Skip to content

Engineers warn of bill shock under green energy surge

September 5, 2018
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

This article originally appeared in the Australian:

 

image

Engineers warn of bill shock under green energy surge

05 Sep, 2018,

 

Summary: Electricity bills will soar and gas and coal-fired power stations will close if the share of wind and solar generation increases dramat­ically, engineers have warned after analysing the nation’s ­energy supply…..

The analysis casts doubt on Labor’s claim that a 50 per cent renewable energy target — the centrepiece of the opposition’s climate change policy — would reduce electricity prices.

It found bills were likely to soar 84 per cent, or about $1400 a year, for the typical household, if wind and solar power supplied 55 per cent of the national electricity market.

The analysis by a group of veteran engineers — written and funded by five mechanical, chemical, electrical and nuclear engineers, with decades of experience in the power industry — was sent to premiers, federal cabinet ministers and shadow cabinet late last month.

It contrasted the costs of supplying electricity in the national electricity market under different mixes of generation. This included the Australian Energy Market Operator forecast for the year 2040 of 65 per cent renewable energy including hydro, as well as five other scenarios, including replacing coal-fired or gas generation with nuclear power.

The AEMO scenario, the closest to Labor’s policy, would lead to retail electricity prices rising by 84 per cent to 39c per kilowatt-hour — adding $1374 to the average household’s 2017 electricity bill based on the competition regulator’s June report into the electricity market.

Robert Barr, an electrical engineer and academic at University of Wollongong, said “in practical terms what would happen is the coal and open-cycle gas stations would go broke long before we reached this situation”.

  

Co-author Barry Murphy, former managing director and chairman of Caltex Australia, said the scenarios with high levels of renewable energy could force coal-fired power stations to be turned on and off at irregular intervals, or spin their turbines uselessly, “which isn’t economic so they would shut down”.

Labor in government would ensure at least 50 per cent of the nation’s electricity was sourced from renewable energy by 2030.

The new figures emerged as Scott Morrison moved to shift the emphasis of Coalition energy policy away from reducing emissions to cutting prices and shoring up reliability. In Cairns yesterday, the Prime Minister criticised NSW and Victorian governments for restricting gas exploration.

“We have to be prepared to use all the resources we have available to get electricity prices down,” he said. “They’re achieving that in Texas while at the same time reducing their dependency, because of the abundance of gas reserves there, on other ­fossil fuels.”

Mr Morrison noted that electricity prices were a third lower in the US state than in Queensland.

  

For Engineering Services related jobs please click here

The analysis takes aim at “technology agnosticism” that ­ignores the “complexities of power system engineering”.

“Looking at the total cost of particular forms of energy in isolation is sensible only if you’re going to rely on that form of energy alone, but for the electricity market, it’s the total system costs that matters,” Mr Murphy said.

The study recommends ceasing subsidies for renewable energy and ending the national ban on nuclear energy. “The fact is technology matters, and poor and poorly informed choices on the NEM can lead to expensive mistakes that could bedevil our prosperity,” it found.

The AEMO scenario of 65 per cent renewable energy by 2040 would reduce emissions at a cost of $365 a tonne of carbon dioxide, the study estimated. Replacing coal-fired power generation with nuclear power would reduce emissions by a far greater amount at an abatement cost of $27.50 a tonne. The Gillard government’s ill-fated carbon tax envisaged a tax of $29 a tonne.

“Even if you allow for the reductions in the cost of batteries, etc, it doesn’t make much difference to the total cost because of the extra transmission costs,” Dr Barr said. “If we put a whole lot of wind farms into the system, we need to spend a lot of money on the transmission network for power that is intermittent.”

The AEMO forecast would require more than a 40-fold increase in the solar capacity and around a tripling of the number of wind turbines. “That’s a total of 62,000MW of unreliable, intermittent, weather-dependent generating capacity, with a lot situated a long way from points of high consumption,” Mr Murphy said.

In his first speech as Energy Minister last week, Angus Taylor all but dropped the national energy guarantee, the Turnbull government’s proposal that included promises to meet emissions reductions agreed to in the Paris agreement.

The new analysis calls for a bipartisan agreement to end the ban on nuclear energy — despite ongoing uranium exports — that has prevailed since 1998.

“Countries like Germany can experiment with high levels of renewables because they can always import nuclear power from France or Czech Republic when there isn’t enough wind or solar energy, but we’re on our own,” Mr Murphy said.

The authors said much of the existing analysis rested on arbitrary assumptions that the cost of renewable energy would fall in the future rather than “actual costs and actual use”.

“Speculating about future costs 22 years hence is futile: where will gas prices go, or recent developments might reduce nuclear costs, who knows for sure,” Mr Murphy said.

“The South Koreans would jump at the opportunity to help us with building nuclear power stations.”

Dr Barr said: “I don’t think politicians realise how much damage is being done to industry.”

Adam Creighton theaustralian.com.au 5/9/2018

https://www.wattelectricalnews.com/NEWS/Engineers-warn-of-bill-shock-under-green-energy-surge/45806

17 Comments
  1. September 5, 2018 1:07 pm

    So you are going to close down cheaper and more reliable coal or gas fired power plants in favor of hamsters in wheels?

    It is time you tried your own Tea Party. The establishment won’t like it–either side. However, a number of Tea Party backed candidates won at all levels during several elections. The establishment thought they had us beaten with the Obama IRS refusing to allow them tax-exempt status. That is still an ongoing case as we are peeling back the Obama onion and his pet weasel Lois Lerner.

    They declared victory at tad too soon. A Tea Party member by another name is called a Trump supporter.

    Maybe you need to begin dumping those turbines and solar panels into the drink, metaphorically speaking. Or, perhaps, the politicians and bureaucrats holding on to them.

