News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
abc
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2022 10:35 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1591 Post by abc » Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:32 pm

SBD wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:23 pm
abc wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2024 1:31 pm
SBD wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2024 12:23 pm


Did you read the fact sheet?

The "native vegetation" looks like it will grow to mask the view, but is a long way from there yet (Streetview August 2023). I guess it will absorb carbon as it grows. Do mature trees keep locking in carbon?

Looking at Streetview of the strip left along Black Road, I'm not sure what value it will provide. If they fall over and get eaten by fungi, the carbon will be released again anyway, won't it?
20 metres of aesthetics retained doesn't account for what was removed
Assuming it was harvested for furniture, building etc, the removed timber continues to contain the carbon it captured. The new plants growing will capture more carbon. Like Rubberman pointed out, the panels also reduce the creation of new carbon dioxide by not needing fossil fuel to drive the pumps, filtration etc.
What new plants growing? The forest has been replaced by solar panels. What is on the border was already there.

A dead tree or block of timber doesn't photosynthesize. Geez :wallbash: What do they teach you in school these days? ...that's a rhetorical question, I already know
tired of low IQ hacks

User avatar
Algernon
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1609
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Moravia

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1592 Post by Algernon » Fri Apr 19, 2024 4:10 pm

A live tree sequesters carbon in 1. wood/roots and 2. soil.

For carbon to be sequestered in soil requires further processes of breaking down fallen leaf matter, namely being consumed by funguses or other organisms. Fallen leaf matter otherwise emits carbon straight back into the atmosphere unless it is sequestered in soil.

The simple act of photosynthesising on a fully grow tree is chiefly producing sugars that sustain the life of the tree and not permanently sequestering carbon. This is moreso in a plantation type environment which is a monoculture and doesn't provide the full spectrum of ecosystem services of a true forest. No. Photosynthesis on a fully grown plantation doesn't permanently sequester much carbon after it has grown. Forests do that.

If the initial existence of the plantation was solely for the purpose of harvesting wood, then nothing environmentally is lost. It has sequestered carbon in its wood and the wood will stay in wood form. Job done - from planting to cutting down, your end result is a net gain.

I once did the sums on how many trees I would need to plant to offset the carbon emitted from my car. This was some 10-15 years ago. I wasn't going in with high hopes that it would be viable, but I did the sums. It was a car with a 3 cyl/1L engine. For the amount of driving I did in it, it worked out that I needed a few thousand square m of property to plant trees in order to get nowhere fucking near offsetting the emissions. As already said previously, your better bet is not putting the carbon in the atmosphere in the first place.

rubberman
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2006
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1593 Post by rubberman » Fri Apr 19, 2024 7:15 pm

Algernon wrote:
Fri Apr 19, 2024 4:10 pm
A live tree sequesters carbon in 1. wood/roots and 2. soil.

For carbon to be sequestered in soil requires further processes of breaking down fallen leaf matter, namely being consumed by funguses or other organisms. Fallen leaf matter otherwise emits carbon straight back into the atmosphere unless it is sequestered in soil.

The simple act of photosynthesising on a fully grow tree is chiefly producing sugars that sustain the life of the tree and not permanently sequestering carbon. This is moreso in a plantation type environment which is a monoculture and doesn't provide the full spectrum of ecosystem services of a true forest. No. Photosynthesis on a fully grown plantation doesn't permanently sequester much carbon after it has grown. Forests do that.

If the initial existence of the plantation was solely for the purpose of harvesting wood, then nothing environmentally is lost. It has sequestered carbon in its wood and the wood will stay in wood form. Job done - from planting to cutting down, your end result is a net gain.

I once did the sums on how many trees I would need to plant to offset the carbon emitted from my car. This was some 10-15 years ago. I wasn't going in with high hopes that it would be viable, but I did the sums. It was a car with a 3 cyl/1L engine. For the amount of driving I did in it, it worked out that I needed a few thousand square m of property to plant trees in order to get nowhere fucking near offsetting the emissions. As already said previously, your better bet is not putting the carbon in the atmosphere in the first place.
Those trees at Happy Valley were intended from the start to be harvested.

They were going to be harvested, whether or not solar panels are there.

There's no point in arguing with someone who simply doesn't want to understand, or lacks the ability to understand. You simply waste your own time by engaging.

mattblack
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:20 am

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1594 Post by mattblack » Wed Apr 24, 2024 10:56 am

Nationals threaten to tear up wind and solar contracts as nuclear misinformation swings polls


NUCLEAR POLICY & PLANNING SOLAR WIND

National leader David Littleproud has threatened to tear up contracts for wind and solar farm developments, in the latest broadside against large scale renewable energy from the federal Coalition.

The remarks – reported by the Newcastle Herald and later verified by Renew Economy via a transcript – were made in a press conference last week in Newcastle, when Littleproud was campaigning against offshore wind projects and outlining the Coalition’s hope that it could build a nuclear power plant in the upper Hunter Valley.

The Coalition has vowed to stop the roll out of large scale renewables, and keep coal fired power plants open in the hope that they can build nuclear power plants – recognised around the world as the most expensive power technology on the planet – some time in the late 2030s and 2040s.

No one in the energy industry, nor large energy consumers for that matter, are the slightest bit interested in nuclear because of its huge costs and time it takes to build, and because it would set back Australia’s short term emissions reductions.

But the comments about contracts are the most sinister to date, and reflect the determination of a party leader who just a few years ago described renewables and storage as a “good thing”, including the huge wind and solar projects that are being built in his own electorate, to destroy the renewables industry.

The Newcastle Herald asked Littleproud if an incoming Coalition government would consider “tearing up contracts” for renewable infrastructure contracts that had already been signed.

“Well exactly,” Littleproud said. “We will look at where the existing government took contracts and at what stage they are at.

“There are some projects on land that we will have to accept, but we are not going to just let these things happen. If that means we have to pay out part of the contracts, and we will definitely look at that. You’re not going to sit here and say today that we’re stopping it and then not following through.”

The federal government this week announced the biggest ever auction of wind and solar in Australia, seeking six gigawatts of new capacity that will be underwritten by contracts written by the commonwealth.

This will see at least 2.2 GW of new wind and solar sourced in NSW, at least 300 MW in South Australia, already the country’s leader with a 75 per cent share of wind and solar in its grid, and multiple gigawatts spread over other states.

However, the Coalition’s nuclear plans are already facing delays, having pulled back from a previous commitment to deliver the nuclear policy before the May 14 federal budget. It now only promises to release the policy before the next election, with Littleproud telling Sky News on Monday that the party “would not be bullied” into an early release.

One of the many problems with its nuclear strategy will be finding sites for the proposed power plants. The Coalition has targeted the upper Hunter as one site, but AGL, the owner of the site that houses the now closed Liddell and the still operating Bayswater coal generators, has said it is not interested because it is focused on renewables and storage.

Littlepround, however, said there are other sites in the area that could be used, although the Newcastle Herald said he declined to nominate those sites. Inevitably, they would require new infrastructure.

The campaign against renewables and for nuclear has been based around misinformation, both on the cost and plans of renewables and transmission, and on the cost of nuclear power plants, which have stalled around the world because of soaring costs, huge delays, and because no small modular reactor has yet been licensed in the western world.

That campaign has been amplified by right wing “think tanks” and ginger groups, and the Murdoch media, and largely reported uncritically in other mainstream media. It appears to be having some traction.

According to an Essential Media poll published in The Guardian on Tuesday, 40 per cent of respondents ranked renewables as the most expensive form of electricity, 36 per cent said nuclear, and 24 per cent said fossil fuels.

The poll also found a majority (52%) of voters supported developing nuclear power for the generation of electricity, up two points since October 2023, and 31% opposed it, down two points.

The most recent GenCost report prepared by the CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator, like other international studies, says that nuclear power costs nearly three times more than renewables, even counting the cost of storage and transmissions.

However, the Coalition – with the support of right wind media and agitators – have led relentless campaigns against the CSIRO and AEMO, even though their nuclear costs were based on the only SMR technology that has gotten close to construction, before being pulled because it was too expensive.

