News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

[rubberman]

It has already been stated that excess nuclear power would be used to power energy intensive industries, which currently have/ are about to offshore due to cost and availability of existing generation. It is being proposed to greatly expand the industrial manufacturing capacity of Australia, which will then improve its cost v benefit.

What excess nuclear power? Dutton is proposing to build small nuclear plants.....ie a small amount of power.

Eraring is closing in 2027, you would need 6 small nuclear reactors to replace Eraring, let alone the other 6 coal fired power stations that will close over the next 12 years.

So what is the coalitions plan to replace this power.....there is no plan....the only plan that makes sense for them is to do nothing and try and keep all those coal fired power stations going forever.....or at least until 2050 when small nuclear has claimed their prices will come down.

In 2016 the South Australian Royal Commission into the Nuclear Fuel Cycle estimated the cost of power coming from a small nuclear reactor @ $238 per mwh, my guestimate in 2024 dollars is @ $350 per mwh. Who interstate wants to buy electricity at that price when solar/wind will cost $60 per mwh via an interstate connector? And coal at $120per mwh....and pumped hydro @ $190 per mwh, gas @ $200 per mwh..... The free market will say NO to nuclear....

And as for energy intensive industries....like mining for example....BHP mining operations in South Australia in 2025 will be entirely powered by renewables. Power for BHP will be coming from the Port Augusta Renewable Park (solar and wind) and Goyder South Wind Farm and on low wind nights the soon to be completed Blyth battery will kick in. I will of course post more on this as it all happens next year.

And what about other really intensive industries like aluminium smelting? Reportedly the most electricity power use intensive industry of all time...

https://reneweconomy.com.au/giant-alumi ... bles-deal/

https://www.aumanufacturing.com.au/rio- ... -aluminium

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscr ... our=append

So, we have renewables proponents on one hand saying nuclear doesn’t stack up because the nuclear plants will be idle most of the time,due to the renewables.. then you ask what excess energy as they are only 7 small plants. So which is it? No excess, or idle all the time?
Also, “ the libs have no plan for energy” … well their plan is the same as Labor. More and more renewables. That is their plan… except they realise.. like most of the rest of the developed world, that backup will be an absolute necessity, even if only on average for small amounts of time, at a time. Some here … and the likes of Bowen, won’t even acknowledge the fact that renewables just might not be able to power an expanding economy, being more electrified, and using infinately more electricity from the likes of data centres powering AI. At least they have opened up a discussion. And BTW… on discussion with a Physics professor from UWA at a recent function, there are many academics asking the same questions.

Even if that eventuates, it simply won't be nuclear. The scenario you paint is for a once in a while start up and run. Gas is not only cheaper to build anyway, but under your scenario, the amount of gas used will be minimal over a year. Indeed, in many years, it will be zero. I'd like to see how you manage mothballing nuclear plants, and then running for a month or so, then mothballing it again. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in the company boardroom when you pitch that idea to the Board. Your observations about the need to cover renewables from time to time are valid, but nuclear is the absolute worst means of addressing it.

[claybro]

[quote=claybro post_id=218680 time=<a href="tel:1720592533">1720592533</a> user_id=5463]
[quote=PeFe post_id=218676 time=<a href="tel:1720590207">1720590207</a> user_id=4203]
[quote=claybro post_id=218674 time=<a href="tel:1720588201">1720588201</a> user_id=5463]
It has already been stated that excess nuclear power would be used to power energy intensive industries, which currently have/ are about to offshore due to cost and availability of existing generation. It is being proposed to greatly expand the industrial manufacturing capacity of Australia, which will then improve its cost v benefit.

What excess nuclear power? Dutton is proposing to build small nuclear plants.....ie a small amount of power.

Eraring is closing in 2027, you would need 6 small nuclear reactors to replace Eraring, let alone the other 6 coal fired power stations that will close over the next 12 years.

So what is the coalitions plan to replace this power.....there is no plan....the only plan that makes sense for them is to do nothing and try and keep all those coal fired power stations going forever.....or at least until 2050 when small nuclear has claimed their prices will come down.

In 2016 the South Australian Royal Commission into the Nuclear Fuel Cycle estimated the cost of power coming from a small nuclear reactor @ $238 per mwh, my guestimate in 2024 dollars is @ $350 per mwh. Who interstate wants to buy electricity at that price when solar/wind will cost $60 per mwh via an interstate connector? And coal at $120per mwh....and pumped hydro @ $190 per mwh, gas @ $200 per mwh..... The free market will say NO to nuclear....

And as for energy intensive industries....like mining for example....BHP mining operations in South Australia in 2025 will be entirely powered by renewables. Power for BHP will be coming from the Port Augusta Renewable Park (solar and wind) and Goyder South Wind Farm and on low wind nights the soon to be completed Blyth battery will kick in. I will of course post more on this as it all happens next year.

