# Forum More Stuff Debate & Technical Discussion  Australian energy supplies

## Smurf

A few random comments: 
So far as feed-in rates are concerned, they are generally based with reference to wholesale electricity prices. Yep, the power stations get stuff all, no more than a quarter of what you pay for electricity at home, and the FIT in most places reflects that. In case you're wondering who does get your money - that would be networks (most of it) and the rest for retailers, GST and so on. But there's not a lot of money being made in power generation that I can assure you. 
Hence why even the more engineering focused generation companies such as Snowy Hydro and Hydro Tasmania have both acquired retailers, they really couldn't afford to just be generating and selling wholesale and not to the public. Red and Lumo are both owned by Snowy. Momentum Energy is Hydro Tas retail in Vic, SA, NSW and parts of Qld. 
But things are changing. Playford B, Northern, Anglesea, Morwell, Redbank, Munmorah, Swanbank B power stations are all gone and the shutdown of the huge Hazelwood station gets underway on Monday next week. Suffice to say this is pushing prices up and in a big way - future hedge contracts have more than doubled and it's getting close to being triple what they were. 
It follows that if this remains the case then it's only a matter of time until both residential power prices and FIT rates reflect that increase. 
So ideas about diverting solar power into things like water heaters aren't going to look so good once the FIT goes up as it almost certainly will. Things like heat pump water heaters start to look a much better option rather than using your own, now far more valuable, solar to run an inefficient electric HWS instead of feeding it into the grid. 
Exactly what happens and when is hard to predict but it's only a matter of time until a retailer sees a commercial advantage through gaining customers by increasing their FIT to reflect where the wholesale market is going. And once one does it, the others will likely follow. 
So bear that in mind. At the wholesale level prices are going up in a big way. Those power stations still operating are, for the first time in a long time, actually making money now (seriously, the general public would be truly amazed at how the finances have been in the industry until now - you might be paying a fortune for power but it sure hasn't been going to the generators that I'm extremely sure of!). 
Can you have a hybrid system using the grid as backup? 
I'm not sure of the rules everywhere but in Tas you can use the off-peak tariffs (61 or 62) for battery charging if you want to. Just need the battery charger to meet electrical regulations etc and be hard wired (can't be plugged in since no power points are allowed on the off-peak tariffs). But you could certainly use solar + off-peak charging if you wanted to. 
I'm pretty sure that Qld has a similar approach, at least they did not long ago, and will let you do the same. Not sure about any other state. 
Also in Tas if you've got grid-connected solar then it's worth considering using Tariff 93 which replaces your present 2 or 3 meters (Light & Power, Heating, Off-peak if you have it) with a single meter with time of use pricing. That means you'll be using your own solar power to heat water, with the fallback if there's no sun being that water will be heated at the off-peak rate provided that you set a timer to limit water heating to between 10am and 4pm Monday to Friday (plus 9pm to 7am if you want to) and all day on weekends. That gets around the problem of not being able to use your own solar to run a HWS that is otherwise heated off-peak or on the heating tariff (Tariff 41 also known as HydroHeat). This should also work nicely for anyone with an electric vehicle - just charge it overnight, of an afternoon, or anytime on weekends.   
So it's potentially a good deal BUT the catch is a relatively high price during the peak times (7am - 10am and 4pm - 9pm Monday to Friday) - that wouldn't be such a good idea for those who use a lot of power during that time (eg at work all day and have electric heating) but is worth looking at for those home during the day or who don't use electricity for space heating (eg they have wood, gas etc). 
Some other states have gone down a rather complex and costly track with time of use pricing. In Tas the approach is to keep it as simple as possible. Only two rates, peak and off-peak, with 128 hours every week at the off-peak rate, 40 hours at the peak rate, and both the actual times and price charged are fixed with no regular variations. NT is pursuing a similar "keep it as simple as possible" approach although the actual times are different to those in Tas. In both cases it's entirely voluntary, you can keep the regular tariffs if you want to, but the idea is to make the TOU option good enough that consumers will actually want it without being forced.

----------


## Smurf

> I don't know if the authorities have allowed a grid tied / island thing here yet.

  Not sure about other states but no problem in Tas as long as it meets electrical (technical) requirements. 
Any such installation will receive a visit from an official Electrical Inspector to make sure it's up to scratch but the onus there is on the installer should any problems be found - they'll get the kick and orders to fix it not the home owner. 
Main thing the Inspector will be worried about is to ensure that there's no possibility of power being fed back into the grid during a blackout. So long as that criteria is met, no issues with it as a concept.

----------


## Marc

A tragic state of affairs you are describing there Smurf, making it very obvious that the spectre of global warming was invented and bandied around for economical gain besides obvious political gains. 
Taking refuge in inefficient hobby like energy production system that are sold at 10 times their real value, because they are percieved as advanced and green, is absurd in an age of efficiency and real technology in a country that is selling top quality fuel to the rest of the world. Japan is building 40 new coal fired stations to be fuelled with our top quality coal. And we, the consumer who funds everything, who pays for everything the government does, have to power our houses with pathetic low tech systems to avoid paying extortion money to the local mafia.

----------


## woodbe

Marc, you're running off the road. 
The problem is not with the public, the problem is with the governments. Our country's power system has a large swathe of ancient power stations that have, or are closing down, but there has been no clear direction. 
Back in 2011 many added an '_inefficient hobby like energy production system that are sold at 10 times their real value_'. We did that for our own home as well. Sure, the cost of PV was high partly because the retailers had added a large profit margin but also because PV production costs were higher than now due to increasing volumes and better production. 
We are delighted with our inefficient hobby! Our PV has been more reliable than the grid, it has never faulted on its own. It's power production has exceeded our home consumption, the cost of our system has been completely paid by the massive savings (and FIT) and it continues to put money in the bank. 
For someone wanting to do similar today, all that is required is a PV and a battery because the FIT is lower now. Just as before with PV panels, battery pricing is falling. As Smurf tells us, the FIT will increase but so will the retail price, so we would need to push a lot more power into the grid than what we consume. The margin between FIT and retail cost will pay for the PV and battery system over time.  
No-one is offering to build a coal fired power station in Australia. There is a reason for that. There is no support to increase greenhouse gas emissions.

----------


## phild01

> We are delighted with our inefficient hobby! Our PV has been more reliable than the grid, it has never faulted on its own. It's power production has exceeded our home consumption, the cost of our system has been completely paid by the massive savings (and FIT) and it continues to put money in the bank.

   Is that a big set-up, or you hardly use electricity! And is it the 60 cents kW community funded subsidy.   I would like to see how installing PV today can repay itself in short term before the panels wear out.  To me it's a bit like the illusion of supermarket rewards cards. 
I like the idea of solar power, I like it to be practical.

----------


## sol381

Agree.. I doubt now that there is hardly any FIT that solar panels will pay for the themselves without Storage capabilities.

----------


## Bros

> But things are changing. Playford B, Northern, Anglesea, Morwell, Redbank, Munmorah, Swanbank B power stations are all gone and the shutdown of the huge Hazelwood station gets underway on Monday next week. Suffice to say this is pushing prices up and in a big way - future hedge contracts have more than doubled and it's getting close to being triple what they were.

  Not only will they push up prices but they will have serious impact on system inertia.

----------


## woodbe

> Is that a big set-up, or you hardly use electricity! And is it the 60 cents kW community funded subsidy.   I would like to see how installing PV today can repay itself in short term before the panels wear out.  To me it's a bit like the illusion of supermarket rewards cards. 
> I like the idea of solar power, I like it to be practical.

  A bit of both. Our home is a large stone home in the SA hills. We cop high and low temperatures, the max amount of energy required is for heating, not cooling.  
When we asked for a quotation for solar from three retailers, we were asked for our power bills and the solar quotes were delivered to equal the annual dollars. I knew the cost of power would rise, so I asked for an annual kWh neutral system and that is what we installed. 
Power cost is escalating regardless of the claims of the current federal government that it was reducing. The cost of solar PV is falling. However, you ask that installing PV today will repay itself in short term is not a fair question. A solar PV system has a life of 20+ years. If we look at our annual PV energy consumed before export, 30% is consumed direct and 70% is exported. Yes we have a benefit from taking up the offer from the government at the time. Not as radical as the NSW and ACT offers though. If the 70% is tipped into a battery then we would basically have a minimal yearly cost from the grid. 
A current 5kW system costs around $5000-8500. Well over $20k back then. https://www.solarquotes.com.au/panels/cost/ 
Current kWh cost of battery systems  https://www.solarquotes.com.au/batte...parison-table/ 
Already, the most economical battery systems are even with the grid! 
So the basics are there: 
1) The cost of power from the grid is continuing to rise
2) The cost of installing PV is continuing to fall
3) The cost of battery backup for the home is falling 
Short term, or you cannot decide: You pay through the nose for power. Do your best to minimise consumption.
Mid term around 5-10 years: You will probably come out even with a PV/Battery system.
Longer term: You will be well ahead.

----------


## Marc

I like solar power ... what does that even mean? Successive governments have spent trillions of dollars of our money in energy production and now are throwing it all away because of an ill conceived con of "carbon pollution".
What's next? We are polluting the sea, so lets go back to septic tanks and a backyard dunny can?  
Isn't that great! I poop in a can and fertilize my tomatoes, perfect environmental cycle. We are at the forefront of idiocy.

----------


## woodbe

> I like solar power ... what does that even mean?

  Solar energy arrives at our planet from the sun 149.6 million km away and delivers energy at the approximate rate of 1000w per square metre for all of us, if we are willing to harness it.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight

----------


## phild01

> I like solar power ... what does that even mean? Successive governments have spent trillions of dollars of our money in energy production and now are throwing it all away because of an ill conceived con of "carbon pollution".
> What's next? We are polluting the sea, so lets go back to septic tanks and a backyard dunny can?  
> Isn't that great! I poop in a can and fertilize my tomatoes, perfect environmental cycle. We are at the forefront of idiocy.

  Irrespective of any kind of pollution, yes I like solar power, but as I said it needs to be practical i.e. has a neutral or cost benefit without comparing it to artificial rises in the cost of energy. 
I am yet to be convinced that the battery systems are practical and I don't hear much about their cycle life.
Is it too hard to come up with an efficient 'solar to hydrogen' stored power?

----------


## woodbe

Artificial rises in cost of energy? The cost of energy to the people of the country is the actual cost they have to pay. Whilst we we may disagree with the changes in the cost of power, we actually have to pay for it.  UBS: Tesla Powerwall can deliver 6-year payback in Australia : Renew Economy     

> The headline conclusion of the UBS team is that the Tesla Powerwall –  the 7kWh version – will deliver an economic return. They estimate at an  IRR (internal rate of return) of 9 per cent. That represents a pay-back  of about six years. If they are right, then that means that mass-market  adoption ain’t so far away as some would believe, and incumbent  utilities might wish.

  I think the above battery system from Tesla has had an upgrade, so these figures may be out of date but as previously mentioned, the cost of power is rising and the alternative option costs are falling. 
Edit: Update on the Powerwall v2: https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/tesla-powerwall-2/   
So this particular battery is good for 10 years

----------


## Marc

> Irrespective of any kind of pollution, yes I like solar power, but as I said it needs to be practical i.e. has a neutral or cost benefit without comparing it to artificial rises in the cost of energy. 
> I am yet to be convinced that the battery systems are practical and I don't hear much about their cycle life.
> Is it too hard to come up with an efficient 'solar to hydrogen' stored power?

  I don't know about solar to hydrogen, but I know about coal to the grid. We have heaps of coal. We also have heaps of uranium. I find it outrageous that the citizen is left to fend it for himself because governments are too busy pandering to fallacious trends and busy selling everything that is not bolted down.

----------


## woodbe

> I find it outrageous that the citizen is left to fend it for himself because governments are too busy pandering to fallacious trends and busy selling everything that is not bolted down.

  As a citizen we are generally sucked dry by government utilities many of which have also been sold off so we are sucked dry by companies with a tick by the Government. 
Rarely do we get an opportunity to claw back a benefit. Solar PV is one of the few and the biggest opportunity we citizens we have. It's out of the box now, and very difficult to put it back in.  
In 2015, 15% of all households had PV on their roof. Good for us!

----------


## Bros

I don't where the electrical grid is going in the future and I don't think anyone else knows but as it is now we are on our way to hell in a handcart. 
We can talk all about solar and it's energy but there is no way currently around replacing the inertia by taking these large generator off line.  
South Australia had a taste of loss of system inertia when the interconnector tripped.  
Gas (if you can get any) will help inertia but the generators have to be on line to be of any use. Pump storage will also help but again they have to be in generating mode as when it is needed it all happens in milliseconds not in minutes but very few people understand inertia and the role it plays. 
If industry doesn't get reliable power they will go elsewhere in the world and it may make some fell good but CO2 pollution here has been shifted to India which lives in the same atmosphere as us.

