Global Warming

[Willo]

So hang on, are you saying that Dutton is creating a policy BEFORE its even been costed out? If he's confident enough to talk about his next election strategy around energy policy, surely he'd have done some level of costings to determine that it was the best course of action?

No, I didn’t think I said that at all.

I’d hazard a guess and say there’s done some level of costing. But similarly to Albo and Bowen not knowing the exact figure of total renewables, there would need to be a comprehensive costing on each site.

For example, If you have an approximation that the total sites would cost $700 billion ($100 billion average for each site. Some of the smaller SMRs cheaper, multiple SMRs dearer. My figures only) and the total cost of renewables was $1.2 trillion (published figures)
You could estimate some savings there, couldn’t you. I’m sure he has economists working on estimates! or rubbery figures or whatever people want to believe.

At least Dutton knows where they’re going to be located.

Something Albo and Bowen don’t know about the next tranche of solar or wind farms. They haven’t even organised the grid sized batteries or the grid rearrangements yet. When are the coal fired power stations to be turned off? 2038. So where are the costings for the threefold increase in the cost of renewables by 2030? Where is the costings for the sevenfold cost of renewables by 2050.
All policy. No costings yet.

All I’m saying is cost what is going to be built. Not go off totally different builds. I’m not privy to how much has been costed, by whom, from where or any other detail. So don’t pull me up on what is or or is yet to happen.

 

[tigersnake]

Apologies if already posted, but comparison with, and a look at Canada is informative. Often compared with Aus economically, similar populations, economies (eg agriculture and mining), developed nations, big expanses of low pop densities.

19 nuclear reactors in 6 plants dating back to the 1960s, producing approx 15% of national power.
Canada has produced 52,000 tonnes of high level waste to date. (If or when a plant is decommissioned, 100K tonne of waste is produced, not all high level, but not much low level either)
The waste is all stored on-site at the plants.
In 2005 the Canadian Nuclear authority undertook to build a deep waste repository. Cost of $24 bill, (I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition has factored that in), paid for by an industry trust fund. 19 years later; "The process of identifying a suitable place for such a long-term facility is ongoing" and waste continues to be stored on-site.

 

[mrposhman]

and the total cost of renewables was $1.2 trillion (published figures)

Do you have a link to this? I've tried searching for it, but coming up short. Interested to see what they've costed and how much production they anticipate generating.

 

[Willo]

Do you have a link to this? I've tried searching for it, but coming up short. Interested to see what they've costed and how much production they anticipate generating.

*smile* quick search. Keep at it as I will.

Previous post.
Albo and Bowen don’t know about the next tranche of solar or wind farms. They haven’t even organised the grid sized batteries or the grid rearrangements yet. When are the coal fired power stations to be turned off? 2038. So where are the costings for the threefold increase in the cost of renewables by 2030? Where is the costings for the sevenfold cost of renewables by 2050.

All policy. No costings yet that I’ve been able to find either.

 

[bengal tigers]

Apologies if already posted, but comparison with, and a look at Canada is informative. Often compared with Aus economically, similar populations, economies (eg agriculture and mining), developed nations, big expanses of low pop densities.

19 nuclear reactors in 6 plants dating back to the 1960s, producing approx 15% of national power.
Canada has produced 52,000 tonnes of high level waste to date. (If or when a plant is decommissioned, 100K tonne of waste is produced, not all high level, but not much low level either)
The waste is all stored on-site at the plants.
In 2005 the Canadian Nuclear authority undertook to build a deep waste repository. Cost of $24 bill, (I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition has factored that in), paid for by an industry trust fund. 19 years later; "The process of identifying a suitable place for such a long-term facility is ongoing" and waste continues to be stored on-site.

Yawn,,how about showing us the costs over a 60 period for renewables ,and all the recycling costs and waste left over ,you can't because it hasn't happened yet .

 

[tigersnake]

Yawn,,how about showing us the costs over a 60 period for renewables ,and all the recycling costs and waste left over ,you can't because it hasn't happened yet .

Just posting a few facts that people might find interesting Bengal old son, even if you obviously don't.

Comparing the waste issue of renewables v nuclear, on both cost and safety grounds, thats interesting. As is yawning at the prospect of having no solution to the issue of dealing with the waste.

 

[bengal tigers]

Do you have a link to this? I've tried searching for it, but coming up short. Interested to see what they've costed and how much production they anticipate generating.

https://www.netzeroaustralia.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Net-Zero-Australia-Modelling-Summary-Report.pdf

 

[bengal tigers]

Just posting a few facts that people might find interesting Bengal old son, even if you obviously don't.

Comparing the waste issue of renewables v nuclear, on both cost and safety grounds, thats interesting. As is yawning at the prospect of having no solution to the issue of dealing with the waste.

Why l Yawned for was we can't compare it snakey, .but there is going to be millions of tons of renewables to recycle in the future.

 

[mrposhman]

https://www.netzeroaustralia.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Net-Zero-Australia-Modelling-Summary-Report.pdf

Thanks I'll take a look at this, might take me a while haha

 

[bengal tigers]

Thanks I'll take a look at this, might take me a while haha

Yeah its long

 

[Wildride]

Yeah its long

The relevant part is:

"The NPV cost of the net-zero Scenarios were found to be $4.8-5.1 trillion, which are $600-900 billion greater than the REF Scenario. However, we note that the costs of REF reflect energy policy stasis, do not account for recent high fossil fuel prices or the costs of inaction on climate change, and assume fossil fuel costs remain consistently low over the course of the transition, an assumption which is deeply uncertain. Assessing the costs of the net-zero Scenarios against a counterfactual reference case with fossil fuel price volatility would serve to reduce their incremental $600-900 billion cost."

Note also that the same report states:

Nuclear could only play a role when:
• nuclear costs are ~30% lower than current international best practice; and
• renewable build out is constrained (E+RE-).

In this case, the proportion of nuclear generation is:
• a modest share of domestic electricity generation; and
• an even smaller share of total export and domestic energy

 

[Willo]

I might have been a bit of with $1.2trillion. Not that matters that much when those numbers are bandied about.

In December 2021, while on the electoral hustings, Albanese told us Labor’s $78 billion figure was backed by:
“the most comprehensive modelling ever done for any policy by any opposition in Australia’s history since Federation”.

Poor old Albo and Bowen. NFI. The Illawarra Offshore Wind Farm is expected to cost $10 billion alone to power 800,000 homes on a good day. $68 billion for the rest of the country might be a bit on the low side you’d think

Same article

But it gets worse. Last July, the former chief scientist Robin Batterham at Net Zero Australia provided a revised estimate of the capital costs of decarbonising the grid. It turns out that Labor’s original cost estimate was out by a factor of 20. Read and weep, as that is not a typo. Australia’s best-ever modelling exercise is a fraud as the cost required to transform the grid by 2030 has jumped from $78 billion to $1.5 trillion in 2030 – a mere down payment on the final bill of $9 trillion by 2050.

Wake up Australia - Renewable energy won't save the planet if it costs the earth: Robert Onfray I Australian Rural & Regional News

I am not sure many people are fully aware of the massive engineering changes currently underway in our rural landscape. The changes are on a scale never attempted in this country before, and it is swallowing obscene amounts of money for minimal benefit and, indeed, no proof it will improve the...

arr.news

But no doubt people will either believe those figures or not. It’s not up to me to convince them one way or another.

I don’t claim to an expert, just someone who has an open mind and an interest to learn a bit about this subject. Unfortunately too many peopl think it’s all about politics rather than economics and science. Technology is always changing.

Just remember google is your friend.

 

[eZyT]

Apologies if already posted, but comparison with, and a look at Canada is informative. Often compared with Aus economically, similar populations, economies (eg agriculture and mining), developed nations, big expanses of low pop densities.

19 nuclear reactors in 6 plants dating back to the 1960s, producing approx 15% of national power.
Canada has produced 52,000 tonnes of high level waste to date. (If or when a plant is decommissioned, 100K tonne of waste is produced, not all high level, but not much low level either)
The waste is all stored on-site at the plants.
In 2005 the Canadian Nuclear authority undertook to build a deep waste repository. Cost of $24 bill, (I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition has factored that in), paid for by an industry trust fund. 19 years later; "The process of identifying a suitable place for such a long-term facility is ongoing" and waste continues to be stored on-site.

prove it

 

[tigersnake]

prove it

you got me, I made it all up.

 

[Wildride]

I might have been a bit of with $1.2trillion. Not that matters that much when those numbers are bandied about.

In December 2021, while on the electoral hustings, Albanese told us Labor’s $78 billion figure was backed by:
“the most comprehensive modelling ever done for any policy by any opposition in Australia’s history since Federation”.

Poor old Albo and Bowen. NFI. The Illawarra Offshore Wind Farm is expected to cost $10 billion alone to power 800,000 homes on a good day. $68 billion for the rest of the country might be a bit on the low side you’d think

Same article

But it gets worse. Last July, the former chief scientist Robin Batterham at Net Zero Australia provided a revised estimate of the capital costs of decarbonising the grid. It turns out that Labor’s original cost estimate was out by a factor of 20. Read and weep, as that is not a typo. Australia’s best-ever modelling exercise is a fraud as the cost required to transform the grid by 2030 has jumped from $78 billion to $1.5 trillion in 2030 – a mere down payment on the final bill of $9 trillion by 2050.

Wake up Australia - Renewable energy won't save the planet if it costs the earth: Robert Onfray I Australian Rural & Regional News

I am not sure many people are fully aware of the massive engineering changes currently underway in our rural landscape. The changes are on a scale never attempted in this country before, and it is swallowing obscene amounts of money for minimal benefit and, indeed, no proof it will improve the...

arr.news

But no doubt people will either believe those figures or not. It’s not up to me to convince them one way or another.

I don’t claim to an expert, just someone who has an open mind and an interest to learn a bit about this subject. Unfortunately too many peopl think it’s all about politics rather than economics and science. Technology is always changing.

Just remember google is your friend.

The Net Zero Aus methodology is computing the NPV cost of the entire energy system up to 2050, so it's way more than the capital costs. You have to compare apples with apples. The report shows that even maintaining baseline (ie current conditions) has an NPV cost of $4.2-4.5 trillion up to 2050.

The $9 trillion number referred to is all investment in all sectors of the economy (public and private) to achieve the energy transition and decarbonise the entire economy. This is not the cost of transforming the energy network only, but also includes behaviour and usage changes, investment in vehicles etc. Ie almost all of these costs are to be incurred no matter what tech is producing the electricity.

 

[eZyT]

Yawn,,how about showing us the costs over a 60 period for renewables ,and all the recycling costs and waste left over ,you can't because it hasn't happened yet .

do you actually want a pound for pound analysis of solar and wind waste (silica, titanium, lithium)

with nuclear waste (uranium, plutonium)



heres a periodic table to take look at.

Periodic Table of Elements

Interactive periodic table with up-to-date element property data collected from authoritative sources. Look up chemical element names, symbols, atomic masses and other properties, visualize trends, or even test your elements knowledge by playing a periodic table game!

pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I think it has half-lives?

oh wait, The stuff them Big Physics dont want you to know about, yeah I forgot

 

[bengal tigers]

do you actually want a pound for pound analysis of solar and wind waste (silica, titanium, lithium)

with nuclear waste (uranium, plutonium)



heres a periodic table to take look at.

Periodic Table of Elements

Interactive periodic table with up-to-date element property data collected from authoritative sources. Look up chemical element names, symbols, atomic masses and other properties, visualize trends, or even test your elements knowledge by playing a periodic table game!

pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I think it has half-lives?

oh wait, The stuff them Big Physics dont want you to know about, yeah I forgot

All energy sources produce waste in varying amounts from construction and combustion. All power stations must be removed at some point, resulting in waste that must either be recycled or deposited. Because renewables have low power density, the amount of waste associated with the shutdown of powerplants is more than one order of magnitude higher than that of fossil and nuclear powerplants. Hydropower and solar powerplants produce the most waste, 14,000 and 16.000 tons per TWh, respectively, while gas and nuclear powerplants produce the least, 600 and 900 tons per TWh, respectively.

2020 report.

Gas and hydropower are cheapest, nuclear is most stable, while coal produces most waste

Solar and wind power are steadily declining in price, and wind power already delivers cheaper electricity than coal and nuclear power – if stability is not a requirement. If the need for backup is added to the total costs, both fossil and nuclear power will be cheaper. All energy sources have...

energy.glex.no

 

[eZyT]

All energy sources produce waste in varying amounts from construction and combustion. All power stations must be removed at some point, resulting in waste that must either be recycled or deposited. Because renewables have low power density, the amount of waste associated with the shutdown of powerplants is more than one order of magnitude higher than that of fossil and nuclear powerplants. Hydropower and solar powerplants produce the most waste, 14,000 and 16.000 tons per TWh, respectively, while gas and nuclear powerplants produce the least, 600 and 900 tons per TWh, respectively.

2020 report.

Gas and hydropower are cheapest, nuclear is most stable, while coal produces most waste

Solar and wind power are steadily declining in price, and wind power already delivers cheaper electricity than coal and nuclear power – if stability is not a requirement. If the need for backup is added to the total costs, both fossil and nuclear power will be cheaper. All energy sources have...

energy.glex.no

You really are doing pound for pound.

I was joking, but youre serious!!!!

Half-lives? Toxicity?

You could actually be undertaking the greatest cherry-pick in history?

 

[RoarEmotion]

Just posting a few facts that people might find interesting Bengal old son, even if you obviously don't.

Comparing the waste issue of renewables v nuclear, on both cost and safety grounds, thats interesting. As is yawning at the prospect of having no solution to the issue of dealing with the waste.

I've thought about this throwaway society we have.

If (which it never will), the full price of recycling something that isn't intended to be indefinitely maintained (e.g. a road) was baked into the purchase price and the onus on the supplier to handle this recycling aspect, we would have a very different world. Everything would cost more upfront - but it should last longer and be upgradable -because that approach would attract way less price and burden of recycling.

The amount of plastic would be infinitely smaller - everyone would use reusable bags, reuse jars etc. clothing would get darned/repaired. Things would be made so they could be maintained - not so sure you get all these smartphones getting obsoleted etc.

Anyway, never going to happen in the world of capitalism.

 

[tigersnake]

I've thought about this throwaway society we have.

If (which it never will), the full price of recycling something that isn't intended to be indefinitely maintained (e.g. a road) was baked into the purchase price and the onus on the supplier to handle this recycling aspect, we would have a very different world. Everything would cost more upfront - but it should last longer and be upgradable -because that approach would attract way less price and burden of recycling.

The amount of plastic would be infinitely smaller - everyone would use reusable bags, reuse jars etc. clothing would get darned/repaired. Things would be made so they could be maintained - not so sure you get all these smartphones getting obsoleted etc.

Anyway, never going to happen in the world of capitalism.

If it doesn't start happening, and the smart money indicates it will, we're buggered. All the critical minerals supply and demand analysis is factoring in recycling becoming built in to the product life cycle.

On the plastic, this is simply a function of the ecological impacts being externalised. A carbon price would help, but not solve it, which is why regulation is needed, and happening.

We're up against sure, but significant change is happening on both of these critical issues.