Wind Generation and the Electricity Grid

[cove]

We were motivated by cost savings but it is good that we have reduced our electricity use on so many properties as it does look like climate change is occurring.

 

[RooFlyer]

Absolutely no doubt the climate is changing!

The earth's climate has been in an easily demonstrable state of change for the past several million years (direct records of the multiple onset and regression of ice ages ... the latter AKA 'global warming'), and there is little doubt that its been changing for billions of years (implied through continental drift and the lithological and paleontological record).

 

[opusman]

Absolutely no doubt the climate is changing!

The earth's climate has been in an easily demonstrable state of change for the past several million years (direct records of the multiple onset and regression of ice ages ... the latter AKA 'global warming'), and there is little doubt that its been changing for billions of years (implied through continental drift and the lithological and paleontological record).

Trying to work out which "How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic" response best fits this tired old trope, I guess it's either this one or this one.

 

[RooFlyer]

Moi? 'Climate sceptic'? Read my post ... I absolutely believe in climate change. The geological and geomorphological record (ie evidence of the last few ice age epochs) is hard to dispute.

Honestly I don't know what the fuss is about.

 

[straitman]

If you shut down base load (eg coal fired) power stations and don't replace them with other base load capacity, and you then rely on intermittent energy generators such as wind and solar, you are going to end up short of power and its going to cost a lot more.

Unfortunately this 'relatively important' fact continually gets lost in the BS.

 

[whatmeworry]

I see that the Greens and others are falling over themselves about this. I'm sure they are happy to waive the standard requirements for permits, Environmental assessments, public consultation and the like because, after all its battery storage . And they won't mind that the batteries are produced at enormous energy expense and uses materials produced by the wicked mining industry. And they won't mind that the proponent is a rich guy at the head of a multinational corporation. Greens just love rich people - like the greenie millionaire who gave them the biggest single political donation in the last Tas election.

Sure, just waive the whole thing through in 100 days. What could possibly go wrong?

Here in Tasmania we have had massive battery storage facilities for over 50 years. We call them hydro dams. Store water and hold it as potential energy and release that energy on demand when its needed. It worked well until the Carbon Tax and its profit generating capacity came along and we damn near ran out of water and had to turn to diesel generators to keep the lights on, when suddenly we also couldn't draw on Victoria's coal generated power.

But of course the 'hydro' type of battery storage, indeed this whole type of renewable energy is condemned by the Greens and here in Tas some are still fighting for at least one of the large hydro impoundments to be emptied.

Well President Trumble is now talking to Elon.

 

[SFSC]

There is a place for any technology in power generation as long as it works and provides a suitable return on investment. Ideally the market for electricity should cost in externalities such as dust, oxides of nitrogen and carbon dioxide emissions and better reflect the true value of ancilliary services such as FCAS (Frequency Control) and SRAS (System Restart).

The current financial reward for SRAS in particular does not reflect the old saying "There is no power more expensive as no power". Some auxiliaries of synchronous rotating generating plant can draw up to 30MW on starting. A battery storage plant of 100MW located a short transmission distance from a coal fired plant would be a good fit if ever system restart capability becomes correctly priced.

 

[RooFlyer]

Well President Trumble is now talking to Elon.

I rest my case!! And I thought it was Prime Minister Trumble?

 

[opusman]

Moi? 'Climate sceptic'? Read my post ... I absolutely believe in climate change.

Just not anthropogenic climate change, huh?

 

[drron]

So why does the satellite data not support the predictions made by the warmists-
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wor...nfirm-2016-is-tied-with-1998-as-warmest-year/

 

[opusman]

So why does the satellite data not support the predictions made by the warmists-
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wor...nfirm-2016-is-tied-with-1998-as-warmest-year/

Sigh... https://grist.org/climate-energy/the-satellites-show-cooling/

 

[RAM]

And I'm sure those same pensioners pay more for water in $/L and telephony in $/call.

Why - in all of these networks a substantial costs is in the maintenance of the network, or poles and wires - which is what the daily access charge, or monthly telephone line rental is there to cover.

--

As for SA and Tesla (or otherwise) batteries.
I'd much prefer a 'cleaner' pumped hydro solution that just needs wind/solar powering a pumping station to shift water up hill when power is cheap, and then used as hydro power when the demand is there.

Versus all the chemicals and expensive metals that go into battery packs that have a limited life span and questionable recyclability.

And some laws and stiff fines to stop players 'gaming' the power system by reducing supply.

1) Totally agree - the federal Govt should act like one, just like a line in the movie "Hidden Figures", 'You're the boss. You just need to act like one!'.

Political donations and certain states using their power companies as quasi-taxing institutions to boost state revenues however make it unlikely to happen for some time to come. Both political parties have a steady stream of ex-pollies or numbers' people joining the various allied lobby groups, industry bodies or companies themselves. They don;'t want to kill the golden goose. Unfortunately what is good for Australia as a whole is subordinate to their own snouts-in-the-trough.