----------


## METRIX

> I believe that the Fukushima disaster so far is just the tip of the iceberg. The missing cores will continue to emit gamma radiation for centuries  to come, possibly poisoning all sea life in the Pacific Ocean and beyond eventually.  
> The Japanese are way in over there heads but are too proud to ask for assistance and the rest of the 1st world are too greedy to fund what it's going to take to clean it up.

  
What I don;t understand is the attitude of some who say we should abandon Solar, and Wind in favour of "clean" Nuclear energy, saying the new reactors are much safer then one of the past BS. 
I don't care how safe they say these things are, the underlying problem is humans are stupid and greedy, and when these things go wrong they always go wrong in a big way which cant be fixed by simply flicking a switch and turning it off.  __

----------


## Marc

The only cheap and safe source of energy that works all year around is coal and hydro. Surprised that both are opposed by the skinny single vegetarian mob on the dole?

----------


## METRIX

> The only cheap and safe source of energy that works all year around is coal and hydro. Surprised that both are opposed by the skinny single vegetarian mob on the dole?

  
Agree, I also believe we should all have solar on our roof, to help provide power during the day and ease the load on the power stations, with the look to building no more power stations 
The addition of batteries is a good idea in the home, not necessarily Lithium ones as they pose an environmental problem for mining the lithium, but something like Aquion batteries which are based around saltwater, and can be completely recycled easily. 
Problem with the above scenario is the gov't are too tied up with petroleum and coal industry, so they don't offer any incentives for this to happen, hence why solar rebate systems in AU are one of the lowest worldwide.
At it's peak the solar rebate system only served the rich who could afford the initial outlay, then they got a hefty rebate, and large feedback tariffs.  http://aquionenergy.com/technology/deep-cycle-battery/

----------


## Marc

Yes, Matrix, I understand what you say but to ask the individual to "help" the powerstation is an admission of incompetence. Power is an essential service like hospitals and transport and the rest. Should be at the forefront of technology and reliability and not at the whim of political alternatives and small little marginal minorities that scream with a higher pitch. 
if you live on Moreton island, you have solar and batteries and wear the cost because the alternative is a diesel generator. If you live in Sydney you should be able to plug in a modern strong 365/24 network that can take anything you throw at it because it is the base for all the economy. 
As it is, we have incompetent government who wash their hands and sell everything and try to please all the potential little mobs who vote the fad of the day and then ask the consumer to "contribute" with batteries and solar panels that cost a bomb. It is the equivalent of the bus driver that asks the passengers to go out and push the bus.

----------


## Bros

> Agree, I also believe we should all have solar on our roof, to help provide power during the day and ease the load on the power stations

  Uneconomical now.

----------


## phild01

> Agree, I also believe we should all have solar on our roof, to help provide power during the day and _ease the load_ on the power stations,

  Aren't power stations in full swing when the sun doesn't shine! However I agree do what can be done to use the sun's energy in the best practical and economical ways.  Solar panels should have started with commercial properties before housing.    

> 

  This graph doesn't mean much to me.  Is it per capita and what about China's and the US etc manufacture of solar panels for the rest of the world, does this slant their showing!?

----------


## METRIX

> Yes, Matrix, I understand what you say but to ask the individual to "help" the powerstation is an admission of incompetence. Power is an essential service like hospitals and transport and the rest. Should be at the forefront of technology and reliability and not at the whim of political alternatives and small little marginal minorities that scream with a higher pitch. 
> if you live on Moreton island, you have solar and batteries and wear the cost because the alternative is a diesel generator. If you live in Sydney you should be able to plug in a modern strong 365/24 network that can take anything you throw at it because it is the base for all the economy. 
> As it is, we have incompetent government who wash their hands and sell everything and try to please all the potential little mobs who vote the fad of the day and then ask the consumer to "contribute" with batteries and solar panels that cost a bomb. It is the equivalent of the bus driver that asks the passengers to go out and push the bus.

  
I'm not asking the individual to help out, I'm saying the gov't should offer high $$ incentives for this, not only will it create jobs but will allow us to minimise our dependencies on fossil fuels for the long term.   
To show you how far our gov't is out of touch, the last decent solar scheme offered, they allocated a certain amount of hundreds of millions for rebates saying this would last 5 years worth of installations, to their surprise (no surprise) the amount of money was chewed up in under 2 years, so they put a stop to it, then dropped all the feed in tariffs to levels that the industry or consumer could not sustain or justify the installation cost, so no surprise the solar industry basically closed shop overnight. 
This should have shown them that the average consumer is actually interested in doing their bit to help, but instead the gov't look at it as oh well we didn;t allocate enough money for that, so lets go build another coal fired station. 
The main problem with the gov't running schemes like this is they put in place idiots to run the schemes like the insulation debacle, these idiots don't keep tabs or regulate the procedures then you have all the scumbags come out of the woodwork who rip off the scheme. 
Now let's look at what thes useless politicians earn, don't see anyone on here on less then $199K, yes I understand if they worked for private enterprise they could earn more, but im sure most of them wouldn't because they are useless, and we wonder why they are out of touch with the average hard working Australian.  *Name* *Constituency* *Party* *Position which Affects Salary* *Total Salary (one position)*  Mr Adam Bandt MP Melbourne, Victoria Australian Greens  $199,040  Senator Lee Rhiannon New South Wales Australian Greens  $199,040  Senator Larissa Waters Queensland Australian Greens Chair of a Senate Legislative and General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Senator Sarah Hanson-Young South Australia Australian Greens  $199,040  Senator Nick McKim Tasmania Australian Greens  $199,040  Senator Peter Whish-Wilson Tasmania Australian Greens  $199,040  Senator Richard Di Natale Victoria Australian Greens Leader of a recognised party of at least 5, and no more than 10, members of Parliament $283,632  Senator Janet Rice Victoria Australian Greens  $199,040  Senator Scott Ludlam Western Australia Australian Greens  $199,040  Senator Rachel Siewert Western Australia Australian Greens Whip in the Senate of a recognised party of at least 5, and no more than 10, Senators $216,954  Hon Kate Ellis MP Adelaide, South Australia Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Senator Katy Gallagher Australian Capital Territory Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Catherine King MP Ballarat, Victoria Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Linda Burney MP Barton, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Mr Ross Hart MP Bass, Tasmania Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Hon David Feeney MP Batman, Victoria Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Ms Lisa Chesters MP Bendigo, Victoria Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Hon Shayne Neumann MP Blair, Queensland Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Jason Clare MP Blaxland, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Ms Justine Keay MP Braddon, Tasmania Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Ms Madeleine King MP Brand, Western Australia Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Mr Julian Hill MP Bruce, Victoria Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of the Joint Statutory Committee on Public Accounts and Audit $214,963  Mr Matt Keogh MP Burt, Western Australia Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Ms Maria Vamvakinou MP Calwell, Victoria Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $209,987  Ms Gai Brodtmann MP Canberra, Australian Capital Territory Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $209,987  Hon Ed Husic MP Chifley, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Hon Richard Marles MP Corio, Victoria Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Dr Anne Aly MP Cowan, Western Australia Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Hon Sharon Bird MP Cunningham, New South Wales Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Ms Emma McBride MP Dobell, New South Wales Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Hon Dr Mike Kelly AM, MP Eden-Monaro, New South Wales Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Hon Dr Andrew Leigh MP Fenner, Australian Capital Territory Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Mr Chris Hayes MP Fowler, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Chief Opposition Whip in the House of Representatives $244,819  Hon Julie Collins MP Franklin, Tasmania Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Mr Josh Wilson MP Fremantle, Western Australia Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $209,987  Mr Tim Watts MP Gellibrand, Victoria Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $209,987  Hon Brendan O’Connor MP Gorton, Victoria Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Anthony Albanese MP Grayndler, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Ms Michelle Rowland MP Greenway, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Ms Terri Butler MP Griffith, Queensland Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $209,987  Ms Cathy O’Toole MP Herbert, Queensland Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Mr Steve Georganas MP Hindmarsh, South Australia Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $209,987  Hon Anthony Byrne MP Holt, Victoria Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $209,987  Ms Clare O’Neil MP Hotham, Victoria Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Hon Joel Fitzgibbon MP Hunter, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Mark Dreyfus QC, MP Isaacs, Victoria Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Jenny Macklin MP Jagajaga, Victoria Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Matt Thistlethwaite MP Kingsford Smith, New South Wales Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Hon Amanda Rishworth MP Kingston, South Australia Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Ms Joanne Ryan MP Lalor, Victoria Australian Labor Party Whip in the House of Representatives of an Opposition party with more than 10 members in the House $222,925  Hon Wayne Swan MP Lilley, Queensland Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Ms Emma Husar MP Lindsay, New South Wales Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Hon Warren Snowdon MP Lingiari, Northern Territory Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $209,987  Ms Susan Lamb MP Longman, Queensland Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Mr Brian Mitchell MP Lyons, Tasmania Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Dr Mike Freelander MP Macarthur, New South Wales Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Ms Susan Templeman MP Macquarie, New South Wales Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Mr Tony Zappia MP Makin, South Australia Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of the Joint Statutory Committee on Public Works $214,963  Hon Bill Shorten MP Maribyrnong, Victoria Australian Labor Party Leader of the Opposition $368,224  Mr Rob Mitchell MP McEwen, Victoria Australian Labor Party Second Deputy Speaker in the House of Representatives $224,915  Hon Chris Bowen MP McMahon, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Michael Danby MP Melbourne Ports, Victoria Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Mr Graham Perrett MP Moreton, Queensland Australian Labor Party Whip in the House of Representatives of an Opposition party with more than 10 members in the House $222,925  Senator the Hon Doug Cameron New South Wales Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Senator Jenny McAllister New South Wales Australian Labor Party Chair of a Senate Legislative and General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Senator Deborah O’Neill New South Wales Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $209,987  Ms Sharon Claydon MP Newcastle, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $209,987  Senator Malarndirri McCarthy Northern Territory Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Mr Milton Dick MP Oxley, Queensland Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Ms Julie Owens MP Parramatta, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $209,987  Ms Meryl Swanson MP Paterson, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $209,987  Mr Tim Hammond MP Perth, Western Australia Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Hon Mark Butler MP Port Adelaide, South Australia Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Senator Anthony Chisholm Queensland Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Senator Chris Ketter Queensland Australian Labor Party Chair of a Senate Legislative and General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Senator Claire Moore Queensland Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Senator Murray Watt Queensland Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $209,987  Dr Jim Chalmers MP Rankin, Queensland Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Hon Justine Elliot MP Richmond, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $209,987  Mr Andrew Giles MP Scullin, Victoria Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters $214,963  Mr Pat Conroy MP Shortland, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Deputy Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $209,987  Mr Luke Gosling OAM, MP Solomon, Northern Territory Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Senator the Hon Don Farrell South Australia Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Senator Alex Gallacher South Australia Australian Labor Party Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade $230,886  Senator the Hon Penny Wong South Australia Australian Labor Party Leader of the Opposition in the Senate $313,488  Hon Tanya Plibersek MP Sydney, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Deputy Leader of the Opposition $313,488  Senator Catryna Bilyk Tasmania Australian Labor Party Opposition Deputy Whip in the Senate $208,992  Senator Carol Brown Tasmania Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Senator Helen Polley Tasmania Australian Labor Party Chair of the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills $220,934  Senator the Hon Lisa Singh Tasmania Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Senator Anne Urquhart Tasmania Australian Labor Party Chief Opposition Whip in the Senate $234,867  Senator the Hon Kim Carr Victoria Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Senator the Hon Jacinta Collins Victoria Australian Labor Party Chair of the Senate Standing Committee of Privileges $220,934  Senator Gavin Marshall Victoria Australian Labor Party Chair of a Senate Legislative and General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Mr Nick Champion MP Wakefield, South Australia Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Hon Tony Burke MP Watson, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Shadow Cabinet Ministers $248,800  Ms Anne Stanley MP Werriwa, New South Wales Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Senator Patrick Dodson Western Australia Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Senator Sue Lines Western Australia Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Senator Louise Pratt Western Australia Australian Labor Party Chair of a Senate Legislative and General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Senator Glenn Sterle Western Australia Australian Labor Party Chair of a Senate Legislative and General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Mr Stephen Jones MP Whitlam, New South Wales Australian Labor Party Other Shadow Ministers $238,848  Mr Peter Khalil MP Wills, Victoria Australian Labor Party  $199,040  Senator the Hon Nigel Scullion Northern Territory Country Liberal Party Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Senator Derryn Hinch Victoria Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party  $199,040  Mr Andrew Wilkie MP Denison, Tasmania Independent  $199,040  Ms Cathy McGowan AO, MP Indi, Victoria Independent  $199,040  Senator Jacqui Lambie Tasmania Jacqui Lambie Network  $199,040  Hon Bob Katter MP Kennedy, Queensland Katter’s Australian Party  $199,040  Senator David Leyonhjelm New South Wales Liberal Democratic Party  $199,040  Senator the Hon George Brandis QC Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Leader of the Government in the Senate $373,200  Hon Alan Tudge MP Aston, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers (not in Cabinet) $313,488  Senator Zed Seselja Australian Capital Territory Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Mr David Coleman MP Banks, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Mr Tony Pasin MP Barker, South Australia Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr John Alexander OAM, MP Bennelong, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr Julian Leeser MP Berowra, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr Ross Vasta MP Bonner, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Ms Nicolle Flint MP Boothby, South Australia Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr Andrew Laming MP Bowman, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Hon Paul Fletcher MP Bradfield, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers (not in Cabinet) $313,488  Mr Trevor Evans MP Brisbane, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr Andrew Hastie MP Canning, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Hon Tony Smith MP Casey, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Speaker of the House of Representatives $348,320  Ms Julia Banks MP Chisholm, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Hon Scott Morrison MP Cook, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Ms Sarah Henderson MP Corangamite, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Hon Julie Bishop MP Curtin, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Mr Michael Sukkar MP Deakin, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Hon Peter Dutton MP Dickson, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Mr Chris Crewther MP Dunkley, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Ms Melissa Price MP Durack, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Hon Stuart Robert MP Fadden, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties $230,886  Mr Ted O’Brien MP Fairfax, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr Andrew Wallace MP Fisher, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Hon Greg Hunt MP Flinders, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Mr Bert van Manen MP Forde, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Whip in the House of Representatives of a Government party with more than 10 members in the House $224,915  Ms Nola Marino MP Forrest, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Chief Government Whip in the House of Representatives $250,790  Mrs Ann Sudmalis MP Gilmore, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr Tim Wilson MP Goldstein, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr Rowan Ramsey MP Grey, South Australia Liberal Party of Australia Whip in the House of Representatives of a Government party with more than 10 members in the House $224,915  Hon Dr John McVeigh MP Groom, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Hon Ken Wyatt AM, MP Hasluck, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Hon Kelly O’Dwyer MP Higgins, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Mr Craig Kelly MP Hughes, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Hon Angus Taylor MP Hume, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Hon Josh Frydenberg MP Kooyong, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Mr Jason Wood MP La Trobe, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Hon Warren Entsch MP Leichhardt, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Mr Jason Falinski MP Mackellar, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Mr Russell Broadbent MP McMillan, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee of Privileges $220,934  Hon Karen Andrews MP McPherson, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Hon Kevin Andrews MP Menzies, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Hon Alex Hawke MP Mitchell, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Hon Steven Ciobo MP Moncrieff, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Mr Ian Goodenough MP Moore, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Senator the Hon Concetta Fierravanti-Wells New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers (not in Cabinet) $313,488  Senator the Hon Marise Payne New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Senator the Hon Arthur Sinodinos AO New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Mr Trent Zimmerman MP North Sydney, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Mr Rick Wilson MP O’Connor, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Hon Christian Porter MP Pearce, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Mr Luke Howarth MP Petrie, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Senator the Hon Ian Macdonald Queensland Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Senator the Hon James McGrath Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Hon Craig Laundy MP Reid, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Mrs Lucy Wicks MP Robertson, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Hon Jane Prentice MP Ryan, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Senator Cory Bernardi South Australia Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Senator the Hon Simon Birmingham South Australia Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Senator David Fawcett South Australia Liberal Party of Australia Government Deputy Whip in the Senate $208,992  Senator the Hon Anne Ruston South Australia Liberal Party of Australia Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Hon Michael Keenan MP Stirling, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers (not in Cabinet) $313,488  Hon Christopher Pyne MP Sturt, South Australia Liberal Party of Australia Leader of the House $348,320  Mr Steve Irons MP Swan, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Mr Ben Morton MP Tangney, Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Senator the Hon Eric Abetz Tasmania Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Senator David Bushby Tasmania Liberal Party of Australia Chief Government Whip in the Senate $238,848  Senator Jonathon Duniam Tasmania Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Senator the Hon Stephen Parry Tasmania Liberal Party of Australia President of the Senate $348,320  Senator the Hon Mitch Fifield Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Other Minister in Cabinet who is also Manager of Government Business in the Senate $348,320  Senator Jane Hume Victoria Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Senator James Paterson Victoria Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Senator the Hon Scott Ryan Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers (not in Cabinet) $313,488  Hon Dan Tehan MP Wannon, Victoria Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers (not in Cabinet) $313,488  Hon Tony Abbott MP Warringah, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia  $199,040  Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP Wentworth, New South Wales Liberal Party of Australia Prime Minister $517,504  Senator Chris Back Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia “Deputy Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and   Trade” $214,963     Senator the Hon Michaelia Cash Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Senator the Hon Mathias Cormann Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Senator Linda Reynolds CSC Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters $230,886  Senator Dean Smith Western Australia Liberal Party of Australia Government Deputy Whip in the Senate $208,992  Mr Scott Buchholz MP Wright, Queensland Liberal Party of Australia Chair of the Joint Statutory Committee on Public Works $230,886  Ms Rebekha Sharkie MP Mayo, South Australia Nick Xenophon Team  $199,040  Senator Stirling Griff South Australia Nick Xenophon Team  $199,040  Senator Skye Kakoschke-Moore South Australia Nick Xenophon Team  $199,040  Senator Nick Xenophon South Australia Nick Xenophon Team  $199,040  Senator Brian Burston New South Wales Pauline Hanson’s One Nation  $199,040  Senator Pauline Hanson Queensland Pauline Hanson’s One Nation  $199,040  Senator Malcolm Roberts Queensland Pauline Hanson’s One Nation  $199,040  Mr Andrew Gee MP Calare, New South Wales The Nationals  $199,040  Ms Michelle Landry MP Capricornia, Queensland The Nationals Whip in the House of Representatives of a Government party with more than 10 members in the House $224,915  Hon Luke Hartsuyker MP Cowper, New South Wales The Nationals Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Mr George Christensen MP Dawson, Queensland The Nationals Whip in the House of Representatives of a Government party with more than 10 members in the House $224,915  Mr Ken O’Dowd MP Flynn, Queensland The Nationals Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Hon Darren Chester MP Gippsland, Victoria The Nationals Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Hon Keith Pitt MP Hinkler, Queensland The Nationals Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Hon Dr David Gillespie MP Lyne, New South Wales The Nationals Parliamentary Secretaries $248,800  Mr Andrew Broad MP Mallee, Victoria The Nationals Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Mr David Littleproud MP Maranoa, Queensland The Nationals  $199,040  Mr Damian Drum MP Murray, Victoria The Nationals  $199,040  Hon Barnaby Joyce MP New England, New South Wales The Nationals Deputy Prime Minister $408,032  Senator the Hon Fiona Nash New South Wales The Nationals Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Senator John Williams New South Wales The Nationals Government Deputy Whip in the Senate $208,992  Mr Kevin Hogan MP Page, New South Wales The Nationals Chair of a House of Representatives General Purpose Standing Committee $220,934  Mr Mark Coulton MP Parkes, New South Wales The Nationals Deputy Speaker in the House of Representatives $238,848  Senator the Hon Matthew Canavan Queensland The Nationals Other Ministers in Cabinet $343,344  Senator Barry O’Sullivan Queensland The Nationals  $199,040  Hon Michael McCormack MP Riverina, New South Wales The Nationals Other Ministers (not in Cabinet) $313,488  Senator Bridget McKenzie Victoria The Nationals Chair of a Joint Statutory Committee or Joint Standing Committee, not otherwise specified (except the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library) $220,934  Mr Llew O’Brien MP Wide Bay, Queensland The Nationals  $199,040

----------


## PhilT2

your list is a little out of date, not that it matters. Because of what i used to do I have had a lot of contact with politicians and have a completely different perspective. You are right that some would struggle if they had to get a real job but that's a minority; many would make more if they quit politics. Some are making more from their family companies and properties than their parliamentary salary. But most, I found, were real people and genuine in their desire to do their job well.

----------


## woodbe

> Uneconomical now.

  Only if you swap houses very often, or if you are in a position with little sunlight because of large trees shadowing your roof, or larger buildings around you.  https://www.solarquotes.com.au/calc5/ 
If you are a renter, then it hasn't been possible unless the owner is smart. But it is improving over time. 
EG: https://www.rta.qld.gov.au/Renting/D...ls/Solar-power

----------


## Bros

> Only if you swap houses very often, or if you are in a position with little sunlight because of large trees shadowing your roof, or larger buildings around you.

  What do you consider a realistic payback time?

----------


## woodbe

> What do you consider a realistic payback time?

  In QLD, with 5kW looks to be about 6 years:    
7kW and more runs at 5 years.   https://www.solarquotes.com.au/calc5/

----------


## Bros

Maybe for some but on these calcs mine would be 8 yrs, getting marginal investment as most of our consumption is of a night with some at $0.20 some at $0.17 the rest at $0.28. The $0.20 would get used during the daylight for about 20 to 30 days per yr. 
I actually got a price for a premium system of $5990 cheapie $5290, then Ergon want $450 to change the meter.

----------


## Marc

The electricity suppliers are free to pillage and steal, supported by the green lunatics and assorted pushbike riders and vegetarians with the blessing of our first ever pretend liberal PM. This could be the new trend. Infiltrate a party, get elected on that party platform then turn the tables and do what your really believe in that is the exact opposite.  Cool.

----------


## Bros

> The electricity suppliers are free to pillage and steal

  I wouldn't put it so bluntly but I believe there is some truth in it. A great example is AGL who are retailers of electricity and to take 1200MW out of the system (Liddell) gives me the impression it is just to constrain the system to jack up the retail price. 
 The feed in solar price in QLD is a reflection of the generation costs and that is $0.10 per KWH whereas the retail price is double that and upwards. I don't believe a generator should be a retailer but it happens in QLD where the government is both but they say they are independent but I don't believe in the tooth fairy. 
The prices shown on the net are spot prices and only big companies play with spot prices and the retailers have contracts with the generators. Rio in QLD thought it could do better on the spot market for 120MW but came a cropper as it was greater than they estimated so they had to curtailed some production.

----------


## johnc

> I wouldn't put it so bluntly but I believe there is some truth in it. A great example is AGL who are retailers of electricity and to take 1200MW out of the system (Liddell) gives me the impression it is just to constrain the system to jack up the retail price. 
>  The feed in solar price in QLD is a reflection of the generation costs and that is $0.10 per KWH whereas the retail price is double that and upwards. I don't believe a generator should be a retailer but it happens in QLD where the government is both but they say they are independent but I don't believe in the tooth fairy. 
> The prices shown on the net are spot prices and only big companies play with spot prices and the retailers have contracts with the generators. Rio in QLD thought it could do better on the spot market for 120MW but came a cropper as it was greater than they estimated so they had to curtailed some production.

  AGL have announced they will replace Liddell with renewables, I think their preference is wind, what will happen is we will see generator capacity spread far and wide and the very large generators such as the big coal fired units will be a thing of the past. It looks as though generator/grid management will become increasingly complex however we will no longer be subject to shutdowns and brownouts due to the loss of large generators when they fail. It is evolution, we either move with it or fight against it either way progress is inevitable. Coal will make a comeback I reckon but not as a power generator, probably in plastics production, fertilizer and other uses.

----------


## Bros

> AGL have announced they will replace Liddell with renewables,

  Yes they did including upgrading Bayswater and they quoted every amount of renewable technology except hydro so they were just preaching to the green lobby. I find it hard to understand how they can possibility replace 1200MW without forcing up the price of electricity which I believe as they are a retail supplier is their aim.  
At the present time Liddell is generating just over 1200MW from three units. 
The gov wisely forbid NBN from being a retailer however in the electricity industry they were asleep at the wheel.

----------


## Bros

Something to think about.Australians are installing more solar power than ever - AM - ABC Radio

----------


## METRIX

If I did not move every few years a priority would be to install a decent solar system, because total years per house ranges from 2-3 it's not worth the investment as I will never see the benefit of it 
When I build my own place up North priority will be to have an either off grid or battery backed system.

----------


## Bedford

https://www.createdigital.org.au/con...like-fbengaged

----------


## Bros

If this thread degenerates in to an emissions slanging match the post will be deleted and so will the poster or posters.

----------


## r3nov8or

> A white roof would pale into insignificance now with solar panels that have higher reflective properties.
> A friend of mine who lives on a rural block was able together with his neighbours to get a solar farm rejected and one of the objections was reflection.

  Your friend and his neighbour sound like dicks

----------


## Bros

> Your friend and his neighbour sound like dicks

  I certainly wouldnt want a 400 acre solar farm on my doorstep.

----------


## r3nov8or

> I certainly wouldnt want a 400 acre solar farm on my doorstep.

  Yeah right. We reckon we want 'it', sometimes we even need 'it', but always gotta put 'it' somewhere else

----------


## Bros

> Yeah right. We reckon we want 'it', sometimes we even need 'it', but always gotta put 'it' somewhere else

   They are like fracking when it came in looked great sounded great but now people are questioning it. Same with huge solar farms taking up agricultural land where food can be grown.
Have another friend who has signed a lease for a disused piece of cane land for a solar farm but the nearest houses are over 1klm away behind heaps of trees. The land is very close to the 132kv power line but the people proposing the farm have been trying to get finance for 3 yrs but so far are unsuccessful.

