Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels (Read 3227 times)
Prime Minister for Canyons
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #15 - Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:27pm
 
TheFunPolice wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:26pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:10pm:
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:09pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:30pm:
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:28pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:23pm:
So are you suggesting not using renewables?

Nope. But you can make your own mind up about its problems.

There needs to be a mix. And if you can't have coal and you can't have nuclear; you can't have reliable power.




AT the moment, anyway.


How do you see it changing in future?

Better batteries? They are an old technology. There will only be incremental increases.


Isnt there something about salt? Also, increases in solar cell efficiency are possible.

--> lee has no brains!



Seriously, shut up.
Back to top
 

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)
 
IP Logged
 
TheFunPolice
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9009
waggawagga
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #16 - Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:27pm
 
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:28pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:23pm:
So are you suggesting not using renewables?

Nope. But you can make your own mind up about its problems.

There needs to be a mix. And if you can't have coal and you can't have nuclear; you can't have reliable power.

No one said you can't have coal or nuclear!

Grin
Back to top
 

......Australia has an illegitimate Government!
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21558
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #17 - Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:49pm
 
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:10pm:
Isnt there something about salt? Also, increases in solar cell efficiency are possible.


That doesn't solve the problem of intermittentcy.

Crescent Dunes is a 110Mwh Solar salt facility. The salt allows a 10hr backup period. If it gets full sun all day.

It occupies 296 acres. According to wiki in 2016 between January and October it generated 127,308MW. It was shut in November for an extended period.

So 127308/304 = 418.77MWh per day. At that rate it generated 110Mw for only 4 hours per day.


Solar history -
"Though solar power as we know it is no more than 60 years old, the discoveries that led to the solar cell began nearly 200 years ago."

https://www.solarpowerauthority.com/a-history-of-solar-cells/
.
I would say at 60 years it is also a fairly mature technology.



Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 3rd, 2018 at 5:01pm by lee »  
 
IP Logged
 
TheFunPolice
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9009
waggawagga
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #18 - Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:53pm
 
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:49pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:10pm:
Isnt there something about salt? Also, increases in solar cell efficiency are possible.


That doesn't solve the problem of intermittentcy.

Crescent Dunes is a 110Mwh Solar salt facility. The salt allows a 10hr backup period. If it gets full sun all day.

It occupies 296 acres. According to wiki in 2016 between January and October it generated 127,308MW. It was shut in November for an extended period.

So 127308/304 = 418.77MWh per day. At that rate it generated 110Mw for only 4 hours per day.





Your point being?
Back to top
 

......Australia has an illegitimate Government!
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21558
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #19 - Apr 3rd, 2018 at 5:02pm
 
TheFunPolice wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:27pm:
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:28pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:23pm:
So are you suggesting not using renewables?

Nope. But you can make your own mind up about its problems.

There needs to be a mix. And if you can't have coal and you can't have nuclear; you can't have reliable power.

No one said you can't have coal or nuclear!

Grin



Except the "green" groups. Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21558
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #20 - Apr 3rd, 2018 at 5:04pm
 
TheFunPolice wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:53pm:
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:49pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:10pm:
Isnt there something about salt? Also, increases in solar cell efficiency are possible.


That doesn't solve the problem of intermittentcy.

Crescent Dunes is a 110Mwh Solar salt facility. The salt allows a 10hr backup period. If it gets full sun all day.

It occupies 296 acres. According to wiki in 2016 between January and October it generated 127,308MW. It was shut in November for an extended period.

So 127308/304 = 418.77MWh per day. At that rate it generated 110Mw for only 4 hours per day.





Your point being?


The Solar salt concept doesn't seem to be delivering on its promises.

Of course if you have a different view; you could expand on your concept. Wink

"SolarReserve’s flagship project is Crescent Dunes, a US$1 billion, 110MW first-of-its-kind project located, perhaps appropriately, near Las Vegas. Ground was broken in 2011 on the project.

