That is when "demand management" should be used. I expect there are lots of industrial workers in hot environments who would be happy to be given the afternoon off on a hot summer day when the business gets paid to shut down for the rest of the day by the power company. I imagine that $600M buys a lot of down days.bits wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 1:56 pmI disagree.PeFe wrote: There is plenty more electrical infrastructure to be built in South Australia (solar farms, wind farms and storage) These gas generators will not be stopping that.....
These generators are now in the supply vs demand pool. They will lead to 273mw of generation to not be built by someone else. It will not alter anything to do with Haywood interconnect once the 273mw is absorbed in to the market.
For me there was no requirement for the government to build a general power station for someone else. Supply and demand in the market leads to a private company building a power station.
These generators were intended to fill gaps on peak days where the private market supply vs demand has failed. As happened in January this year.
Agreeing to privatising these generators does mean you would have been happy to not have power on days like occured in January 2019 due to the private market failing to cover such edge cases.
Maybe 600mil was too much to cover the edge cases and we are just better off with no power.
Did any of SA lose power due to demand outstripping supply (ie not distribution failures) in January? I thought our generators were turned on to avoid Victoria having to do that.
Soon we will have another interconnector, to New South Wales, past the big solar farms being built in the west of that state, and possibly triggering the build of some of the approved ones in the Mid North here too.