----------


## Uncle Bob

The grid and power generators should all be a Federal Government run enterprise.

----------


## phild01

> The grid and power generators should all be a Federal Government run enterprise.

   So should airports and toll roads.

----------


## Uncle Bob

Take a look at the table on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_pricing called "Global comparison".
Sort it by US cents by kWh descenting and surprise surprise who comes to the top. 
Strange how Islands with diesel generators can beat us on price.
Bloody disgusting if you ask me.

----------


## Marc

In this tense climate of "he said this, she said that", in a climate of hate and spite, envy and bitterness, all in the name of " we know better what is good for you", I thought it would be good to reflect ... removing us from politics as far as possible ... on what is a good source of energy. 
Humans need an energy source ... or many rather, to keep warm, cool down, to make things, for light, to cook, to power the car and millions of other things. To say we can do without and go back to live in caves and light a fire and eat grass or kill to eat, might appeal to a small minority in Noosa, Newtown and Tasmania but it is not for the average punter who works, and has a family to look after. Sure there are brave attempts at negating the need for a family or even a defined gender, in the name of progressive thinking, but let us leave that for the closet bound, the bent, the skewed, the bully victim and the odd, and let us reflect on the technical aspect of energy sources. 
Since the invention of steam powered machines, and then DC generators and then the supremacy of AC generation, electricity has become the one universal source of energy that humanity needs for everyday life. 
However electricity is strictly speaking not a source of energy per se, since it needs to be produced with another source of energy, and it is that primary source that is the focus of my reflection.  
Historically we had steam power created by burning different fuels like wood or coal, then with the invention of internal combustion engines diesel generators, then back to steam with coal fired power stations, Nuclear creating yet again steam, gravity pushing masses of water over turbines, and that was it for a while. Sure we always had the odd wooden blade spinning a car dynamo to charge a battery and watch TV.  
And then came the photovoltaic cell. From it's invention in 1839 by Edmond Becquerel aged 19, to the 70ties Cherry Hills Conference where it kicked off, the solar cell was always a powerful attraction because it gives free energy from the sun. What better than free energy right?
And let us not forget the humble spinning car dynamo charging a battery. Make it bigger and you have another source of free energy, the wind.  
This two "free" sources of energy, solar and wind, from their humble hobby origins have now become a massive industry and a political football. Why political football? Simple. First they produce electricity in an inconsistent manner since the sun does not shine 24/7 and the wind does neither, and we need electricity all the time. Second those sources are so expensive that in order to make them feasible they need massive amounts of subsidies. 
And finally they are ... diluted fuel, and so need massive amounts of land to be. 
But who would want to pay trillions to hobby like systems, to produce electricity and be able to compete with steam powered generators, that use vastly aboundand cheap coal? There was a need for a stimulant. A reason that would compel politicians to pay tax payers money to subsidise what would otherwise be a rather bad joke.  
And so the demonisation of CO2 was born. An invisible and harmless gas, essential for human existence since it is the only bridge between the energy of the sun and the earth via plants, a bit like the photovoltaic cell ...  that is naturally 0.04% of the atmosphere and to that humans contribute 3%, so 0.0012% of the atmosphere was the target of such a relentless campaign of repetition that in true United Australia Party fascion, it eventually had an effect. The message is "We must save the planet from human kind" 
Of course if "the planet" is under threat from humans the obvious solution is to cull humans, but no one was gutsy enough to say so ... well almost no one, a few did attempt to forward an ideal number, somewhere around 2 billions, to return the balance in nature, but no one proposed a method to kill 4 billions give or take. Well almost no one, Prince Philipp alluded to this by stating that in his next life he would like to return as a virus to cull human kind ... or words to that effect, not that anyone noticed.   
So after my rambling introduction to this well known conundrum, I was scouring googleland for someone to make sense and have even a partial view of things from a practical view rather than from a mercenary or vicarian view, and found a surprising revelation from someone who is an environmentalist, lives in california of all places yet has a bit of a revelation to the sun and wind worshippers out there.
I hope you enjoy it. 
Or maybe you hate it? Does it matter in this era of everything goes?
 The law on non-contradiction seem not to apply in this days of dogmatic tautologies. 
In an effort to "save the climate" are we destroying the environment?
Aristotle, eat your shirt!  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-yA...1xtZ3el0ZsUVgd  XemXiYns5InFN9tFlk

----------


## woodbe

> And so the demonisation of CO2 was born. An invisible and harmless gas,  essential for human existence since it is the only bridge between the  energy of the sun and the earth via plants, a bit like the photovoltaic  cell ...  that is naturally 0.04% of the atmosphere and to that humans  contribute 3%, so 0.0012% of the atmosphere was the target of such a  relentless campaign of repetition that in true United Australia Party  fascion, it eventually had an effect. The message is "We must save the  planet from human kind"

  Obviously, Marc you believe there is no issue with burning coal and ignore the effect of adding the coal outputs into the atmosphere. 
So out watching the video from Michael Shellenberger, he makes a lot of opinions between wind, solar and other systems and says that Nuclear is safer than Wind/Solar/etc. Ignoring that there has been a disaster at Nuclear power places killing thousands of people and wrecking people who didn't die.  *Nuclear power in the global context*  https://www.cleanenergywire.org/fact...lear-phase-out   

> Despite the attention Germany gets, it is not the only country in Europe to phase-out nuclear energy. Italy, Belgium and Switzerland  have also principally decided to be or become nuclear energy-free.  Others such as Denmark, Ireland, Portugal and Austria will remain  nuclear free. 
>  Britain, France, Poland, Finland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and  Hungary want to keep nuclear power in their energy mix and even plan to  build new reactors.
>  The French government passed an energy transition bill in 2015, specifying that the country will reduce its share of nuclear energy from 75 to 50 percent by 2025 but said in November 2017 that this target was not realistic and would endanger the security of supply.  Japan  turned off its 50 nuclear power reactors in the wake of Fukushima, but  the government decided in 2014 to start operating reactors again after a  security check.
>  In the United States, all but one of the 99 operational commercial reactors (producing about 20 percent  of the total electric energy use) became operational before the year  2000. Since 2012, ten nuclear power station units are under  construction, according to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 
>  31 countries operate nuclear power plants. The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2017  said that global nuclear power generation increased by 1.4 percent in  2016 due to a 23 percent increase in China but the share of nuclear  power in electricity generation stagnated at 10.5 percent. It had  declined steadily from a historic peak of 17.6 percent in 1996.
>  The average age of operating nuclear reactors was 29.3 years in 2017.  As of July 2017, 53 new reactor units were under construction. While  the average construction time is seven years, seven of the reactors have  been under construction for more than a decade. 
>  Between 2000 and 2013, global investment in new power plants went mainly into renewables (57 percent), followed by fossil fuels (40 percent), while only three percent of investment was spent on nuclear energy.  _This Factsheet was first published in July 2015._
>                  All texts created by the Clean Energy Wire are available under a            Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0)     .     They can be copied, shared and made publicly accessible by users so long as they give appropriate credit, provide a     link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.

  So yes, there are problems with Nuclear but there will be continuing Solar, Winds, Nuclear, etc, over time to reduce Coal, gas, etc because most people now in the world would like the environment to be better than it is now and not becoming worse continuing using Coal.

----------


## Marc

Two separate issues and the reason to post an environmentalist video that I would normally ignore or scoff at. 
To me ... and history will prove me right most likely in half a century or so when this issue is no longer contentious and we may have found new sources of energy unknown today ... CO2 is not an issue and we could burn coal for another two centuries with no measurable effect on the environment due to CO2. Sure, there are real pollutants we must watch. The CO2 scare mongering was and still is a fraud put forward to shift resources towards an otherwise unfeasible industry.  
The argument by Schellenberger is a new one, one that the unbeliever like me can not utter at risk of being lynched by the good citizen with the pitchforks. 
Solar and wind are not worth the extra expense, they wreck the environment much more than they portray to solve ... even from the "CO2 is bad for you" believer point of view ... Of course to me it is all a strawman argument in order to drum up business for this new industry that akin to the pink bats and school shelters are being more and more reckless since the end justifies the means. And the means is money for the solar and wind barons of this world.  
New nuclear plants are safer than ever and it is the choice of location that makes them even safer. Australia has an extremely stable land with hardly any tremors and a vast amount of uranium  that can last us 1000 years.  
The reality is that we need large amounts of electricity to have a job, to have schools, hospitals transport and a functioning home, and this large amount needs to be cheap ... very cheap, and demonising consumption and pretending that high prices will somehow "save the planet" by curbing consumption is a fallacy and only makes some billionaires and more poor people. The global warming fraud has achieved nothing in favour of the environment, made armies of middle class people poor, and wrecked the environment it pretends to defend. 
Even if I believed the mantra that AGW is measurable ... which I do not ... the method used to reduce CO2 is the wrong one and is doing more damage than doing nothing. 
Coal and Nuclear and Hydro are the answers today, not bloody solar and wind. 
And to the greens great shame, the damage done to the environment by a dam, compared to a solar farms like in california, that damage would be negligible yet no one open their mouth to the solar farms and the wind turbine, yet people would chain themselves to the bulldozers attempting to build a dam.  
The green movement is a demented irrational movement that follows no logic and can not see reason besides their own skewed agenda that most time than not has a completely different target in mind, and it is not the environment.

----------


## DavoSyd

> The argument by Schellenberger is a new one,

  he is arguing for is more nuclear generation and less wind & solar - how is that new?

----------


## SilentButDeadly

The ideological drive for new energy sources or more energy sources often ignored the elephant in the room... which is actually a question: Do we need more energy sources? 
Are we making the best and most effective use of the power generation capacity we already have? Is the energy being generated being used efficiently and effectively? 
Perhaps it might be cheaper for everyone if we just used what we have much better than we do now?

----------


## Whitey66

> The ideological drive for new energy sources or more energy sources often ignored the elephant in the room... which is actually a question: Do we need more energy sources? 
> Are we making the best and most effective use of the power generation capacity we already have? Is the energy being generated being used efficiently and effectively? 
> Perhaps it might be cheaper for everyone if we just used what we have much better than we do now?

  This isn't going to cut it due to the biggest problem we have, but nobody wants to talk about - population explosion.

----------


## pharmaboy2

> he is arguing for is more nuclear generation and less wind & solar - how is that new?

  I don’t think so.  He is arguing for more nuclear and more solar and wind, because that’s what it will takes to replace Fossil fuels, though he doesn’t have a lot of love for the other 2 because the carbon ive4 the lifetime is higher than nuclear (excuse if I’m dreadfully wrong, haven’t watched the video recently)

----------


## pharmaboy2

J  

> So out watching the video from Michael Shellenberger, he makes a lot of opinions between wind, solar and other systems and says that Nuclear is safer than Wind/Solar/etc. Ignoring that there has been a disaster at Nuclear power places killing thousands of people and wrecking people who didn't die.
> l.

  
That seems to be overstating the death toll from any nuclear power disaster that Ive seen. 
NP is clearly one of the safest forms of energy we have , if you use actual statistics of actual deaths , and not some 1989 paper predicting thyroid cancer that never came to fruition. 
the downside of solar and wind, is that technology seems to be moving so fast that plant you install today will be on the scrap heap in 10 or 15 years - not the 50-100 year timeline of nuclear power reactors.. 
given investments tend to be made in those 15 year timelines, no one seems to care, but if you care about carbon output then a century life cycle means an incredibly efficient form of energy as regards carbon output. 
heres the question though - can the conservative right wing be enrolled into this decarbonisation discussion if we include nuclear power as part of the solution?

----------


## DavoSyd

> I don’t think so.  He is arguing for more nuclear and more solar and wind,

  and how is that new either?    

> (excuse if I’m dreadfully wrong, haven’t watched the video recently)

  (btw - he was bagging the @@@@ out of wind and solar in the video, he seems 100% pro-nuclear - check his blog etc... )

----------


## woodbe

> J  
> That seems to be overstating the death toll from any nuclear power disaster that I’ve seen.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherno...r#Human_impact   

> In the aftermath of the accident, 237 people suffered from acute radiation sickness, of whom 31 died within the first three months.[151][152] 
> In 2005 the Chernobyl Forum, composed of the IAEA,  other UN organizations and the governments of Belarus, Russia and  Ukraine, published a report on the radiological environmental and health  consequences of the Chernobyl accident. 
> On the death toll of the accident, the report states that 28 emergency workers ("liquidators") died from acute radiation syndrome, including beta burns,  and 15 patients died from thyroid cancer in the following years, and it  roughly estimated that cancer deaths caused by Chernobyl may reach a  total of about 4,000 among the 5 million persons residing in the  contaminated areas. The report projected cancer mortality "increases of  less than one per cent" (~0.3%) on a time span of 80 years, cautioning  that this estimate was "speculative" since at this time only a few  cancer deaths are linked to the Chernobyl disaster.[153]  The report says it is impossible to reliably predict the number of  fatal cancers arising from the incident as small differences in  assumptions can result in large differences in the estimated health  costs. The report says it represents the consensus view of the eight UN  organizations. 
> Of all 66,000 Belarusian emergency workers, by the mid-1990s only  150 (roughly 0.2%) were reported by their government as having died. In  contrast, 5,722 casualties were reported among Ukrainian clean-up  workers up to the year 1995, by the National Committee for Radiation  Protection of the Ukrainian Population.[111][154] 
> The four most harmful radionuclides spread from Chernobyl were iodine-131, caesium-134, caesium-137 and strontium-90, with half-lives of 8.02 days, 2.07 years, 30.2 years and 28.8 years respectively.[155]:8  The iodine was initially viewed with less alarm than the other  isotopes, because of its short half-life, but it is highly volatile, and  now appears to have travelled furthest and caused the most severe  health problems in the short term.[111]:24 Strontium, on the other hand, is the least volatile of the four, and of main concern in the areas near Chernobyl itself.[155]:8  Iodine tends to become concentrated in thyroid and milk glands,  leading, among other things, to increased incidence of thyroid cancers.  Caesium tends to accumulate in vital organs such as the heart,[156]:133 while strontium accumulates in bones, and may thus be a risk to bone-marrow and lymphocytes.[155]:8  Radiation is most damaging to cells that are actively dividing. In  adult mammals cell division is slow, except in hair follicles, skin,  bone marrow and the gastrointestinal tract, which is why vomiting and  hair loss are common symptoms of acute radiation sickness.[157]:42

  Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths...nobyl_disaster 
That is only for Chernobyl. 
My opinion is that there is more problem, not less.

----------


## DavoSyd

> can the conservative right wing be enrolled into this decarbonisation discussion if we include nuclear power as part of the solution?

  NP has been the "answer" for decades... (albeit an expensive one) 
but it is ironic that nuclear *waste* is often the deterrent, whilst the problem it solves; i.e. Marc's * invisible and harmless gas*, is worse for our future but it is less tangible, so easier to ignore...

----------


## toooldforthis

> ... the biggest problem we have, but nobody wants to talk about - population explosion.

  u nailed it.

----------


## pharmaboy2

> NP has been the "answer" for decades... (albeit an expensive one) 
> but it is ironic that nuclear *waste* is often the deterrent, whilst the problem it solves; i.e. Marc's * invisible and harmless gas*, is worse for our future but it is less tangible, so easier to ignore...

  Yes, irony.   It’s far easier to handle though, and not an insurmountable problem - should even have a couple of storage places ready by 2030 forthe worst of it (that we’ve had to wait so long for it to clam down and be safe to process and store ) 
anyway, Chernobyl is still under 100, wit( lots of Mays shoulds and mights to get it into the thousands.  By then I’m figuring the 80 yeas old dying of a cancer a year premature might still be pretty happy with the 50 years cancer free post “disaster “ they got.  Meanwhile no one complains about the known 10’s of thousands of coal particulate deaths every year.......

----------


## Marc

You are all missing the point, all but Silent it seems.
The best ever solution to a power shortage is to make do with what we have more efficiently.
That means to build more "new generation" coal fired and take advantage of the vast source of coal so we get to use it rather than export it for others to burn and have power at 6c at KW instead of 25c
The _new _ argument _against_  wind and solar, new coming from an environmentalist, is the _admission_ that solar and wind POLLUTE by a massive amount more that anyone ever dared to admit. They will be and already are a problem to dispose of and all the other NEW arguments against wind and solar. 
Nuclear is not new but the technology gets better by the day. 
I personally don't believe we need to go Nuclear for the sake of CO2 since I know that 0,0012% is meaningless from a global point of view and of that one, we contribute 1.3% so 0.0000156% is attributable to Australia. 
But if it comes to bloody subsidise energy sources, I rather throw some money towards nuclear than towards made in china windmills or solar panels. 
My Solar power inverter by the way, made in Finland and oversized lasted 8 years and stopped working.
Of course since we are in Australia, repairing is below us, so had to replace at the tune of $1000. It was that or take the lot to the rubbish tip since the way the panels are installed on the roof, when compliant 8 years ago, no longer comply with the rules that have turned into a phone book size rulebook. So if I want to add panels I have to scrap the lot and start again.
And you honestly believe this is not a con job of gargantuan proportion?
You are _very_​ naive.
Give me Coal, Nuclear and Hydro anyday.

----------


## Bros

The thread has been merged in with a previous thread on Australian Energy Supply which if you have lived in a cave you would not know about the energy debate in Australia. I personally believe that neither party seems to be able to grasp the problem we are facing with reliable electricity supply. 
So lets not let this thread degenerate into emissions argument and large blocks of cut and paste.

----------


## SilentButDeadly

> This isn't going to cut it due to the biggest problem we have, but nobody wants to talk about - population explosion.

  In Australia? Really?

----------


## DavoSyd

> You are all missing the point, all but Silent it seems.

  we were probably not assisted by your rambling introduction and exhortation to watch the video?   

> You are _very_​ naive.

  obviously in contrast to anyone who goes to YouTube to find someone who makes sense* 
what else can you tell us about Schellenberger? what are his views on fossil fuels? and what are his views regarding carbon dioxide emissions? do these views align with yours?           *someone that provides views that bolster your own ideology...

----------


## craka

> In Australia? Really?

  
Yes, both world and Australia.    Have a guess of what the wolrds population was pre WWI . 
I know Australia is a large land mass but most of which is not habitable and apart from Antartica the driest continent on earth.

----------


## woodbe

> My Solar power inverter by the way, made in Finland and oversized lasted 8 years and stopped working.
> Of course since we are in Australia, repairing is below us, so had to replace at the tune of $1000. It was that or take the lot to the rubbish tip since the way the panels are installed on the roof, when compliant 8 years ago, no longer comply with the rules that have turned into a phone book size rulebook. So if I want to add panels I have to scrap the lot and start again.
> And you honestly believe this is not a con job of gargantuan proportion?
> You are _very_​ naive.
> Give me Coal, Nuclear and Hydro anyday.

  So, let's think about the solar panels fitted on your house. 
Bought the PV system and have it fitted to the roof 8 years ago. 
The PV system supplied power into the house and the grid (depends how the system is done in NSW, there were options there) 
Over time, 8 years have made power to reduce or eliminate the cost of electric from the grid, depends how much PV you have and how much power you use. 
And now, the inverter failed and needed replacing and improving the system for $1k. 
Obviously, you have replaced the inverter because _you know that the PV system is saving you power_ rather than using power from Coal, Nuclear and Hydro. 
If you want to use Coal, Nuclear and Hydro, turn off the PV system and sell it to someone who wants it, but would cost you more. 
Sorry, Marc, I think _you_ are _very_​ naive. There are hundreds of electricians etc working to install parts. The parts are new, not old ones. The suppliers have made changes for inverters over years and need to install the new versions not the old now ancient ones. That's for safe and maybe some have a little better efficiency.

----------


## phild01

There are many solar installations where the inverter is overclocked.  It makes no sense to me having in excess of 6kW to a 5kW inverter or whatever it is, the things can get very hot.  Also some of these inverters may not have an ideal install location.  Keep hearing of inverters failing, which seems to me the install is flawed.

----------


## pharmaboy2

> we were probably not assisted by your rambling introduction and exhortation to watch the video?   
> obviously in contrast to anyone who goes to YouTube to find someone who makes sense* 
> what else can you tell us about Schellenberger? what are his views on fossil fuels? and what are his views regarding carbon dioxide emissions? do these views align with yours ...

  Well isn’t that the interesting thing.  Marc’s views couldn’t be further away from Shellenberger s.   It’s intersting how Marc has suddenly become green.......   :Smilie:

----------


## pharmaboy2

> There are many solar installations where the inverter is overclocked.  It makes no sense to me having in excess of 6kW to a 5kW inverter or whatever it is, the things can get very hot.  Also some of these inverters may not have an ideal install location.  Keep hearing of inverters failing, which seems to me the install is flawed.

  Its done because the panels rarely achieve 6kw because it’s too hot, sun too low whatever and secondly because the stupid providers have too many hoops to jump through to install something with a bigger rating. 5kw inverters are also a sweet point for value

----------


## phild01

> Its done because the panels rarely achieve 6kw because it’s too hot, sun too low whatever

  I know that but even so, manufacturers probably factor that in when they rate their devices. My inverter is slightly underated in a cool underhouse location but it can run very hot when it is within 10 percent under it's rating.

----------


## Marc

My inverter was top of the range and overkill for the 9 panes. Rated to handle 15 panels. 
The only reason I fixed it is because I can. After all it was a gift from Mr Rudd, paid from his personal account. Or so he told me. 
And when they end their flimsy life, the panels and the $1000 inverter will go to the tip to pollute the landfill for our kids to clean up.
Yes, I can play the emotional blackmail just like you guys do. 
At the rate of "rebate" I get I will probably get my $1000 back in 3 years time providing the panels don't cark it first. 
The idea that a hobby installation on the roof is the solution to our power supply is the most moronic idea ever to pollute people's minds. 
It is akin to ask the passengers on a cruise ship to row in order to save fuel.  
I could add some other thoughts to my answer but I am getting a tad tired of this. And it is going to get worse before it gets better. 
Keep on with the mental self gratification of saving the planet. I don't mind one bit, and powerbills of $1000 or $2000 don't scare me. 
May be it scares you ... or your children?

----------


## Bros

> There are many solar installations where the inverter is overclocked.  It makes no sense to me having in excess of 6kW to a 5kW inverter or whatever it is, the things can get very hot.  Also some of these inverters may not have an ideal install location.  Keep hearing of inverters failing, which seems to me the install is flawed.

  They are all like that so you will get your full output. I have 3.9Kw of panels for a 3Kw inverter, the max allowed input power is 4.2Kw

----------


## PhilT2

> It’s intersting how Marc has suddenly become green.......

  Marc hasn't changed; he firmly believes the govt is out to get him.
I'm beginning to hope they are.

----------


## Bros

> My Solar power inverter by the way, made in Finland and oversized lasted 8 years and stopped working.
> Of course since we are in Australia, repairing is below us, so had to replace at the tune of $1000. It was that or take the lot to the rubbish tip since the way the panels are installed on the roof, when compliant 8 years ago, no longer comply with the rules that have turned into a phone book size rulebook. So if I want to add panels I have to scrap the lot and start again.

   You would have well and truely paid for the system by now and a new inverter will be cost neutral in 12 mths. As for adding panels why would you, if you want to make some money by selling excess power I could give you some stock market tips. 
All rules change over time as deficiencies are found in the old rules eg the previous AS 3000 was 471 pages and the new one 611, I suspect the next one would be bigger.

----------


## Marc

I am not interested in making money with solar panels. It was a gift and of course it paid itself a long time ago. 
Actually, no it has not. If you count in the real cost and add all the subsidies when they paid 62c per KW and charged me 18c, it is most likely still in the red and will be for some time. May be at age 15 it will be even. 
But that's not my point, I am only pointing out at the fallacy of the whole idea. I remember stopping at a "Solar shop" on Canterbury road in the 90ties, curious of the whole concept. A dyed in the wool greenie was manning the shop ... sorry personing it ... and to my questions about the horrific cost of it all, he replied patronisingly that people install solar "to be green, not to save money!" ... "If it was a good business to have solar panels generating electricity there would be farms covered with them" ... see, there was no government subsidies back then. 
Oh the pretenses and the arrogance fo those who think they can build a dial to tune in the weather! ... sorry climate ... and adjust temperature at will.
I like autun weather in Sydney. Can we keep it like this all through July?
Oh yes, and rain only at night please ...  :Smilie:  
PhilT1/2
Never wish on others the things you fear yourself. Karma and all that.

----------


## woodbe

> I am not interested in making money with solar panels. It was a gift and of course it paid itself a long time ago. 
> Actually, no it has not. If you count in the real cost and add all the subsidies when they paid 62c per KW and charged me 18c, it is most likely still in the red and will be for some time. May be at age 15 it will be even. 
> But that's not my point, I am only pointing out at the fallacy of the whole idea.

  It's not a fallacy. 
People in Australia can pay 100% from the wrecked electricity system, or if they are able, they can buy their own PV panels and save money and reduce the amount of burning coal.  
Marc, you might think you are not interest in 'making money with solar panels' but you didn't throw it into the bin. It saved you some dollars, and your PV is helping the world by burning less coal.  
Thanks Marc!

----------


## Marc

Stoppit man, I think I am going to cry now ...  :Rofl5:

----------


## Bros

I wondered how long this would take to come up.    

> Australia's electricity grid operator wants the power to remotely switch off or constrain the output of new rooftop solar systems, as it finds ways to manage South Australia's world-leading levels of "invisible and uncontrolled" solar output.

   https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-...in-sa/12202004

----------


## johnc

For quite some time they have been concerned about the amount of renewables coming into the grid which simply can't handle it. However they do think by 2025 we can handle 75% renewables coming in. No doubt batteries are part of it but coal is fast becoming a fuel of the past.