The project has 10 hours molten salt storage but the relevant statistic is its design capacity factor of 51 per cent.
Not enough evidence that Crescent Dunes works

Production from the facility was first reported in October, 2015, and out of 26 months since then the facility has been completely offline for 9 months. On only 3 months has it met the annualized design goal.

Figure 1 Crescent Dunes operating history. Source EIA, Wikipedia

SolarReserve management stated that the reason the facility was closed down for 8 consecutive months in 2016/2017 was a leak in the molten salt tank.

Leaving aside any questions of how that could happen, or why it should take 8 months to repair, we note that having started up again in July 2017 the facility did not reach design goal and as of November 2017, on the last data available, it appears to have virtually shut again.

It did not meet its design goal in any month after being restarted.

Leaving aside any questions of project economics we would simply say there is not enough positive evidence to suggest the technology works to the extent advertised."

http://reneweconomy.com.au/solarreserve-still-falling-short-at-flagship-solar-to...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
TheFunPolice
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9009
waggawagga
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #21 - Apr 3rd, 2018 at 5:48pm
 
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 5:02pm:
TheFunPolice wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:27pm:
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:28pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 2:23pm:
So are you suggesting not using renewables?

Nope. But you can make your own mind up about its problems.

There needs to be a mix. And if you can't have coal and you can't have nuclear; you can't have reliable power.

No one said you can't have coal or nuclear!

Grin



Except the "green" groups. Wink

link, thanx!
Back to top
 

......Australia has an illegitimate Government!
 
IP Logged
 
TheFunPolice
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9009
waggawagga
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #22 - Apr 3rd, 2018 at 5:52pm
 
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 5:04pm:
TheFunPolice wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:53pm:
lee wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:49pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 3:10pm:
Isnt there something about salt? Also, increases in solar cell efficiency are possible.


That doesn't solve the problem of intermittentcy.

Crescent Dunes is a 110Mwh Solar salt facility. The salt allows a 10hr backup period. If it gets full sun all day.

It occupies 296 acres. According to wiki in 2016 between January and October it generated 127,308MW. It was shut in November for an extended period.

So 127308/304 = 418.77MWh per day. At that rate it generated 110Mw for only 4 hours per day.





Your point being?


The Solar salt concept doesn't seem to be delivering on its promises.

Of course if you have a different view; you could expand on your concept. Wink

"SolarReserve’s flagship project is Crescent Dunes, a US$1 billion, 110MW first-of-its-kind project located, perhaps appropriately, near Las Vegas. Ground was broken in 2011 on the project.

The project has 10 hours molten salt storage but the relevant statistic is its design capacity factor of 51 per cent.
Not enough evidence that Crescent Dunes works

Production from the facility was first reported in October, 2015, and out of 26 months since then the facility has been completely offline for 9 months. On only 3 months has it met the annualized design goal.

Figure 1 Crescent Dunes operating history. Source EIA, Wikipedia

SolarReserve management stated that the reason the facility was closed down for 8 consecutive months in 2016/2017 was a leak in the molten salt tank.

Leaving aside any questions of how that could happen, or why it should take 8 months to repair, we note that having started up again in July 2017 the facility did not reach design goal and as of November 2017, on the last data available, it appears to have virtually shut again.

It did not meet its design goal in any month after being restarted.

Leaving aside any questions of project economics we would simply say there is not enough positive evidence to suggest the technology works to the extent advertised."

http://reneweconomy.com.au/solarreserve-still-falling-short-at-flagship-solar-to...

RenewEconomy is an independent website founded and owned by Giles Parkinson, a journalist of 30 years experience, a former Business Editor and Deputy Editor of the Australian Financial Review, a former columnist for The Bulletin magazine and The Australian, and the founder and former editor of Climate Spectator.

Giles is joined by Deputy Editor Sophie Vorrath and other contributors. These include David Leitch, an independent energy analyst with decades of experience in the energy markets with a high profile investment bank.


<<

Doesn't even mention the effects of government intervention!

What kind of independant analyst does he think he is!!

Shocked
Back to top
 

......Australia has an illegitimate Government!
 
