network charges", though they are not listed separately on your power bill) were about 50% of your bill at somewhere around 15c/kWh.

The way the maths normally works is that the feed-in tariff is set to lure new customers on the assumption that most people don't actually export all that much power. As exports go up the power companies start to feel that tariff more, and so use any excuse to lower it - but in fact it is way too high anyway compared to the general wholesale price of power.

Note: I'm not in any way anti "rooftop solar", in fact I currently have about 40kW of solar installed. I am, however, realistic about the costs. When solar first came in, people complained that the feed-in tariff was too low, because they failed to understand that the "gold plated" network charged such a large amount to "transport" power. The assumption that "I pay $0.xx so I should get the same" does not allow for "transport costs". It is just unfortunate that in Australia, for various reasons, our "network" is massively costly! If the power company buy my power for much more than wholesale price, they still have to add that 15c/kWh "transport" charge to the cost, and then even if they sell it at a premium "green power" price it's barely profitable.

By the way, Origin currently pay us 6c, IIRC.

[Chris Parks]

It is a game of we will give you a deal if you sign up today. I was just given a quote of 17c/kwh FIT by Origin for the first 12 months and a buy rate 4c lower than what I am paying at present. I don't think the free market principle has worked really well in the energy supply sector.

[Warb]

It is a game of we will give you a deal if you sign up today. I was just given a quote of 17c/kwh FIT by Origin for the first 12 months and a buy rate 4c lower than what I am paying at present. I don't think the free market principle has worked really well in the energy supply sector.

Remember to check all the details! We went through the process on a business account; on some of the offers the daily service charge was significantly higher and on one there was a "price change after the first xxkWh's per quarter" clause. There are many things they do to try to claw back money whilst still *apparently* offering a fabulous deal......

But no, there is no free market. The poles and wires are far too expensive and the retailers are stuffing everything up in their attempts to make more money. We used to have Country Energy who employed their own meter readers, and they never missed a reading. Now we have Origin Energy who employ a contract meter reader, and the excuses for failing to read the meters are pathetic. We've had several saying the meter was "overgrown with vegetation". I complained and sent them a video, taken 3 days after I came out of hospital having had spinal surgery (I got home from hospital and founds the bill waiting), where I walked (slowly!) to the meter filming with my phone. There was no vegetation whatsoever, it was in the middle of a drought! Their eventual excuse was that the meter reader was driving a hire car whilst waiting for their new ute to be delivered, and they couldn't drive it across a paddock. Well that's not the same as "overgrown with vegetation", and it's also rather stupid given that their entire job is reading farm meters on a rural road. On another occasion they said the "gate was locked", because they ignored the directions to the meter (recorded in their own system) and tried to get in the back gate. I no longer even bother complaining - my son and I were working on fences last week and we watched the meter reader visit the first three meters and then simply turn around and drive off, making no attempt to read the fourth meter to which my son and I had slashed a path, moved out the sheep and opened all the gates the previous week to allow easy access.... I wonder if the meter will be "overgrown with vegetation" or "infested with insects" this time!!!

I've also got video footage of them leaving gates open and letting out livestock on my farm (they denied this until I emailed the video to them), and we had a gate on a council road left open (the same day as the meters were read, but "it wasn't them" even though the only family up that road would never be that stupid) allowing over a thousand of our neighbours sheep in to a paddock that we had been reserving to feed lambs.

Overall, they're not that impressive!

[BobL]

Our fixed supply charge is about $1 a day (not kw/hr rated)

[T91]

looking at this logically...

A FIT guarantees to buy your excess electricity whenever you produce it... There is no other market on the planet that does this...

A genuine market supplies a "demand".

In the case of solarPV,all production is at exactly the same time. a couple of hours around lunchtime. Because it *all* produces at the exactly same time, it often produces a glut ( the actual definition of uncontrolled production of marginal units of a good or service) Economics therefore dictates that the price must fall, because there is more production than there is demand. Anyone who has ever been in business will know this.

If you want your product to be valuable, you need to produce it and offer it for sale when demand is high and competition is low.

Many governments have said all sorts of things to win the popular vote, but the public seems to have been conned into believing the unbelievable, based on rather hollow and frankly childish rhetoric.

IF YOU demand electricity 24/7, then the simple fact that the market was forced to buy unwanted electricity at a premium MUST tell you that the price of electricity in any non peak generation time slot must rise cover the cost of the unwanted electricity bought a non-commercial prices during lower demand periods. Personally I demand that my power saw must operate when I turn the switch, Its similar to my absolute refusal to buy any car that only operates in favorable weather conditions, as distinct from when I turn the key...

The end result of these things is always _tears_ when they are driven by supply, rather than demand. It works when the volume of supply is small and the demand for the resource is large, but as soon as the supply starts to generate a bit of volume, the market will determine when it will buy, and at what price.... Because it has choice... Producers of weather dependent electricity do not have choice about whether they can produce, nor do they influence the demand curve at any production interval.

In fact now that solarPV is quite "common" you can expect domestic PV to be curtailed, just as wind turbines are curtailed during stormy weather. This may not be a popular thing, but it is reality because over production strains the grid... you may have heard about "gold plating", to guarantee reliability, which raises costs.

Not saying anything is good,or bad. What I am saying is, how much a MWh can you sell electricity for between 6pm and 9am and how much can PV produce... If I have a shortfall in supply, how can I ask PV producers to increase output? Not all KWh are equal, which is why we have peak and non peak consumption, which is also why FITs are a demonstrably artificial construct, which will eventually fail, just as every other means of propping up a market to achieve a political agenda has always failed...

[pippin88]

In NSW AGL was the best deal I could find.

FIT 17c
Supply ~29

I often generate much more than I use. You can certainly get cheaper supply. I was with PowerShop before and paying ~22c, but FIT was only 7c.

[Jeffen]

QLD Ergon rates (State owned - no competition)

Feed in 7.861c / KWh
General Domestic use - 21.756 / KWh
Night rate use (water heating) 14.932 / KWh
Service fee 90.676 cents / day

Jeff

[Chris Parks]

looking at this logically...

A FIT guarantees to buy your excess electricity whenever you produce it... There is no other market on the planet that does this...

A genuine market supplies a "demand".

In the case of solarPV,all production is at exactly the same time. a couple of hours around lunchtime. Because it *all* produces at the exactly same time, it often produces a glut ( the actual definition of uncontrolled production of marginal units of a good or service) Economics therefore dictates that the price must fall, because there is more production than there is demand. Anyone who has ever been in business will know this.

If you want your product to be valuable, you need to produce it and offer it for sale when demand is high and competition is low.

Many governments have said all sorts of things to win the popular vote, but the public seems to have been conned into believing the unbelievable, based on rather hollow and frankly childish rhetoric.

IF YOU demand electricity 24/7, then the simple fact that the market was forced to buy unwanted electricity at a premium MUST tell you that the price of electricity in any non peak generation time slot must rise cover the cost of the unwanted electricity bought a non-commercial prices during lower demand periods. Personally I demand that my power saw must operate when I turn the switch, Its similar to my absolute refusal to buy any car that only operates in favorable weather conditions, as distinct from when I turn the key...

The end result of these things is always _tears_ when they are driven by supply, rather than demand. It works when the volume of supply is small and the demand for the resource is large, but as soon as the supply starts to generate a bit of volume, the market will determine when it will buy, and at what price.... Because it has choice... Producers of weather dependent electricity do not have choice about whether they can produce, nor do they influence the demand curve at any production interval.

In fact now that solarPV is quite "common" you can expect domestic PV to be curtailed, just as wind turbines are curtailed during stormy weather. This may not be a popular thing, but it is reality because over production strains the grid... you may have heard about "gold plating", to guarantee reliability, which raises costs.

Not saying anything is good,or bad. What I am saying is, how much a MWh can you sell electricity for between 6pm and 9am and how much can PV produce... If I have a shortfall in supply, how can I ask PV producers to increase output? Not all KWh are equal, which is why we have peak and non peak consumption, which is also why FITs are a demonstrably artificial construct, which will eventually fail, just as every other means of propping up a market to achieve a political agenda has always failed...

All very good and pertinent points. I think that there will be a demand for peer to peer electricity trading and a few ideas have already been tried IIRC. The seller pays a price to use the grid infrastructure and then sets a price for selling, possibly brokers will be somewhere in the mix if needed. It is in the early stages of being tested and the whole idea must be causing energy companies to have some genuine worries about the effect it will have on the traditional supply market.