----------


## John2b

> I wondered how long this would take to come up. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-...in-sa/12202004

  It is astounding that demand control of renewable sources hasn't always been built in to the energy distribution system. Unlike coal, gas or nuclear, there is no operational penalty for limiting outputs from wave, wind, solar, hydro or geothermal generation to match demand. I guess that is what happens when one sector of industry has many more full time paid lobbyists in Canberra than there are politicians, lobbyists for whom accommodating non traditional energy generation is death to their own industries.

----------


## Bros

> However they do think by 2025 we can handle 75% renewables coming in.

  You missed two important words "At times" there are times when it is much less and that is where the problem lies.

----------


## johnc

> You missed two important words "At times" there are times when it is much less and that is where the problem lies.

   One would imagine they are looking at battery systems as well as total deployable generating assets of various types. It should go without saying that anyone working in that field has an understanding of causes of demand and the variables of supply.

----------


## John2b

> You missed two important words "At times" there are times when it is much less and that is where the problem lies.

  The only time that under-supply has occurred in the past decade have resulted from catastrophic failure of plant or transmission assets. The ratio or presence of wind and solar in the generation mix played no role in those historical under-supply issues, although they may in the future.

----------


## Bros

> One would imagine they are looking at battery systems as well as total deployable generating assets of various types. It should go without saying that anyone working in that field has an understanding of causes of demand and the variables of supply.

  Trouble with battery systems is that batteries are not cost competitive now but i assume will be in the future but the vast majority of the currently installed inverters are not battery comparable. The report specifically mentions roof top solar as it is currently unregulated so more and more that come on are pushing the coal fired generators back during the day to very low loads that are difficult to maintain however they are then need when the sun goes down as wind is a fickle source of energy so for the foreseeable future coal will be needed. 
I just noticed in my paper today ads for 6.6KW solar systems which are massively excessive for a home. I have a 3 kw system and it would export half of what I generate. These systems add to the instability of the system.  
I can see a number of options coming and they are no export, solar control and zero or maybe a penalty for export as unregulated rooftop solar expansion cannot go on. Any of these options will make the large rooftop solar systems uneconomical.

----------


## PhilT2

> Trouble with battery systems is that batteries are not cost competitive now but i assume will be in the future but the vast majority of the currently installed inverters are not battery comparable. The report specifically mentions roof top solar as it is currently unregulated so more and more that come on are pushing the coal fired generators back during the day to very low loads that are difficult to maintain however they are then need when the sun goes down as wind is a fickle source of energy so for the foreseeable future coal will be needed. 
> I just noticed in my paper today ads for 6.6KW solar systems which are massively excessive for a home. I have a 3 kw system and it would export half of what I generate. These systems add to the instability of the system.  
> I can see a number of options coming and they are no export, solar control and zero or maybe a penalty for export as unregulated rooftop solar expansion cannot go on. Any of these options will make the large rooftop solar systems uneconomical.

  You buy a paper?? Comparable or compatible?

----------


## Marc

> I just noticed in my paper today ads for 6.6KW solar systems which are massively excessive for a home. I have a 3 kw system and it would export half of what I generate. These systems add to the instability of the system.

  No they do not, they highlight the stupidity of allowing individuals to add or detract from the network according to their individual preferences to suit a particular political agenda.
Solar panels depend from base load power, because at night there is no sun. During the day the coal fired generator can not be switched off, so the save the planet brigade, does not provide any solution only problems. 
And if you add to that the fact that solar, wind and fossil fuels are all hand in hand happily polluting way more than if we had only coal, the picture is complete. 
That is the inconvenient truth. Watch the video "Planet of the humans" and weap.

----------


## Bros

> You buy a paper?? Comparable or compatible?

  Yes I do delivered by internet though.

----------


## PhilT2

> but the vast majority of the currently installed inverters are not battery comparable.

  Compatible?

----------


## Bros

End of free electricity at our dump.

----------


## Uncle Bob

If I saw those, I'd be picking up a couple for the van.

----------


## Bros

> If I saw those, I'd be picking up a couple for the van.

   Bit big as they are grid connected panels.

----------


## Uncle Bob

Does that matter (genuine question)? My MPPT controller optimal wattage is 390w (max 1170w) and max open circuit voltage is 92vdc.

----------


## Bros

> Does that matter (genuine question)? My MPPT controller optimal wattage is 390w (max 1170w) and max open circuit voltage is 92vdc.

   I believe that you can use  a MPPT controller for them but they were of no interest to me.  
I heard a while back that those who got in early and got the 44c rebate were well ahead have been ditching their old systems and replacing them with better panels and inverters. It explains the number of systems you see on Gumtree for sale or they end up as landfill.

----------


## Uncle Bob

They would be mad to screw with it if they're on 44c FIT.  I'm on 8c so I had to go big. So them with a 44c FIT 1.5KW system are possibly well ahead me.

----------


## johnc

> I believe that you can use  a MPPT controller for them but they were of no interest to me.  
> I heard a while back that those who got in early and got the 44c rebate were well ahead have been ditching their old systems and replacing them with better panels and inverters. It explains the number of systems you see on Gumtree for sale or they end up as landfill.

   I have heard the same, people upgrading to larger systems and dumping the old but still efficient panels because they aren't that compatible with the new expanded system. New panels are actually able to produce more power from the get go than the panels of 10+ years ago

----------


## johnc

> I believe that you can use  a MPPT controller for them but they were of no interest to me.  
> I heard a while back that those who got in early and got the 44c rebate were well ahead have been ditching their old systems and replacing them with better panels and inverters. It explains the number of systems you see on Gumtree for sale or they end up as landfill.

  We are on 66c wth four years to run, you would need rocks in your head to upgrade until the current contract ends

----------


## Bros

> We are on 66c wth four years to run, you would need rocks in your head to upgrade until the current contract ends

   You misunderstand if you have a 3kw system installed by dodgy bros them you can change the system for another 3kw system, size for size

----------


## John2b

It isn't economic for a grid connected system to integrate panels of different ratings. It's simple enough for an off-grid system so those cheap discarded panels have been a boon for me. They were recycled from people upgrading from early 1, 1.5 and 2kW systems. My nearly 20 year old Sharp panels still meet new spec for output. 
Sure they are only ~15% efficient compared to todays 20% panels, but so what? I get the least sun in winter on cloudy days, and on those days it doesn't matter which way the panels face, so I've put them where they shade the roof from the late afternoon summer sun, i.e. facing SW. The old panels need ~30% more area than our new array but both arrays produce about the same amount of power on cloudy days.

----------


## Bros

> It isn't economic for a grid connected system to integrate panels of different ratings. It's simple enough for an off-grid system so those cheap discarded panels have been a boon for me.

  Yes I know as one of my mates has a beach shack and he keeps adding panels as he has the room, he also has panels 20 yrs old and some new ones he bought last year

----------


## John2b

Last year South Australia produced more than 60% of all electricity from solar and wind. Wholesale electricity prices in South Australia are now the lowest in Australia, averaged over the last few months.

----------


## r3nov8or

> Last year South Australia produced more than 60% of all electricity from solar and wind. Wholesale electricity prices in South Australia are now the lowest in Australia, averaged over the last few months.

   Is that being reflected as savings passed on to retail customers, or being reinvested in more solar and wind generation? (or a bit of both)

----------


## John2b

Retail prices have drifted down in SA but are still high relative to the eastern states. Generation wholesale costs don't feed directly into retail electricity prices, and aren't even the largest cost component, which is the retailer's markup*. The wholesale price varies a lot depending on matching supply to demand. Before there was any battery storage like the Tesla 150MW battery at Hornsdale SA, the coal and gas fired power stations were 'gaming' the system to push wholesale prices up. Hornsdale makes that impractical as it can fill any gap in supply in a tiny fraction of a second and has stabilised wholesale prices across the National Energy Market, not just in SA. Retail prices in SA are boosted by a high transmission cost, partly due to the lucrative deal the Singapore owned network operator SAPN got from our guvmint for distribution (which privatises the profit whilst the public picks up the infrastructure costs) and partly because the distribution network has more kms of lines per customer than any other state.  
*It is ironic that the retailer takes the biggest cut, but doesn't actually do anything towards supply; they don't generate electricity, they don't distribute electricity, they don't even read the meters - just send you the bill! And the justification for the high markup is - wait for it - marketing costs! I.E. the cost of scabbing customers off each other and customer churn.

----------


## Bros

> Last year South Australia produced more than 60% of all electricity from solar and wind. Wholesale electricity prices in South Australia are now the lowest in Australia, averaged over the last few months.

   I would have thought Tasmania would be cheaper as South Australia still uses a considerable amount of fossil fuel whereas Tasmania uses no fossil fuel.

----------


## UseByDate

> I would have thought Tasmania would be cheaper as South Australia still uses a considerable amount of fossil fuel whereas Tasmania uses no fossil fuel.

  Wholesale prices. https://www.aer.gov.au/wholesale-markets/wholesale-statistics
"Q4 2020 prices (VWA) were lowest in South Australia ($35/MWh)  and Victoria ($40/MWh), followed by Queensland ($48/MWh) and Tasmania  ($46/MWh), with the highest quarterly prices occurring in NSW ($71/MWh)"

----------


## John2b

> NSW ($71/MWh)

  Obviously Taylor and Morrison not wanting NSW to lose the mantle of most costly wholesale electricity is behind their determination to fund gas fired generation in the Hunter Valley with money that is supposed to be bolstering the Snowy Hydro System. No private operator will build the 1GW coal plant Taylor Slowmo wants because it is economic suicide against much cheaper renewable sources, even with battery firming.

----------


## Bros

> Wholesale prices. https://www.aer.gov.au/wholesale-markets/wholesale-statistics
> "Q4 2020 prices (VWA) were lowest in South Australia ($35/MWh)  and Victoria ($40/MWh), followed by Queensland ($48/MWh) and Tasmania  ($46/MWh), with the highest quarterly prices occurring in NSW ($71/MWh)"

  What that tells me is that SA and Vic had good renewable weather. They are both in a position to reduce the cost as with wind and solar if you don't use it you lose it unlike Tasmania who don't have to use their water so no need to compete. 
Wholesale prices don't reflect the generation costs as you cant bank wind or solar.   

> Very low levels of demand and high renewable generation led to a record number of negative prices in South Australia and Victoria.For the week starting 6 December, weekly prices fell to their lowest level ever in South Australia ($3/MWh) and second lowest level ever in Victoria ($14/MWh).

----------


## John2b

> What that tells me is that SA and Vic had good renewable weather.

   Victoria's renewable share rose to about 25% last year and a fair bit of that came from South Australia. I do not think the weather was a significant factor in the renewable contribution last year, more the huge amount of new non-fossil generation coming online. 
From AEMO: 
During the quarter, nine new projects (six solar, three wind) amounting to 1,183 MW of installed capacity commenced generation (Table 2), the highest quarterly addition since Q2 2019. New capacity, coupled with continued ramp up of projects from previous quarter, resulted in several grid-scale VRE records19 this quarter, including:
• Highest grid-scale VRE share of NEM operational demand – NEM VRE output met 36% of NEM operational demand at 0930 hrs on 3 October 2020.
• Highest grid-solar output on record – NEM grid-solar output reached 3,210 MW at 1230 hrs on 30 November 2020.  
Grid solar generation reached a record quarterly high of 1,018 MW on average, surpassing the previous record set in Q4 2019 by 193 MW. This was mainly a result of new capacity entering the system over the last year as solar irradiation during the quarter was lower than Q4 2019.  
Average wind generation was 2,441 MW this quarter, with the largest increase compared to Q4 2019 occurring in Victoria (+223 MW) followed by Queensland (+93 MW).
• Higher output in Victoria this quarter was predominantly due to continued ramp up of large amounts of recently installed capacity, including Dundonnell and Bulgana wind farms.
• In New South Wales, despite the commencement of two new wind projects wind generation decreased by 15 MW compared to Q4 2019, due to lower wind speed (-2% on average) for existing wind farms.

----------


## Bros

I wondered how long this would take.   

> She was not put off by new powers introduced last month allowing the electricity distributor SA Power Networks to switch off all new solar installations if too much solar was putting the system under pressure.

  And    

> AEMO suggests similar action is "required urgently in Victoria, and promptly in Queensland".

  It would be pretty easy to do as they can switch off Hot water remotely just need to connect it up to solar feed in.  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...-time/12810366

----------


## UseByDate

> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...-time/12810366

  Premier was on TV about a month ago and stated that, at the present level of rooftop PV , new systems would be disconnected from the grid for, on average, 2 to 3 hours per year. Obviously as more people get rooftop PV this period will increase.  When electricity has no buyers it has no value.