And what about other really intensive industries like aluminium smelting? Reportedly the most electricity power use intensive industry of all time...

https://reneweconomy.com.au/giant-alumi ... bles-deal/

https://www.aumanufacturing.com.au/rio- ... -aluminium

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscr ... our=append
[/quote]

So, we have renewables proponents on one hand saying nuclear doesn’t stack up because the nuclear plants will be idle most of the time,due to the renewables.. then you ask what excess energy as they are only 7 small plants. So which is it? No excess, or idle all the time?
Also, “ the libs have no plan for energy” … well their plan is the same as Labor. More and more renewables. That is their plan… except they realise.. like most of the rest of the developed world, that backup will be an absolute necessity, even if only on average for small amounts of time, at a time. Some here … and the likes of Bowen, won’t even acknowledge the fact that renewables just might not be able to power an expanding economy, being more electrified, and using infinately more electricity from the likes of data centres powering AI. At least they have opened up a discussion. And BTW… on discussion with a Physics professor from UWA at a recent function, there are many academics asking the same questions.
[/quote]

Even if that eventuates, it simply won't be nuclear. The scenario you paint is for a once in a while start up and run. Gas is not only cheaper to build anyway, but under your scenario, the amount of gas used will be minimal over a year. Indeed, in many years, it will be zero. I'd like to see how you manage mothballing nuclear plants, and then running for a month or so, then mothballing it again. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in the company boardroom when you pitch that idea to the Board. Your observations about the need to cover renewables from time to time are valid, but nuclear is the absolute worst means of addressing it.
[/quote]

It is however the only practically emissions free means, and that’s what I thought this whole thing was about.

[SBD]

The "problem" is that the load of electricity demand is not constant.

The demand drifts up and down on a daily basis as people go about daily business, factories and shopping centres operate only in daytime, etc. The annual cycle includes heaters in winter and airconditioners in summer. Wind and solar with battery backup are likely to be able to handle most of the load, most of the time.

In the old scheme, "Baseload" generation was scaled to cover the (overnight autumn) minimum load, with ramp-up and "peaking" plants meeting the daytime peaks. The baseload generators can be turned up to their maximum for the really hot weeks, and the spare peaking plants given more fuel to meet almost all of the peaks. Each state has a "load shedding" schedule to drop a few suburbs for half an hour or so when the demand exceeds all available supply.

Home solar is reducing the scale of the daytime peak - in fact the grid demand now drops n the middle of the day and we have morning and afternoon peaks. Sometimes, the "market price" of electricity drops below zero when the idling generators are still making more than is being consumed. Possibly it's coal and thermal power stations (Torrens Island, coal and any potential nuclear) that contribute to this as they are difficult to stop and restart. When Tailem Bend solar opened, it was public that it would just turn off when it would have to pay to export power.

Load shedding was never popular, and now seems unacceptable. Demand management is occasionally talked about, but often hard to achieve, partly because we're not used to it and haven't designed systems to do it well. I think the desalination plant can be ramped down to reduce demand on tight days.

No matter what the technology mix is,the grid needs to have available generation to meet the once-every-couple-of-years peak, but most of the time, a lot of that generation capacity is not required. It's not economic to build a generator of any kind, keep it ready for use, cleaned, fueled and staffed, but hardly ever turned on. I think that was the point of the Weatherill Government's gas turbines - they didn't have to be economic, the government would wear the cost of maintenance and make them available below market price on the days when demand spiked. The Marshall government sold them (or rented on long term leases?) to be used by wind farm companies to provide firm contractable electricity.

I'm gradually becoming convinced that the current government's hydrogen plans have some merit. They can soak up "excess" electricity (it's excess at the time of generation whenever the market price is below zero or the operating cost of production), providing a controllable load. It can then burn the hydrogen during those rare peaks, and arbitrage means it actually makes a profit as well. The grid-scale batteries work essentially the same way, but can't have a truck roll up to refill them when they run flat during an extended peak.

[mattblack]

It really doesn't matter if you like it or not, agree or disagree, suits your agenda or not - 100% renewables is coming!

South Australia locks in federal funds to become first grid in world to reach 100 per cent net wind and solar

South Australia has locked in federal funding to ensure that it becomes the first non-hydro grid in the world to reach 100 per cent net renewables.

The funding deal – through what’s known as a Renewable Energy Transformation Agreement – means that the federal government will underwrite a minimum one gigawatt of new wind and solar generation capacity and another 400 MW (1,600 MWh) of storage – to ensure it meets its target of 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.

South Australia already leads Australia – and the world – with a wind and solar share of around 70 per cent over the last 12 months. The addition of the new capacity, along with the new Project Energy Connect transmission link from NSW, will enable it to become the first in the world to reach 1`00 per cent net renewables based around wind and solar.

That does not mean it will be powered at all times by wind and solar. But the amount of wind and solar generated and stored each year will be equivalent to what it consume each year. The state will export power at times and import at other times, and can fall pack on existing peaking gas plants to fill in the gaps.

