Wind Generation and the Electricity Grid

[RAM]

This piece provides an understanding to the SA Govt's generator & battery project - the amount it can earn by using the battery for say just 30 hours a year could more than pay for the entire cost over 3 years (in SA's case).


UK opens first subsidy-free solar farm, complete with storage

“It is only going to be exceptional projects that are built subsidy free. What we are asking for is a level playing field for solar power.”

Anesco’s Shine admitted that the Clayhill farm would not pay with solar by itself at the moment – the storage support is key to ensuring its viability because by providing grid balancing services to the National Grid it can receive the extra payments offered to electricity generators that help to ensure high voltage transmission systems remain stable and absorb excess power when solar and wind load the grid.

 

[drron]

I'm sorry but the last paragraph gives the lie to the heading-

Anesco’s Shine admitted that the Clayhill farm would not pay with solar by itself at the moment – the storage support is key to ensuring its viability because by providing grid balancing services to the National Grid it can receive the extra payments offered to electricity generators that help to ensure high voltage transmission systems remain stable and absorb excess power when solar and wind load the grid.

 

[RAM]

I'm sorry but the last paragraph gives the lie to the heading-

Dear drron - perhaps look at my post which includes that last paragraph...

Generation + storage is EXACTLY what SA is doing for EXACTLY the same outcomes.

So, in the UK with significantly LOWER PV generation capacity per day vs SA - a PV plant with battery requires ZERO subsidies of any sort.
______________________________________________

Sorry - you seem to have missed the point of my previous post entirely.

 

[wandering_fred]

In the category of unintended consequences, the following article discusses offshore wind farms. They would likely be useful near me or in Bass Strait or western Tasmania, but time will tell. As will the analysis of large scale battery storage as a grid stabilization source.

Neither of which will be bad.........

Just wandering
Fred

Offshore wind turbines are changing the marine environment in complex and unexpected ways

 

[drron]

Dear drron - perhaps look at my post which includes that last paragraph...

Generation + storage is EXACTLY what SA is doing for EXACTLY the same outcomes.

So, in the UK with significantly LOWER PV generation capacity per day vs SA - a PV plant with battery requires ZERO subsidies of any sort.
______________________________________________

Sorry - you seem to have missed the point of my previous post entirely.

The highlighted part says it all-higher payments.A subsidy by another name.Sorry you don't get it.

 

[RAM]

The highlighted part says it all-higher payments.A subsidy by another name.Sorry you don't get it.

You miss the point once more...

Those higher payments are going to the GAS or COAL fired operators now - in the UK and around the world (including Australia).. However the fossil fuel lobby does not call them subsidies.

What is wrong with a subsidy free Solar farm competing with gas or coal plants to provide frequency stabilisation services? Other than it stops the fossil fuel plants from gaming the system - remember it was the failure of both coal and gas-fired power plants that nearly turned out the lights in NSW earlier this year.

In Australia these 'higher payments' to gas and coal generators are around the $1 billion mark EVERY year. But they are not called subsidies by the fossil fuel lobby - so why would you call them subsidies?

<redacted>

 

[drron]

You miss the point once more...

Those higher payments are going to the GAS or COAL fired operators now - in the UK and around the world (including Australia).. However the fossil fuel lobby does not call them subsidies.

What is wrong with a subsidy free Solar farm competing with gas or coal plants to provide frequency stabilisation services? Other than it stops the fossil fuel plants from gaming the system - remember it was the failure of both coal and gas-fired power plants that nearly turned out the lights in NSW earlier this year.

In Australia these 'higher payments' to gas and coal generators are around the $1 billion mark EVERY year. But they are not called subsidies by the fossil fuel lobby - so why would you call them subsidies?

....

Prove it.Give me the feedin tariff for this solar plant,solar plants in general in the UK and if any coal production.
The AEMO system in Australia is not in evidence in the UK.
And far from subsidies for each MW of coal fired electricity production have to buy a REC whilst wind and solar get an REC-currently worth ~ $A80.So explain again how coal power is subsidised?


<redacted>

 

[RAM]

Prove it.Give me the feedin tariff for this solar plant,solar plants in general in the UK and if any coal production.
The AEMO system in Australia is not in evidence in the UK.
And far from subsidies for each MW of coal fired electricity production have to buy a REC whilst wind and solar get an REC-currently worth ~ $A80.So explain again how coal power is subsidised?


<redacted>

Dear drron - every time I have "PROVED" it previously for some strange reason you ignore it and do not admit you were mistaken or posted FAKE news (remember my personal favourite recent FAKE news post by you of Bill gates investing $40bn).

Posting the reports from the AEMO, AEMR etc etc keep being ignored by you.

Posting the admission by Malcolm Turnbull that generators are gaming the system to create huge profits at the community's expense - is ignored by you.

All the information I provide - is ignored by you.

Do you see a trend? If someone does not agree with you, and produces FACTUAL evidence that your claims have no substance - you turn to the next outrageous claim.

1) Were you wrong in your post about Bill Gates investing $40bn in nuclear plants in China? A post which you later denied making for some odd reason.

2) Were you wrong in denying that a number Australian power generators are gaming the market to earn windfall gains?

3) Were you wrong in claiming renewable energy was responsible for the near blackout in NSW earlier this year?

The facts, Govt reports, and now the Prime Minister says you were.

Or is everybody else wrong?

Until you answer Qns 1-3 above honestly, I will adopt your approach and ignore.

 

[RAM]

Due to expected sunny skies and slightly windy day in SA today - the wholesale price for its power for many hours through the day is expected to be below $20 per MWh



Qld with no wind farms currently and equally sunny skies - see its wholesale price ranging from around $80 to $93 per MWh over this same time period.

Later in the day, SA's price rockets to (Woomera..) $73 per MWh.

Qld merely rises to $249 per MWh.

<< Do the last two sentences qualify me to write for the Murdoch press? >>

What about that pariah State Victoria? Surely as they allowed Hazelwood to shut down - they must be suffering badly. They sure are... what torture - $10 per MHw wholesale prices. Get the bulldozers out and destroy those wind turbines!

 

[cove]

We are working on a 100kW solar system for a key supplier. We don’t want price rises from our supplier due to electricity charges.

 

[whatmeworry]

We are working on a 100kW solar system for a key supplier. We don’t want price rises from our supplier due to electricity charges.

I thought Western Australians were smarter for reserving gas, thus negating raising electricity prices?

 

[wandering_fred]

WA network charges offset any benefit received from "reasonable" gas prices. The number of "employees" required to replace a transformer hit by lightning may be influenced by historical work rules..... As well ignoring wooden power poles for thirty years or more could be a reason why so many needed to be replaced in a short period of time. Both would "explain" recent rises in network access fees. Pity the FIT does not reflect the distance from the base load power plants.

On the continued topic of wind power, other countries seem to be progressing even if there is a serious diversity of opinion here in Australia.

Just wandering
Fred
The first solar power plant in Britain built without Government help just opened

 

[cove]

WMW that new project is in Adelaide.
We operate in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth with office and warehouses so we have seen some crazy stuff over 38 years.

 

[drron]

Ram quite frankly your answers do not go to the questions asked.I asked you for feed in tariffs to prove your claims that wind is cheaper than coal or nuclear.You provide opinions often from obviously unbiased renewable Energy sources.

The problem is you want to see corruption and unscrupulous businessmen and politicians everywhere you look./You are wrong.I could not give a fig for peak pricing.The reason it comes about is because your beloved wind and solar are unreliable.Back up power is needed,the gas and coal stations have been forced to operate in an uneconomic fashion,so they take advantage of it.Big deal.
Just like this day in South Australia-

.

Oh dear.1100 MW of wind generation to nil in minutes.SA didn't have enough back up power-coal had been closed and blown up and AGL had closed 4 of the Torrens Island station in 2014.

What is more important is the feed in tariffs.One days peak pricing means nothing.QLD electricity over the year is cheaper than SA.
Annual volume weighted average spot prices | Australian Energy Regulator

The problem is that when wind doesn't blow it may keep on not blowing for some time eg the June quarter this year in SA-
Lack of wind blows out South Australia power costs
So in the June quarter this year the average price of generation was $116 up from $81 the year before.Nothing to do with coal as there is none in SA.

On you final put down of nuclear power you wrote of the problems of toxic waste.So here is a question-how much toxic waste does a nuclear reactor produce compared to solar power for the same amount of power production.Figures please-no opinion piece from an anti nuclear fanatic.

 

[Quickstatus]

Drron, the shape of the aggregate curve is interesting as well. Wind is so fickle it cannot provide at any time a stable supply. The ups and downs surely must play havoc with the quality of the supply - as supply in Australia is mainly AC 50Hz, the instability makes the AC frequency unstable as well.

To compensate they want to go further down the road of insanity with storage like batteries and pumped hydro to smooth out the ups and downs.

In the meantime how many electronic logic boards go kaput with dodgy supply...

 

[whatmeworry]

States that fail to permit coal seam gas mining would be penalised under a fresh proposal from the Grants Commission to change the method of distributing goods and services tax revenue.

The adjustment would hurt Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory, each of whom has complete or partial bans on coal seam gas exploration or development or has a moratorium on fracking.

Meanwhile the Federal Government punishing states that don't allow CSG or fracking exploration.

Oh well I guess they have to repay the donations the fossil fuels lobby has given them.

Victoria, NSW to be penalised for outlawing fracking under Grants Commission plan

 

[drron]

Meanwhile the Federal Government punishing states that don't allow CSG or fracking exploration.

Oh well I guess they have to repay the donations the fossil fuels lobby has given them.

Victoria, NSW to be penalised for outlawing fracking under Grants Commission plan

Well Victoria doesn't even allow conventional gas.Around Portland there is a project ready to go that would supply 50% of Victoria;'s need for many years.
I think you will find that donations from the fossil fuel lobby are well and truly beaten by the subsidy mining lobby AKA the renewables lobby.
Remember the sight of Al Gore meekly standing behind Clive Palmer when the RET was being debated in the Senate.Pathetic but just follow the money.

PS the Chief Scientist has said fracking is safe with current safequards.What was that about believing the science?

 

[Moody]

.... PS the Chief Scientist has said fracking is safe with current safequards.What was that about believing the science?

Yes - this is quite a turnaround for you, drron. A complete backflip in fact!

Now that you have recently converted I expect you will be editing all your erroneous posts that misquote, cherry-pick, grossly understate or vastly exaggerate the financial and ecological pros and cons of the energy generation options. (Don't worry about the climate change posts - that's just too big a job.)

The only problem with the Chief Scientist's statement (assuming you haven't mis-quoted him) is that it comes from that bubble of idealism that doesn't factor in the greedy liars (or "colourful entrepreneurs" as they refer to them in FNQ).

"Fracking can be safe if current safeguards are followed and independently monitored" is what he should have said.

Perhaps if that had been done in the first place we wouldn't have had the debacle in QLD and the subsequent "Lock the Gate" movement. Stupidity and greed strike again - Oi Oi Oi.

 

[drron]

So Moody I guess you think nuclear power is more dangerous than wind or solar.Please Explain.But with figures and facts please.

 

[RAM]

So Moody I guess you think nuclear power is more dangerous than wind or solar.Please Explain.But with figures and facts please.

drron - yet again you do not admit posting FAKE FACTS aka wrong information.

A debate requires BOTH sides to acknowledge the facts rather one side invent things to say due to their losing hand.

You posted that Bill gates was investing $40 billion in Chinese Nuclear - that was WRONG, untrue, false. Do you admit it?

Please own up to your bad habits for once.

You were asked why if nuclear is so economical and practical have six US nuclear plants shut down due to losing hundreds of millions?

You were asked to explain why six more are scheduled to close due to losing money?

You were asked to explain why the US had abandoned two of three NEW plants under construction despite over 10 billion spent so far?

Time to actually answer some questions for a change - 'swinging in the wind' is a phrase that comes to mind.