Thread: Future of the Australian Electricity Market

Originally Posted by Warb

I agree, if that's what they're doing. But if it is what they're doing, why bother also doing the "stop charging at 80% until the last minute" thing on the iPhone? And why does the EV battery link tell us to avoid charging above 80%? If the safety limit (for want of a better phrase) is 80% of "real", why further reduce that by another 20%? Is the suggestion that charging above 60%odd "real" degrades battery life?

What bothers me is all these "round" numbers: 80%, 10%, 60%.

Everything on these EV's is engineered down to several decimal points, but they expect us to believe that a round 80% is the optimum charge for the batteries and discharging them below a round 10% will damage them.

And from the discussion here about if 100% is really only 80% or not, the whole battery thing seems to be made deliberately confusing by the manufacturers.

I have a bank of auxiliary batteries in the back of my ute for camping. I have a sensor on the batteries that bluetooths to my phone, telling me stats about my battery bank to two decimal places yet with a high tech EV we can't tell if 100% is really 100% or just 80%.

I've just looked back through my LiPo notes from my electric RC car days (slightly different battery, but I'm guessing the graph would be similar for both). There is quite a fine line between charging voltage, capacity and lifetime.

Lipo.png

I guess the nice round numbers are because the manufacturer can simply choose a point on the graph that gives enough "life" to cover the warranty, and enough power to give the vehicle a suitable range. Clearly Barney Stinson doesn't work for them, otherwise it would be 83%....

Originally Posted by Warb

I guess the nice round numbers are because the manufacturer can simply choose a point on the graph that gives enough "life" to cover the warranty, and enough power to give the vehicle a suitable range. Clearly Barney Stinson doesn't work for them, otherwise it would be 83%....

With several brands competing in a market, all trying to make out that THEIR product is the one to buy, it's a wonder it isn't 83.17649%

Warm winter sees wholesale energy prices fall sharply, as demand for electricity hit record lows - ABC News

FF

Thanks for that link. I thought this was pertinent:

The regulator said while the growing influence of cheap renewable solar and wind power on the grid is welcome, the transition still isn't occurring quickly enough.
"Overall, the rate of new entry into the market is not in line with what the market needs to transition," it said.
"In Victoria, for example, no new capacity has entered the market since April."

However, there was still no mention of the need to store electricity! As I keep mentioning, without a realistic storage system we are not solving the problem. In fact, more renewables at the moment would be close to useless.Solar farms are likely to be shut down for most of the day and they don't work at night. I would not be proposing any new solar farms for the moment and if they are doing their homework I don't think there will be too many coming online.

The trend at the moment, with mild Spring weather, is for the wholesale price to go negative by 0800hrs and remain there until about 1600hrs. This means that the most opportune time for a solar farm to generate is removed. There is the occasional spike:



Spot market 14 -16 ept.png

I wasn't at work to witness the spike on Monday, but they typically last for 5 minutes. It still makes a big difference. However, generally I would fully expect that the solar farms are losing money right now and I am not surprised to hear no new solar farms have come online since April in Victoria as pointed out in the linked article. If they had, I would be questioning their diligence.

Of course, the issue is that the low prices are not flowing on to the retail sector. It is a little like the banks being fast to pass on rate rises, but slow to pass on the decreases. The retailers will say that contracts are in place I suppose. The retailers screamed when prices did not go their way. What are they saying right now? Perhaps they are down the pub celebrating.

Regards
Paul

And in the mean time my Amber Wholesale prices continue to be about 18% lower than Origin Mate's, and 36% lower than Origin Idiot's rates. (total costs shown)


Capture.JPG

Originally Posted by doug3030

With several brands competing in a market, all trying to make out that THEIR product is the one to buy, it's a wonder it isn't 83.17649%

Ah, the illusion of precision!

In a former life as an economist I had many pointless discussions with econometricians, aka "quants", who would make broad brush assumptions and then calculate the results to three decimal places - or six if Doug calculated to five places! Usually, their precision was dependent on their having next quarters economic indicators - as likely as having next week's horse race results.

In your previous career, Doug, presumably you were counselled to never expect your work to be more precise than it was. "Know thy weaknesses ... before the enemy does"

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

In your previous career, Doug, presumably you were counselled to never expect your work to be more precise than it was.

No, but I learned not to expect anyone to believe it was as good as it invariably was.

If the Snowy 2.0 rows your boat, the Four Corners programme this coming Monday (and probably on Iview subsequently) may be of interest.

Tunnel Vision: The nation-building project that went horribly wrong - ABC News

A cost blowout of 600%, a stuck tunnel boring machine 150m into a 15Km tunnel and a projected completion date not before 2028 are some of the issues likely to be dissected.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

If the Snowy 2.0 rows your boat, the Four Corners programme this coming Monday (and probably on Iview subsequently) may be of interest.

Tunnel Vision: The nation-building project that went horribly wrong - ABC News

My impression at the time was.... yet another hastily cobbled together election headline grabber. I liked the direction but questioned the merits of spending the original estimated cost on that project rather on other well thought through and planned infrastructure, like the national grid.

Without looking at the programme, my thinking now is that it is far too early to say if the updated estimated $12bn will be a good investment. Some projects need the benefit of very long time horizons before they can be properly assessed. Two come to mind.