Reaching that milestone will be a landmark for the state, and for advocates of the renewable energy transition, particularly as conservative and legacy fossil fuel interests continue to push back on the idea that a modern economy can be powered by renewables and storage.

The irony about South Australia is that the target of 100 per cent net renewables was originally committed by the state Liberal government. The state Labor government merely accelerated it from 2030 to 2027.

And to underline the difference in federal politics, the announcement was made at Port Augusta, the site of a former coal fired power station that the federal Coalition wants to turn nuclear, but which has already become a hub for green energy and green industry.

“South Australia has been a renewable energy pioneer – so much so that we recently brought forward our renewable energy target by three years, committing to ensure electricity generation can be sourced from net 100 per cent renewables by 2027,” state energy minister Tom Koutsantonis said in a statement.

“So we warmly welcome this agreement to accelerate the roll out of renewables while ensuring the reliability of the energy system.

“Our government is committed to working with the Commonwealth to establish a secured grid, supporting the power needs of South Australian households and businesses.”

South Australia has not added a new wind or solar project to the grid for around two years, although the biggest wind project in the state – the 412 MW Goyder South wind farm – is about to connect and send its first power to the grid.

Several new battery projects are also under construction – at Blyth, Hallett, Clements Gap and Templers and another, Tailem Bend, still waiting to be commissioned.

These projects will help propel the state towards 80 per cent renewables over the coming year, while the additional capacity of 1,000 MW of wind and solar, 400 MW of battery capacity (plus the minimum 200 MW included in the current CIS auction) will take it towards 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.

South Australia is also building the world’s first green hydrogen power plant at Whyalla, which will be accompanied by a 250 MW green hydrogen electrolyser and storage facilities, which will also be the world’s biggest when complete.

The state is also fielding huge number of inquiries from industry keen to source zero emissions and low cost green energy – with the local transmission company ElectraNet reporting that more than 2 gigawatts of load inquiries have been made.

Federal energy and climate minister Chris Bowen says the signing of the Renewable Energy Transformation Agreement means that South Australia is the first state to lock in the funding required to meet its targets under the federal government’s Capacity Investment Scheme.

The CIS aims to contract an additional 32GW of renewable generation and storage across the country to help it deliver most of the capacity needed to meet its 82 per cent renewable energy target by 2032.

The first tender of 6 gigawatts of new wind and solar capacity has been flooded with interest, with more than 40 GW of projects showing interest, while the first storage tender – for 600 MW, 2,400 MWh in Victoria and South Australia – was also heavily oversubscribed with some 19 GW of proposals.

Bowen says the bilateral agreements have been designed specifically to address the barriers developers, communities, and governments face in delivering renewable projects, and to replace ageing infrastructure that was built half a century ago.

“The Albanese Government is delivering the certainty and confidence the market spent a decade asking for,” Bowen said in a statement.

“The more renewable energy we have in our grid, the more downward pressure it puts on energy bills because it is the cheapest form of energy to power households and industry.

“Giving the market the confidence to build new projects is good; signing an agreement to collaborate with South Australia on practical steps to get the best out of this energy transformation for South Australian workers, communities and industry, is great.

“The Albanese Government’s Reliable Renewables Plan is the only plan supported by experts to deliver the clean, cheap, reliable and resilient energy system that Australians deserve. This is in sharp contrast to Peter Dutton’s anti-renewables nuclear plan – which remains uncosted and unexplained.”

As part of the deal, South Australia, will establish its own specific grid reliability mechanism and benchmark to be used in place of the national framework, and to be responsible for identifying and delivering new projects and technologies that will maintain reliability to that standard.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/south-austr ... and-solar/

Really need a mic drop emoji for these occasions.

[claybro]

It really doesn't matter if you like it or not, agree or disagree, suits your agenda or not - 100% renewables is coming!

South Australia locks in federal funds to become first grid in world to reach 100 per cent net wind and solar

South Australia has locked in federal funding to ensure that it becomes the first non-hydro grid in the world to reach 100 per cent net renewables.

The funding deal – through what’s known as a Renewable Energy Transformation Agreement – means that the federal government will underwrite a minimum one gigawatt of new wind and solar generation capacity and another 400 MW (1,600 MWh) of storage – to ensure it meets its target of 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.

South Australia already leads Australia – and the world – with a wind and solar share of around 70 per cent over the last 12 months. The addition of the new capacity, along with the new Project Energy Connect transmission link from NSW, will enable it to become the first in the world to reach 1`00 per cent net renewables based around wind and solar.

That does not mean it will be powered at all times by wind and solar. But the amount of wind and solar generated and stored each year will be equivalent to what it consume each year. The state will export power at times and import at other times, and can fall pack on existing peaking gas plants to fill in the gaps.

Reaching that milestone will be a landmark for the state, and for advocates of the renewable energy transition, particularly as conservative and legacy fossil fuel interests continue to push back on the idea that a modern economy can be powered by renewables and storage.