2) Do you think the more power or gas etc you use that you should pay a lower rate per unit used or higher? Should families conserving energy or recycling nearly everything (so cost to council of rubbish is a fraction or non-recycling household for example) be charged more per unit used (not factoring in the daily access fee)?

3) It is a good question you raise about the relative cleanliness. Did you know that the solid waste from the coal-fired plants as well as the emissions are radio active as well as containing various toxic substances?

Who is one of Australia's top ten users of power from brown coal?

The Snowy Mountains scheme.

 

[RooFlyer]

Just not anthropogenic climate change, huh?

Well, why didn't you say that, if that's what you meant?

In my science, "climate change" was taught when I was an undergrad 35 or so years ago. Ho hum.

I dare say than mankind has some impact on climate, as it has on all aspects of the environment, but having studied the dramatic, and sometimes sudden changes in climate over the past few million years (ie onset and regression of ice ages), I'm damned if we can separate out the relative impact of mankind vs nature. I mean, we have a current dataset of one example for the current situation. And if I'm a sceptic, then I'm sceptical of scientists who have an enormous financial interest in the continuation of the ACC hysteria. I don't think there's ever been such a monumental gravy train of funds for research, has there? I'm also sceptical when CO2 is called "carbon" by these so-called 'scientists' and this gas, essential for plant life and therefore most life on earth, is called a "pollutant" and represented by chimneys billowing soot (take a bow, Katie Blanchett, that well known expert in the field ).

Yes, climate change is real... we can agree on that.

As for wind power? I personally don't like to see eagles chopped up by the rotor blades, but I think the greenies here are OK with them.
Solar? If people want to pay for the full cost of solar, I say good luck to them.

 

[RAM]

Oops, I did miss something. Let me re-do it:

If you shut down base load (eg coal fired) power stations and don't replace them with other base load capacity, and you then rely on intermittent energy generators such as wind and solar, you are going to end up short of power and its going to cost a lot more.

Thank you!

The "cost a lot more" is not necessarily correct.

What has pushed the cost up Australia (ex-WA slightly) has been the Qld LNG plants. Also the existing LNG plants to some extent for good measure as mentioned above.

Pumped hydro is one of the easiest ways to address the short term aberrations that are happening all too frequently however the 'late bidding' practice by a number of duopoly producers Aust-wide as well as surely coincidental actions by competing generators are reaping hundreds of millions at the community and business' expense. That's why a number of mid-level power users have run the numbers and are building their own utility-scale PV, wind, combined or pumped-hydro/PV projects.

The instances that were not 'gaming' can be solved by having the quick response storage solutions. The batteries (do not have to be lithium as there are a few different solutions available) can have the fastest response (milli-seconds) pumped hydro is somewhat longer but much faster than peaking gas. Another problem is that the amount actually paid to the generators is averaged out over half an hour minute interval which the coal/gas plant operators are demanding not be changed and the hydro/PV/wind are wanting the more modern approach of 5 minutes.

Australia's electricity demand by state and taken as a whole had been falling since around 2008/9 or so. For some states (several) it is still falling year on year, Qld ex-LNG use is still falling. How many people may not remember that wholesale power prices in Qld went negative several dozen times in 2014. Then the gaming of the system has seen negative prices happen a few times this year (did you see that on the front pages though?)
[h=3]High Energy price QLD NSW Negative Energy price TAS[/h]https://www.aemo.com.au/-/.../Electricity/.../Pricing.../30-January-2017---High-Energ...


Jan 30, 2017 - Electricity Pricing Event Report – Monday 30 January 2017 ... Detailed Analysis: The 5-Minute dispatch Energy price in QLD was $13,800/MWh ...

This gem from the Australian Energy Regulator's Annual report highlights the gaming and the lack of any Govt will to deal with it.

Queensland’s generation sector is more highly concentrated than other mainland NEM regions, with Stanwell and CS Energy controlling 64 per cent of capacity. From November 2014 generators (including Stanwell, CS Energy and Callide) used rebidding strategies to shift large volumes of capacity from low to very high prices late in a trading interval. In tight market conditions, an unexpected shift in supply can cause prices to spike. By rebidding late, other participants lack sufficient time to respond, preserving a high 30 minute average spot price.

Volatility peaked on 5 March 2015, when Queensland’s spot price exceeded $5000 per MWh for all but one trading interval from 4.30 pm to 7 pm. Forecast spot prices (both four and 12 hours ahead) for all intervals ranged from $39 to $60 per MWh. Prices were volatile for the entire day, with 39 (five minute) dispatch intervals at or above $12 900 per MWh. While a heatwave in Brisbane caused maximum demand to set a record on the day, and long term network constraints limited electricity imports from NSW, Queensland had 800 MW of surplus available capacity when the price spikes occurred.

Ernst & Young estimated the late rebidding added around $8 per MWh to Queensland price caps in the December quarter 2014, and around $7 per MWh in the March quarter 2015. Across the market, this increase represented a cost of around $170 million.

What it did not mention though was that the power plants in southern Qld were maxing out so that there was no capacity in the north/south transmission line for NSW producers to sell power into Qld. Sound familiar? The Qld producers did the exact same thing recently.

So Qld Govt earned an extra $170mn in a single 6 month period from doing that. One State in 6 months. Add in what is happening currently around Australia and you can see how much money there is in this rorting.

 

[RAM]

Yes, climate change is real... we can agree on that.

As for wind power? I personally don't like to see eagles chopped up by the rotor blades, but I think the greenies here are OK with them.
Solar? If people want to pay for the full cost of solar, I say good luck to them.

Nothing's simple, pity the discussions by the powers that be are not on harm minimisation but satisfying the donors.

"Yet many environmentalists say wind power ultimately benefits birds. It is a "a growing solution to some of the more serious threats that birds face, since wind energy emits no greenhouse gases that accelerate climate change," Terry Root of Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, said in a statement accompanying the study's release.



Earlier this month, a National Audubon Society report said that hundreds of bird species in the U.S. — including the bald eagle and eight state birds, from Idaho to Maryland — are at "serious risk" due to climate change. It said some species are forecast to lose more than 95% of their current ranges.



"Our scientists are still reviewing this particular study," says Audubon spokesman David Ringer. He says his group strongly supports "properly sited wind power as a renewable energy source that helps reduce the threat posed to birds and people by climate change." He says it has helped develop guidelines for the wind industry to minimize harm to wildlife."

 

[RooFlyer]

Nothing's simple, pity the discussions by the powers that be are not on harm minimisation but satisfying the donors.
<snip>

Of course the other side has 'donors' as well - except they, the taxpayers, don't get much say in where their hard-earned goes, funding billions of subsidies to 'renewables' and conga-lines of 'climate change' (sic) scientists, all with their hand out to maintain the paper flow and research apparatus. Sorry for the cynicism but I'm again within the bosom of our tertiary education system and my God, you wouldn't want to fund 10% of what goes on there.

<snip>
"Yet many environmentalists say wind power ultimately benefits birds. It is a "a growing solution to some of the more serious threats that birds face, since wind energy emits no greenhouse gases that accelerate climate change," Terry Root of Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, said in a statement accompanying the study's release.
<snip>

Er, yes ... he would say that, wouldn't he? But I don't think it 'ultimately benefits' the dozens of eagles that get smashed to bits along Tas west coast. But then again, there's no hypocrite like an environmental hypocrite. Greenies in Tasmania still won't accept hydro as a legitimate, 'carbon free' source of energy, because of their history against it (thank you, Bob Brown).

 

[RAM]

Of course the other side has 'donors' as well - except they, the taxpayers, don't get much say in where their hard-earned goes, funding billions of subsidies to 'renewables' and conga-lines of 'climate change' (sic) scientists, all with their hand out to maintain the paper flow and research apparatus. Sorry for the cynicism but I'm again within the bosom of our tertiary education system and my God, you wouldn't want to fund 10% of what goes on there.

Snouts-in-trough know no boundaries.

Just like an eco-conference that changed the figures so that Ethical funds out-performed. Trouble was I had downloaded the same presentation by a global index company given in NY two weeks earlier. Amazing how quickly blood drains from some people's face when caught. His excuse "the organiser said I could either present the slides they've put into their format (background etc) with the wrong figures or they'd present them on my behalf."

That was in 2000 when the ESR funds were 3/10ths of nothing and a global supplier would not stand up to a tin-pot operation in Australia.

 

[drron]

Sigh... https://grist.org/climate-energy/the-satellites-show-cooling/

Sigh.......,https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech...rming-satellite-data-gets-suspicious-makeover

 

[wandering_fred]

I wonder what relatively minor changes in the earth crust temperatures would do to support or deny the current climate change arguments? A couple of degree change underneath Greenland or Antarctica would create all sorts of "grief".....

Back to the (eastern) Australian grid issues. The system controller should not have a financial interest in providing power. Base load providers should have LARGE penalties when prices spike because of the lack of base load power. Perhaps the state governments should be willing to supply the capital cost (audited) of peaking (gas?) generating systems.

Discuss with minimal wandering

Fred

 

[samh004]

Discuss with minimal wandering

I believe the right wants less government interference and more power for private companies to take advantage of the people who elected them, while the left wants more government oversight to stop private companies from taking advantage of the people who elected them.

But back on the topic of this thread, I note no one has addressed my comment about a large battery storage plant suffering the same problem that caused the major SA blackout, i.e. the powerlines between the batteries and the people falling over in high winds. Thus, while batteries may solve issues on days with low wind and high power usage, they won't help the route cause of the blackout