Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by ian
Not Quite, All dams silt up - some are faster than others - the sorts of numbers thrown around are about 0.5% per year so unless active de-siltation programs (ie expensive) are enacted after 50 years the capacity will be around 78%
Siltation depends on a bunch of factors and one of the biggest is the size and variation in precipitation. Give that climate change is driving us to much greater variations than in the past siltation of all ams is going to increase.
I don't know of any dams in NSW that have been desilted - as BobL says, it would be an expensive process. I do know of one that was abandoned as it silted up very quickly. Note that most of the silting occurs in the top reaches of the storage, and small dams fill up more, as a percentage, than large ones. I don't know the numbers for the Snowy dams.
I'd expect that because most of the inflow to the Snowy storages is from snowmelt, there is relatively little silt inflow compared with dams that are filled by storm runoff. Of course, with climate change, the nature of inflows to the Snowy storages may change.
I have been a little alarmed at public comment on the behaviour of coal fired stations with regard to maintenance. We have to remember in the first instance that they are commercial operations that have to provide a profit for their owners and shareholders: They are not a benevolent society and they are at the hands of economic pitfalls as much as anybody. They certainly do not plan to fail, although the big danger is that they reach a point where there is no economic sense in ploughing good monay after bad. It is true that the older stations are more at risk than the newer stations, of which the newest is about fifteen years old.
However, to give one example, I saw that AGL has a number of units offline. One is at Loyang where it was on a scheduled outage that has extended because there has been difficulty sourcing some generator parts. Bayswater has three of it's four units out of service, which sounds badly planned, but not so much when the reasons are examined. One unit is on a scheduled outage for maintenance, a second unit was taken offline for a tube leak (tube leaks are the bane of boiler operation, affict everybody and are largely unpredictable) and the third unit has some coal plant issue that requires the unit offline (I don't know the detail there). At a time like this no power station wishes to be offline as for so long they have operated making minimal profits. The combination of these four units alone is around 2500MW. At an average of $350/MWhr ($875,000 per hour) I am quite sure they would be online ifthey possibly could be. They are losing a potential of $21 million dollars per day!
I took an average of $350 off the top of my head. That may be a reasonable guess if these plants were in service. Right now the averages, from the AEMO dashboard, are considerably in excess of that.
I just wished to put things in perspective rather than have people totally believing the ill considered statements that are flung out pandering to sensationalism. It is true to say that this situation is pushing up prices on the spot market.
Regards
Paul
An interesting article describing how we have allowed the gas crisis to develop
'Stupid' gas policies led to energy crisis in eastern states, say former premiers (msn.com)
The "hillbilly" WA does not appear to have this problem.
Regards
Paul
A little bit of H2 development in SA.
How the planned 'hydrogen hub' in SA could help Australia's gas crisis | Watch (msn.com)
Regards
Paul
A bloke on Reddit, in Victoria, received this unpleasant bit of an update yesterday.....
Seems we are not the only place discussing this :oo::q:U
Attachment 512928
Attachment 512929
Absolutely true, Paul, but sometimes I think your heart is too pure to analyse the commercial world objectively. I will put on my economists hat and "re-analyse" the rest of your post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
First and key is that the power companies are in the business of making money, not making electricity - the latter is just a step in the process - and they want to maximise that money. Next we must look at pricing, the intercept of supply and demand.
Demand for electricity is inelastic in economic terms. This means that in the short term people will not change their demand in responses to price changes. If the price of electricity doubles tomorrow, you will still turn on the lights, watch TV, log onto the Forum, etc; you might intend to turn down the heat pump by a degree or two, but will probably soon revert to your prefered comfort level. You might think about more insulation. Most people will do the same and the demand will not change very much with the price rise. Demand for electricity is inelastic.
Supply is by an oligopoly - a very small number of electricity producers - most of whom have more than one plant. Take one plant or even one production line out of the equation - shut it down - and you immediately have a fixed demand chasing a smaller supply and prices will rise. That closed plant will not make money, but the company will make more money at its other plants that may more than offset the losses from the closed plant. Next, respond to the publicity about dirty coal and close another plant and put your public relations staff in overdrive. "We have closed two dirty coal fired plants, arn't we good?" The extra dollars roll in!
Credibility; think I am exagerating? Then read what happened in the electricity industry in California 20 years ago.
Moral. The power companies are in the business of making money, not making electricity. All is fair in love and war, and in the utilities market.
Graeme
I was speaking very much from the perspective of our plant at Millmerran (we also have a 50% share in two units at Callide) and while I accept that supply and demand are cagey sleeping partners (the story of the Sybilline books comes to mind) I believe that the generators mainly are keen to be online: Possibly the naieve side of my nature is surfacing there.
I spoke a few moments ago to one of my work colleagues and he told me the average price for the month so far is just under $600/MWhr (60 cents/Kwhr)! That means even charging the money WP has posted above, companies such as that are likely still going to go bust.
I think I am on the record here somewhere with a few statements such as these:
1. It was a big mistake for the government electricity utilities to sell off their interests for the sake of a quick monetary gain. We are now all, literally, paying the price. It is also irreversible.
2. The state owned electricity commisions were formed back in the 50s with the sole concept of ensuring "continuity of supply."
3. "Continuity of Supply," as the the prime concern, went out the back door with privatisation and the competitive market.
4. Once the competitive market was introduced there were only three issues; Price, Price and Price. I first heard that statement around 1996.
When we talk at my workplace, about events coinciding we often refer to the holes in Swiss cheese lining up. The current situation is a combination of unfortunate events that have all lined up. The Russo-Ukrainian war (I call it a war; Anything else is too stupid to contemplate), the consequent high demand and price for gas overseas (it was always going to be there, but arguably not quite so intense as it currently is), the succession of coal fired plants out of service for unforseeable events, the difficulties some coal fired plants have with coal supplies because of unprecedented wet weather for this time of year, the increased demand for electricity courtesy of a colder and early onset winter and reduced supply of renewables because of unusually cloudy days associated with the wet weather.
Add all this up and you have the recipe for high prices at best and potential disaster at worst.
You have brought out the pessimist in me, which was previously in denial being deeply hidden.:(
Regards
Paul
Its across all energy.
The holes in the swiss cheese have lined up on many parts of the market :)
The yanks are having a whinge about "$5 gas".... poor princesses.
I just paid $2.25 today. That's USD$1.86 a litre. It filled 1/3rd of my tank for $50....
Gasoline Prices Reach $5 a Gallon Nationwide for the First Time - WSJ
Apparently it has gone past $6.43 in California over the weekend. (AUD$2.39/L).
It may indicate the pain ahead for us? (plus the petrol tax reduction ends soon??) I'd say to fill those cars up tomorrow lads and learn how to NOT use the accelerator :U
Attachment 512948
1 US gallon = 3.7854
AUD is .7100
WP
Those gas prices for the US will, long term, have a significant repercussion on their car market. The American gas guzzler was never of concern while the prices for fuel were low, but that looks to be changing. Europe, where fuel prices have always been high, tended to have small engined cars with better fuel economies. Australia is somewhere in between these two extremes, but there will be an increasing tendency away from large engines. This may well serve to kickstart the hesitant conversion to EVs, although much will depend on exactly how they are taxed in both the short and long terms.
Regards
Paul
In his last post, Graeme mentioned the inelasticity of power demand because, in the longer term, domestic consumers are unlikely to change their power consumption in response to high energy prices. This made me ask myself what practical steps could be taken in a household to stabilize and, hopefully reduce consumption? Obviously, the saving of one household wouldn't even be as drop in the proverbial ocean but, repeated in thousands of households, these would have to have an effect on demand.
Small steps like change all light bulbs to LED's, switch lights off in unoccupied rooms etc etc.
Any suggestions ?
Cheers,
Yvan
YvanQuote:
Originally Posted by yvan
What you have said is quite correct. In our household we have an arrangement where SWMBO goes around from room to room turning lights on and I follow behind her turning them off! :rolleyes: I am am not convinced that is how team work should function, but that is how it is.
Lights, particularly LEDs, consume very little power, so not so much is saved there despite it all adding up over a long term. However, the high consumption devices, such as air con, can make quite a difference. They should be restricted to the rooms you are using and maybe, during winter, turn the setting down a couple of degrees (the opposite in summer of course) and perhaps wear a sweater. As Graeme has said, people are stubborn and generally wish to continue exactly as they have been without any concession or compromise so those people hike up the temp on thier air cons and continue to walk around shirtless in their stubbies. That may change a little when they get their next electricity bill, although Graeme thinks not: He may well be right. Such change only occurs over a long period of time.
My daughter works for a division of Schneider Electric that examines and recommends ways of saving on electricity bills for large companies. Bunnings is one of their clients. Last time I was in one of their two Toowoomba stores there was a large TV screen showing real time electricty they were generating both for that individual store and their network of stores as a whole. Clearly they, in an industrial context, are aware there are savings to be made: Indeed need to be made. Very interesting. I have noted that it is never very warm in their stores: A true wharehouse.
Regards
Paul
This is probably another indictment of Australia's foreign ownership policy:
Gas exporters mostly foreign owned (msn.com)
In particular I took this extract.
"The institute’s analysis also shows the top 20 ASX-listed companies are on average 80 per cent foreign owned.
Overseas investors have a 51 per cent stake in Telstra, despite a 35 per cent cap. Qantas is 62 per cent under foreign ownership despite a 49 per cent limit on overseas investors.
Australia’s mining industry was found to be 90 per cent foreign owned, including BHP – founded in NSW – which was 94 foreign owned.
The Commonwealth Bank is 81 per cent foreign owned."
It does explain the reluctance of the Gas companies to make supply available to Australia, but not why there is no condition where fixed supply is not complusory for the Australian domestic market.
Regards
Paul
An article explaining how much retaillers are able to increase their charges to the consumer and why some retiallers are attempting to divest their clients so they don't go bust. There is also some suggestions for conserving useage, which Yvan may find useful.
How much are power prices increasing by? Why are they going up? What can I do to save on electricity? (msn.com)
As you can see, it is comples with the rules varying for different regions. I assume that this increase is just for the one year and the following year it could go up by the same amount again.
However, it doesn't explain how some retaillers are able to double their prices legally. There is an anomally there that perhaps somebody else can explain.
Regards
Paul