The irony about South Australia is that the target of 100 per cent net renewables was originally committed by the state Liberal government. The state Labor government merely accelerated it from 2030 to 2027.

And to underline the difference in federal politics, the announcement was made at Port Augusta, the site of a former coal fired power station that the federal Coalition wants to turn nuclear, but which has already become a hub for green energy and green industry.

“South Australia has been a renewable energy pioneer – so much so that we recently brought forward our renewable energy target by three years, committing to ensure electricity generation can be sourced from net 100 per cent renewables by 2027,” state energy minister Tom Koutsantonis said in a statement.

“So we warmly welcome this agreement to accelerate the roll out of renewables while ensuring the reliability of the energy system.

“Our government is committed to working with the Commonwealth to establish a secured grid, supporting the power needs of South Australian households and businesses.”

South Australia has not added a new wind or solar project to the grid for around two years, although the biggest wind project in the state – the 412 MW Goyder South wind farm – is about to connect and send its first power to the grid.

Several new battery projects are also under construction – at Blyth, Hallett, Clements Gap and Templers and another, Tailem Bend, still waiting to be commissioned.

These projects will help propel the state towards 80 per cent renewables over the coming year, while the additional capacity of 1,000 MW of wind and solar, 400 MW of battery capacity (plus the minimum 200 MW included in the current CIS auction) will take it towards 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.

South Australia is also building the world’s first green hydrogen power plant at Whyalla, which will be accompanied by a 250 MW green hydrogen electrolyser and storage facilities, which will also be the world’s biggest when complete.

The state is also fielding huge number of inquiries from industry keen to source zero emissions and low cost green energy – with the local transmission company ElectraNet reporting that more than 2 gigawatts of load inquiries have been made.

Federal energy and climate minister Chris Bowen says the signing of the Renewable Energy Transformation Agreement means that South Australia is the first state to lock in the funding required to meet its targets under the federal government’s Capacity Investment Scheme.

The CIS aims to contract an additional 32GW of renewable generation and storage across the country to help it deliver most of the capacity needed to meet its 82 per cent renewable energy target by 2032.

The first tender of 6 gigawatts of new wind and solar capacity has been flooded with interest, with more than 40 GW of projects showing interest, while the first storage tender – for 600 MW, 2,400 MWh in Victoria and South Australia – was also heavily oversubscribed with some 19 GW of proposals.

Bowen says the bilateral agreements have been designed specifically to address the barriers developers, communities, and governments face in delivering renewable projects, and to replace ageing infrastructure that was built half a century ago.

“The Albanese Government is delivering the certainty and confidence the market spent a decade asking for,” Bowen said in a statement.

“The more renewable energy we have in our grid, the more downward pressure it puts on energy bills because it is the cheapest form of energy to power households and industry.

“Giving the market the confidence to build new projects is good; signing an agreement to collaborate with South Australia on practical steps to get the best out of this energy transformation for South Australian workers, communities and industry, is great.

“The Albanese Government’s Reliable Renewables Plan is the only plan supported by experts to deliver the clean, cheap, reliable and resilient energy system that Australians deserve. This is in sharp contrast to Peter Dutton’s anti-renewables nuclear plan – which remains uncosted and unexplained.”

As part of the deal, South Australia, will establish its own specific grid reliability mechanism and benchmark to be used in place of the national framework, and to be responsible for identifying and delivering new projects and technologies that will maintain reliability to that standard.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/south-austr ... and-solar/

Really need a mic drop emoji for these occasions.

I’m sure you realise the difference between 100% NET and 100% 24/7. Whilst it is a noteworthy achievement, and kudos to SA… in the scheme of things, it is not quite the mic drop moment you think. It still requires interconnection to much more significant coal and gas resources over east.

[Waewick]

It really doesn't matter if you like it or not, agree or disagree, suits your agenda or not - 100% renewables is coming!

South Australia locks in federal funds to become first grid in world to reach 100 per cent net wind and solar

South Australia has locked in federal funding to ensure that it becomes the first non-hydro grid in the world to reach 100 per cent net renewables.

The funding deal – through what’s known as a Renewable Energy Transformation Agreement – means that the federal government will underwrite a minimum one gigawatt of new wind and solar generation capacity and another 400 MW (1,600 MWh) of storage – to ensure it meets its target of 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.

South Australia already leads Australia – and the world – with a wind and solar share of around 70 per cent over the last 12 months. The addition of the new capacity, along with the new Project Energy Connect transmission link from NSW, will enable it to become the first in the world to reach 1`00 per cent net renewables based around wind and solar.

That does not mean it will be powered at all times by wind and solar. But the amount of wind and solar generated and stored each year will be equivalent to what it consume each year. The state will export power at times and import at other times, and can fall pack on existing peaking gas plants to fill in the gaps.

Reaching that milestone will be a landmark for the state, and for advocates of the renewable energy transition, particularly as conservative and legacy fossil fuel interests continue to push back on the idea that a modern economy can be powered by renewables and storage.

