Reply to Australia has so much solar that it’s offering everyone free electricity

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Australia has so much solar that it’s offering everyone free electricity"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]But Trump wants us down in the mines digging coal and partying like it's 1899.

FFS why are we stuck with this idiot's ideas and why don't Republicans display some common sense and speak up?

The mid-terms can't come fast enough.[/quote]Solar is more expensive, as seen in the RGGI.
And in Europe, they are backing off their targets as models clash with reality.[/quote]

Actually commercial solar is the second cheapest type of electricity to generate by source even in the US( even in North Dakota)

Below are the estimated unsubsidized LCOE ranges in dollars per megawatt-hour ($/MWh) for new power plants, based primarily on 2024 and 2025 reports from sources like Lazard and the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA): 
Technology

Unsubsidized LCOE Range ($/MWh)

Onshore Wind	$27 – $86
Utility-Scale Solar PV	$29 – $92
Natural Gas (Combined Cycle)	$48 – $107
Geothermal	$55 – $396
Coal	$68 – $166
Offshore Wind	$74 – $157
Natural Gas (Peaker Plants)	$115 – $262
Nuclear	$141 – $221

Esmeralda 7 Plant that was cancelled by Trump was schedule to produce 6.2 gigawatts at $25-$30 per MWh. 
[/quote]

It makes me crazy when people talk about the green scam. Clean energy is literally the cheapest to produce. It's just energy.[/quote]

It is so much more complicated than that. And LCOE, which is what the poster above used, is a deeply flawed metric that green energy supporters love.

Energy delivery is subject to important midstream system constraints as well as dependability/reliability issues.

The two most important are interrelated:   Americans expect the lights to come on when they flip a switch. Intermittent power sources struggle with this. Second, your midstream and backup dispatchable system has to be built out and maintained to deliver at peak demand when non-intermittent are not available, not average.  So when intermittent sources are low (say 10% of the year), dispatchable energy sources have to make a ton of money during that 10% of time in order to pay for their existence 100% of year (variable costs are obviously saved, but 100% of fixed costs have to be earned during that 10% of time).

The reactions to this Australia post are very telling. The “free” energy is causing significant problems/volatility to their energy grid (see also, Spain’s blackout earlier this year).  The Aussies are passing emergency legislation to deal with the instability they are facing.  I am curious to see if they are going to be able to avoid blackouts.

Check in on the Australian energy grid in about 9-12 months and let us know how “great” this is.

I am not anti-green energy. It has its place and role. [/quote]

Here is it is! Oh Australia grid has collapsed! No Australia’s grid is actually setting records for lows on peak and minimum demands on their grid. This is because so many(1 in 3 residential) use have solar. There are no blackouts and no grid problems. Australia grid uses synchronous condensers and large batteries address oscillation and base load. In fact the grid has become more and more decentralized because of solar.

The same decentralized is happening in India with solar because of its unreliable grid using coal power plants. Should we stop using fossil fuels because India has blackouts? According to you yes!

If you are such the expert tell us how California avoids all the black out experts predict? Solar power and batteries. Wow!

According to Institute of Technological Research’s report Spain’s blackout was caused by primary the Iberian Peninsula grid having insufficient dispatch of synchronous generation with dynamic voltage control(managing flow rates) combined with the limited resilience of the electricity transmission network(ie the Iberian Peninsula grid is not sufficiently connected to the larger European grid). So insufficient synchronous generation, the fragile state of the transmission network(grid infrastructure) and an inadequate security margin to prevent collapse due to overvoltage. Oh and Spain’s largest nuclear plant was on that grid(guess we have to stop using nuclear!). One of the recommendations to address the problem is to copy the Australian grid!

Now tell us how solar and wind froze in Texas while NG saved the day!  :roll: [/quote]

1.  Every territory in Australia is presently prepping emergency plans for blackouts due to what they are terming "reliability gaps" (euphemism for volatility introduced by transition to intermittent power sources).  If you know better than the people running the system over there, you should probably get on a plane and go help them.

https://cyanergy.com.au/blog/power-shortage-by-2027-in-australia-and-how-to-avoid-it/#:~:text=Coal%20plant%20retirements:%20In%20Australia,power%20stations%20will%20shut%20down.

In fact, the center-left government just introduced legislation materially reforming environmental review for natural gas and renewable projects because otherwise the system cannot possibly transition to avoid blackouts.  Does that sound like a stable system to you?

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/australian-government-says-its-environmental-protection-bill-will-help-business-2025-10-29/

2.  I am not familiar with India, so I won't comment.

3.  California consistently has the highest or second highest energy prices in the lower 48 (both consumer and commercial).  I'm not sure that is the model I would point to, but you do you.  CA gets about 40% of its energy production from renewable, yet prices are twice as high as Texas, which gets about 31% of its production from renewable.  There are better examples to use.

4.  Why did the Spanish peninsula need more synchronous power generation (hint: that means hydro or dispatchable power generation, and explicitly excludes solar and wind)?   Would the underlying voltage surge (first known in history to cause a material blackout) have occurred in a fully dispatchable system?  Certainly much less likely.  Again, I am not anti-renewable.  I think it has an important role to play in energy markets.

5.  Wind was around 10-13% of power generation in ERCOT during winter storm Uri and solar was 0%.  Dispatchable power sources clearly failed Texas in that moment, but are you honestly trying to imply that wind and solar were reliable during the Texas winter storm?  Put down the Kool-Aid.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics