Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

First warm day for Melbourne this year for the most part, but wasn't that warm comparatively for the other states.
With the SA government rolling out new diesel generators to pump on-demand capacity by 276MW and victoria also rolling out some new diesel generators as well we might get through the summer without any blackouts, thanks to fossil fuels. The Saudis/Russia etc must be thinking if this is the future of renewables with cities ditching coal just to burn diesel/gas at 80,000litres an hour then its a great time to be in the fossil game.

the generators will use 80,000 litres of diesel an hour.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/sa-connects-its-hybrid-dieselgas-generators/news-story/7eb0233530f7dffaf38c9a6866b26553

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/diesel-generators-at-elizabeth-and-lonsdale-are-ready-to-provide-276mw-of-extra-power-to-south-australia-this-summer/news-story/b20bfc0eeb1ddf8a66d16e6c9218d3fb
http://www.news.com.au/national/south-australia/diesel-generators-at-elizabeth-and-lonsdale-are-ready-to-provide-276mw-of-extra-power-to-south-australia-this-summer/news-story/b20bfc0eeb1ddf8a66d16e6c9218d3fb
Looming power crisis in SA: AEMO warns of 90,000-home electricity shortfall before summer even starts
It comes after The Advertiser revealed last month that gas generators had been forced to turn on or stay on five times in a recent six week period to prevent blackouts.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/looming-power-crisis-in-sa-aemo-warns-of-90000home-electricity-shortfall-before-summer-even-starts/news-story/da085ab7da538317b99680dcc33bdf73

Diesel generators to bolster Victoria’s energy network over summer
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/diesel-generators-to-bolster-victorias-energy-network-over-summer/news-story/459c7bf8de58a3f0349e580c4e560f7f

Still no replacement for the 1600MW Hazelwood coal-power station which is medium sized for coal stations that closed down 6 months ago.
But with the others ramping up picking up the slack where Hazelwood used to might be ok.

I came across this "Live Consumption chart" today.
Instead of showing energy generation its consumption, complete with temperature recordings for the whole of Australia.
A day where blackouts might occur is one where its about 40+ in Melbourne and either in SA or NSW as well.
http://www.nem-watch.info/widgets/energyconsumersaustralia/



Then there is the popular live generation chart
http://www.nem-watch.info/widgets/reneweconomy/
I guess whats interesting that despite the interstate grid between Victoria and SA was beefed up a little while ago so that SA could pretend its on wind power they aren't fully utilizing it right now, I think this is because AEMO the federal electricity regulator stepped in to force SA to generate more of its own electricity via their gas generators instead of leeching off Victorias coal power-stations.
Will be interesting to see SAs retail power-bills after the end of this summer.

Dauntless said:

But if the people are doing just fine without it at the moment, why the rush to get electricity to them that they have no idea that they need?

Click to expand...

Because in general they are not doing "just fine."

It's easy to think of people without electricity as ignorant savages who don't know what the rest of the world is like. Most aren't like that, and they still need to be able to see at night, run refrigerators to keep vaccines cold, run pumps for water and charge cellphones and other electronics.

Meanwhile, there may be no grid, but those backward areas often have all sorts of electricity. Some of it solar or wind, some of it their own personal gas generators.

Click to expand...

In places like Africa solar is making big inroads. The #1 market for off-grid solar systems is currently sub-Saharan Africa. Since in general a small amount of power (enough to run lights, a fan, a few device chargers and a well pump) makes a huge difference, the smaller, low-cost systems are working there.

billvon said:

Because in general they are not doing "just fine."

It's easy to think of people without electricity as ignorant savages who don't know what the rest of the world is like. Most aren't like that, and they still need to be able to see at night, run refrigerators to keep vaccines cold, run pumps for water and charge cellphones and other electronics.

Click to expand...

Who said anything about savages? Oh, wait, YOU did. It's only easy for YOU to think of them as savages. The rest of us see them as what they are, people who are doing just fine without living in the suburbs, no matter how much it surprises you that the whole world doesn't look like your neighborhood.

Another useful site to view and analyse Australias power generation and demand is..
http://anero.id/energy/solar-energy Just pick a generation source from the drop down menues.
Also a good review of the weeks power consumption with explanations here..
https://papundits.wordpress.com/2017/11/12/australian-base-load-electrical-power-week-ending-11th-november-2017/

Hillhater said:

And i thought your belief was that Utilities changing to RE sources will make Utility power cheaper over the next 20 yrs ?
How much more would you pay for a home with 10 yr old solar system installed ?
The simple fact that industry doesent pay the same price, effectively means they are being subsidised by the higher tax payers.

Click to expand...

I never claimed that. I just support RE as generally a good idea, even if it costs a little more. You might think fossil fuels are cheap, but once subsidies for them end they'll get more expensive. Then when carbon taxing kicks in to offset the external cost, they'll get really expensive. Perhaps then you'll be railing against your local government for the blackouts caused by crippling coal prices and failing to invest in RE.

I'd evaluate the utility and remaining life of the system and pay accordingly. As long as it's functional I would pay more. Why wouldn't you for something that offers ongoing savings on your utility bills? No different from a house that has a new, efficient heater system versus one that doesn't.

You have failed to consider economies of scale. Large consumers are cheaper to supply to than small domestic ones. This is why it costs you more to buy one apple from a shop than a food factory buying them in bulk.

TheBeastie said:

The fact with this is why can't we now point the finger at solar panel manufacture everytime see a global warming temperature increase claim/chart than co2? Especially considering the fact that increase co2 ppm levels past a certain point doesn't increase its greenhouse effect anymore due to the fact co2 only absorbs a certain spectrum of the suns energy. Its like sticking your arm in a bucket of water after a while the bucket can't get any warmer.

Click to expand...

Your anti-science global warming denialism has, somehow, sunk to a new low.

Here is another example of RE power madness...
California increasingly paying other states to take excess power generated....
http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-solar/
And remember, at the same time California also IMPORTS more electricity than any other state...31+% of all power used last year
What a joke !

Puxnor... Co2 is not a GHG !!....
You are chasing the wrong suspect for GW.

Dauntless said:

Who said anything about savages? Oh, wait, YOU did. It's only easy for YOU to think of them as savages.

Click to expand...

I've lived with them, and no, I don't think they are savages.

The rest of us see them as what they are, people who are doing just fine without living in the suburbs

Click to expand...

Who said they "want to live in the suburbs?" They just want to be able to see at night. Charge their phones, Have a fan when it's hot. Just like you do.

Hillhater said:

Puxnor... Co2 is not a GHG !!....
You are chasing the wrong suspect for GW.

Click to expand...

You just discredited yourself.

Study the science, rather than read the media. :wink:
I never considered i had any "credit" to "dis" on here.

Hillhater said:

Puxnor... Co2 is not a GHG !!....

Click to expand...

CO2 is the second strongest greenhouse gas in the Earth's atmosphere. (The strongest is water vapor.)

I give money to Wikipedia every year.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
.

billvon said:

Hillhater said:

Puxnor... Co2 is not a GHG !!....

Click to expand...

CO2 is the second strongest greenhouse gas in the Earth's atmosphere. (The strongest is water vapor.)

Click to expand...

Yes, i admit i should have said "not a significant GHG"
The Wiki info is correct in as far as it goes, but that is far from the full picture of the processes .

With those patently rediculous beliefs you are not qualified to comment. No wonder you oppose RE in favour of continuing to burn fossil fuels. You are beyond reason and beyond help. No doubt you will continue to deny reality even after it has played out around you.

Hillhater said:

Yes, i admit i should have said "not a significant GHG"

Click to expand...

It is the second strongest greenhouse gas, and contributes about 20% (and rising) of the greenhouse effect. That seems significant.

The Wiki info is correct in as far as it goes, but that is far from the full picture of the processes .

Click to expand...

What significant effect is missing?

Sorry guys, i am not going to get sucked into another OT debate over the science of AGW/CO2.
I have been there before , done the research, checked the science, studied the arguments, etc etc and come to my own conclusions....just as you have i assume.
I know that you will not change your view, and i am settled in mine, so i will not waste time and effort debating it over again here.
Pick your Team, and cross your fingers !

Punx0r said:

With those patently rediculous beliefs you are not qualified to comment. No wonder you oppose RE in favour of continuing to burn fossil fuels. You are beyond reason and beyond help. No doubt you will continue to deny reality even after it has played out around you.

Click to expand...

Everyone is "qualified" to comment.
And you have shown your lack of comprehension of my position, ..
I do not "oppose" RE generation in favour of fossil fuels, quite the oposite.
I am a huge fan of Hydro, Geothermal, Nuclear and Solar within limits.
My issue is with those who think that a program of 50-100% RE ( meaning mostly Solar and Wind) is practical for Utility Grid supply on a national basis , without serious impact on grid stability, consistent supply, and huge cost implications.
All the regeons where this has been progressed have shown what those issues are, but Politics, Financial greed, and false beliefs , have caused those issues to be dismissed....so far.
I an trying to find out if anyone has a practical solution to develop a RE supply that is reliable without the power cuts, restrictions of use, and enormous cost impacts we are currently seeing.
That is the "reality that is currently playing out". around us.!

billvon said:

Who said they "want to live in the suburbs?" They just want to be able to see at night. Charge their phones, Have a fan when it's hot. Just like you do.

Click to expand...

And more to the point, they want to be able to cook, read (scool kids learning), and keep warm......without having to constantly cut down trees to burn and slowly kill each other with the smoke and fumes from open fires inside the homes.
The amount of trees and shrubs burnt for this in undeveloped countries, ...Africa, India, China, Indonesia, etc etc....is enormous.
Even the dirtiest coal generator in these areas would result in a massive reduction of emmissions and many thousands of trees not chopped down.

Punx0r said:

billvon said:

I've lived with them, and no, I don't think they are savages.

Click to expand...

You just discredited yourself.

Click to expand...

Dang, just the article on Social Science affecting Climate Change to fit in here. Right up your alley, the way you two discuss. Climate change is in the second half. Don't worry, it's short.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170519175310/https://www.cogentoa.com/article/10.1080/23311886.2017.1330439.pdf

Hillhater said:

Another useful site to view and analyse Australias power generation and demand is..
http://anero.id/energy/solar-energy Just pick a generation source from the drop down menues.
Also a good review of the weeks power consumption with explanations here..
https://papundits.wordpress.com/2017/11/12/australian-base-load-electrical-power-week-ending-11th-november-2017/

Click to expand...

Yeah thats interesting stuff.
That anero.id site is pretty interesting as you can see live statistics on the wind farms.
Funny to see the biggest windfarm in the southern hemisphere only going at 9% which I am guessing is pretty typical.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macarthur_Wind_Farm


As for my point on the greenhouse gases released by solar panel manufacturer, lets go over the numbers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_trifluoride#Greenhouse_gas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexafluoroethane#Environmental_effects
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_hexafluoride#Greenhouse_gas

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, SF6 is the most potent greenhouse gas that it has evaluated, with a global warming potential of 23,900[23] times that of CO2
.
Sulfur hexafluoride is also extremely long-lived, is inert in the troposphere and stratosphere and has an estimated atmospheric lifetime of 800–3200 years.
.
More than 10,000 tons of SF6 are produced per year,

So thats 10,000SF6 x 23,900 = 239,000,000 million tons of co2 equivalent thats been officially record of this gas to make green energy technology just from Sulfur_hexafluoride. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mauna_Loa_Sulfur_Hexafluoride.png
But considering the fact that China etc has only been stepping up making solar panels and the fact they are more than happy to create 10km2 radioactive sludge lakes, I would say its a lot more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_UdqZdFr-w https://youtu.be/S_9Q_6fuGNI?t=1m55s http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150402-the-worst-place-on-earth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_trifluoride#Greenhouse_gas
NF3 is a greenhouse gas, with a global warming potential (GWP) 17,200 times greater than that of CO2
.
4000 tons in 2007 and is projected to increase significantly.[15] World production of NF3 is expected to reach 8000 tons a year by 2010.
Considering this gas more than doubled in 3 years and with green tech demand going through the roof its safe to say its at least 16,000tons a year now.
16,000 x 17,200 = 275,200,000co2 equivalent, the truly scary thing about these gases is they are expected to stay in the atmosphere for a long time (3200 years for SF2)

So with just these two super warming gases (not much data on 3rd one Hexafluoroethane) being released into the year every year into the atmosphere thats more than 500,000,000 tons co2 equivalent a year. Australias annual co2 emissions from all coal power-stations is just 151million ( https://theconversation.com/is-clean-coal-power-the-answer-to-australias-emissions-targets-71785 )

All modern PV cell lines and lithium cell lines are fully closed loop with all mfg gasses and solvents, because to not be means you're not going to be cost competitive anymore.

liveforphysics said:

All modern PV cell lines and lithium cell lines are fully closed loop with all mfg gasses and solvents, because to not be means you're not going to be cost competitive anymore.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

The above is a common tactic. "Well, OK, maybe it is really warming - but all your supposed 'solutions' are just making it worse, stupid!" I've also heard that:

- solar panels absorb heat and make the planet warmer
- solar panels take so much energy to make that they make the planet warmer
- solar panels make electricity, which is shipped to cities - and that electricity makes the city warmer
- solar panels change the weather (reason unspecified) and make the planet warmer

Interesting article in Bloomberg on China's energy future.
.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-14/china-energy-gorilla-will-eat-less-do-more
.

liveforphysics said:

All modern PV cell lines and lithium cell lines are fully closed loop with all mfg gasses and solvents, because to not be means you're not going to be cost competitive anymore.

Click to expand...

That is an idealistic view which is not supported by the available data...
Many of the plants wont even disclose their emmissions data.
http://www.solarscorecard.com/2014/2014-scorecard.php
....then there are situations in China like this with Jinko, one of the worlds largest PV manufacturers...

China has already seen a backlash. Panel manufacturer Jinko Solar, for example, has faced protests and legal action since one of its plants, in the eastern province of Zhejiang, was accused of dumping toxic waste into a nearby river

Click to expand...

https://www.sciencealert.com/new-composite-material-reduces-helium-damage-fusion-reactors

Fact- There's not enough land mass for solar panels to support the current world popluation nevermind it's ever increasing, so solar is just a stepping stone it will never be out bread and butter, In years to come when we have energy on demand like no one's business these large array's that have been assembled on agricultural land will be dismantled and used once again for food production.

Solar is good for a low demand off grid home but power the world's industry it will not if Elon wants his big goals then he should be collaborating with many others on the fusion bandwagon and I'm sure when it's close enough they will and we are getting advancement''s constantly all the major money will flow towards it and then we can kiss fuel as we know it good bye kick solar into touch along with wind stop drilling the seafloor and use the advancement in batteries to its true capabilities,

WE WILL KICK ARSE IN OUR GALAXY WE HAVE NO CHOICE.