The irony about South Australia is that the target of 100 per cent net renewables was originally committed by the state Liberal government. The state Labor government merely accelerated it from 2030 to 2027.

And to underline the difference in federal politics, the announcement was made at Port Augusta, the site of a former coal fired power station that the federal Coalition wants to turn nuclear, but which has already become a hub for green energy and green industry.

“South Australia has been a renewable energy pioneer – so much so that we recently brought forward our renewable energy target by three years, committing to ensure electricity generation can be sourced from net 100 per cent renewables by 2027,” state energy minister Tom Koutsantonis said in a statement.

“So we warmly welcome this agreement to accelerate the roll out of renewables while ensuring the reliability of the energy system.

“Our government is committed to working with the Commonwealth to establish a secured grid, supporting the power needs of South Australian households and businesses.”

South Australia has not added a new wind or solar project to the grid for around two years, although the biggest wind project in the state – the 412 MW Goyder South wind farm – is about to connect and send its first power to the grid.

Several new battery projects are also under construction – at Blyth, Hallett, Clements Gap and Templers and another, Tailem Bend, still waiting to be commissioned.

These projects will help propel the state towards 80 per cent renewables over the coming year, while the additional capacity of 1,000 MW of wind and solar, 400 MW of battery capacity (plus the minimum 200 MW included in the current CIS auction) will take it towards 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.

South Australia is also building the world’s first green hydrogen power plant at Whyalla, which will be accompanied by a 250 MW green hydrogen electrolyser and storage facilities, which will also be the world’s biggest when complete.

The state is also fielding huge number of inquiries from industry keen to source zero emissions and low cost green energy – with the local transmission company ElectraNet reporting that more than 2 gigawatts of load inquiries have been made.

Federal energy and climate minister Chris Bowen says the signing of the Renewable Energy Transformation Agreement means that South Australia is the first state to lock in the funding required to meet its targets under the federal government’s Capacity Investment Scheme.

The CIS aims to contract an additional 32GW of renewable generation and storage across the country to help it deliver most of the capacity needed to meet its 82 per cent renewable energy target by 2032.

The first tender of 6 gigawatts of new wind and solar capacity has been flooded with interest, with more than 40 GW of projects showing interest, while the first storage tender – for 600 MW, 2,400 MWh in Victoria and South Australia – was also heavily oversubscribed with some 19 GW of proposals.

Bowen says the bilateral agreements have been designed specifically to address the barriers developers, communities, and governments face in delivering renewable projects, and to replace ageing infrastructure that was built half a century ago.

“The Albanese Government is delivering the certainty and confidence the market spent a decade asking for,” Bowen said in a statement.

“The more renewable energy we have in our grid, the more downward pressure it puts on energy bills because it is the cheapest form of energy to power households and industry.

“Giving the market the confidence to build new projects is good; signing an agreement to collaborate with South Australia on practical steps to get the best out of this energy transformation for South Australian workers, communities and industry, is great.

“The Albanese Government’s Reliable Renewables Plan is the only plan supported by experts to deliver the clean, cheap, reliable and resilient energy system that Australians deserve. This is in sharp contrast to Peter Dutton’s anti-renewables nuclear plan – which remains uncosted and unexplained.”

As part of the deal, South Australia, will establish its own specific grid reliability mechanism and benchmark to be used in place of the national framework, and to be responsible for identifying and delivering new projects and technologies that will maintain reliability to that standard.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/south-austr ... and-solar/

Really need a mic drop emoji for these occasions.

I’m sure you realise the difference between 100% NET and 100% 24/7. Whilst it is a noteworthy achievement, and kudos to SA… in the scheme of things, it is not quite the mic drop moment you think. It still requires interconnection to much more significant coal and gas resources over east.

It really doesn't matter if you like it or not, agree or disagree, suits your agenda or not - 100% renewables is coming!

South Australia locks in federal funds to become first grid in world to reach 100 per cent net wind and solar

South Australia has locked in federal funding to ensure that it becomes the first non-hydro grid in the world to reach 100 per cent net renewables.

The funding deal – through what’s known as a Renewable Energy Transformation Agreement – means that the federal government will underwrite a minimum one gigawatt of new wind and solar generation capacity and another 400 MW (1,600 MWh) of storage – to ensure it meets its target of 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.

South Australia already leads Australia – and the world – with a wind and solar share of around 70 per cent over the last 12 months. The addition of the new capacity, along with the new Project Energy Connect transmission link from NSW, will enable it to become the first in the world to reach 1`00 per cent net renewables based around wind and solar.

That does not mean it will be powered at all times by wind and solar. But the amount of wind and solar generated and stored each year will be equivalent to what it consume each year. The state will export power at times and import at other times, and can fall pack on existing peaking gas plants to fill in the gaps.

Reaching that milestone will be a landmark for the state, and for advocates of the renewable energy transition, particularly as conservative and legacy fossil fuel interests continue to push back on the idea that a modern economy can be powered by renewables and storage.

The irony about South Australia is that the target of 100 per cent net renewables was originally committed by the state Liberal government. The state Labor government merely accelerated it from 2030 to 2027.

And to underline the difference in federal politics, the announcement was made at Port Augusta, the site of a former coal fired power station that the federal Coalition wants to turn nuclear, but which has already become a hub for green energy and green industry.

“South Australia has been a renewable energy pioneer – so much so that we recently brought forward our renewable energy target by three years, committing to ensure electricity generation can be sourced from net 100 per cent renewables by 2027,” state energy minister Tom Koutsantonis said in a statement.

“So we warmly welcome this agreement to accelerate the roll out of renewables while ensuring the reliability of the energy system.

“Our government is committed to working with the Commonwealth to establish a secured grid, supporting the power needs of South Australian households and businesses.”

South Australia has not added a new wind or solar project to the grid for around two years, although the biggest wind project in the state – the 412 MW Goyder South wind farm – is about to connect and send its first power to the grid.

Several new battery projects are also under construction – at Blyth, Hallett, Clements Gap and Templers and another, Tailem Bend, still waiting to be commissioned.

These projects will help propel the state towards 80 per cent renewables over the coming year, while the additional capacity of 1,000 MW of wind and solar, 400 MW of battery capacity (plus the minimum 200 MW included in the current CIS auction) will take it towards 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.

South Australia is also building the world’s first green hydrogen power plant at Whyalla, which will be accompanied by a 250 MW green hydrogen electrolyser and storage facilities, which will also be the world’s biggest when complete.

The state is also fielding huge number of inquiries from industry keen to source zero emissions and low cost green energy – with the local transmission company ElectraNet reporting that more than 2 gigawatts of load inquiries have been made.

Federal energy and climate minister Chris Bowen says the signing of the Renewable Energy Transformation Agreement means that South Australia is the first state to lock in the funding required to meet its targets under the federal government’s Capacity Investment Scheme.

The CIS aims to contract an additional 32GW of renewable generation and storage across the country to help it deliver most of the capacity needed to meet its 82 per cent renewable energy target by 2032.

The first tender of 6 gigawatts of new wind and solar capacity has been flooded with interest, with more than 40 GW of projects showing interest, while the first storage tender – for 600 MW, 2,400 MWh in Victoria and South Australia – was also heavily oversubscribed with some 19 GW of proposals.

Bowen says the bilateral agreements have been designed specifically to address the barriers developers, communities, and governments face in delivering renewable projects, and to replace ageing infrastructure that was built half a century ago.

“The Albanese Government is delivering the certainty and confidence the market spent a decade asking for,” Bowen said in a statement.

“The more renewable energy we have in our grid, the more downward pressure it puts on energy bills because it is the cheapest form of energy to power households and industry.

“Giving the market the confidence to build new projects is good; signing an agreement to collaborate with South Australia on practical steps to get the best out of this energy transformation for South Australian workers, communities and industry, is great.

“The Albanese Government’s Reliable Renewables Plan is the only plan supported by experts to deliver the clean, cheap, reliable and resilient energy system that Australians deserve. This is in sharp contrast to Peter Dutton’s anti-renewables nuclear plan – which remains uncosted and unexplained.”

As part of the deal, South Australia, will establish its own specific grid reliability mechanism and benchmark to be used in place of the national framework, and to be responsible for identifying and delivering new projects and technologies that will maintain reliability to that standard.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/south-austr ... and-solar/

Really need a mic drop emoji for these occasions.

I’m sure you realise the difference between 100% NET and 100% 24/7. Whilst it is a noteworthy achievement, and kudos to SA… in the scheme of things, it is not quite the mic drop moment you think. It still requires interconnection to much more significant coal and gas resources over east.

You are determined to be unimpressed, aren't you

Being one of the first to be net 100% is a huge thing given we have people telling us its not possible even on a net basis.

It will be interesting to see what will happen when the new NSW/SA interconnector is finished to see if that drives even more investment into SA renewables

[SouthAussie94]

Before you can get to 24/7 Renewables, you first need to get to Net 100% Renewable.

This is simply a step in the journey to Renewables being the source of power 24/7.

[rubberman]

https://johnmenadue.com/the-sun-has-won ... -on-price/

This contains some interesting info about the development of solar over time.

[mattblack]

Before you can get to 24/7 Renewables, you first need to get to Net 100% Renewable.

This is simply a step in the journey to Renewables being the source of power 24/7.

Exactally.

These ridiculous arguments have now been reduced to, ok the tech works but look everyone, it still isn't 100% all the time! Going from 1% renewables to 100% net in 20yrs is incredible no matter how you spin it.

Looking forward, stating that we need to be connected to massive coal and gas is completely false. SA has been disconnected from the grid in the recent past and guess what, no blackouts.

500% slated for 2050. Massive green industry potential on the horizon.

Not really sure if this will ever make the naysayers happy however, like I said, it doesn't matter.

[rev]

Before you can get to 24/7 Renewables, you first need to get to Net 100% Renewable.

This is simply a step in the journey to Renewables being the source of power 24/7.

So there'll be enough electricity stored, to power every home in Australia, every business, every manufacturer, every mine, every ship/sub builder, etc, on a cloudy sun-free day? Of which we have plenty of those lately, as does that rather large population centre known as Melbourne to our south east...

The argument hasn't been that renewables don't work, the argument is what happens when the suns not out and the winds not blowing to generate electricity or enough electricity.
The battery farms are going to be big enough and have enough continually stored electricity to keep everyone's lights on as normal?
This is all about the environment and climate right?
How much of our natural landscape is going to be bulldozed and turned into wind/solar farms and battery farms?
Just how big are these battery farms in particular to store the necessary energy to power the entire country, going to have to be?


Seems to be very hypocritical.
- We have to save the planet, but we can only do it our way because we said so and we're the loudest.
- We have to save the environment and climate, but lets ignore the destruction being caused to reduce carbon emissions.
- While we want you to ignore the destruction caused and waste by our way, we'll tell you all about how unsafe and bad the other guys methods are.

[Waewick]

Before you can get to 24/7 Renewables, you first need to get to Net 100% Renewable.

This is simply a step in the journey to Renewables being the source of power 24/7.

So there'll be enough electricity stored, to power every home in Australia, every business, every manufacturer, every mine, every ship/sub builder, etc, on a cloudy sun-free day? Of which we have plenty of those lately, as does that rather large population centre known as Melbourne to our south east...

The argument hasn't been that renewables don't work, the argument is what happens when the suns not out and the winds not blowing to generate electricity or enough electricity.
The battery farms are going to be big enough and have enough continually stored electricity to keep everyone's lights on as normal?
This is all about the environment and climate right?
How much of our natural landscape is going to be bulldozed and turned into wind/solar farms and battery farms?
Just how big are these battery farms in particular to store the necessary energy to power the entire country, going to have to be?


Seems to be very hypocritical.
- We have to save the planet, but we can only do it our way because we said so and we're the loudest.
- We have to save the environment and climate, but lets ignore the destruction being caused to reduce carbon emissions.
- While we want you to ignore the destruction caused and waste by our way, we'll tell you all about how unsafe and bad the other guys methods are.

I have to admit, its been a while since I've seen the old 'wind don't blow, sun don't shine ' line.

There really isn't anything hypocritical about moving away from fossil fuels.

You might need to update that post to be inline with what we know in 2024.

[mattblack]

Before you can get to 24/7 Renewables, you first need to get to Net 100% Renewable.

This is simply a step in the journey to Renewables being the source of power 24/7.

So there'll be enough electricity stored, to power every home in Australia, every business, every manufacturer, every mine, every ship/sub builder, etc, on a cloudy sun-free day? Of which we have plenty of those lately, as does that rather large population centre known as Melbourne to our south east...

The argument hasn't been that renewables don't work, the argument is what happens when the suns not out and the winds not blowing to generate electricity or enough electricity.
The battery farms are going to be big enough and have enough continually stored electricity to keep everyone's lights on as normal?
This is all about the environment and climate right?
How much of our natural landscape is going to be bulldozed and turned into wind/solar farms and battery farms?
Just how big are these battery farms in particular to store the necessary energy to power the entire country, going to have to be?


Seems to be very hypocritical.
- We have to save the planet, but we can only do it our way because we said so and we're the loudest.
- We have to save the environment and climate, but lets ignore the destruction being caused to reduce carbon emissions.
- While we want you to ignore the destruction caused and waste by our way, we'll tell you all about how unsafe and bad the other guys methods are.

Seriously??

In the foreseeable future when every house is a energy producer and battery, every business with roof space will be a energy generator and battery, when every car is a battery, when we can store vast amounts of energy in the form of hydrogen to be dispatched when required all you can focus on is batteries covering the entire landscape.

Battery storage is in it's infancy and yet how much of SA is really covered in renewable tech. I doubt you have ever driven past say Pt Augusta and thought of the natural landscape that has apparently been devastated.

Another overblown argument

[Waewick]

Seriously??

In the foreseeable future when every house is a energy producer and battery, every business with roof space will be a energy generator and battery, when every car is a battery, when we can store vast amounts of energy in the form of hydrogen to be dispatched when required all you can focus on is batteries covering the entire landscape.

Battery storage is in it's infancy and yet how much of SA is really covered in renewable tech. I doubt you have ever driven past say Pt Augusta and thought of the natural landscape that has apparently been devastated.

Another overblown argument

Honestly I thought that post was something straight off facebook circa 2002.

I look forward to telling future generations about what we had to put up with in the last few decades.

[rev]

Before you can get to 24/7 Renewables, you first need to get to Net 100% Renewable.

This is simply a step in the journey to Renewables being the source of power 24/7.

