Global Warming

[Willo]

Bloody amazed that none off the greenie climate warriors haven't been all over the sodium ion ?? battery tech that's being spruiked about lately. Think it was in a Hun article I was reading online a few days ago. Apparently about at the same stage of development and quality as early lithium battery tech but supposedly should be matching the current lithium standard within a few years. Any one got any goss or info about the validity or potential of this stuff

Yeah, been some talk about them heavier and a low energy density ie bulkier and heavier. But if area isn’t a problem they are an alternative. Vastly more abundant supplies, a lot cheaper, better safety

https://www.reddit.com/r/batteries/comments/14xhlw6/review_of_the_first_sodium_ion_batteries_you_can

China is putting him in ev’s

The first EV with a lithium-free sodium battery hits the road in January

JAC Motors, a Volkswagen-backed Chinese automaker, unveiled the first mass-produced EV with a sodium-ion battery through its new Yiwei brand. Although sodium-ion battery tech has a lower density than lithium-ion, its lower costs, simpler and more abundant supplies and superior cold-weather...

www.engadget.com

China is also trialling large scale systems for housing

China switches on first large-scale sodium-ion battery

China Southern Power Grid has deployed a 10 MWh sodium-ion battery in China's Guangxi Zhuang region. It is the first phase of a 100 MWh project.

www.pv-magazine.com

I thought there was an Australian company investing in this technology. I’m not sure whether it was Redflow. My BIL is an investor. I’ll have a look.
*edit. Redflow have a zinc bromine battery

ZBM3 Battery – Redflow

redflow.com

 

[TigerMasochist]

Was thinking, that with some development advancements and upgrading of the technology, they might be ideally suited for installing in houses rather than lithium ones. See there's a recall notice and urgent fire risk warning from LG still running in the paper regarding some faulty LG lithium batteries, pretty sure they've been running the ads since sometime last year.

 

[Willo]

Supposedly free renewables are paradoxically wildly expensive


Can Australia survive the Albanese Labor Government’s minister for destroying our electricity system Chris Bowen?

This is not just a legitimate question. It is both an urgent question and a truly existential question.

They are questions posed directly by the latest data from AEMO – the operator of our national electricity market, which includes all the states except Western Australia.

They are questions posed by the data, but not – to its disgrace, and its continuing betrayal of those 26m Australians – by AEMO itself.

Like most regulators these days, AEMO’s an institutional coward. It’s not going to call out its political masters, and the one in particular, for prancing, like the proverbial emperor, clothes-less.

In its cowardice, it’s also signed up to the “mad, bad and – seriously – dangerous” rush to wind and solar, enough batteries hopefully included, so peerlessly executed by Bowen.

The latest AEMO numbers suggest the $75 per household quarterly rebate over the 2024-25 financial year is going to prove an even sicker joke than it already looked on budget night.

Then it was supposed to deliver some reduction from the punitive 30 per cent-plus higher levels of power prices that Australians had already suffered since the election of the Albanese government.

Now it looks more likely to merely take away some of the pain from yet further increases, to even higher levels, in 2024-25.

It all comes back to one reality.

The more supposedly – in the brainless eyes of Bowen - “free” wind and solar forced into our national grid; the more and more expensive electricity becomes.

Back in 2012, when we still had plenty of brown and black coal generation, the wholesale price of electricity – according to the AEMO data - averaged around $30 per MWh over the entire year and in every state in the NEM.

Very importantly, in those days AEMO and the national grid worked to force the cheap prices from coal-fired plants across all the eastern states.

Fast forward to 2024 and after the billions of dollars spent on forcing all that “free” electricity into the system, AEMO tells us that prices in the June quarter ranged from $101 per MWh in Queensland to $173 in NSW.

Across the NEM the average was $133 per MWh in the quarter.

That’s some 340 per cent higher than the electricity price across Australia over the entire 2011-12 year.

That’s also, me telling you that, not the thoroughly compromised AEMO.

So far in July the price has run from $105 per MWh in Queensland up to $180 in Tasmania.

In South Australia which has the most ‘free’ electricity in the nation, the wholesale price has averaged $167 per MWh.

The most damning – of both Bowen and AEMO itself - was the proud boast that in July 2023, for 30 minutes one day, the entire grid got 65 per cent of its electricity from renewables.

Yet in the same month, on another day, it got just 19 per cent. Bowen is of course utterly incapable of understanding how disastrous that is, and will get catastrophic.

AEMO should understand. But it’s a disgrace.

How ‘free’ power is so expensive — Adelaide Advertiser

Can Australia survive the Albanese Labor government’s minister for destroying our electricity system Chris Bowen?

apple.news

Don’t worry. It’s only going to get more expensive.

 

[DavidSSS]

Sodium batteries are an interesting prospect. The thing is, cars are a special case in the sense that they are a form of transport, which means you need to carry around the batteries. Hence the need for as light and small batteries as you can make. For things like batteries for a home or batteries as part of a grid or micro-grid this is less of an issue. If sodium batteries are cheaper and less likely to catch fire (which would make sense as they are less energy intensive) then sounds like a good technology for stationary batteries.

You can be certain there are a lot of other candidates for battery technology being looked at too and we will find out if any are successful over the next few years.

DS

 

[RoarEmotion]

Supposedly free renewables are paradoxically wildly expensive


Can Australia survive the Albanese Labor Government’s minister for destroying our electricity system Chris Bowen?

This is not just a legitimate question. It is both an urgent question and a truly existential question.

They are questions posed directly by the latest data from AEMO – the operator of our national electricity market, which includes all the states except Western Australia.

They are questions posed by the data, but not – to its disgrace, and its continuing betrayal of those 26m Australians – by AEMO itself.

Like most regulators these days, AEMO’s an institutional coward. It’s not going to call out its political masters, and the one in particular, for prancing, like the proverbial emperor, clothes-less.

In its cowardice, it’s also signed up to the “mad, bad and – seriously – dangerous” rush to wind and solar, enough batteries hopefully included, so peerlessly executed by Bowen.

The latest AEMO numbers suggest the $75 per household quarterly rebate over the 2024-25 financial year is going to prove an even sicker joke than it already looked on budget night.

Then it was supposed to deliver some reduction from the punitive 30 per cent-plus higher levels of power prices that Australians had already suffered since the election of the Albanese government.

Now it looks more likely to merely take away some of the pain from yet further increases, to even higher levels, in 2024-25.

It all comes back to one reality.

The more supposedly – in the brainless eyes of Bowen - “free” wind and solar forced into our national grid; the more and more expensive electricity becomes.

Back in 2012, when we still had plenty of brown and black coal generation, the wholesale price of electricity – according to the AEMO data - averaged around $30 per MWh over the entire year and in every state in the NEM.

Very importantly, in those days AEMO and the national grid worked to force the cheap prices from coal-fired plants across all the eastern states.

Fast forward to 2024 and after the billions of dollars spent on forcing all that “free” electricity into the system, AEMO tells us that prices in the June quarter ranged from $101 per MWh in Queensland to $173 in NSW.

Across the NEM the average was $133 per MWh in the quarter.

That’s some 340 per cent higher than the electricity price across Australia over the entire 2011-12 year.

That’s also, me telling you that, not the thoroughly compromised AEMO.

So far in July the price has run from $105 per MWh in Queensland up to $180 in Tasmania.

In South Australia which has the most ‘free’ electricity in the nation, the wholesale price has averaged $167 per MWh.

The most damning – of both Bowen and AEMO itself - was the proud boast that in July 2023, for 30 minutes one day, the entire grid got 65 per cent of its electricity from renewables.

Yet in the same month, on another day, it got just 19 per cent. Bowen is of course utterly incapable of understanding how disastrous that is, and will get catastrophic.

AEMO should understand. But it’s a disgrace.

How ‘free’ power is so expensive — Adelaide Advertiser

Can Australia survive the Albanese Labor government’s minister for destroying our electricity system Chris Bowen?

apple.news

Don’t worry. It’s only going to get more expensive.

I think the thrust of this article is right and wrong at the same time. It’s right that green is going to cost more than fossil fuels. But it is wrong in that it ignores the long term damage fossil fuels cause which has a large (infinite?) cost too.

We need the big grown up conversation that if we agree with the overwhelming data that the climate is changing and we risk killing billions of people and doing untold damage to the environment then the price of energy needs to go up and the demand needs to go down
That means quality of life suffers but we also focus on using that energy way more efficiently.

We also need a shitload less of us to work that demand side down with population shrink. (IMO).

Unfortunately if large parts of the world don’t do it together we know what will happen.

So to not kill australia we need a reasonably priced lowish carbon intensity source of energy to be there when the VRE is low and suck up higher prices. Since energy forms a part of everything we buy we can expect stuff to continue to inflate and also erode our quality of life.

Unfortunately all the obstacles the Vic gov created to gas supply in Vic are going to have some serious consequences given how many homes rely on it.

 

[Sintiger]

I think the thrust of this article is right and wrong at the same time. It’s right that green is going to cost more than fossil fuels. But it is wrong in that it ignores the long term damage fossil fuels cause which has a large (infinite?) cost too.

We need the big grown up conversation that if we agree with the overwhelming data that the climate is changing and we risk killing billions of people and doing untold damage to the environment then the price of energy needs to go up and the demand needs to go down
That means quality of life suffers but we also focus on using that energy way more efficiently.

We also need a shitload less of us to work that demand side down with population shrink. (IMO).

Unfortunately if large parts of the world don’t do it together we know what will happen.

So to not kill australia we need a reasonably priced lowish carbon intensity source of energy to be there when the VRE is low and suck up higher prices. Since energy forms a part of everything we buy we can expect stuff to continue to inflate and also erode our quality of life.

Unfortunately all the obstacles the Vic gov created to gas supply in Vic are going to have some serious consequences given how many homes rely on it.

When I was a young fella we used to talk about air pollution in relation to fossil fuels and we don't ever seem to talk about it now. Leaving aside the issue of climate change the burning of coal and the use of petrol and diesel in vehicles degrades the quality of the air we breathe. What happened to that as part of the conversation?

I remember the first time I went to China, I was up in Beijing and Tianjin. It was winter and there were lots of people wearing masks simply because the air quality was so bad, the cities were covered in a pall of coal dust and exhaust fumes from cars and trucks.

Its strange in a way that the discussion about climate change and the future of energy doesn't also include the simple fact that we want and need to breathe fresh air.

 

[RoarEmotion]

When I was a young fella we used to talk about air pollution in relation to fossil fuels and we don't ever seem to talk about it now. Leaving aside the issue of climate change the burning of coal and the use of petrol and diesel in vehicles degrades the quality of the air we breathe. What happened to that as part of the conversation?

I remember the first time I went to China, I was up in Beijing and Tianjin. It was winter and there were lots of people wearing masks simply because the air quality was so bad, the cities were covered in a pall of coal dust and exhaust fumes from cars and trucks.

Its strange in a way that the discussion about climate change and the future of energy doesn't also include the simple fact that we want and need to breathe fresh air.

It's a good point.

Europe mandated diesel until it smogged up its cities.

A lot of the sulphur changes in petrol support better air quality as you get less SOx emissions at the tailpipe which has acid rain implications and air quality implications. It comes at the cost of way more intensive refinery processes to remove it.

At it's heart, anything that is free - capitalism will exploits until advocates for those people/things harmed get laws changed. It's super slow. I guess I'm a bit of a climate doomist as I just don't see how global society will change itself enough to not run off the cliff / trigger some runaway type of environmental/climate reaction. We've proved here the most left leaning people won't give up their air flights. (Even now we are about to hoover up metal on the seabed floor that apparently makes oxygen. (https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/oxy... and the,seawater through a chemical reaction.)

Cigarettes = cancer / societies health / taxpayer funded healthcare
Long hours = free child care from the carer not working
Manufacturing of pretty much anything = environmental damage to extract the resource / rubbish put in seas and landfill
Meat = suffering of animals
Stuff that is cheap = slave labor in China
Social media = truth / people's attention

Some of the 'primitive' societies seems to have a more holistic take and put back culture that respected the cycle. It is a very different way of life though that I certainly don't want to live and imagine most others don't either.