----------


## Bros

> Premier was on TV about a month ago and stated that, at the present level of rooftop PV , new systems would be disconnected from the grid for, on average, 2 to 3 hours per year. Obviously as more people get rooftop PV this period will increase.  When electricity has no buyers it has no value.

   I don't think we have heard the last of this. The return for rooftop solar for feed in is incredibly low which is an indication that the supply is excessive and the only way to stop this is turn the systems off. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a new tariff that will evolve like HW in that you will get more for feed in tariff if you accept that the supply authority can turn off your feed in or the system completely. 
A couple of yrs ago they did an evaluation of in the rare event of a statewide blackout and it was found that the worst time for the system to have one was on a mild sunny day.

----------


## John2b

Does anyone spot the irony with plans to shut down privately owned small scale solar generation during periods of oversupply? Large scale electricity users like smelters account for a substantial proportion of all electricity consumed. Plant that takes several days to heat up and cool down can have the power interrupted for several hours without even noticing, like during the early afternoon solar peak. Controlling a few plants has little downside and is much cheaper and easier to implement than controlling 100,000s of small solar systems where the owners are negatively impacted, but that's our retard LNC guvmint's preferred option, of course!

----------


## phild01

> Plant that takes several days to heat up and cool down can have the power interrupted for several hours without even noticing, like during the early afternoon solar peak.

  Closer analytical evidence of this would be nice to see.

----------


## John2b

> Closer analytical evidence of this would be nice to see.

  The idea has been around for a few decades. Aluminium smelters could even same on electricity costs using demand management. 
"...the smelting process is able to change its power consumption both accurately and quickly by controlling the pots' DC voltage, without affecting the production quality. Hence, an aluminum smelter has both the motivation and the ability to participate in demand-side management. By bidding into the electricity market, the smelter provides flexibility to the power system operator and gets compensation which reduces the overall electricity cost."  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282743180_Bidding_strategy_in_energy_and_spinning_  reserve_markets_for_aluminum_smelters%27_demand_re  sponse

----------


## phild01

So how is their supply governed, what if it is shut down when it is most needed. How random is the control, as random as the weather is!

----------


## John2b

> So how is their supply governed, what if it is shut down when it is most needed. How random is the control, as random as the weather is!

  The same way that small scale solar would be controlled / shut down, except it's controlling a handful of users, not 1,000,000s (there are now more than 2.6 million small scale rooftop PV systems in Australia). The paper I linked is downloadable if you want more detail, and there are dozens of others if you want collaboration.

----------


## Bros

> The idea has been around for a few decades. Aluminium smelters could even same on electricity costs using demand management.

   And they make a packet for shutting down which only happens when supply is tight and the price high so shutting down they get paid at this high price.

----------


## Bros

> So how is their supply governed, what if it is shut down when it is most needed. How random is the control, as random as the weather is!

   It’s not random as it can be predicted and the smelters have the control.

----------


## phild01

Miss my point, sure they can operate without a supply for so long, but it needs replenishing, so how can that be done in an orderly manner when the sun decides to shine. I don't wish to  wade through all of that information. To my mind, far more manageable to cut supply at the source.

----------


## John2b

> To my mind, far more manageable to cut supply at the source.

  Demand management, namely balancing two halves of an equation, supply and consumption, is actively happening on _both_ sides of the equation 24 hours a day by the network operators. Examples of consumption management include off-peak loads, staggering the start of factories, and deciding when to charge utility sized grid connected batteries or operate pumps to lift water for stored hydro. 
The basic idea for a smelter was in the first sentence I quoted here: #108 I'm sure you'll get the gist of it by reading a couple of sentences! It takes about 10 days for an aluminium smelter to get up to speed. Losing electricity for the odd 1% or 2% of that time scale when solar peaks in the afternoon is not a big operational issue, especially as the timing of the sun rising and setting doesn't take anyone by surprise these days. 
Also a small scale solar installation can have its contribution "managed" by the export settings in the system's grid connected inverter without any need for central control. In fact it already happens in many locations at the ends of local distribution lines. When there is an excess of local supply fed into the grid, the local voltage rises. All grid connected inverters have a setting for voltage at which point the output from the inverter automatically reduces. This 'passive' supply management does not need central control, so it probably won't find favour with the fossilised energy luddites in charge.

----------


## Bros

> , but that's our retard LNC guvmint's preferred option, of course!

   Ever thought of standing for politics so you can move out of your alternative closeted environment?

----------


## John2b

> Ever thought of standing for politics so you can move out of your alternative closeted environment?

   No. But I did have a SA guvmint Minister at my place Thursday PM for a meeting about the settlement of court action where a group of us Islanders took the department to court over what we saw as non-compliance with their own legislation. The dept is giving back the significant amount of money the community raised and spent on legal fees.

----------


## Bros

> The dept is giving back the $100,000 the community raised and spent on legal fees.

   In writing I hope.  
What are they doing now amending the legislation so you will be back where you come from.

----------


## John2b

> In writing I hope.

  Absolutely.  

> What are they doing now amending the legislation so you will be back where you come from.

  Not sure what you mean...

----------


## John2b

On Sunday last at a time when 70% of SA's electricity was being supplied by solar, supply was trending to exceed consumption. The electricity inter-connector to Victoria (then NSW, QLD) had technical issues affecting SA's capacity to export the excess. That resulted in the disconnection of a considerable amount of SA rooftop solar from the grid through three different mechanisms including over-voltage controls in individual grid connected inverters and by central control of solar arrays supplied as part of electrical utility supplier and government sponsored schemes. The irony is that nobody noticed.

----------


## Bros

Sundays are always a time of low load. Cutting off solar by overvoltage is a brutal way of doing it and can lead the supply authority to damages claim

----------


## John2b

> Cutting off solar by overvoltage is a brutal way of doing it

   ??? Over-voltage control is self adaptive and is a perfectly normal control method. How do you think battery chargers prevent overcharging? All grid connected inverters have over-voltage regulation built in to comply with Australian standards. The actual behaviour of the over-voltage regulation is set in firmware. It does not have to be either ON or OFF, although that is up to the programer of the firmware. BTW even if each inverter is only on or off, the net effect of 100,000s of individually connected inverters individually responding to local grid voltages will not cause any noticeable disruption.

----------


## Bros

> ??? Over-voltage control is self adaptive and is a perfectly normal control method. .

   Not really if the supply authority causes the over voltage which they have in their control to shut down the rooftop solar.

----------


## John2b

> Not really if the supply authority causes the over voltage which they have in their control to shut down the rooftop solar.

   There is absolutely no need for that kind of crowbar action if the existing controls built into inverters are used.

----------


## r3nov8or

> There is absolutely no need for that kind of crowbar action if the existing controls built into inverters are used.

  Yeah, pretty sure my inverter will throw an error and "protect the network" if over-voltage is detected. Haven't noticed it personally, but certainly discussed on related forums. Or is my example different to that discussed?

----------


## John2b

> Yeah, pretty sure my inverter will throw an error and "protect the network" if over-voltage is detected. Haven't noticed it personally, but certainly discussed on related forums. Or is my example different to that discussed?

  The built-in shutdown of grid connected inverters for over-voltage protection is a "crowbar" mechanism that is there for safety reasons in fault conditions to protect both the inverter and locally connected consumer connected electrical appliances. 
However a grid connected inverter can also be set to taper off the attached solar system's contribution to the grid in response to the local grid voltage. This tapering action is inherently self-regulatory and responsive to insolation and grid load, e.g. part cloud days, and does not need central control or predictive load management. The behaviour needed is a bit like a cruise control in a car, responding to variations in vehicle load and engine output. The capability to do this is built into the design of grid connected inverters, although to enact this response would require changes to inverter settings and possibly firmware updates for individual inverters.

----------


## Bros

I don’t believe we are to far off having centralised control of all grid connected inverters.

----------


## John2b

> I don’t believe we are to far off having centralised control of all grid connected inverters.

  I am not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that not only is central control a blunt instrument, but a fair proportion of the 2.7 million existing household grid connected inverters probably are not compatible with central control. Autonomous export limiting settings in individual inverters can handle the rolling shadows of a partly cloudy day on a house by house basis, with no central control input required.

----------


## Bros

> I am not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that not only is central control a blunt instrument, but a fair proportion of the 2.7 million existing household grid connected inverters probably are not compatible with central control. Autonomous export limiting settings in individual inverters can handle the rolling shadows of a partly cloudy day on a house by house basis, with no central control input required.

   Turning off the 240 cb stops them working

----------


## Bros

Thin end of the wedge for total remote control in the future, the proposal does nothing for the grid just lines someone’s pocket. 
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-25/australians-with-rooftop-solar-charged-export-electricity-grid/100026336

----------


## John2b

The conflict between for profit utility companies and the public need has completely screwed the energy market, and it's just getting more nonsensical as it gets further politicised. That's one reason why we severed the grid connection four years ago. The payback period for our standalone system is looking like 7-8 years at our current energy usages, and we are almost half way through. Then we'll essentially have free power for as long as we live here, with no idiotic customer service issues, no overcharges, no electricity outages, no surges, no frequency variations, no lightning strikes on poles, just superior pure sine-wave power with crystal locked frequency, and free spare energy for running the car.

----------


## phild01

> Then we'll essentially have free power...
> ...just superior pure sine-wave power with crystal locked frequency, and free spare energy for running the car.

  What about your battery replacements!

----------


## r3nov8or

_Australians with rooftop solar panels could soon be charged for exporting power into the grid, under proposed changes_  https://amp.abc.net.au/article/100026336 
WTF!

----------


## John2b

> What about your battery replacements!

  Battery life in a system is a design issue. There are plenty of off-grid systems over here running on ex-Telstra batteries well over twenty years old, some approaching thirty years old, and those batteries don't have the benefit of lead carbon anode designs which lower deterioration rates and double life over older sealed lead acid battery designs. 
The battery technology selected for our system, the designed-in margin of capacity, the management of battery depth of discharge, and the environmental conditions under which the batteries operate, are such that the batteries will probably outlive us. And given the current trajectory of battery prices I'm not losing any sleep worrying  about it.

----------


## Bedford

*This couple had a Tesla battery when storms cut power. At first it was a lifesaver. Then it died.*  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-...grid/100264988   

> Freek and Iet Fuijkschot had spent roughly $10,000 on their fancy home battery storage unit, plus installation.They installed it because they care about the environment,

  I'm happy for them but clearly it didn't help their environment.......

----------


## Bart1080

> _Australians with rooftop solar panels could soon be charged for exporting power into the grid, under proposed changes_ https://amp.abc.net.au/article/100026336
> WTF!

  
There is some level of logic around this issue where the distributed systems in some areas are struggling to manage the network effectively due to the influx of solar injecting into the grid and certain periods of the day.  There will be a solution put into place to better manage this at some stage as its not unique to Australia.   
But reading between the lines is effectively a "click Bait" article, I'm mean really, for a system generating ~$1200 per year and likely to drop $100 to $1100 a year under the proposal along with non solar owners having their bill reduced by ~$25 per YEAR....WOW, lets all go out and celebrate the BS chump change we are likely to receive or loose!!!!  :Smilie:  
In the mean time, I've just signed up for a 12.7kW system and with a few other changes (timers to operate certain appliances pumps, hot water during the day, changing habits - washing, dishwasher etc), should pay it off within 4 years or less....reducing my annual bill from $5,200 to maybe $1,800 to 2,200 which over time if I dont do anything is always going to rise with inflation/cost of maintaining our networks.

----------


## r3nov8or

I agree the dollar amounts are not significant, but it's The Vibe  :Smilie:  (queue The Castle) 
I have about a year remaining until my 8.12kW system has paid itself off... happy days

----------


## Marc

This sounds interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAv6GGDGeJM

----------


## phild01

> This sound interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAv6GGDGeJM

  Wow!

----------


## Marc

Here is another one this is on water  :Smilie:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwkVL8A-8t4

----------


## r3nov8or

How much fossil fuel does it take to manufacture a $23bn solar farm and the sub-sea cable from Au to Sing?

----------


## John2b

> How much fossil fuel does it take to manufacture a $23bn solar farm and the sub-sea cable from Au to Sing?

  The energy will be a small fraction of what the solar farm is going to generate and deliver or it simply would not be viable. 
It's several decades since the energy embedded in a solar panel was a significant proportion of what it would produce during its functional design life. Today's panels will produce as much as 30 times the energy taken to make them and even after that, when their output has fallen a little, properly made panels will continue to produce electricity for decades more. 
Many PV panel factories now run on solar power, so even the energy embedded in the panels is renewable energy to start with.