    • Duker permalink
      September 6, 2018 6:08 am

      Cheaper gas power ?
      Thats part of Australias problem, natural Gas prices have increased recently by between 2 -3 times their previous costs. This was due to the large scale export of LNG and made the local market in line with world prices.

      • September 6, 2018 12:14 pm

        I spent a month in Adelaide, August 1968 to be in my girlfriend, Barbara’s wedding. She and her late husband had a large farm at Moree, NSW. Now she lives in Brisbane.

        While I was in Adelaide, my late parents went to the Great Barrier Reef, Alice Springs, Climbed Ayer’s Rock and took 3 trains down to Adelaide.

  2. keith permalink
    September 5, 2018 1:28 pm

    They won’t take notice of this in the UK, the Government Energy Departments under Clarke, Perry and Gove are too busy taking instructions from the NGO’s Greenpeace etc.
    Maybe they will change when our energy prices go through the roof or we get rolling power cuts when coal back up is closed down, but I’m not optimistic.
    One good thing though I can’t see EV’s ever replacing ICE’s here. There won’t be the power needed to charge millions of EV’s.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      September 5, 2018 1:58 pm

      Might be coming sooner than you think, Keith. As a ‘no deal’ Brexit is now the government’s plan, at 11pm on 29 March we exit the Single Energy Market. So no more importing electricity, or what could be more crucial, no more gas imports. Imported gas saved the day last March. Nobody can say how long we might be out of the SEM. Personally, I think we should not be in it all at as it comes with stupid global warming targets.

      • bobn permalink
        September 5, 2018 2:41 pm

        Why would we not import electricity or gas post brexit? We import gas currently from USA and Qatar without being in a ‘union’, and guess what – you dont need a wasteful and extravagant political union to engage in trade. That said, its daft the UK imports electric today when it should burn its coal reserves.

      • September 5, 2018 4:18 pm

        But not as daft as importing pelleted wood from American forests to burn instead of coal.

      • Duker permalink
        September 6, 2018 6:15 am

        Single Energy Market. ?
        Even the EU hasnt been able to make that work that well. Its more a set of consistent rules on how to cooperate. I cant see the French or Dutch waving a large customer goodbye. With the the confrontations between Russia and its neighbours hasnt stopped the gas flowing

      • Ben Vorlich permalink
        September 6, 2018 8:27 am

        With Macron and his predecessors push to renewables reducing nuclear to 50% of the mix there’s not going to be much to spare when high pressure dominates. There is growing resistance to wind turbines in France.

        https://environnementdurable.net/

  3. ThinkingScientist permalink
    September 5, 2018 1:49 pm

    An interesting additional case would have been to calculate the cost of replacing the current mix with the cheapest possible combination (presumably coal/gas mix)

  4. September 5, 2018 2:43 pm

    The maritime industry sorted this question out many moons ago. Why are we now all going on about it? Well not all of us – just the greenblob and their disreputable practices.
    The gross naivety/corruption of the politicians is perhaps the most depressing aspect.

    • September 5, 2018 5:40 pm

      Further: All future delegates attending these “Tower of Babel” Conferences, should be required to account for their attendance carbon footprint. Sailing boats, balloons, cycles and shankes’s ponies being acceptable; but not biomass except by oars.

      Their respective footprints should analysed against their respective proposals.

  5. Jack Broughton permalink
    September 5, 2018 4:14 pm

    The key feature of this presentation is the use of two very simple and clear visual aids. The same concept has been done by Paul previously, but possibly not quite as simple to take in.

    Will Jillian Ambrose include this in her next article??? Can pigs really fly???

  6. Curious George permalink
    September 5, 2018 5:02 pm

    I wonder about numbers for “renewables with storage”. Are they based in reality, or in tarot cards?

    • September 5, 2018 6:32 pm

      Yes Storage is the problem. Potatoes, cows and trees store energy and we harvest that energy, at a costs of course; as we have wilth beasts of burden and slavery.
      Wind turbines don’t store so where do we store the energy? Indeed they are not beasts of burden to be bent to our will.
      Currently we just do not know how to do this storage cost effectively. However much we would wish it. The costs being horrendous when you look at the figures. Need I really spell it out?
      Hydro energy is perhaps the best example energy storage; but has its geographical limitations

      Meanwhile we dig up ready made stored energy up from the ground and have found it amazingly beneficial. Wow! – loads of horses in a gallon of oil. What can we do with that?

      Well deny the opportunity if you like; but maybe best keep your stable so you can get to work on your trusty nag and maybe get him to treadle enough energy to to run your computer.

  7. Steve Borodin permalink
    September 5, 2018 6:36 pm

    I somewhat doubt the zero emissions for 100% renewable. What about the network of heavy load bearing concrete roads to service wind turbines? Concrete manufacture produces large quantities of CO2. What about the large amounts of steel used? Steel manufacture also produces CO2. What about the spinning reserves? You can’t use intermittent sources to provide backup and at present prices batteries are impracticable to provide more than minutes of grid requirements.

    Currently both government and opposition seem technologically and scientifically illiterate.

    It is amazing what chaos and suffering a few falsified temperature measurements can cause.

  8. It doesn't add up... permalink
    September 8, 2018 5:48 pm

    Most of our imported gas comes from Norway. The EU has been receiving gas via the UK pipelines and is in any case in a poor position to export gas with the Dutch having decided to restrict Groningen production. That is the case whether we are in or out of the EU. Most of the gas that comes via those pipelines is in any case Norwegian gas landed via other pipe systems. Norway is not in the EU. It is not about to break its contracts with the UK, and we have spearte pipeline treaties with them in respect of each system that lands in the UK.

Comments are closed.