 

[Brodders17]

Supposedly free renewables are paradoxically wildly expensive


Can Australia survive the Albanese Labor Government’s minister for destroying our electricity system Chris Bowen?

This is not just a legitimate question. It is both an urgent question and a truly existential question.

They are questions posed directly by the latest data from AEMO – the operator of our national electricity market, which includes all the states except Western Australia.

They are questions posed by the data, but not – to its disgrace, and its continuing betrayal of those 26m Australians – by AEMO itself.

Like most regulators these days, AEMO’s an institutional coward. It’s not going to call out its political masters, and the one in particular, for prancing, like the proverbial emperor, clothes-less.

In its cowardice, it’s also signed up to the “mad, bad and – seriously – dangerous” rush to wind and solar, enough batteries hopefully included, so peerlessly executed by Bowen.

The latest AEMO numbers suggest the $75 per household quarterly rebate over the 2024-25 financial year is going to prove an even sicker joke than it already looked on budget night.

Then it was supposed to deliver some reduction from the punitive 30 per cent-plus higher levels of power prices that Australians had already suffered since the election of the Albanese government.

Now it looks more likely to merely take away some of the pain from yet further increases, to even higher levels, in 2024-25.

It all comes back to one reality.

The more supposedly – in the brainless eyes of Bowen - “free” wind and solar forced into our national grid; the more and more expensive electricity becomes.

Back in 2012, when we still had plenty of brown and black coal generation, the wholesale price of electricity – according to the AEMO data - averaged around $30 per MWh over the entire year and in every state in the NEM.

Very importantly, in those days AEMO and the national grid worked to force the cheap prices from coal-fired plants across all the eastern states.

Fast forward to 2024 and after the billions of dollars spent on forcing all that “free” electricity into the system, AEMO tells us that prices in the June quarter ranged from $101 per MWh in Queensland to $173 in NSW.

Across the NEM the average was $133 per MWh in the quarter.

That’s some 340 per cent higher than the electricity price across Australia over the entire 2011-12 year.

That’s also, me telling you that, not the thoroughly compromised AEMO.

So far in July the price has run from $105 per MWh in Queensland up to $180 in Tasmania.

In South Australia which has the most ‘free’ electricity in the nation, the wholesale price has averaged $167 per MWh.

The most damning – of both Bowen and AEMO itself - was the proud boast that in July 2023, for 30 minutes one day, the entire grid got 65 per cent of its electricity from renewables.

Yet in the same month, on another day, it got just 19 per cent. Bowen is of course utterly incapable of understanding how disastrous that is, and will get catastrophic.

AEMO should understand. But it’s a disgrace.

How ‘free’ power is so expensive — Adelaide Advertiser

Can Australia survive the Albanese Labor government’s minister for destroying our electricity system Chris Bowen?

apple.news

Don’t worry. It’s only going to get more expensive.

That article appears to be suggesting that the price increases are all due to the increase in renewables?
I would hazard a guess that is not true. (I would also hazard a guess the source is NewsCorp?)

 

[RoarEmotion]

That article appears to be suggesting that the price increases are all due to the increase in renewables?
I would hazard a guess that is not true. (I would also hazard a guess the source is NewsCorp?)

Both left and right conflate marginal cost (at source) and the marginal cost (of system) to support their messaging.

The first bit of VRE is cheaper than fossil from both points of view. The 100% of VRE has to be way more expensive. ie. 100% solar = massive battery support needed so the system cost is astronomic.

It's a very boring and disappointing black and white take on things. I guess most people (in society and not so much PRE) aren't comfortable with grey except laura kane.

 

[Willo]

Both left and right conflate marginal cost (at source) and the marginal cost (of system) to support their messaging.

The first bit of VRE is cheaper than fossil from both points of view. The 100% of VRE has to be way more expensive. ie. 100% solar = massive battery support needed so the system cost is astronomic.

It's a very boring and disappointing black and white take on things. I guess most people (in society and not so much PRE) aren't comfortable with grey except laura kane.