The Sydney Opera House opened 50yrs ago this week. The cost, value and time to build it was widely derided during my youth in NSW. In retrospect it has turned out to be not only NSW's, but also Australia's, best investments, IMO.

The other contentious 'investment' that comes to mind also goes back exactly 50yrs this year when Jackson Pollock's Blue Poles was purchased for $1.3m with taxpayers' money. I was in the art world at the time and got some of the brunt of the outrage against the spending of public money on something that a 'monkey could do'. I though at the time we were very fortunate to be able to acquire it, let alone afford it. Its art value may still be contentious for some, but in monetary terms that $1.3m ($11.3m in today's A$) is now valued at $500. In retrospect a good investment.

So, whether Snowy 2.0 itself will be a good investment is probably too soon to tell, but whether the money would have been better spent at this key time in the transition away from FFs is another matter.

Originally Posted by NeilS

My impression at the time was.... yet another hastily cobbled together election headline grabber. I liked the direction but questioned the merits of spending the original estimated cost on that project rather on other well thought through and planned infrastructure, like the national grid.

Neil

The concept of pumped hydro power is, to my mind, one of the best stored energy sources, although economics and the effect on the ecology need to be taken into consideration. Unfortunately, not all the dams and generators in Snowy 2.0 have pumped capability and I feel it is less able to provide stored energy than we have been led to believe.

However, I will be interested to see the programme as it seems to me that the desire to provide this facility may have clouded judgement or, if I was being more cynical, it was the result of a political grab. Having said that, it is a shame as it seems to be the only instance where the government of the day has made an attempt to intervene and actively support electricity storage. For the moment, it appears to be as ill-fated as the Inland Rail project. Hopefully, something can be extracted from the debacle.

Regards
Paul

A little information of where renewables are going and their penetration of the market. A few records were broken, but as usual it is a little sketchy. It focuses on how good the renewables are during the day, but not very much mention of how they are going to cope at night and during the evening peak. Ironically, the controversial issue of daylight saving does help a little as far as electricity demand is concerned as it spreads out the evening high demand period.

Fresh records for renewables but fears linger for bills (msn.com)

It is certainly a good time for those with retailer alternatives to hunt around for better deals. Having said that, The air conditioners will be taking a hammering with temperatures in my area around 35° today and tomorrow and 36° forecast for Wed.

Also a reminder to take a peek at Four Corners this evening (Tunnel Vision on ABC @ 2030hrs) to see whether the Snowy project is still stuck in the tunnel and/or "synched" without trace .

Regards
Paul

Been waiting for your response to the Four Corners program, Paul. I thought it was a little disjointed - possibly the old "commercial-in-confidence" wall or silence and/or the journalist's work had been edited by the ABC lawyers.

Some things not mentioned or glossed over.

COSTS: Mentioned that the original estimate of $2 billion had grown to $12 billion. No mention of viability at either cost. But in over 2019 contracts of $5.7 billion were issued - over four years ago! Not new news?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=..._&opi=89978449

Lead contractors were a joint venture between Clough Engineering of Perth and Santini Impregilo of Italy. Clough went broke a year ago and Santini, who had changed their name to "Webuild Spa", bought the wreckage. There must have been legal and personnel disruptions in the fall out.

Contractor names: I do not recall mention of the contractor's names, merely "the best tunnelers in the world". Not sure if they were being satirical or if it was on legal advice.

Tunneling machines: Early it mentions three tunneling machines, but the focusses soley on Florence which has been perpetually bogged. Presumably the other two machines are busy boring away at 1-2 metres per hour?

Geoligical risks: Four Corners said the contractors were doing insufficient pre-drilling and ignoring risks; management says they were managing those risks .... Who is right?

This gung ho approach is the subject of a classic business school skit referenced as the John Wayne school of management, as in this military example:

We have a problem, Sir.
CHARGE!
Which way, Sir?
You heard the order, CHARGE.

Will be interesting to watch the political and business reaction.

Graeme

I was waiting for everybody else to chime in as I didn't wish to lead the viewers!

I thought the programme was a little light on and really, as you say, only focused on the "Florence" flop, which does not appear to have been resolved even now. I too thought there were two other tunnels being drilled simultaneously.

I was a little disappointed that the succession of dams was not discussed as that I feel is more pertinent to the success or failure of the project. That is unless you factor in the cost, which for the moment looks as though it would be a non starter if the project had not already started. I felt Mr. Turnbull ducked and weaved with aplomb. Mr. Morrison likewise looked as though he might have had the politician's handbook of photo ops in his back pocket. I had to go and get a fairly stiff drink at that point so I could continue watching. So I hope I didn't miss too much.

The new CEO cannot really be blamed for the failures so far, other than he must have known what he was getting in to. I felt he conceded enough past failures to be plausible, but not enough to instill confidence. Unless something really changes regarding performance of contractors and catch up on progress, it looks to be the proverbial goat propagation.

That's a shame as it is the only government effort towards renewables. One other thing I found surprising was the various statements that batteries are now so good we should not really be countenancing hydro storage. True to say Hydro is good when the topography lends itself easily to the project, but not when mountains have to be moved. Batteries on the other hand would be good, if they put enough in place. That has not be done so far: Not even close.

Lastly, comments about long term storage seemed a little out of place as really it is the short term storage that is more urgent for the moment from day to night: Every day.

Regards
Paul