So there'll be enough electricity stored, to power every home in Australia, every business, every manufacturer, every mine, every ship/sub builder, etc, on a cloudy sun-free day? Of which we have plenty of those lately, as does that rather large population centre known as Melbourne to our south east...

The argument hasn't been that renewables don't work, the argument is what happens when the suns not out and the winds not blowing to generate electricity or enough electricity.
The battery farms are going to be big enough and have enough continually stored electricity to keep everyone's lights on as normal?
This is all about the environment and climate right?
How much of our natural landscape is going to be bulldozed and turned into wind/solar farms and battery farms?
Just how big are these battery farms in particular to store the necessary energy to power the entire country, going to have to be?


Seems to be very hypocritical.
- We have to save the planet, but we can only do it our way because we said so and we're the loudest.
- We have to save the environment and climate, but lets ignore the destruction being caused to reduce carbon emissions.
- While we want you to ignore the destruction caused and waste by our way, we'll tell you all about how unsafe and bad the other guys methods are.

I have to admit, its been a while since I've seen the old 'wind don't blow, sun don't shine ' line.

There really isn't anything hypocritical about moving away from fossil fuels.

You might need to update that post to be inline with what we know in 2024.

I'm starting to wonder if some of you guys on here have actually ever seen the wind farms in person, or actually set foot outside of your bedrooms.

What I know in 2024 is what we have known since the dawn of time. The sun isn't always shining it's at times concealed by cloud cover, and the wind doesn't always blow. Amazing right?

Lets apply that to your solar panels and wind turbines.

Solar panel requires sun light to generate electricity. No sunlight, is it generating electricity, or enough electricity to meet demand?
Wind turbine requires the wind to generate electricity. Can you explain how a wind turbine generates electricity without the wind blowing? I'm going to assume you're aware of the cut in speed.
Hence why in that post I also said will the batteries have enough stored electricity to cover demand. But hey lets ignore what people say and take things out of context. Good to see you're back to your usual trolling behaviour.

[Waewick]

So there'll be enough electricity stored, to power every home in Australia, every business, every manufacturer, every mine, every ship/sub builder, etc, on a cloudy sun-free day? Of which we have plenty of those lately, as does that rather large population centre known as Melbourne to our south east...

The argument hasn't been that renewables don't work, the argument is what happens when the suns not out and the winds not blowing to generate electricity or enough electricity.
The battery farms are going to be big enough and have enough continually stored electricity to keep everyone's lights on as normal?
This is all about the environment and climate right?
How much of our natural landscape is going to be bulldozed and turned into wind/solar farms and battery farms?
Just how big are these battery farms in particular to store the necessary energy to power the entire country, going to have to be?


Seems to be very hypocritical.
- We have to save the planet, but we can only do it our way because we said so and we're the loudest.
- We have to save the environment and climate, but lets ignore the destruction being caused to reduce carbon emissions.
- While we want you to ignore the destruction caused and waste by our way, we'll tell you all about how unsafe and bad the other guys methods are.

I have to admit, its been a while since I've seen the old 'wind don't blow, sun don't shine ' line.

There really isn't anything hypocritical about moving away from fossil fuels.

You might need to update that post to be inline with what we know in 2024.

I'm starting to wonder if some of you guys on here have actually ever seen the wind farms in person, or actually set foot outside of your bedrooms.

What I know in 2024 is what we have known since the dawn of time. The sun isn't always shining it's at times concealed by cloud cover, and the wind doesn't always blow. Amazing right?

Lets apply that to your solar panels and wind turbines.

Solar panel requires sun light to generate electricity. No sunlight, is it generating electricity, or enough electricity to meet demand?
Wind turbine requires the wind to generate electricity. Can you explain how a wind turbine generates electricity without the wind blowing? I'm going to assume you're aware of the cut in speed.
Hence why in that post I also said will the batteries have enough stored electricity to cover demand. But hey lets ignore what people say and take things out of context. Good to see you're back to your usual trolling behaviour.

No one took your post out of context and thats a lovely projection on trolling there.

Wind and Solar are used in conjunction with each other, wind farms and solars farms aren't located in a single area where the wind isn't blowing or the sun isn't shining at the same time. They are spread out geographically and require to submit studies to understand when they will be generating power

I can only assume AEMO plans on supply electricity at all times as well, with the use of batteries in times when power generation is lower than required to meet demand.

Fortunately the develoment of batteries is coming along as well.

And yes, ive seen wind farms, solar farms, hydro plants , coal fired power stations and gas turbines ! Ive even been Fortunate enough to meet with experts in the electrical generation and supply industry.

To keep on topic, SA is getting some attention

https://reneweconomy.com.au/south-austr ... e-a-folly/


Germany seems to be going the same way

https://reneweconomy.com.au/german-coal ... pct-share/

Edit - and just a bit of a (dated) story on batteries

https://reneweconomy.com.au/big-batteri ... main-grid/