Unless there is a massive investment in battery backup, we’re gonna be in for some major *smile*.

Gas fired generators should be part of the mix for 24/7 backup. But obviously with net zero it wont be considered.

 

[RoarEmotion]

Unless there is a massive investment in battery backup, we’re gonna be in for some major *smile*.

Gas fired generators should be part of the mix for 24/7 backup. But obviously with net zero it wont be considered.

I work in gas. Governments know they get voted out when the power fails so they are trying to balance not getting voted out by supporting fossil fuels with not getting voted out by having the power fail. Just ridiculous situation and all revolves around the dumb messaging that renewables are cheaper. I mean they are cheaper if you don't want the power on all the time. But that second bit never gets mentioned.

The timelines involved in getting enough gas to put into the generators IMO will be the issue in the middle of winter in Victoria in 26/27.

We will probably see the incompetent Vic libs get voted in because labor will have put Vic massively in debt with the union corrupted big build, commonwealth games wastage, covid related bills etc. etc. and short of gas due to banning it for so long and de Ambrosia basically being in public ideologically opposed to it.

As you say we need some form of battery or on demand capacity. The cheapest will likely be gas - it still won't be cheap as you need to make it commercial for someone having what ever form of on demand power sit there for 90%+ of the year and not getting used. This is the true cost of high VRE penetration.

 

[Willo]

Origin to spend $450m to expand Eraring battery


The energy group will spend another $450m to expand a battery at the Eraring coal power station as it looks to exploit the increasing market volatility.

Colin Packham | The Australian Business Network
July 25, 2024 10:16 am

Origin Energy will spend $450m to expand its large-scale battery at the site of its Eraring coal power station, as Australia’s largest electricity and gas retailer moves to profit from ever-increasing market volatility.

The expansion of the battery is a boost to Australia’s energy transition, with storage capacity seen as a critical enabler for the exit of coal and underpinning new renewables., while the development will aid Origin’s capacity to profit from wild swings in the price of electricity during the day.

Origin has in the last few years moved to rapidly deploy batteries and last year approved the $600m development of a battery at the Eraring coal power station, but the company on Thursday said it will now expand that battery.

The company said the second stage of the Eraring battery will add a 240MW/1030 MWh four-hour duration grid-forming battery to the 460 MW/1073 MWh two-hour duration first stage battery development already under construction and which is anticipated to come online at the end of the 2025 calendar year. Stage two is anticipated to come online in the first quarter of the 2027 calendar year.

Origin’s head of energy supply and operations Greg Jarvis says the investment underscores the company’s commitment to the transition.

“We are pleased to have approved Origin’s third investment in a large-scale battery at one of our existing power stations, which reflects our belief that storage will play an important role in the changing grid by helping to firm up variable supply from wind and solar,” he said Mr Jarvis.

Batteries are playing an increasingly important role in Australia’s electricity supply and their role is set to grow substantially if new renewable energy generators are deployed as expected.

Batteries can supply electricity during times of so-called renewable energy droughts, an extremely lucrative asset for developers as Australia’s electricity market experiences wild swings in wholesale prices.

Australia has the world’s highest per capita penetration of rooftop solar, which means wholesale electricity prices – the cost of producing power – is often in negative territory – meaning that batteries can charge and receive a fee. When the sun sets, wholesale electricity prices spike and battery developers can discharge and earning lucrative returns.

The trend is expected to grow as Australia moves towards the federal Labor government’s target of having renewable energy generate more than 80 per cent of the country’s electricity by 2030, increasing the country’s reliance on batteries.

But Australia’s energy industry has warned batteries are often only viable for short periods of time, and sustained periods of limited sunlight or light winds will cause wholesale prices to spike.

These so-called renewable energy droughts were illustrated when the Australian Energy Market Operator revealed the cost of producing electricity across the national market averaged $133/MWh in the three months to June 30, 23 per cent higher than the same period one year earlier.

Origin to spend $450m to expand Eraring battery — Adelaide Advertiser

The energy group will spend another $450m to expand a battery at the Eraring coal power station as it looks to exploit the increasing market volatility.

apple.news

And people think the electricity market isn’t being exploited by energy companies.

 

[Willo]

Household EV infrastructure could cost as much as $10bn, inquiry told


The transition to electric vehicles that can be charged at home for a million Australians is mind-blowing, experts have warned.

The transition to electric vehicles would put as much pressure on Australia’s struggling electricity grid as homes and apartments already do, experts have warned.

It comes as the House of Representatives continues its inquiry into impact of the wholesale uptake of electric vehicles, or EVs, including infrastructure and costs to motorists.

Race for 2030 interim director Roger Dargaville said powering EVs in just one million households could cost as much as $10bn in power inverters.

Professor Dargaville said such inverters, unlike home batteries such as Tesla’s Powerwall, would allow EV drivers to recontribute power into the grid.

“That piece of infrastructure costs about $10,000 at the moment, and if you have a million vehicles sometime in the future trying to do this that’s $10bn,” he said.

“It’s very dangerous to make predictions about the cost … we all made the mistake with solar panels of saying that they can’t come down and they’ve exceeded expectations.

“That comes with scale … I suspect they’ll come down to half or a third of the current costs, but even at $3000 a pop, if you’ve got millions of them, it’s a lot of money.”

Professor Dargaville said there was only a single brand of inverters on the market but couldn’t confirm whether people with solar inverters would need another.

The “optimal situation” he said was for there to be widespread charging infrastructure “where they’re parked during the day at office buildings, shopping centres, schools”.

Asked about EVs feeding power back into the grid, Professor Dargaville admitted it was a “very complicated question” and more research was needed about the benefit.

He said research about the impact of EVs on the entire grid was also needed but warned they would demand “as much electricity as the residential sector at the moment”.

The inquiry seeks to establish the wide-reaching impacts of widespread EV take-up, including batteries, and is chaired by South Australian Labor MP Tony Zappia.

It was told the recycling sector was “in crisis” over the handling of disposed batteries, namely from vapes, which according to research had resulted in 10,000 fires in just 2024.

Association for the Battery Recycling Industry chief executive Katharine Hole said “recycling of lithium batteries is inherently dangerous” and required safety and fire measures.

She said the “waste industry was struggling because of battery disposal and fires” and insurance for BRI members had increased in 2024 by as much as 200 per cent.

The inquiry was told disposal of EV batteries, namely recycling, required “engagement of a professional network” and Australia needed to “work up the waste hierarchy”.

Eye-watering cost of EV transition — news.com.au

The transition to electric vehicles that can be charged at home for a million Australians is mind-blowing, experts have warned.

apple.news

 

[IanG]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1817376779386196398

 

[RoarEmotion]

Slugcatcher: H2 or hot air, is there a difference?​

Or, Twiggy takes on Rudolf Clausius and William Thomson and loses.
Slugcatcher
22 July 2024

Officially, there's not a race between natural gas (CH4) and H2 (H2) but there is no doubt in Slugcatcher's mind that CH4 scored a big win last week when Andrew Forrest pulled the pin on his green H2 dream. What finally caught up with the iron ore billionaire Twiggy, were the laws of thermodynamics which - in the case of green H2 - essentially mean it takes more energy to produce from water than it contains. Slugcatcher won't patronise his readers with a lesson on the first law of thermodynamics). What science did was compound a problem identified last month by the International Energy Agency that warned about an end of decade oil glut. which will work wonders in keeping energy prices down. In the simplest possible terms, high-cost green H2 cannot compete with CH4 with the gap potentially widening if the IEA's oil glut develops.
Forrest's problem, which led to an organisational shake-up at his mining business Fortescue, is a belief that he can beat the laws of physics and create a globally significant and profitable H2 business using electrolysis to convert water into H2 and oxygen (O). Powerful he is but not that powerful and so last week he admitted it's too difficult to do it with the technology of today - a discovery which is estimated to have cost Fortescue shareholders around US$2 billion. Despite the setback, Forrest aims to continue developing Fortescue as a business with an iron ore engine room and a renewable energy division probably focusing now on solar and wind with a dash of H2 for old times' sake.
But whatever he tries there will be the problem of keeping costs down because the IEA might actually be right with its forecast of an oil glut putting a lid on energy prices which might have the effect of squeezing high-cost renewables out of the market. The reason for suggesting something like that is that green H2 isn't the only emerging alternative energy source in trouble. Offshore wind, according to a leading management consultancy, is also in strife.
McKinsey & Company recently took a deep dive into offshore wind (pun intended) which has been touted as a viable source of low-cost, low-pollution, energy.
Said quickly - and if an observer is only considering a turbine spinning in the breeze - then a case for offshore wind can be mounted but it actually means meeting high initial capital costs, overcoming ever tighter government regulations and competing with energy alternatives (such as CH4). "Our analysis shows that since the beginning of the decade many developers have experienced inflated project costs," McKinsey said. "The communicated levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) has risen by around 40% to 60% compared with 2020. "Further, many projects have contracts that are not inflation adjusted, rendering these projects unprofitable."
So, in one week, green H2 was dumped and the financial case for offshore wind was trashed without any help from red hot US Presidential candidate Donald Trump who is dead against offshore turbines ("they kill birds, and kill whales," he said at a rally in May). If Forrest is going to continue what he sees as a crusade to rid the world of fossil fuels, he's going to have a tough job, first in finding an alternative to green H2 and secondly in convincing customers they have a duty to pay a high price to help "save the planet." Perhaps the biggest surprise in the discovery by Fortescue that green H2 is a non-starter is that so many people knew that to be the case years ago but were drowned out by the promotion of the fuel, largely by people with a vested interest. In London, the Daily Telegraph newspaper has explained how the western world's big bet on H2 fell apart when it crashed into economic reality. "On the same day that Forrest pulled back, the European Union was told that its plan to make and import 10 million tonnes of green H2 by the end of this decade was unrealistic, despite the bloc making €18.8 billion available for a slew of projects," the paper reported.
"The European Court of Auditors dismissed the target as one based on political will rather than concrete data and said it had been partly spurred on by lobbyists".
It gets better, because other critics of green H2 pointed to what they call "the missing trillions/" Michael Liebreich, an energy consultant, told the Telegraph that from an engineering perspective everything was possible whereas the real problem is the cost which very quickly adds up into trillions of dollars. Greg Jackson from Octopus Energy, a British energy business with Australian shareholders, said using H2 for home heating was the equivalent of "flushing the toilet with champagne."
Over time, and with a few trillion dollars to spare, H2 could become a viable fuel but until then the world will remain committed to oil and gas, no matter how much that annoys people like Forrest.

RE take : this is the economic reality. Compromise QOL massively if you want green. Every energy input will 3x - 4x in price. We should be massively focused on demand side solutions. Whilst being non-sexy insulation is cheaper than hydrogen. Heat pumps beat gas heating. Walking / riding a bike doesn't burn liquid fuels and free/cheap mass public transport moves lots of people for way less energy input etc. etc. Less babies helps too.

 

[RoarEmotion]

SAF is triple if not four times the cost of fossil jet fuel.

Any airline that does this by itself will clearly go out of business. (Probably double the price of every flight at least)

NZ government isn't going to mandate green travel to/from NZ (with tourism one of its biggest industries) out of existence.

Air New Zealand becomes first major carrier to drop climate goal

The airline blamed difficulties securing more efficient aircraft and sustainable jet fuel.

www.bbc.com

2% of global emissions

 

[Willo]

Australia’s highest electricity costs hold SA back in business cost report


South Australia is being held back by nation-leading energy costs in a ranking of business-friendly states.
Paul Starick | The Advertiser


August 08, 2024 8:28 pm

The nation’s most expensive electricity costs are a “major black mark” holding South Australia back from being the most business-friendly state, according to a research-based ranking.

SA is “growing its reputation as a state that is open for business” and is second behind Western Australia of the five states ranked in an Institute of Public Affairs paper.
The Ease of Doing Business Report finds SA has the lowest state tax and red tape burden, while also ranking second in rental and fuel costs.

But a comparison of annual electricity bills for businesses with consumption of 20,000 kWh finds SA has the highest cost of $10,964 – NSW was second-most expensive at $8718 and Victoria the cheapest at $6580.

Report author and IPA research fellow Lachlan Clark said the ease of doing business was critical to overall economic performance, resulting in the creation of well-paying jobs.

“South Australia is growing its reputation as a state that is open for business. The state’s taxation system is attractive for new businesses to invest and grow for the benefit of South Australians,” he said.

“Although South Australia’s ease of doing business credentials are impressive, a major black mark is the fact that energy is the most expensive in the nation. This is due to the shortsighted decision to decommission and blow up its baseload power supplies.

“Having to rely on a state such as Victoria, with all of its problems, to supply critical energy is no way to run a state economy.”

Wholesale electricity prices soared in southern states on Monday after SA’s wind and solar generation fell to zero, according to clean energy analyst Renew Economy.

SA has relied on an interconnector to Victoria and gas-fired generators for baseload power since Port Augusta’s coal-fired plant stopped generating electricity in May, 2016.

The former Port Augusta site has been earmarked for a nuclear power stationby the federal Coalition in a policy it argues will drive down energy prices.


Mr Clark praised Premier Peter Malinauskas’s open-minded nuclear power stance, saying this was “a much-needed, mature outlook”, even though he has dismissed it as uneconomic for Australia.

“South Australia’s leaders should be looking at ways to strengthen the state’s affordable and reliable baseload power generation,” Mr Clark said.

The Malinauskas government’s cornerstone energy policy is a $593m hydrogen power plant at Whyalla, modelling for which Energy Minister Tom Koutsantonis has said would bring prices down by 10 per cent.

“We have an oversupply of renewable energy and the key to cracking the code of decarbonisation has always been storage, so we look at things like battery storage, grid-scale battery storage and hydrogen,” he said in mid-July.

A government spokesperson said, “Institute of Public Affairs research often leaves out facts which don’t match its bias.

“SA has a policy of giving regional SA a fair go, with households and small businesses paying the same rate right across the state,” they said

“Under this year’s Default Market Offer, a small business in regional NSW would pay $5733 a year for a standard 10,000kWh consumption.

“A small business anywhere in SA would pay less for the same amount - $5352. NSW favours Sydney, where the cost would be $4612.”

Nation’s highest power costs a ‘major black mark’ on SA — Adelaide Advertiser

South Australia is being held back by nation-leading energy costs in a ranking of business-friendly states.

apple.news

As minister Tom says, SA has an oversupply of renewable energy. except when it doesn’t. Cloudy, no wind meant meant SA’s generation supply fell to zero and had to rely on imports from Victoria.
This should ring alarm bells that there needs to be investment into gas fired generators. But stick you head in the sand and maybe it will all go away

 

[RoarEmotion]

This should ring alarm bells that there needs to be investment into gas fired generators. But stick you head in the sand and maybe it will all go away

Willo having now worked I’m gas less than a year I worry if it will be there when needed even if oeakers get built due to the regulatory settings (federal and state). that make investment in new supply very difficult and slowwwwwwww in Victoria. Having worked in downstream most of my careeer I’m shocked at the timelines needed in upstream needed to consult. Any change almost sends you back to the beginning. and even that gives no certainty.

The pipe that brings it down from qld won’t be big enough. We will see if an import terminal gets built.

 

[TigerMasochist]

The pipe that brings it down from qld won’t be big enough.

Does this comment mean that someone's spending billions to build a long garden hose when they actually need a full on fire hose to do the job?

 

[RoarEmotion]

Does this comment mean that someone's spending billions to build a long garden hose when they actually need a full on fire hose to do the job?

Victoria has been long gas with Gippsland for a long time so the pipe was built in the 60s to send it north not bring it south.

Pipeline Facts and Figures - Australian Pipelines and Gas Association

Dive into insightful facts and figures about pipelines, revealing their critical role in energy transportation and fostering economic growth, presented by APGA.

apga.org.au

But yeah the choice is have bigger or duplicate billion dollar hoses or more billion dollar exploration and production where you ‘need’ it…… Or turn the lights / cooker off.