IP Logged
 
DonDeeHippy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Cool Stuff

Posts: 2782
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #23 - Apr 8th, 2018 at 8:16am
 
I think its great that the renewable costs r steadily going down and worldwide renewable is taking over fossil fuel. I'm not sure why there is opposition to it, yes there will be lots of mistakes and money wasting even govt help outs but if makes less pollution what's the problem ?
What is the alternative ? Keep burning coal, i know i would rather be downwind of a solar farm or windfarm than a coal plant or a LPG one
Back to top
 

I am me
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21558
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #24 - Apr 8th, 2018 at 11:40am
 
DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 8:16am:
What is the alternative ?



Nuclear? No the greenies don't like it.

Hydro? No the greenies don't like the drowned earth for the dams.

DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 8:16am:
Keep burning coal, i know i would rather be downwind of a solar farm or windfarm than a coal plant or a LPG one



Why? Do you think the CO2 will kill you? Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #25 - Apr 8th, 2018 at 12:26pm
 
DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 8:16am:
I think its great that the renewable costs r steadily going down and worldwide renewable is taking over fossil fuel. I'm not sure why there is opposition to it, yes there will be lots of mistakes and money wasting even govt help outs but if makes less pollution what's the problem ?
What is the alternative ? Keep burning coal, i know i would rather be downwind of a solar farm or windfarm than a coal plant or a LPG one



Well the main 'opposition' is the fact solar doesn't fkking work at night time, or when it s cloudy or when the panels are dirty.

The cost of building batteries for 9 000 000 households and all of the commercial and industrial needs would be astronomical if the south Australian battery is anything to go by.

$100 mil for 30 000 households for 1 single hour; get out your calculator champ


It would only taken you a minute or two to work that out if you weren't an extreme socialist greenie.  Smiley Smiley
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
DonDeeHippy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Cool Stuff

Posts: 2782
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #26 - Apr 8th, 2018 at 1:21pm
 
BigOl64 wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 12:26pm:
DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 8:16am:
I think its great that the renewable costs r steadily going down and worldwide renewable is taking over fossil fuel. I'm not sure why there is opposition to it, yes there will be lots of mistakes and money wasting even govt help outs but if makes less pollution what's the problem ?
What is the alternative ? Keep burning coal, i know i would rather be downwind of a solar farm or windfarm than a coal plant or a LPG one



Well the main 'opposition' is the fact solar doesn't fkking work at night time, or when it s cloudy or when the panels are dirty.

The cost of building batteries for 9 000 000 households and all of the commercial and industrial needs would be astronomical if the south Australian battery is anything to go by.

$100 mil for 30 000 households for 1 single hour; get out your calculator champ


It would only taken you a minute or two to work that out if you weren't an extreme socialist greenie.  Smiley Smiley


Well if because I think we need to address pollution makes me a extreme socialist greeny, I guess I'm guilty

Instead of personal attacks and talking about the cost of completely changing a system, maybe u could suggest positive actions we could take to stop polluting our country.

reneweconomy.com.au/tesla-big-battery-is-already-bringing-australias-gas-cartel-
to-heel-39541/

The big gas generators – even though they have 10 times more capacity than is required – have systematically rorted the situation, sometimes charging up to $7 million a day for a service that normally comes at one-tenth of the price.
(You can read our reports on how they do it here, here and here, and for a more detailed explanation at the bottom of this story).
The difference in January was that there is a new player in the market: the Tesla big battery, officially known as the Hornsdale Power Reserve, which bid into the market to ensure that prices stayed reasonable, as we predicted last year.
Rather than jumping up to prices of around $11,500 and $14,000/MW, the bidding of the Tesla big battery – and, in a major new development, the adjoining Hornsdale wind farm – helped (after an initial spike) to keep them at around $270/MW.
This saved several million dollars in FCAS charges (which are paid by other generators and big energy users) in a single day.
And that’s not the only impact. According to state government’s advisor, Frontier Economics, the average price of FCAS fell by around 75 per cent in December from the same month the previous year. Market players are delighted, and consumers should be too, because they will ultimately benefit.