The push to stop renewables comes despite reports from both AEMO and the Australian Energy Regulator that highlight how the growth in renewables has lowered wholesale power prices, despite extreme weather events and the impact of the unexpected outage of Victoria’s biggest coal generator.

The only state where wholesale electricity prices actually rose were in Queensland, which has the heaviest dependency on coal, although the state has just passed laws that lock in its 75 per cent emissions reduction target and its 80 per cent renewables target by 2030.

South Australia has already reached a 75 per cent wind and solar generation share in its grid, and aims to reach “net” 100 per cent by the end of 2027. It enjoyed the biggest fall in wholesale spot prices in the last quarter, which state minister Tom Koutsantonis said should be passed on to consumers.

“SA’s prices fell the most of any state, and the black coal dependent states of Queensland and NSW had the highest prices,” Koutsantonis said.

“These proven falls in wholesale prices are encouraging signs that we are on the right track. South Australia’s high proportion of renewables – which exceeded 75 per cent of generation in 2023 – is key to South Australian prices being far lower than the black-coal states of NSW and Queensland.

“Retail prices must fall because wholesale costs to retailers are going down.”

https://reneweconomy.com.au/nationals-t ... ngs-polls/

mattblack
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:20 am

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1595 Post by mattblack » Wed Apr 24, 2024 11:00 am

SA records nation’s biggest fall in power prices

Release date: 23/04/24

South Australia has recorded the biggest price drops for wholesale electricity and gas in the nation, a new report by the Australian Energy Market Operator shows.
The falls indicate that the global gas price shocks are easing, and that renewable energy is driving down costs in South Australia.

The latest AEMO quarterly report published today shows the average wholesale electricity price for the first quarter of this year was $55 per megawatt hour in South Australia. That was $17 - or 24 per cent – lower than the average for Q1 in 2023.

Prices in Queensland ($118/MWh, up 13 per cent) were more than double the SA average, and SA was cheaper than NSW ($87/MWh, down 13 per cent) and Tasmania ($67/MWh, down 17 per cent).

Wholesale price changes flow through to the retail prices paid by households and small businesses. The AEMO report follows the announcement last month by the Australian Energy Regulator that it intends to cut benchmark retail prices – the Default Market Offer (DMO) – from July. Its draft DMO signals cuts of up to 2.5 per cent cut for households and 8.2 per cent for small business. These cuts are being driven by falling wholesale prices.

The AEMO report corresponds with a recent AER report on the first quarter of this year, which uses different methodology but draws the same conclusion – SA’s prices fell the most of any state, and the black coal dependent states of Queensland and NSW had the highest prices.

Both of these first-quarter reports extend the trend identified by these national agencies in January of significant price falls in the 2023 calendar year compared to 2022, when the Russian invasion of Ukraine coupled with worsening reliability of coal-fired generators in eastern Australia saw electricity prices spike.

The AEMO report says that in the gas market, Adelaide recorded the biggest year-on-year price fall – 7 per cent – to $11.65/gigajoule. The report says international gas prices have eased because of a mild winter in the Northern Hemisphere and increased use of storage in Europe in response to the war in Ukraine.

The Tailem Bend Stage 2 solar farm joined the state’s generation fleet in the first quarter of 2024.

The impact of the new Torrens Island Battery was shown with SA recording the largest year-on-year increase in revenue for batteries. The $20.4 million revenue was up from $9.3 million in Q1 of 2023.

Across the National Electricity Market, batteries offered more volume at lower prices, resulting in battery output more than doubling.

https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/media-rel ... wer-prices

rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 6382
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1596 Post by rev » Wed Apr 24, 2024 12:58 pm

Yeh we'll see...

At what stage in the first quarter of the year?
Because my first quarterly bill for 2024 which included January and February was higher then the previous quarter.
Let's see if the next one in late May will be lower, or even higher.

If I was a betting man, I'd wager it being higher.
Purely on the statistics of recent performances, when we're told it's going to be come down it goes higher.

Why will this occasion be any different?

rubberman
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2006
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1597 Post by rubberman » Wed Apr 24, 2024 1:38 pm

mattblack wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2024 11:00 am
SA records nation’s biggest fall in power prices

Release date: 23/04/24

South Australia has recorded the biggest price drops for wholesale electricity and gas in the nation, a new report by the Australian Energy Market Operator shows.
The falls indicate that the global gas price shocks are easing, and that renewable energy is driving down costs in South Australia.