Here is an article on it What is Peer-to-Peer Energy Trading? | Infinite Energy (https://www.infiniteenergy.com.au/peer-to-peer-energy-trading/)

[Warb]

looking at this logically...

Mostly true and logical, except that "gold plating" the grid didn't actually "gold plate" it very much, but seems rather to have spent an awful lot of money on change for changes sake and increased costs without benefit. As an example, about 15 years ago we upgraded (modernised) an irrigation pump and installed a VFD. The VFD reported a high grid voltage, so I contacted (as it was back then) Country Energy. Two guys came out in a ute, measured the voltage, scurried up the pole and re-tapped the transformer. The job took perhaps 5 minutes plus travelling time for 2 guys and a ute. Contrast this to another situation, perhaps 8 years ago, when we had a newly installed solar inverter report a high voltage. Once again I contacted the power company, whatever it was at that time. Two guys came out in a ute and told me that my meter was probably wrong and they'd check with their "official" meter. It read about 0.1V different from mine, and still way out of specification. But that was no longer enough. They had to monitor it for 2 weeks. So, and I kid you not, a week or two later 4 utes, 2 trucks and a small army of guys turned up. They mucked about for perhaps an hour, and installed a monitor on the transformer. Two weeks later the same army came back and took the meter away for analysis. Yes, the voltage was high so they would adjust it. The "team" that returned to re-tap the transformer had to be seen to be believed, and it took them a couple of hours to do the job, although the actual "up the pole" time was still only a couple of minutes.

In both these cases we were the only users connected to the transformer, yet this job, in perhaps 5 years, went from 2 guys and 10 minutes to a bunch of vehicles, a small army and tens (perhaps hundreds) of man-hours. That's not gold plating, that's just spending money.

Equally, all our meters have now been replaced with "smart" meters that they can control (read?) via the mobile phone network. Except that we have no mobile phone coverage! The guys who have replaced the meters (sub contractors, not employees) have done them one at a time - so 4 separate 2 hour drives - each time "testing" several different meters because, apparently, "some will work with a weaker phone signal even though they are all supposedly identical" and finally leaving a meter that won't connect because there's no signal. Many $ spent, but no plating!

The peak solar generation being all around the same time I entirely understand (as with the real-world financials of all this!), but if I buy a Telsla power wall and move my exports to later in the day, do I get paid more? [Not a serious question, obviously I'd just use that power overnight! But like the "Snowy 2" project, energy storage is interesting to consider....]

[Warb]

I was just reminded of another example of increased spending without actually "plating" anything. In our area, both the RMS and the electricity company use a contract company to do their tree maintenance. This company now employs a person in a vehicle to drive around and spot "problems" - i.e. trees encroaching on the measured "clear zone" around roads and power wires. This would be great, except that clearly such contractors don't get paid unless they actually DO something, which must create some pressure to "find" work that needs doing. In my experience, native Australian trees, especially in the drought that we've had for the previous few years don't grow very quickly (rainforest trees excepted!), yet the "spotter" for this company can be seen touring the area very frequently. They have removed trees (branches or often entire trees) on the sides of our road perhaps 3 times in the last couple of years, and we have just received a note to say they will be cutting vegetation on our property for the second time in around 12 months. Why? If they cut back everything to a safe distance a year ago, there's no way that anything has grown enough to threaten the power lines in that time. I can only see three possible reasons; either they don't do a very good job and have to return to fix it, or they're trimming to the exact clearance line such that 25mm of growth requires retrimming, or they're simply inventing work to make more money.... Costs without benefits due to the use of contractors!

[BobL]

The peak solar generation being all around the same time I entirely understand (as with the real-world financials of all this!), but if I buy a Telsla power wall and move my exports to later in the day, do I get paid more? [Not a serious question, obviously I'd just use that power overnight! But like the "Snowy 2" project, energy storage is interesting to consider....]

In WA there is a proposal to pay people with batteries nothing for their excess power over and above their battery storage capCITY!

[Bushmiller]

With electricity it's even more complicated, because the wholesale price of the power is a relatively small part of the retail price of electricity - the "poles and wires" charges far outweigh the actual cost of the power, or at least they did the last time I checked. Wholesale electricity was less than 3c/kWh last I checked, which makes the feed-in tariff seem pretty good, whilst the poles and wires charges ("network charges", though they are not listed separately on your power bill) were about 50% of your bill at somewhere around 15c/kWh.



Warb

3c/KWh, which equates to $30/MWh is how the wholesale market refers to power generation, but this figure is a little out of date. That price was typical about ten years ago or more. Wholesale price of electricity is both dynamic and volatile. It varies from state to state and season to season. Queensland is about the cheapest state and South Australia seems to be the most expensive. Winter and summer are the periods of highest demand.

To illustrate this volatility see this example of the QLD price over two recent days, which would appear to support your figure of $30/MWhr:

486484

but have a look at these two days from about a week earlier:

486485

These were just the first two examples I pulled up and I was not expecting that difference, but it does serve to illustrate how different things can be.

What is the overall average price? I am not really sure. About a year ago before Covid-19 reared it's ugly head I would have said about $80/MWhr (8c/KW/hr), but now a little less than that. I would hazard a guess at $60/MWhr: This is in QLD. It will be slightly higher in the other states.

There is another issue in that the figure above refers to the spot price. Retailers negotiate contracts with the generators to avoid the price spikes. These contracts are at fixed rates of course. As these contracts are confidential documents it is difficult to know exactly how much is sold this way, but quite likely no more than half of the total demand.

The market is competitive and supposedly a free market, but at times the government "directs" the government owned stations, which is not quite according to the spirit of the competitive market.

To explain the way the demand is satisfied, we have to remember that there is no means of storing electricity and all power generated has to be consumed. Consequently as demand falls, for example, generators have to produce less. This is achieved by offering lower and lower prices. It frequently gets to the point where the spot price goes negative. Overall the average price evens out at something respectable. "Respectable" being where everybody is making money.

With the advent of large quantities of PV Solar, both domestic and commercial, the whole dynamic of generation has begun to move and while the transition to renewables has commenced renewables will not be exclusive until such time as they can produce reliable power twenty four hours a day.

In summary I would suggest that a feed in tarrif for domestic Solar PV should reflect the average wholesale price. The major difference between commercial generation and domestic is that domestic supply is not and cannot be asked to back off. The solar farms shut down if the spot price goes negative during the day.

Lastly, I would remind people that the MWs are one, arguably the biggest, aspect of power generation, but it is not as simple as that and there are other factors that generators are asked to provide. For the moment the renewables are unable to provide this. I stress that it will not always be this way.

Regards
Paul

PS: I work as a control room operator in a supercritical, coal-fired power station in QLD.

[BobL]

Interesting to see Australia's newest coal fired electrical generator plant in WA has been written off as worthless
Bluewaters coal-fired power station written off as worthless as renewables rise - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-17/bluewaters-coal-fired-power-station-written-off-books/12990532)

[Bushmiller]

Interesting to see Australia's newest coal fired electrical generator plant in WA has been written off as worthless
Bluewaters coal-fired power station written off as worthless as renewables rise - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-17/bluewaters-coal-fired-power-station-written-off-books/12990532)

Bob

That one sparked a bit of interest over this side too, but of course it is on your independent grid. Something does not quite ring "right" with that situation, but we would need to know more to comment, although I believe there is a financing issue with the banks.

Regards
Paul

[Warb]

Warb

3c/KWh, which equates to $30/MWh is how the wholesale market refers to power generation, but this figure is a little out of date. That price was typical about ten years ago or more. Wholesale price of electricity is both dynamic and volatile. It varies from state to state and season to season. Queensland is about the cheapest state and South Australia seems to be the most expensive. Winter and summer are the periods of highest demand.

The major difference between commercial generation and domestic is that domestic supply is not and cannot be asked to back off. The solar farms shut down if the spot price goes negative during the day.


I appreciate that the cost of power varies, and that coal fired power stations (as an example) are unable to react quickly to demand changes which causes prices to fluctuate - that is the nature of supply and demand. The same applies in many industries, including farming - it's hard to stop cows from producing milk in a glut, and nor can you stop feeding them! I live in a coal mining area, where the towns would/will simply cease to exist if/when the mines shut so this has a direct bearing on my life. However, the maximum prices, at least when I last investigated the figures, tend to exist only for seconds or minutes, at times of very short term peaks or (I read this several years ago, it may or may not be true!) when the networks and power stations make adjustments that cause very short term dips in supply or availability. Whilst a genuine number, those transient peaks may not have much bearing on the average price.

Above all, however, I was simply pointing out that the wholesale price of electricity is largely irrelevant to the consumer, because it comprises only a relatively small part of the bill - the poles and wires cost outweighs it hugely. It is therefore not valid to claim (as people were doing in the early days of solar) that they should get the same for their exported power as they paid for their "bought" power.

The storage of power is an interesting concept. I have not followed the story, but I was under the impression that the "Snowy 2" project was entirely based on power storage - at times of over-supply, water was to be pumped from a lower dam to a higher dam, such that it could be released to generate more power in times of short-fall. It was to be a closed-loop system, using no water (except evaporation) and giving the ability to "store" power. I believe there was also a plan to use Tesla batteries in Victoria to achieve the same thing - avoid power shortfalls by storing energy in times of over-supply.

Lastly, I'm not certain of the current ability of power companies to control domestic solar. In NSW I know that they can insist on a "fixed" export limiter, where the inverter is controlled by an export meter and artificially limits the amount of power exported by down-tuning the panels. However at one point I was told that the smart meters they were installing could, at their discretion, simply stop any power export whatsoever. This was, at the time, claimed to be to "prevent damage to the grid at times of oversupply", or some-such. Not sure if it's true!

[Bushmiller]

I appreciate that the cost of power varies, and that coal fired power stations (as an example) are unable to react quickly to demand changes which causes prices to fluctuate - that is the nature of supply and demand. The same applies in many industries, including farming - it's hard to stop cows from producing milk in a glut, and nor can you stop feeding them! I live in a coal mining area, where the towns would/will simply cease to exist if/when the mines shut so this has a direct bearing on my life. However, the maximum prices, at least when I last investigated the figures, tend to exist only for seconds or minutes, at times of very short term peaks or (I read this several years ago, it may or may not be true!) when the networks and power stations make adjustments that cause very short term dips in supply or availability. Whilst a genuine number, those transient peaks may not have much bearing on the average price.


Above all, however, I was simply pointing out that the wholesale price of electricity is largely irrelevant to the consumer, because it comprises only a relatively small part of the bill - the poles and wires cost outweighs it hugely. It is therefore not valid to claim (as people were doing in the early days of solar) that they should get the same for their exported power as they paid for their "bought" power.



The storage of power is an interesting concept. I have not followed the story, but I was under the impression that the "Snowy 2" project was entirely based on power storage - at times of over-supply, water was to be pumped from a lower dam to a higher dam, such that it could be released to generate more power in times of short-fall. It was to be a closed-loop system, using no water (except evaporation) and giving the ability to "store" power. I believe there was also a plan to use Tesla batteries in Victoria to achieve the same thing - avoid power shortfalls by storing energy in times of over-supply.



Lastly, I'm not certain of the current ability of power companies to control domestic solar. In NSW I know that they can insist on a "fixed" export limiter, where the inverter is controlled by an export meter and artificially limits the amount of power exported by down-tuning the panels. However at one point I was told that the smart meters they were installing could, at their discretion, simply stop any power export whatsoever. This was, at the time, claimed to be to "prevent damage to the grid at times of oversupply", or some-such. Not sure if it's true!

Warbs

The maximum prices vary in size. if you study the second example I gave, that five minute price spike made a huge difference to the average for the day. Averaged over the year not so big.

Regarding the feed in tariff that is exactly right. The distribution network is at least as high a proportion of the costs as generation.

I am skeptical of the Snowy 2.0 scheme. Many of the dams in the proposal do not have pumping ability and I think the capability of the scheme has been mischievously exaggerated. The Tesla battery is the largest of it's type, but is very small compared to even the size of the SA grid where it was first installed. You would need hundreds of those batteries. The SA battery provides 100MW for one hour only in what is one of the smallest systems on the Eastern Seaboard at a maximum of, say, 2000MW. The biggest advantage of the Tesla battery system is the ability to provide extremely rapid frequency control: Much better than Gas Turbines and much better than Hydro.

Regards
Paul

[Warb]

I am skeptical of the Snowy 2.0 scheme.

I've been skeptical about Snowy 2 simply because they tried to promote it as "new green power generation", which it's not - it's a lossy (meaning less than 100% efficient) method of storing power from ANY source, green or otherwise!

I have no idea of the granularity of the spot power price data. If that spike was 5 minutes, then as you say it would have made a big difference on the day, but if it was simply a "maximum" it could have lasted a second (or one single MWh sold at that price!?), and made almost no difference even on a daily basis. It is, however, interesting that it was such a massive price spike on a day when the demand figures aren't massively higher than the previous day. Do you know what caused it? The explanation I was given several years ago (as I said earlier, no idea of the accuracy!) was that such spikes lasted seconds and were caused by "switching" issues on the grid - i.e. someone somewhere changed something (deliberately or by mistake) and caused a momentary shortfall, with a "desperation" price response.

The Tesla batteries are largely a stunt, I suspect, both for Tesla and the various governments. Having said that, almost every green power or "climate change" action falls under the same heading (or is an opportunity to make someone some money) so that's nothing new!

[woodPixel]

We live in interesting times.

Big wind. Big solar. Big everything.... even 300 MW big batteries --> The batteries that could make fossil fuels obsolete - BBC Future (https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201217-renewable-power-the-worlds-largest-battery)


My poor coal shares are down.... a bit more.... than I'd like! (58%!!!) :(

BUT! I have a good investment in a tech called CAES - Compressed Air Energy Storage --> Liquid-air energy storage: The latest new “battery” on the UK grid | Ars Technica (https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/06/liquid-air-energy-storage-the-latest-new-battery-on-the-uk-grid/)


It soaks up cheap power at "whatever time is cheapest" and sells it while its nice and high. Paid for the plant install within 1 year and it's 100% fat profit now :) I can see this rolling out hard, even into the smallest places.... the company can roll out these facilities like LEGO and a local engineering company can plug them up inside of a week. They need nothing more than a standard industrial block!

They scale indefinitely. Old caves, salt mines and oil wells are apparently useful. If not available, there is talk on underwater systems with vast air bags that just scale and scale and scale.

There are other useful side effects too. Compressing the air creates a lot of heat which is useful to industries, also cold when decompressed - again useful. There is talk that industries will spring up around these plants, just like the deep-sea beasties that pop out of nowhere on "smokers".


Back to solar in-feed tariffs for individuals.... there is a BIG future for this. Every milliwatt counts.


I'm surprised that roof space isn't leased by start-ups to use "your" solar to their profit.... soon... soon.

[Bushmiller]

I've been skeptical about Snowy 2 simply because they tried to promote it as "new green power generation", which it's not - it's a lossy (meaning less than 100% efficient) method of storing power from ANY source, green or otherwise!

I have no idea of the granularity of the spot power price data. If that spike was 5 minutes, then as you say it would have made a big difference on the day, but if it was simply a "maximum" it could have lasted a second (or one single MWh sold at that price!?), and made almost no difference even on a daily basis. It is, however, interesting that it was such a massive price spike on a day when the demand figures aren't massively higher than the previous day. Do you know what caused it? The explanation I was given several years ago (as I said earlier, no idea of the accuracy!) was that such spikes lasted seconds and were caused by "switching" issues on the grid - i.e. someone somewhere changed something (deliberately or by mistake) and caused a momentary shortfall, with a "desperation" price response.

The Tesla batteries are largely a stunt, I suspect, both for Tesla and the various governments. Having said that, almost every green power or "climate change" action falls under the same heading (or is an opportunity to make someone some money) so that's nothing new!

Warbs

The pricing is set in five minute bands, which it is why it represents such a lot of money. It is supposed to change to one minute bands but I can't recall if that is scheduled for 2021 or 2022 and it may or may not happen.

What causes a price spike? It could be many things and it is dependent on the available power at that moment. It is only partially linked to the level of demand. However periods of high demand will dictate more risk. A typical scenario would be where there was a hot day with the system stretched and then a unit or more than one unit trips. Initially the existing generators with spinning reserve will attempt to pick up the shortfall. At some point the price will rise and for a short while (that five minute period) there will be money to be made. Then the peaking power plants (gas turbines, hydro etc) will kick in and assuming they can cope with the demand the price will fall to a lower level but still high.

Equally the opposite can occur with a transmission line failing. This results in a load centre being disconnected. There is now too much power, the price falls and the generators back off towards their minimum levels. It may be that the price falls to negative numbers. Negative prices actually happen far more frequently than the elevated prices, but it is not talked about by no-nothing politicians as it is not so sexy and does not get them the attention they seek. The negative prices are more likely to be there for sustained periods of time. Recently I saw SA sit with negative prices for most of the daylight hours! It is not limited to SA either.

The challenge for the future and for renewable power systems is to find suitable means of storing energy to re-use to make electricity. If we take solar power it is effectively active for about six hours a day and that does not include cloudy days. Solar power would require four to five times the available generation to provide for the hours where solar does not function: Then that generation has to be stored. Hydro, hydrogen, salt-beds, batteries ,compressed air are all capable of storing energy and likely down the track there will be others to provide a mix: We are not close to being at that point yet.

The Tesla battery and other similar batteries are supreme at providing frequency control. Their downside is being expensive and too small. You are correct about the Tesla being a stunt, although I would probably describe it more as a PR exercise to demonstrate what is possible for the future and how quickly it could be done given the right incentives.

Regards
Paul

[Warb]

I'm surprised that roof space isn't leased by start-ups to use "your" solar to their profit.... soon... soon.

This has actually been happening for some time. My uncle investigated it a few years ago. A company would install a PV system on the roof of his building, and pay him a fixed amount to have it there. They would take all the generated power (clearly worth more than they would pay him!), manage and maintain the system. After a predefined number of years it would revert to his ownership, I assume that timeframe allowed them a healthy profit and presumably was close to the reliable, "high output" life expectancy of the panels*. That's fairly close to your concept of leasing roof-space!

*Whilst they have always made 20+year claims for panels, the real-world output normally starts to drop long before that point. Indeed the fine print of the warranty often states 80% of initial output after 20 years. Given that almost all the panels are Chinese, and the importers, distributors and installers start, fail and (conveniently) pop up again with different business names but the same phone number (hence have no responsibility for previous warranties), the warranties are largely worthless anyway.

Interesting but largely unrelated story; a solar installer in SA (from memory) did this "install cheap systems then go bust" trick some while ago. Unfortunately for me they left a webpage up with MY mobile phone number on it - after being very confused by the first two or three angry phone calls, I Googled my own mobile number and found the website in question. I have no idea if this was a misfrint or if they picked a number at random to throw people off the scent, but for months I got SA and Vic residents phoning me up demanding I fix their PV systems! Some of them got quite upset, apparently they felt it was my responsibility to fix their system even after I explained that I had nothing to do with Chris or Clint or whatever his name was.......

[AlexS]

I am skeptical of the Snowy 2.0 scheme. Many of the dams in the proposal do not have pumping ability and I think the capability of the scheme has been mischievously exaggerated.

Agree wholeheartedly. Also, bear in mind that the whole Snowy scheme was designed as an irrigation scheme - hydro power was simply a serendipitous by-product.

To run an irrigation scheme (in particular, this one) you need to get the water downstream where the irrigators are. To run a hydro-electric scheme, you need to keep the water as far upstream as possible. Someone is going to discover, very quickly and to their great discomfort, that you don't get between an irrigator and a bucket of water.

[Warb]

What causes a price spike? It could be many things and it is dependent on the available power at that moment. It is only partially linked to the level of demand. However periods of high demand will dictate more risk. A typical scenario would be where there was a hot day with the system stretched and then a unit or more than one unit trips. Initially the existing generators with spinning reserve will attempt to pick up the shortfall.

So the pricing system is automated and all customers (i.e. the energy retailers or whatever other bulk users buy wholesale) pay the same? I wondered how that worked!

The guy who told me about the wholesale pricing spikes many years ago said that the large spikes were caused by network switching issues, and whilst he didn't mention the negative prices he actually implied that the system was too easily manipulated - "when higher prices are available as a result of something tripping there must be motivation for such a trip to occur" was his underlying theory. Whilst I assume there are checks and balances to avoid this, my experience of PV (and, it must be said, most areas of business) is that it's rare to find a business that won't leverage an opportunity to make extra money, so I can understand where he was coming from even if it wasn't true (and I assume it's not!).

Energy generation, storage and (importantly but usually ignored) usage is a fascinating subject and vital to our future. Sadly it is largely undermined by the fact that every player is constantly trying to benefit themselves and secure their own future - working together for the good of society as a whole seems to be a concept that is alien to most people and businesses. My own belief is that all forms of energy generation (and storage) should be investigated and encouraged, and the grid should be maintained and upgraded to allow such a disparate system to be managed effectively. Sadly, as I stated in previous posts, I'm not sure this is happening - the gold plating of the grid seems largely to involve spending money but not necessarily improving anything, the businesses involved are all simply trying to make money whilst resisting any significant change in the market, and the politicians (as always) are interested in themselves and getting votes. The green party I find especially disappointing, seemingly having abandoned any common sense approach to "green issues" and become intent on side issues and demanding a perfect solution or nothing at all.....

And nobody is promoting "use less" because it doesn't make money!

[Warb]

Agree wholeheartedly. Also, bear in mind that the whole Snowy scheme was designed as an irrigation scheme - hydro power was simply a serendipitous by-product.

To run an irrigation scheme (in particular, this one) you need to get the water downstream where the irrigators are. To run a hydro-electric scheme, you need to keep the water as far upstream as possible. Someone is going to discover, very quickly and to their great discomfort, that you don't get between an irrigator and a bucket of water.

The concept, as I understand it, is that the water is pumped between a higher and a lower dam. The result is that there is no net usage of water, meaning it shouldn't impact the systems ability to provide irrigation water unless the levels are sufficiently low as too have no water to pump back up. It does, of course, require the construction of new dams (either high or low) to increase the net storage capacity by the amount of "energy storage water" envisaged. Once those dams are constructed, it should at worst require a short term reduction in irrigation water (or a La Nina year!) to fill the extra capacity, after which it should be business as usual.

As a farmer who does sometimes use supplementary irrigation (not from Snowy dams or rivers!) I must also say that the majority of the Australian public 100% fully understand that food comes from supermarkets and not farms, so any impacts on farmers isn't relevant anyway.....

[Bushmiller]

So the pricing system is automated and all customers (i.e. the energy retailers or whatever other bulk users buy wholesale) pay the same? I wondered how that worked!

The guy who told me about the wholesale pricing spikes many years ago said that the large spikes were caused by network switching issues, and whilst he didn't mention the negative prices he actually implied that the system was too easily manipulated - "when higher prices are available as a result of something tripping there must be motivation for such a trip to occur" was his underlying theory. Whilst I assume there are checks and balances to avoid this, my experience of PV (and, it must be said, most areas of business) is that it's rare to find a business that won't leverage an opportunity to make extra money, so I can understand where he was coming from even if it wasn't true (and I assume it's not!).

Energy generation, storage and (importantly but usually ignored) usage is a fascinating subject and vital to our future. Sadly it is largely undermined by the fact that every player is constantly trying to benefit themselves and secure their own future - working together for the good of society as a whole seems to be a concept that is alien to most people and businesses. My own belief is that all forms of energy generation (and storage) should be investigated and encouraged, and the grid should be maintained and upgraded to allow such a disparate system to be managed effectively. Sadly, as I stated in previous posts, I'm not sure this is happening - the gold plating of the grid seems largely to involve spending money but not necessarily improving anything, the businesses involved are all simply trying to make money whilst resisting any significant change in the market, and the politicians (as always) are interested in themselves and getting votes. The green party I find especially disappointing, seemingly having abandoned any common sense approach to "green issues" and become intent on side issues and demanding a perfect solution or nothing at all.....

And nobody is promoting "use less" because it doesn't make money!

Warbs

The contracts are negotiated individually and could vary, but as the retailers have the opportunity to approach the suppliers for the best deal it is reasonable to assume the contracts they negotiate will be similar. A further variation depends on which of the states they are based as the average price, as I have mentioned, is not the same for each state.

I think your "guy" may have misled you. I only gave a single example of why a price spike would occur: There are many. Switching issues would be unusual. Line constraints would be more common either because of maintenance or overloaded lines, mechanical damage from storms or even a Goanna falling across the lines (that tripped a unit at Liddell many years ago). In South America the Condor was responsibly at times as their wingspan was large enough to contact two wires, which provoked a phase to phase fault and a dead Condor.

One thing I can categorically state is that no generator trips a unit to create a shortage of supply as it would mean that to supply their contracts they may now have to buy power at the elevated prices. I will give an example. Kogan Creek power station near Chinchilla in QLD has the largest single unit in Australia (about 780MW). Lets assume they have half their capability under contract. Perhaps the price on the spot market is $75/MWh. Something goes wrong and the unit trips. The new price jumps to $1500/MWh for one time segment and then settles back to $120/MWh. They still have to supply power for their contract. Firstly they have lost 390 MWs at $75. Also they have to buy from the market to supply the contracts. They are hugely out of pocket.

Our nightmare at Millmerran is that the price goes up with a huge spike and one of our two units tripping is the cause! :oo:

You are quite right when you point to business manipulating the market. This is human nature and indeed the greed of human nature. Major utilities (electricity, gas and water) should not be in the hands of private ownership, but they are ans we have to thank the politicians and their greed for that. It is what it is and no amount of lamenting by me or anybody else will change that. Even if the politicians did have a reflective moment where they saw the error of their ways they cannot afford now to buy back: On top of that I don't believe the will is there either.

A few years ago the competitive market and the rules that governed it were a little "loose" and the generators could organise their price bands at short notice to maximise their income. At the time it was within the rules, but no longer so. From just before 1960 to the middle 90s the primary aim of electricity markets in Australia was continuity of supply. Now that continuity only comes at a price. The price spikes could be eliminated by load shedding, but there would be a public outcry. Load shedding only occurs when the equipment is at risk or the lines are down. It is a rare situation where we have load shedding.

Investigations are conducted when a significant pricing event has happened. There was one a little while ago where one generator had apparently flaunted the regulations. I actually thought they had been pinged big time, but I heard a few days ago that they are still fighting it. Interesting that as it is a government owned enterprise.If it had been us we would have gone for a row!

All forms of energy should be investigated, but I despair when some types are put forward and hailed as being the new Messiah of electricity generation when they are completely untried and looking very shaky economically. No type of electricity generation will "fly" unless it is commercially viable. That is how it is. Not only that it has to be viable for a long time, because it requires a huge investment to get started. The longevity aspect has been one of the barriers to renewables, in my opinion, because our governments won't commit and scandalously, again in my opinion, talk about new coal fired and gas fired plants. That sort of talk I believe is close to criminal. These stations have to run for fifteen to twenty years to get the investment back and would have a normal life expectancy of forty to fifty years. No private company in their right mind is going to commit to that.

Using less is an option. In fact the overall demands are down, but I don't think this is a conscious effort by the community.

Regards
Paul

[Bushmiller]

The concept, as I understand it, is that the water is pumped between a higher and a lower dam. The result is that there is no net usage of water, meaning it shouldn't impact the systems ability to provide irrigation water unless the levels are sufficiently low as too have no water to pump back up. It does, of course, require the construction of new dams (either high or low) to increase the net storage capacity by the amount of "energy storage water" envisaged. Once those dams are constructed, it should at worst require a short term reduction in irrigation water (or a La Nina year!) to fill the extra capacity, after which it should be business as usual.

As a farmer who does sometimes use supplementary irrigation (not from Snowy dams or rivers!) I must also say that the majority of the Australian public 100% fully understand that food comes from supermarkets and not farms, so any impacts on farmers isn't relevant anyway.....

Warbs

You might find this article interesting:

NSW has approved Snowy 2.0. Here are six reasons why that's a bad move (theconversation.com) (https://theconversation.com/nsw-has-approved-snowy-2-0-here-are-six-reasons-why-thats-a-bad-move-139112)

I alluded to the pumping capacity being exaggerated and I think it was this article that supported this claim. I have also seen that cost have already ballooned from less than $5 billion to more than $10 billion.

Not looking good for a variety of reasons. I know our rainfall in this region is well down. I don't know the situation in the Snowy region.

Tasmania got their DC link from mainland Australia to provide security in case they underwent a protracted dry spell, which would have spelled disaster for their hydro stations. Once they had their link the hydro companies sold power back the other way to mainland Ozdepleting their dam supplies.

Greed.

Then the DC cable broke.

Disaster: For nearly a year!

Regards
Paul

[Mobyturns]

We are the fortunate recipients of the Queensland Solar Scheme.

QSS FIT 44 c/kWh
Tariff 11 - general domestic to 30/06/2020 - 23.661 c/kWh
Tariff 11 - general domestic post 30/06/2020 - 23.661 c/kWh

Service Fee - to 30/06/2020 - 90.345 c/day
Service Fee - from 30/06/2020 - 90.666 c/day

Some may find this project interesting Project Details (genexpower.com.au) (https://www.genexpower.com.au/project-details.html)

250MW Kidston Pumped Storage Hydro Project (K2-Hydro)

Quick Facts:
Location: Far-North Queensland
Nameplate capacity: 250MW
Generation duration: 8 hours
Storage capacity: 2,000MWh
Upper reservoir: Wises Pit (52ha)
Lower reservoir: Eldridge Pit (54ha)
Project lifespan: 80 years
Number of turbines: 2
Turbine details: 125MW reversible turbines
Start-up time: <30seconds
Max gross water head: 218m

[Fuzzie]

From my point of view the feed in tariff was almost a secondary consideration in making the decision to install solar in our new house.

At current bank interest rates the financial equation of a capital investment is quite persuasive without a feedin tariff. If you have the money to buy a system rather than letting it sit in the bank getting 0.01% interest, installing solar and offsetting the electricity you would otherwise purchase is a winner straight out of the blocks as a direct investment return. Capital depreciation is offset by the bonus of feed in tariffs that shorten the payback period of the initial investment. Most systems seem to have a capital payback estimate of about 7 years with a significantly longer estimated lifetime in which your electricity use becomes essentially free irrespective of feed in tariff. If you are producing at a significant excess rate to your usage you also have the potential of a bonus small untaxed income as well as reducing the pay back period.

Is the investment return the most important thing rather than the fact you are perhaps actually reducing your carbon footprint and doing something positive to reduce accelerators of climate change?

However having made the decision to install solar it is only common sense to try and get your best financial return as well, even if some of the excess power eventually gets shed by the retailer. My old house is with Origin as the best feedin, my new house is with AGL as the best feedin. The best feedin is a moving target.

[Warb]

I think your "guy" may have misled you.

That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest! I did say that I assumed it wasn't true.....

I agree with just about everything you have said, with the possible exception of public ownership being of power being a better option. Even that I'd like to agree with, but sadly my experience of EVERYTHING that is publicly owned is that it doesn't work very well. The concept is great, but from what I've seen it becomes an expensive, slow and fairly ineffectual way to run an organisation. Humans, as we've said, are profit/greed driven. In a private business that results in those at the top "driving" to make more profit. In the public sector it results in those on the shop floor doing as little as possible, because there's nobody above them driving to make more profit! My first job (not in Australia, and many years ago), a fill-in when I first left school and was considering a job in medicine, was as a hospital cleaner in a public hospital. A friend of mine took the same job, and after a month or so we were approached by the union rep and asked to slow down because we were making everybody else look bad. We didn't think we were putting all that much effort in to it, but seemingly we worked far too hard. Eventually we were reassigned as a "special mission" team to re-finish floors or deep-clean (as they call it in these Covid times) particular areas, that way we could not be directly compared to anyone else. Eventually I moved in to I.T., and the same applied, whether abroad or in Australia; every government department that I had "professional" contact with was frankly appalling.

Until we overcome our species' greed and laziness we're never going to get an optimal solution, so it comes down to the "least worst" option! I'm not sure what that is!

From your other post - ballooning costs are standard. Quote low, get the job, then start upping the price and extending the duration of the task. Doesn't matter if it's private or public, the same rules apply! Personally I could never bring myself to do it - when I had an I.T. company the only time I changed the price was when the customer changed the task. Otherwise I worked on the basis that if we had stuffed up the price it was our fault for not costing it out properly - our mistake and I wore the consequences. It cost me some jobs (other people quoted low and then changed) but it let me sleep at night. On the other hand, it also got me repeat business and even new business from people who'd turned down our quote and gone with the supposedly "cheap" alternative! Retirement is good........

[woodPixel]

Perhaps the government should "own" the lines and transmission and Private should own the means of generation?

Just did a stupid calculation based on some numbers above - 780 MW x $75/MWh = $512 mil.

Of course its not that due to Variables, but that's a big revenue number! A lot of interesting things could be bought to grab a slice of that.


I had a thought and looked back on a Singapore investment that's put in wind generators in Tassie (these mills are so ridiculously frickin massive it is simply unbelievable! the BLADES are 100m long!) and the UK compressed air mob... that $512MM sure does buy a lot of windmills and storage... a LOT of it... now multiply that by 10 and one gets 5 Billion.... that buys an absolutely SHOCKING amount of solar, wind and CAES.

No wonder the Japanese wrote off that WA coal plant as Zero.


486565 486564

[Bushmiller]

Perhaps the government should "own" the lines and transmission and Private should own the means of generation?

Just did a stupid calculation based on some numbers above - 780 MW x $75/MWh = $512 mil.

Of course its not that due to Variables, but that's a big revenue number! A lot of interesting things could be bought to grab a slice of that.


I had a thought and looked back on a Singapore investment that's put in wind generators in Tassie (these mills are so ridiculously frickin massive it is simply unbelievable! the BLADES are 100m long!) and the UK compressed air mob... that $512MM sure does buy a lot of windmills and storage... a LOT of it... now multiply that by 10 and one gets 5 Billion.... that buys an absolutely SHOCKING amount of solar, wind and CAES.

No wonder the Japanese wrote off that WA coal plant as Zero.


486565 486564

WP

Extrapolating on that at an installation cost of $3mil for a 2MW wind turbine that figure of $512mil, which is a gross sum, what have we got? Take off your fixed running costs, the cost of fuel (likely around at least $10 - $20 per MW), the repayment of debt to the good natured bankers, down time for maintenance, breakages and outages and what do we have left? I don't know, but nowhere near $512 mil.

A wind turbine cost between $3mil and $4mil for a 2MW machine. 512mil would buy somewhere between 128 and 170 2MW wind turbine so they could produce between 256 and 340 MW nominally but in reality only between 35% of that when new and 25% as the machine ages, So between 64MW and 85MW when new.

How much do wind turbines cost? - Windustry (http://www.windustry.org/how_much_do_wind_turbines_cost#:~:text=The%20costs%20for%20a%20utility%20scale%20wind%20turbine,in%20size%20and%20cost%20roughly%20%243-%244%20million%20installed.)

Lets do similar sums with solar.

1MW costs between $1.3mil and $2mil, but here we can only work on a quarter to a fifth of the rated power being generated each day. Actually that does not allow for a week, say, of cloudy weather when very little is generated. To produce the same amount of power as a traditional coal fired generator we have to have an installed capacity of at least five times the nominal amount. So to equate to 780MW you need 4000MW of installed capacity, but, and here is the crunch, you need the abilty to store 3,220MW either through batteries, hydro or whatever method you can come up with. For the moment, that is the absolute killer.

Incidentally, a generator cannot produce it's maximum rated load for revenue (we refer to it as what you send over the fence into the switch yard). Deduct 5% for your own consumption (all your auxiliaries) and de-rate the machine for hot weather. Maybe loose up to 20% of rated power through the middle of the day on hot days (this will vary from station to station). We have an awful lot of hot days in Oz.

Solar panels loose their efficiency as the temp rises beyond 25°C. They require sunlight more than temp.

Lastly, I should explain that I am not knocking renewables. I explain this as I had a disastrous conversation with my daughter that literally ended in tears (hers not mine :( ) . It appears I can be a little less than diplomatic at times.

We now have two solar systems installed as I am a big fan of using the sun to generate power. However, I feel obligated to explain the many pitfalls. I am not starry eyed in this regard. I would draw your attention to a manager interaction I had with one of our managers at work.

Manager: Paul, how do you like working at Millmerran?

Paul: If I have to work at a coal-fired, atmosphere polluting, greenhouse gas generator, Milmerran is the one I absolutely choose.

I don't think that was the answer he expected and to be fair I might have slightly and deliberately misinterpreted his question. As any pollster will tell you, the answers you get will depend on the questions you ask. Careful how you phrase the question.

Regards
Paul

[Warb]

........ I explain this as I had a disastrous conversation with my daughter that literally ended in tears (hers not mine :( ) . It appears I can be a little less than diplomatic at times.

My daughter is 15, and many of my ideas and opinions get short shrift too. Apparently years of work, experience of working and running companies in many countries etc. etc. mean nothing compared to what idealistic teachers or (worse) YouTubers with daft names have to say. I don't get tears, just huge amounts of attitude and "OK boomer" comments.... strange when in the next breath she's asking me to fix her computer!

[Mobyturns]

Unfortunately the "spin" used by politician's, and promoter's of any "beneficial" technology is always over simplified. Trying to win an argument with a 15 yo about why solar & wind is not the magic solution is always going to be a hard sell.

I like to use a very simplified scenario - water from an intermittent source being delivered through an unregulated hose filling a 9lt bucket, and you using a 250ml cup to empty it. There is a sweet spot where you can easily keep up with the incoming flow. When the flow from the hose increases you can increase your tempo but can't sustain it for long so the bucket eventually overflows, and you have to "use" the water or store it somewhere. Oh, and btw the bucket has a hole in it - "system loss." No water coming in, then you have a small reserve capacity - 36 cupfuls, IF you don't spill any! IF you don't use it you will lose it anyway due to the leak. When that is depleted and no incoming water, well there is nothing left.

Now add in "upstream storage," an ability to top up from another water source as well, and the ability to regulate supply (a tap), repair the hole in the bucket (reduce system loss) and hence not waste the water means you have a whole different scenario - efficiency!

Solar & wind are largely an intermittent & unregulated supply, add in some storage capacity, battery or pumped storage, then you introduce some control. However the cost to dimension that storage to a practical capacity is staggering in cost and we have very limited potential sites for pumped storage. Then we introduce the environmental issues, more Franklin Dam protests???

Most residential, business and industrial consumers demand certainty, reliability, continuity, and security of supply, rain, hail or shine. The "alternates" at this stage are far short of that expectation. The Australian Energy Regulator (AER) has a complex task to manage the various stakeholder's interests.

Our only practical solution is a complex mix of technology to satisfy the base load; "temporary" increased demands or reduced supply; peak hour loads; and consumer education to "flatten out" demand across the day. Simple things like putting on the washing machine in off peak periods all contribute to "stability."

[Warb]

......and consumer education to "flatten out" demand across the day. Simple things like putting on the washing machine in off peak periods all contribute to "stability."

The German (?) inverter company SMA make a whole house management system that intelligently controls loads, electric car charging and battery storage included, to best use PV power output. This is the kind of technology I like. Factor in some AI to look at tomorrow's weather forecast and analyse past loads, then deplete battery storage early in the morning, either as export or heating/cooling/charging the car, and then recharge through the day. For new houses such a system could be centrally controlled at the fusebox with discrete circuits for each load, and for retrofits it could use a Philips Hue style WiFi/Zigbee/otherwirelesstechnology box at each load. I've only briefly looked at the SMA system, but it should almost be doable now using something like IFTTT....

One of the difficulties is that there is a requirement for transition. At present "cheap rate" electricity is overnight, which works great for a coal-fired environment. However PV, for example, does nothing at night so the conceptual "cheap rate" for PV is around lunchtime (ignoring loads, for the time being, and looking only at generation). Clearly at present overnight cheap rate is still relevant, because the loads are fewer, but with renewables perhaps we have to rethink this? Perhaps a system more like the "controlled load" (water heater) environment, centrally triggered through the network and allowing "cheap rate" power, or discharge of stored domestic power (domestic Tesla batteries, for example) whenever it is appropriate.

So, for example, my PV system runs my house and charges my (imaginary, sadly) Tesla batteries through the day. If the grid "runs short", it triggers my Tesla batteries to sell power to the grid. Equally if the grid price goes negative (as has been mentioned in this thread), my batteries can soak up that power. Whilst I clearly need to maintain a minimum charge level in my (also imaginary) electric car, it can receive a higher level of charge should the grid be in oversupply. And so on.

Sadly, like the concept of "petrol stations" having banks of easily swappable batteries to avoid the long delays charging electric cars, it will never work because no two organisations will ever agree, and neither will most individuals. Hang on, perhaps those "petrol stations" with racks of hot-swap electric car batteries can also be used in the "soak up excess power or cover brief shortfalls" concept. After all, if we are moving to electric cars that's a lot of hot swap batteries on racks....... "People working together for the common good", ROFL.....

[woodPixel]

My figures were only for a years income at one plant.

If one is looking at investment, to get a 10% return, perhaps multiply by ten. Thats 5 Billion dollars to get $500 mil income?

Thats a lloooooottttt of windmills :)

Interestingly I saw the link too on windmill costs. I spent the afternoon reading about the new GE mills (10MW) and the new 20's coming on board.

I found a calculator for these and Canberra could power every house with only 10 of these monsters.... lets multiply that by 3 for a 30% duty usage... double it for storage.... NOW, we just "bought" a white elephant rail system, it was $1.5 billion oops, thats TWO BILLION (https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6910035/light-rail-to-woden-costs-could-blow-out-to-almost-2-billion/).... we could have THREE wind farms for the price of a single unused train.


The Coal industry is a stiffening corpse, it just needs to be buried.

Its why Sumitomo wrote off their plant in WA. (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-17/bluewaters-coal-fired-power-station-written-off-books/12990532) $1.2 billion gone.... poof!

[Bushmiller]

Chris Parks

Apologies. I am reluctant to say we have hijacked your thread, but I would admit to having digressed a little. I hope all this explains a little more as to why your feed in tarif has gone down but your electricity charge has remained the same.

:rolleyes:

Regards
Paul

[Chris Parks]

Paul, no need for the apology as I find it all very interesting. I am interested also in the peer to peer possibilities of electricity supply which I touched on as I think that idea has legs so to speak. So carry on and let's see where it all goes.

[woodPixel]

I just love the idea, the tech, the possibilities of vast quantities of cheap electricity.

How liberating for industry!

On the OPs original thread :) :B there is this article on the ABC today that goes directly towards the question! ---> Electricity prices predicted to fall as renewable supply increases, gas price falls - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-21/electricity-prices-expected-to-fall-as-renewable-supply-increase/12999538)

[Warb]

The Coal industry is a stiffening corpse, it just needs to be buried.

That thought worries me greatly. It's a fine goal, and has much support from those in cities, but for those of us living in mining areas the realities are somewhat different. We are told that renewables will employ those ousted from the mining industry, but that's a pipe dream. In our area we have large PV and wind generation systems being, or having recently been, installed. What we have seen is short term employment of "muscle" to do the earthmoving, construction etc., but all the technical stuff is either FIFO workers or done off site. Once the system is up and running, employment drops to near zero - I am told the large wind farm near us employs a handful of permanent local staff (I've read just two people are required full time). Compare this to the thousands of people employed at the local mines. The vast majority of those mineworkers are "muscle", largely unsuited to anything other than driving big machines, and are used to being paid big$ for doing so......

When a mine closes, all its employees will be looking for work. There is nothing local for them to do, even if they took jobs as farm hands (jobs for which they are neither suited nor required) they would be looking at perhaps 70% pay cuts, and would be unable to pay their mortgages. So their only choice is to move or claim the dole (and sell their house!). All the direct mining support industries, engineering supply companies, and most of the irrigation/pumping companies would go bust, so their employees are also on the dole. Car dealerships and mechanics have no mines to buy fleets of vehicles, nor mine workers wanting new cars every couple of years. In short, the knock-on effect is that every other local business is then in trouble - no customers and nobody has any money to spend. People move away to try to find jobs, local businesses fold. Eventually even the supermarkets have too few customers to generate enough income for their corporate heads, so they close down.

For those of us living in a mining economy, those mines shutting is a terrifying concept!

[Chris Parks]

Our local mine is closing for 8 weeks from early January and there is some discussion in town as to whether it will be re-opened. On a personal note I would welcome permanent closure due to local coal dust pollution issues that have been happening since they introduced long wall operations but I would not be out of work like the current employees would be and I can relate to being unemployed and given the boot.

[woodPixel]

Warb, I absolutely agree and empathise with that dilemma.

I've no answer, other than to do one of a few things.... get out now, reskill/train/whatever before the rush, or work out a way to migrate/mitigate it on a personal level.


There are many parallels such as Holden.... steel mills, the Tasmanian timber industry and coal. Mining towns boom and bust all the time.

I had shares in a gold mining company in NT that was going gangbusters, until it... didn't (poof!). The entire area went from casino town to carpark in a fortnight....


I think, however, that new opportunities will present themselves. I spend a bit of time each day just thinking about things and this is one which crosses my mind often. I honestly believe we are in for a truly golden age soon. The economies of the world are violently changing, communications/internet are part of daily lives, locality will soon not matter too much (autocars and autotrucks) and the use/need for "cities" seems to be vaporising by the day.

I find it of no use to agonise over the end of things. I stole part of the above statement from an intellectual property lawyer I once worked with... he described Telstra thusly "The rancid and putrefying remains of a terrible business, with desperate people trying to prise money out of an ever-stiffening corpse".... I loved it! Man he hated Telstra.

We can see the end. Don't need to be Nostradamus. Like those desperate saps who still worked at Holden at the end. What a "rancid and putrefying" affair that was.... corporate social security at its very worst. It would have been kinder to kill it quickly. It was unseemly seeing those workers holding out the rattling cup for alms at the end...

[Warb]

Warb, I absolutely agree and empathise with that dilemma.

I've no answer, other than to do one of a few things.... get out now, reskill/train/whatever before the rush, or work out a way to migrate/mitigate it on a personal level.

I'm lucky, I'm largely retired except for a few small "freebie" jobs I do for some local businesses. I have my farm and another business that is to some degree immune from mine closures, certainly in the short term. The majority of the mine workers themselves will be totally stuffed, however. The mines don't develop their employees in a positive way, but rather with a "hit it with a bigger hammer" approach to most things. One of my friends has postulated that this is quite deliberate, as it makes those guys almost unemployable anywhere else - the mines have money to spend fixing broken machines, but farmers etc. don't, so nobody wants to employ people who smash machines on a regular basis! The other big problem is that, as I said, those guys are paid a ridiculous amount of money for what they do, and there is no way they'll get the same money anywhere else. This is why many of them are still there - they don't enjoy it, their bodies are breaking and the hours are awful (12hour shifts, compulsory night work etc. etc.) but they just can't get other jobs, never-mind a level of pay to cover the lifestyle (and loans) they are used to.

I do agree that the mines are doomed, but sadly I struggle to see a "golden age" in the making any time soon. We have all the ability to make it happen, but I'm not sure we will. At present I see vast numbers of people who make all the right noises but don't actually do anything. Many if not most of our friends in Sydney expound green principles, desires to stop global warming, address inequalities and all the other popular views, but do they actually do anything? Rooftop PV, water tanks, electric cars? No, no and no. Composting, growing their own vegetables, limiting showers to 3 minutes to save water? Well no, but this year they haven't flown abroad so that must count? Oh, wait, nobody has been allowed to fly abroad because of Covid......... But they did join a TwitFace group to show their support for something or other, so that PROVES they're serious, and they signed a petition to have a wind farm built somewhere well away from their suburb.......

We have the ability, but few people are willing to put in the effort, and even fewer seem willing to change their habits. Maybe that will change, but we're a selfish species in the main. Until the disaster hits us in the face, we'll make the right noises whilst carrying right on doing the wrong thing. It's the same concept as leaving before the Covid lockdown, everyone knows the lockdown is to reduce the spread so they should stay put, but "if we leave now we won't get stuck and we can still have our holiday".

[Bushmiller]

I thought you folks might like to see some of the disparities that occur in our Eastern Seaboard grid. This was the first snapshot from 2006hrs last night. It has been a long time since the load was more in QLD than NSW and more usual is the price in NSW to be five times that of QLD! You will also see that the QLD price is actually more than the retail price (29c/KWhr), although it did not stay quite that high for very long.

486666

This snapshot from 0607hrs this morning is quite different.


486667

It was an interesting, but hectic night ironically brought on by some welcome rain. Very, very pleased I don't have to return until after Xmas.

Regards
Paul

[Warb]

I thought you folks might like to see some of the disparities that occur in our Eastern Seaboard grid.

Out of interest why does the Tasmanian price go the opposite way to everyone else?


I notice the government has now approved a new coal mine in Jerry's Plains supposedly to produce coal for the next 26 years.

[Bushmiller]

Out of interest why does the Tasmanian price go the opposite way to everyone else?


I notice the government has now approved a new coal mine in Jerry's Plains supposedly to produce coal for the next 26 years.

Warbs

Where there is an inter-connector the power will always flow to the state with the lowest price. Particularly with Victoria, which has inter-connectors with Tassie, SA and NSW this can result in some interesting flows. Each inter-connector has a maximum flow it can support, but there are sometimes physical issues that "constrain" the flow. Consequently there may be a flow that is less than the maximum. This is a situation that can cause an increased price in one state and often a low price in the state at the other end of the inter-connector. Balance of power is a reality in the electricity market :rolleyes: .

New coal mines may receive approval to go ahead, but whether any company is brave enough to push ahead with that development is another matter. The ability to raise finance is another matter again with the mainstream bank starting to treat coal as a pariah. However, the fact the government is open to such approvals is a statement of where their priorities lie and here I am not being political as the QLD government have in recent times approved the Adani mine, which is even more questionable.

I would also echo at this point your comments on potential employment. The mines have offered well paid jobs. Compare, for example, the rate a dozer driver gets in general construction compared to an employee in a mine. However it is indeed only the construction phase that provides significant employment. Increasingly there are fewer and fewer people employed on site. Driverless trucks can be operated from anywhere.

Regards
Paul

[Warb]

Where there is an inter-connector the power will always flow to the state with the lowest price.

I need some time to think about that, and I'm too busy right now! Normally things are purchased FROM the lowest priced supplier, so it seem counter-intuitive that power from higher priced states would flow to a state with a lower price, because that would imply it has been bought at a high price and then sold low..? I think I'm missing something!

[Bushmiller]

I need some time to think about that, and I'm too busy right now! Normally things are purchased FROM the lowest priced supplier, so it seem counter-intuitive that power from higher priced states would flow to a state with a lower price, because that would imply it has been bought at a high price and then sold low..? I think I'm missing something!

Warbs

No time needed. Power flows from the lower price state to the higher.

I got it a.r.s.e. about. :- That's what night shifts can do to an already addled brain. :rolleyes:

On the positive side you have demonstrated you are reading the posts most carefully and keeping me honest.

:cool:

Regards
Paul

[Mr Brush]

At some point, the declining feed in tariff(and utilities limiting feed in due to grid instability) will intersect the falling price of home battery storage, probably within the next 2-3 years.

I'm partway through re-building after our home was lost in the bushfires in Jan (first anniversary coming up :(), and have put a 6.6kW system on the roof which the original house didn't have. Plenty of space in my services area for modular LG Chem (or similar) batteries when the time is right, and everything has been selected/wired to make this easy.

In the short term, AGL were offering 17c/kWh vs the 11c we would get from our existing provider (Red Energy). Of course, that may all change by the time we move back in !

[Chris Parks]

In suitable areas I can see a future for local micro grids to lessen the impact on the wider e=grid. This has been done in WA mainly to try and ensure better reliability over long distances in remote areas due to grid disruption problems such as high winds etc.

[Warb]

At some point, the declining feed in tariff(and utilities limiting feed in due to grid instability) will intersect the falling price of home battery storage, probably within the next 2-3 years.

I'm partway through re-building after our home was lost in the bushfires in Jan (first anniversary coming up :(), and have put a 6.6kW system on the roof which the original house didn't have. Plenty of space in my services area for modular LG Chem (or similar) batteries when the time is right, and everything has been selected/wired to make this easy.


In suitable areas I can see a future for local micro grids to lessen the impact on the wider e=grid. This has been done in WA mainly to try and ensure better reliability over long distances in remote areas due to grid disruption problems such as high winds etc.

When I bought the farm I live in, a fair number of years ago, I had owned my previous farm for several years and the power hadn't been great - awful by city standards but probably passable in a rural area. The house on the "new" farm needed work (my wife point blank refused to live in it until I'd sorted it out) but I intended building a new house so I just did basic reno's to make it habitable. Then we lived in it for a couple of years whilst we planned and built the new house. That was an eye opener; the power went out at the slightest excuse, high voltage (and spikes), brownouts etc. etc. With that knowledge, I built the new house with a separate group of circuits for "mission critical" loads like lights, fridges/freezers/coolroom, computers and TV. At that time there was very little commercially available battery backup, so my electrician and I improvised a system. I found a battery inverter (second hand) of suitable capacity, and a large box of AGM batteries. I then used about 2kW of solar panels on a shed roof, connected to the batteries by a Midnite Solar charge regulator to keep the batteries topped up - at the time the DC side was all "DIY" legal, though I believe they have since dropped the DIY allowable voltage to something stupidly low. I incorporated a S.O.C. meter (Victron?) that also shuts down the inverter if the batteries discharge below a preset level. My electrician then checked the DC side and wired up the inverter with a bypass switch, such that I can (if I choose) power the "critical circuits" from the batteries 24/7, or power everything the grid or (the normal setting) power from the grid but with an instant automatic transition to batteries should the grid fail. He was (still is) happy that it was legal and provides no risks, the fuseboxes are all correctly labelled to make it clear which circuits are supported etc. in the approved manner. It works perfectly, and is still on the original batteries. It has, I suspect, also saved it's cost in wasted food etc. when the grid has gone down for 12 to 24 hours a couple of times over the years. Unlike modern commercially available versions, it generates no feed-in to the grid, no REC's etc., it is purely used to keep the power going when the grid fails. It is, however, a nice feeling when a neighbour complains about spending the previous evening with screaming kids by candlelight, and we didn't even know there was a problem!

One day (or in the next place, if we ever move again) I'll replace it with a more modern storage system with the capability to store excess power through the day and reuse it at night - we can do this now, but it requires a bit of thought so we don't bother!

I'm hoping, though somehow doubting it will be in my lifetime, that eventually a "micro-grid" system will leverage cheap battery storage, both domestic and grid based, to smooth out the loads and supplies. Unfortunately I suspect things will have to get a fair bit worse before the various organisations involved are driven beyond thinking of their own profit or simplistic well-being and start to consider the bigger picture. The present thinking seems to be largely "domestic PV is a challenge for the grid, so quietly discourage it", which is driving people around here to contemplate off-grid solutions using the newer cheaper batteries. I think a better option would be to develop a management system that would allow people to interact with the grid in a "managed" way that would be beneficial to both the power companies and the homeowner.......

[woodPixel]

These are now being rolled out by the hundreds.... 13 GW.... ONE is enough for 13000 houses.

A Monster Wind Turbine Is Upending an Industry - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/01/business/GE-wind-turbine.html)


In one deal alone 276 turbines are being installed at Dogger Bank off Britain... 276!
487128

[Bushmiller]

These are now being rolled out by the hundreds.... 13 GW.... ONE is enough for 13000 houses.



WP

That is an interesting article and water based wind turbines certainly avoid the land acquisition issues (presumably some permission is still required). I imagine that it brings other challenges instead such as, but not limited to, sinking a footing and rough weather as well as corrosion in the unforgiving salty environment. Not meaning to be a dampener :rolleyes: .

From reading the article I don't think they are quite at the point of rolling out hundreds, although General Electric would clearly like to be at that point. They have one turbine erected (they did not say if it was hooked up to the grid) and it is on land at Rotterdam. They are still investigating where they will be manufacturing the machines with several of their plants in different countries and seeking an economic method of mass production. However, I can only go from what is in the article you have linked.

This is a video of the latter stages of construction. Not easy with something that is 850' high. Even more difficult while "treading water." No doubt it can be done, but can it be built for the right price and will it last long enough to return it's owners a financial benefit? These are the questions we should ask of any new technology and before anybody jumps in and says wind is not new (I agree ) it is when it is this big.

Construction of world's biggest wind turbine Haliade X | Drone video - Bing video (https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=general+electric+wind+turbines&&view=detail&mid=DB436102BF010AA10479DB436102BF010AA10479&&FORM=VDRVRV)

Thank you for posting.

Regards
Paul

[woodPixel]

I believe they are like oil derricks, they float. We see only one third of the install, the rest is a ballast underwater?


edit! They do indeed float. They are monsters.

487142 487143 487144

[Bushmiller]

I believe they are like oil derricks, they float. We see only one third of the install, the rest is a ballast underwater?


edit! They do indeed float. They are monsters.

487142 487143 487144

Thanks WP.

I had no idea how they did it and had a mental image of people pushing wheelbarrows laden with concrete (waterproof) on the sea bed filling post holes...Well not exactly but you probably get the drift. You would not want to run into one in your private submarine I am thinking.

Regards
Paul

[Mr Brush]

Coming soon to an empty patch of sea near you.....

Star of the South (https://www.starofthesouth.com.au/)

I have an indirect connection with this project. Predictably, it's the onshore portion that is causing all the issues !!

[Warb]

...... and water based wind turbines certainly avoid the land acquisition issues (presumably some permission is still required).

The land issues cause all kinds of problems. The owner of the land in question has to sign a non-disclosure agreement and gets paid a lease fee for each turbine. Their neighbours, who may be 5m on "the wrong side of the fence" get nothing, even though the person owning the land on which the turbine is built may be km's away and out of view of the turbine (or even living in a city somewhere) whilst the "neighbour" may have the turbine right in the middle of their view and only a few meters (relatively) from their house. It can create some bad feeling..........