ouch the old 30000 ppl for 1 hour seams silly when that's not how it works, 7million saved in one day for a 110 million investment seams pretty good to me.
When it works as a peaker plant its so fast at keeping power stable that the monitors r not able to register when its working because a gas fired one still takes minutes instead of micro seconds to respond.
I see your frustrations and I sympathise.
Back to top
 

I am me
 
IP Logged
 
DonDeeHippy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Cool Stuff

Posts: 2782
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #27 - Apr 8th, 2018 at 2:18pm
 
BigOl64 wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 12:26pm:
DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 8:16am:
I think its great that the renewable costs r steadily going down and worldwide renewable is taking over fossil fuel. I'm not sure why there is opposition to it, yes there will be lots of mistakes and money wasting even govt help outs but if makes less pollution what's the problem ?
What is the alternative ? Keep burning coal, i know i would rather be downwind of a solar farm or windfarm than a coal plant or a LPG one



Well the main 'opposition' is the fact solar doesn't fkking work at night time, or when it s cloudy or when the panels are dirty.

The cost of building batteries for 9 000 000 households and all of the commercial and industrial needs would be astronomical if the south Australian battery is anything to go by.

$100 mil for 30 000 households for 1 single hour; get out your calculator champ


It would only taken you a minute or two to work that out if you weren't an extreme socialist greenie.  Smiley Smiley


Sydney morning herald reported
The 100-megawatt battery system provides 129-megawatt hours of energy, reduces intermittency issues, and manages increased demand during summer peak loading periods, potentially providing enough energy to power 30,000 homes for eight hours, or 60,000 homes for four hours.

I see one hour sounds so much better than 8 hours or 240000 houses for 1 hour just ruins the whole thing.
If that hour is when power is charged at $1000 MWH at peak time instead on the average $79 an hour for cost of coal power.
Hmmmm 129 x $1000 = $129000 a day times 350 (16 days with no wind or solar) is $45 million a year. Ok so sounds to good, 10 years is 3650 days into 100 million is $27400 a day the battery have to make a day to pay for themselves.
ok how about 50000 houses and every house usually pays $1200 a year (300 a quarter) ok thats 60 million dollars
so if the battery does 8 hours a day and the possible lowest price it will receive  that's 20 million dollars a year.
So thats 200 million in 10 years, that looks like to me pay off in 5 years then a 100 million profit over 10 years.
Some days saving everyone 7 million overall its far higher.

I'm glad u mentioned I should get out my calculator you have helped me greatly , because of u i feel like a champ  Wink
Back to top
 

I am me
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21558
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #28 - Apr 8th, 2018 at 2:38pm
 
DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 2:18pm:
If that hour is when power is charged at $1000 MWH at peak time instead on the average $79 an hour for cost of coal power.
Hmmmm 129 x $1000 = $129000 a day times 350 (16 days with no wind or solar) is $45 million a year. Ok so sounds to good, 10 years is 3650 days into 100 million is $27400 a day the battery have to make a day to pay for themselves.



What about when the power is NOT available for more than 1 hour? Do you think the punter will feel dudded?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
DonDeeHippy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Cool Stuff

Posts: 2782
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Falling Renewable Costs Chilling For Fossil Fuels
Reply #29 - Apr 8th, 2018 at 8:21pm
 
lee wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 2:38pm:
DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 8th, 2018 at 2:18pm:
If that hour is when power is charged at $1000 MWH at peak time instead on the average $79 an hour for cost of coal power.
Hmmmm 129 x $1000 = $129000 a day times 350 (16 days with no wind or solar) is $45 million a year. Ok so sounds to good, 10 years is 3650 days into 100 million is $27400 a day the battery have to make a day to pay for themselves.



What about when the power is NOT available for more than 1 hour? Do you think the punter will feel dudded?


.
?? Huh herb kept quoting the battery was only good for 30000 houses for one hour and not sustainable, I don’t know what it has to do the punters
Back to top
 

I am me
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print