----------


## r3nov8or

Big Battery continues to burn nearly 24 hours after catching alight 
The battery, enclosed in a shipping container, is part of Australia's largest lithium-ion battery which is under construction and was expected to be operation by November 2021.  https://www.bay939.com.au/news/local...rthern-suburbs

----------


## Bros

Might be of interest to some, but it is heavy going. 
If you comment leave your political baggage at the door along with your climate views.  https://www.aemo.com.au/-/media/file...d-shedding.pdf

----------


## havabeer

> Might be of interest to some, but it is heavy going. 
> If you comment leave your political baggage at the door along with your climate views.  https://www.aemo.com.au/-/media/file...d-shedding.pdf

  from what I remember the summary was:
had a unit trip
lost AC oil supplies to the turbine
Due to work happening on their DC bus, the DC oil pumps didn't kick in either
the loss of DC also meant their field circuit breaker didn't open (the big one that connects it to the grid)
the generator stopped making power
the generator instead started acting like a big motor
this went on for about 25 mins till the turbine/generator was operating on a higher plane and left for the heavens on a hydrogen powered rocket
the DCS (screens used to control the power station) was flooded with like 15,000 alarms so it was a bit hard to see what was going on. 
but basically the interconnectors between QLD and NSW did what they where meant to do... open when there is a fault and close back up once the fault cleared.  
as someone who works at coal fired power station (and is just about finished his training on being the panel operator), its really quite scary just how much every bit of plant in that place is trying to kill you.

----------


## Marc

> How much fossil fuel does it take to manufacture a $23bn solar farm and the sub-sea cable from Au to Sing?

  I would like to know if singapore will dispose of the spent solar panels after their brief useful life and bury them in their own backyard. 
The reality of so called renewables, is that their manufacture, network connection and operations, produce real and present pollution of the permanent kind.

----------


## Bros

> I would like to know if singapore will dispose of the spent solar panels after their brief useful life and bury them in their own backyard.

   I don't know about Singapore but the disposal of end of like solar panels and batteries will have to be solved. The worst end of life disposal will be the windmills as these are difficult to access and the cost of maintenance will exceed the cost of replacement due to their small size and numbers. 
Maybe the windmills will come down like removing old power stations stacks, whereas solar panels and batteries are easy to access.

----------


## Bros

> the loss of DC also meant their field circuit breaker didn't open (the big one that connects it to the grid)
> the generator stopped making power

  You had better look at the difference between a field switch and GCB other than that you had the incident right but the sequence is wrong.   

> as someone who works at coal fired power station (and is just about finished his training on being the panel operator), its really quite scary just how much every bit of plant in that place is trying to kill you.

  From someone who has worked for over 30 yrs in coal fired power stations I have never seen an injury from an operating unit, I've had a few frights but they were unexpected events not life or injury threatening.

----------


## John2b

The disposal of the composite materials of wind turbines at end of life is problematic, just as is the disposal of composites in boat hulls, commercial airliners, cars, building cladding, benchtops and bathtubs, to name a few. 
To suggest that there is a net negative energy/cost/environmental balance from renewable energy generation beggars disbelief. The fiscal institutions that finance renewable generation (and pay dividends to their shareholders, including superannuation funds) do so because low whole of life costs means greater financial returns - a big DOH to anyone who hasn't got it yet (I'm not holding my breath LOL). The Australian state with the lowest wholesale cost of electricity has >60% generation from renewables averaged over the year, and far from being out of pocket over renewable subsidies, the biggest financial beneficiary has been that state's government.

----------


## John2b

South Australian households and businesses have set what the state's electricity distributor believes is a world record: generating more electricity from solar than they consumed for periods of time on five different days in the past five weeks. SA Power Networks (SAPN), said the five events of so-called "negative demand" was a world first for a gigawatt-scale power grid. 
7 renewable energy lessons from South Australia: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/...limate-change/

----------


## Bros

> In October of that year, 100% of the state’s energy came from solar sources – just for one hour,

  One hour out of 744 not an impressive score but as my school report card used to say "room for improvement"

----------


## John2b

> One hour out of 744 not an impressive score but as my school report card used to say "room for improvement"

   Top of the class worldwide, but sure room for improvement. I'm glad I didn't have your teacher, though my parents were like that. BTW that was October 2020. Move forward to this year and five times from 26 Sept to the end of October had negative demand for at least a couple of hours.    https://www.sapowernetworks.com.au/d...ark-for-solar/

----------


## John2b

Electricity supplies in South Australia no longer depend on 'base load' generation with that being replaced by synchronous condensers, which provide “system strength” and other services without burning fuel. That means SA was able to generate its entire electricity demand from wind and solar alone for nearly four days continuously (i.e. day and night) in late November. With more renewable electricity infrastructure currently under construction and even more in planning, 100% solar and wind will become be the normal circumstance for SA with Australia's already lowest wholesale electricity prices to drop even further.  100 Per Cent Of SA Demand Met By Just Wind And Solar Over A 93 Hour Period https://reneweconomy.com.au/solar-re...ecords-tumble/

----------


## r3nov8or

I trust the "more in planning" is catering for when "everyone" plugs in to charge their EV...  :Biggrin:

----------


## John2b

The South Australian government target is for wind and solar to generate >500% of current local grid demand by 2050, and likely to be achieved because wind and solar infrastructure is cheap and once built the energy is free. The excess capacity means there will never be an undersupply of electricity and the excess can be exported and/or used for creating other forms of stored energy, such as hydrogen which can then be used to replace fossil fuel for forms of transportation where electrification isn't practical.

----------


## John2b

From the Sydney Morning Herald today:  South Australia sourced an average of just over 100 per cent of the electricity it needed from renewable power for 6½ days leading up to December 29 last year  a record for the state and perhaps for comparable energy grids around the world. The states previous record was just over three days, says Geoff Eldridge, an energy analyst who runs the website NEMlog.com.au, which tracks the operations of the National Energy Market covering Australias east-coast states and South Australia.     The Hornsdale Power Reservation in South Australia, where tech firm Tesla has installed a huge battery.  His analysis shows that for the six days identified, the state produced on average 101 per cent of the energy it needed from wind, rooftop solar and solar farms, with just a fraction of the energy the state used being drawn from gas, in order to keep the grid stable. At times during the period, slightly less renewable energy was available and at other times renewable capacity was higher than needed, he says. Bruce Mountain, director of the Victoria Energy Policy Centre, said he believed that aside from some small island grids such as those in Hawaii and Tasmania, it was likely that South Australias six-day run on renewables was a record for a grid supporting an advanced economy.  During the unprecedented 156-hour renewable run, the share of wind in total energy supplied averaged 64.4 per cent, while rooftop solar averaged 29.5 per cent and utility-scale solar averaged 6.2 per cent, clean energy website RenewEconomy.com.au reported, using Mr Eldridges data.

----------


## havabeer

it is impressive and the way forward more places will be doing it. 
I did have a chuckle at this bit:  

> with just a fraction of the energy the state used being drawn from gas

  but don't let the title of " a week of 100% renewable power" get in the way of the truth, that there was still a fossil fuel source pumping into the grid and that it was just an *average* 100% renewable

----------


## UseByDate

> it is impressive and the way forward more places will be doing it. 
> I did have a chuckle at this bit:  
> but don't let the title of " a week of 100% renewable power" get in the way of the truth, that there was still a fossil fuel source pumping into the grid and that it was just an *average* 100% renewable

  The gas fuel supplied energy was used to keep the grid stable. IE correct voltage and frequency. A larger battery or a mechanical means of stabilising the grid would eliminate the need for gas. Note that it may be cheaper to use gas.   His analysis shows that for the six days identified, the state produced on average 101 per cent of the energy it needed from wind, rooftop solar and solar farms, with just a fraction of the energy the state used being drawn from gas, *in order to keep the grid stable.*

----------


## phild01

What fraction though!?

----------


## UseByDate

> What fraction though!?

  Thought exercise.
 I don't know what the faction is but it does not change the fact that SA for 6 days was powered by renewables.
 Let us assume that in order to keep the SA grid stable, 10% (it does not matter what % we assume for the following argument) of the load has to be generated by gas generators. So if 100% of the load is being supplied by renewables and 10% by gas then SA will export the 10% excess to Victoria. SA keeps the green energy and exports the gas generated energy to Victoria. Victoria then can reduce the energy they are generating by the same amount that they are importing, thereby reducing their gas/coal consumption by the same amount that SA is consuming.  
 So we have the situation that SA generates all its electricity via renewables and no extra electricity is gas/coal generated within Australia as a whole.

----------


## John2b

UBD is correct. In effect the net generation consumed from fossil sources was 0% because the rest of the Australian Energy Market was being used as a 'battery' to mop up excess renewables and replace that electricity when there was a renewable shortfall. Obviously this will not work on a nationwide basis without either a lot more storage or, much more more likely because it is so cheap, a lot more renewable generation capacity combined with the ability to throttle output to prevent oversupply. 
Unlike trying to limit output from nuclear and/or fossil energy boiling water steam turbine electricity generators which causes all sorts of problems for the generation plant, there is essentially no downside to feathering a wind turbine or reducing the output current of PV panels. In the first instance all that happens is that the wind going past the turbine isn't slowed as much, in the second the PV panel gets a little hotter and settles on a slightly higher panel temperature where reradiated heat matches the insolation less the lower electrical energy harvested.

----------


## r3nov8or

Covering all bases...  https://timesnewsgroup.com.au/geelon...-gas-projects/ 
Viva took over the Shell refinery in northern Geelong suburb Corio in 2014

----------


## r3nov8or

One of the KI places might be John2b's  :Smilie:   https://southaustralia.com/travel-bl...outh-australia

----------


## John2b

> One of the KI places might be John2b's  https://southaustralia.com/travel-bl...outh-australia

  Not mine, and there are many more on Kangaroo Island than this list. We went off grid for economic and supply security reasons. 
Today's news papers report there are significant wholesale price increases from 64% in SA up to 284% rise in Queensland on last year's prices, due to the rise in coal costs.    https://indaily.com.au/news/2022/04/...-prices-surge/

----------


## John2b

South Australia has been effectively powered by green energy for a week, with one expert predicting it could extend to a month by early next year. 
From December 12 to 19, National Energy Market data showed wind and solar contributed on average 103.5 per cent towards the state's energy demand. No coal was used during the period, but gas accounted for 5.9 per cent of electricity when renewable sources were not enough to power the state at points at night. The state's connection to the national electricity grid saw it import three per cent of its net energy demand. The average cost of a megawatt hour dropped to -$26.35. It's understood to be a world-first achievement for a jurisdiction of its size.  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-...n-sa/101788694 
 (BTW sorry to all the naysayers here, but it seems I was correct when I posted this #152 a year ago.)

----------


## John2b

Solar panels that work overnight? They're under development. 
A consequence of the first law of thermodynamics, AKA the law of conservation of energy, means that the same amount of energy radiates away from the Earth overnight as arrives during the sunlight hours. 
Solar photovoltaic panels convert the incoming electromagnetic radiation of UV, visible light and near IR (short wavelength infrared) waves into electricity. Earth's outgoing radiation is in the form of far IR (long wavelength infrared) electromagnetic radiation, so it stands to reason that with the right semiconductor materials it should be possible to capture the outgoing (nighttime) radiation with a photovoltaic panel. Turns out it is possible:  Night-time Photovoltaic cells

----------


## Bart1080

> Solar panels that work overnight? They're under development.  Night-time Photovoltaic cells

  
Interesting article. 
Like many other developments on the drawing board (some for 50+ years), I wonder if it will ever see the light of day that's both feasible (ROI) and affordable within our lifetimes or will other tech beat the need like more efficient and far cheaper batteries.

----------


## doovalacky

Meanwhile in good old WA new systems larger than 5kW will be export limited to 1.5kW, and all new systems have to have remote shutdown controlled by supplier. https://www.synergy.net.au/global/dpv-management

----------


## r3nov8or

> ...:  Night-time Photovoltaic cells

  Where are we going to economically place these nighttimers, where we wouldn't otherwise choose to place regular solar PV which generate 4 times as much? And so as not to interfere with daytimers?

----------


## Bart1080

> Meanwhile in good old WA new systems larger than 5kW will be export limited to 1.5kW, and all new systems have to have remote shutdown controlled by supplier. https://www.synergy.net.au/global/dpv-management

  
Yep that is low, but all the states heading down the same path due to massive rooftop solar excess's pumping into the system as more and more solar is installed.  Setting your new home system up with max self-consumption is now the only option the get a good ROI whilst there is still good gov incentives.   
Hopefully battery tech will be much cheaper at some point to give a good ROI instead on the current break-even scenario, so why bother (at least with an all in 1 solution like a Tesla with a ROI of 15 years), maybe separate component system can achieve a slightly better but still no real ROI for the first 10+ years...dependent on the battery size..

----------


## John2b

"No-light" PVs have only been under development for ~2-3 years. Not that long ago when solar PVs were introduced on watches and camera light meters they were around ~1% conversion efficiency and >100 times today's price. 
A direct comparison for the output per m2 of light and dark PVs is not really important. The demand for electricity at night is never going to be as high as daytime, plus waste heat sources, such as cooling water from fossil or nuclear powered steam driven turbine electricity stations or other industrial processes can be used as the heat source giving substantial gains in efficiency and reduction in size of array needed.

----------