The latest AEMO quarterly report published today shows the average wholesale electricity price for the first quarter of this year was $55 per megawatt hour in South Australia. That was $17 - or 24 per cent – lower than the average for Q1 in 2023.

Prices in Queensland ($118/MWh, up 13 per cent) were more than double the SA average, and SA was cheaper than NSW ($87/MWh, down 13 per cent) and Tasmania ($67/MWh, down 17 per cent).

Wholesale price changes flow through to the retail prices paid by households and small businesses. The AEMO report follows the announcement last month by the Australian Energy Regulator that it intends to cut benchmark retail prices – the Default Market Offer (DMO) – from July. Its draft DMO signals cuts of up to 2.5 per cent cut for households and 8.2 per cent for small business. These cuts are being driven by falling wholesale prices.

The AEMO report corresponds with a recent AER report on the first quarter of this year, which uses different methodology but draws the same conclusion – SA’s prices fell the most of any state, and the black coal dependent states of Queensland and NSW had the highest prices.

Both of these first-quarter reports extend the trend identified by these national agencies in January of significant price falls in the 2023 calendar year compared to 2022, when the Russian invasion of Ukraine coupled with worsening reliability of coal-fired generators in eastern Australia saw electricity prices spike.

The AEMO report says that in the gas market, Adelaide recorded the biggest year-on-year price fall – 7 per cent – to $11.65/gigajoule. The report says international gas prices have eased because of a mild winter in the Northern Hemisphere and increased use of storage in Europe in response to the war in Ukraine.

The Tailem Bend Stage 2 solar farm joined the state’s generation fleet in the first quarter of 2024.

The impact of the new Torrens Island Battery was shown with SA recording the largest year-on-year increase in revenue for batteries. The $20.4 million revenue was up from $9.3 million in Q1 of 2023.

Across the National Electricity Market, batteries offered more volume at lower prices, resulting in battery output more than doubling.

https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/media-rel ... wer-prices
Even though the wholesale price comes down, it doesn't mean that the retail price will.

It's easy for retailers to increase their profits and blame renewables. The fact that some people can actually see the numbers coming down verifiably for renewables, yet ignore the retailers profiting really makes me question their cognitive abilities. I could even accept that if they were to at least acknowledge the retailers' part in this. But no. It's renewables. Even though the data is from independent sources.

abc
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2022 10:35 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1598 Post by abc » Wed Apr 24, 2024 9:06 pm

Algernon wrote:
Fri Apr 19, 2024 4:10 pm
A live tree sequesters carbon in 1. wood/roots and 2. soil.

For carbon to be sequestered in soil requires further processes of breaking down fallen leaf matter, namely being consumed by funguses or other organisms. Fallen leaf matter otherwise emits carbon straight back into the atmosphere unless it is sequestered in soil.

The simple act of photosynthesising on a fully grow tree is chiefly producing sugars that sustain the life of the tree and not permanently sequestering carbon. This is moreso in a plantation type environment which is a monoculture and doesn't provide the full spectrum of ecosystem services of a true forest. No. Photosynthesis on a fully grown plantation doesn't permanently sequester much carbon after it has grown. Forests do that.

If the initial existence of the plantation was solely for the purpose of harvesting wood, then nothing environmentally is lost. It has sequestered carbon in its wood and the wood will stay in wood form. Job done - from planting to cutting down, your end result is a net gain.

I once did the sums on how many trees I would need to plant to offset the carbon emitted from my car. This was some 10-15 years ago. I wasn't going in with high hopes that it would be viable, but I did the sums. It was a car with a 3 cyl/1L engine. For the amount of driving I did in it, it worked out that I needed a few thousand square m of property to plant trees in order to get nowhere fucking near offsetting the emissions. As already said previously, your better bet is not putting the carbon in the atmosphere in the first place.
Why don't you set an example then?
tired of low IQ hacks

rubberman
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2006
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1599 Post by rubberman » Thu Apr 25, 2024 2:30 pm

An article explaining why retail power prices go up, even though wholesale prices are going down.

Spoiler alert, it's not because of renewables.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-24/ ... /103741682

abc
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2022 10:35 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1600 Post by abc » Thu Apr 25, 2024 3:25 pm

rubberman wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 2:30 pm
An article explaining why retail power prices go up, even though wholesale prices are going down.

Spoiler alert, it's not because of renewables.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-24/ ... /103741682
because we should listen to an activist who has a vested interest...
tired of low IQ hacks

rubberman
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2006
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1601 Post by rubberman » Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:24 pm

abc wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 3:25 pm
rubberman wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 2:30 pm
An article explaining why retail power prices go up, even though wholesale prices are going down.

Spoiler alert, it's not because of renewables.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-24/ ... /103741682
because we should listen to an activist who has a vested interest...
That what's called an "ad hominem" logical fallacy.

People can read the article and make up their own minds. Obviously, some people cannot be reasoned with.

abc
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2022 10:35 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1602 Post by abc » Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:24 pm

rubberman wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:24 pm
abc wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 3:25 pm
rubberman wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 2:30 pm
An article explaining why retail power prices go up, even though wholesale prices are going down.

Spoiler alert, it's not because of renewables.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-24/ ... /103741682
because we should listen to an activist who has a vested interest...
That what's called an "ad hominem" logical fallacy.

People can read the article and make up their own minds. Obviously, some people cannot be reasoned with.
people can read the article and make up their own minds, however you dictated what that opinion would be with your original comment
tired of low IQ hacks

rubberman
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2006
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1603 Post by rubberman » Thu Apr 25, 2024 8:17 pm

abc wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:24 pm
rubberman wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:24 pm
abc wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 3:25 pm


because we should listen to an activist who has a vested interest...
That what's called an "ad hominem" logical fallacy.

People can read the article and make up their own minds. Obviously, some people cannot be reasoned with.
people can read the article and make up their own minds, however you dictated what that opinion would be with your original comment
I encourage you to actually read the article.

The Energy Regulator provided a graph to show wholesale cost reduction due to renewables. So, I provided what was literally a "spoiler".

I mean what do you understand from a graph from a regulator showing that the wholesale price of power has gone down?

mattblack
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:20 am

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1604 Post by mattblack » Thu Apr 25, 2024 9:39 pm

rubberman wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 8:17 pm
abc wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:24 pm
rubberman wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:24 pm


That what's called an "ad hominem" logical fallacy.

People can read the article and make up their own minds. Obviously, some people cannot be reasoned with.
people can read the article and make up their own minds, however you dictated what that opinion would be with your original comment
I encourage you to actually read the article.

The Energy Regulator provided a graph to show wholesale cost reduction due to renewables. So, I provided what was literally a "spoiler".

I mean what do you understand from a graph from a regulator showing that the wholesale price of power has gone down?
The Regulator is an activist and has an agenda :roll:
Last edited by mattblack on Fri Apr 26, 2024 12:04 am, edited 3 times in total.

SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2708
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

#1605 Post by SBD » Thu Apr 25, 2024 11:30 pm

abc wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:24 pm
rubberman wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:24 pm
abc wrote:
Thu Apr 25, 2024 3:25 pm


because we should listen to an activist who has a vested interest...
That what's called an "ad hominem" logical fallacy.

People can read the article and make up their own minds. Obviously, some people cannot be reasoned with.
people can read the article and make up their own minds, however you dictated what that opinion would be with your original comment
The point I saw was that high retail prices are because retailers have to build in a margin to cover "high price events" when the actual spot price jumps from an average of $90 to a spike as high as $10994. We've seen massive business collapses in other industries with variable-price inputs and fixed price outputs (eg builders, cafes). Energy retailers need to build in a margin to avoid going the same way.

The article gives an example of a cause for these high-price events in Queensland was that one of the large coal-fired generators is not reliable, and the price spiked each time it broke down.

It's not clear if coal is a driving feature here or if it could happen to anything. That power station is only just over 20 years old, so newer than most. I guess most coal (and nuclear) power stations drop a larger amount of generation in one swoop if they fail.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest