What would a Dutton Liberal leadership mean for the Liberals and the country?

Remove this Banner Ad

Take a step back

1) We know renewables have failed to deliver clean energy; as there is not one jurisdiction on the planet with a renewable energy strategy that has delivered clean energy unless supported by hydro and nuclear

Take a step forward….

Battery storage is the game changer.
Adelaide right here in Australia is proof of that.
Battery storage costs have been dropping by an average of 13% a year….
And when we have 1million EVs with vehicle to grid connections the need for peak back up generation will be gone.

And when Snowy 2 is online the eastern grid will be secure.
Gas turbines can be used in emergency.
Ther is no need for overpriced Nuclear.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Loving the logic that to transition to renewables, you need nuclear, and batteries are evil

Batteries have their place but can you point to a justification on the planet after 34 years, where a renewables strategy has delivered clean energy without hydro or nuclear?

It isn’t about good vs evil, rather what is effective and what is not.

How long should we wait in a climate emergency to adopt technologies that work?
 
Take a step forward….

Battery storage is the game changer.
Adelaide right here in Australia is proof of that.
Battery storage costs have been dropping by an average of 13% a year….
And when we have 1million EVs with vehicle to grid connections the need for peak back up generation will be gone.

And when Snowy 2 is online the eastern grid will be secure.
Gas turbines can be used in emergency.
Ther is no need for overpriced Nuclear.

In addition to providing a jurisdiction where your proposed solution has worked, can you kindly provide a cost per kWh delivered from batteries?

It is easy to say reduced 13% but it would be great to hear the actual cost to the consumer
 
How is that proof that these small reactors are viable? Possible?

Shouldn't you apply the same skepticism to these speculative nuclear reactors that you apply to renewables that are working now?

Agree

My position is we don’t commit to nuclear for 5 years but start planning now.

This gives us sufficient time to see the performance of chalk river and others.

We either build a Gen 3.5 or commit to a proven SMR.

This also gives batteries 5 years to reduce their costs and improve performance. Do you know the current cost per kWh is for a battery?
 

Around $0.30 kWh based on a $0.05 kWh input

That’s why green hydrogen is being pursued. But green hydrogen from electrolysis is a nightmare:
  • 35% PFAS ( forever chemicals - cancer and foetal mortality)
  • ammonia (destroys marine life)
  • doesn’t work with green energy

That’s why fmg and others have pulled out, as the environmental impact is horrendous. Hopefully Hysata put their hand up and admit their PFAS use and PFAS byproduct

Batteries are also PFAS

Curtin and Lincoln Labs have a non electrolysis technology which looks like a winner
 
In addition to providing a jurisdiction where your proposed solution has worked, can you kindly provide a cost per kWh delivered from batteries?

It is easy to say reduced 13% but it would be great to hear the actual cost to the consumer

Firm renewables which includes Battery storage…..


The 2024 GenCost report's 90% firmed renewables LCOE came out as $100/MWh to $143/MWh, while large-scale nuclear was estimated to be between $155/MWh to $252/MWh. This means the lower bound of nuclear is already fairly close to the upper bound of renewables.


Can you tell me what the cost of decommissioning a nuclear plant is in 70yrsrs time?
 
In addition to providing a jurisdiction where your proposed solution has worked, can you kindly provide a cost per kWh delivered from batteries?

It is easy to say reduced 13% but it would be great to hear the actual cost to the consumer

SA wholesale prices today…

Can you show me any country in the world that has negative prices with out solar, wind and batteries?

IMG_0331.jpeg
 
So he’s going negative in teal seats. Alp should adopt the ‘we’re not going back to that’ from the US dems.

Had to laugh at ‘throwing significant resources’ at teal seats. So a lib poster on every lamp post not every other one with fryzo mugshot on it?

 
SA wholesale prices today…

Can you show me any country in the world that has negative prices with out solar, wind and batteries?

View attachment 2153120

If only deflections like this, worked for engineers and reality

Can you kindly provide your thoughts on the cost of energy per kWh from a battery?
 
Firm renewables which includes Battery storage…..


The 2024 GenCost report's 90% firmed renewables LCOE came out as $100/MWh to $143/MWh, while large-scale nuclear was estimated to be between $155/MWh to $252/MWh. This means the lower bound of nuclear is already fairly close to the upper bound of renewables.


Can you tell me what the cost of decommissioning a nuclear plant is in 70yrsrs time?

The cost Gen report was dodged as fk further you didn’t answer the question other than to highlight another issue which we can discuss later
1. Please provide a jurisdiction that delivers clean energy without hydro or nuclear
2. What is the cost per kWh from a battery
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Firm renewables which includes Battery storage…..


The 2024 GenCost report's 90% firmed renewables LCOE came out as $100/MWh to $143/MWh, while large-scale nuclear was estimated to be between $155/MWh to $252/MWh. This means the lower bound of nuclear is already fairly close to the upper bound of renewables.


Can you tell me what the cost of decommissioning a nuclear plant is in 70yrsrs time?


From your own link please refer how dodgy the report you referenced was and….,,,


This means Australians are set to pay $72.8 billion for pumped hydro and transmission that don’t produce any electricity and are simply there to firm intermittent wind and solar energy.

Taking at face value GenCost’s capital cost estimate of $8.7 billion to build a 1GW reactor, $72.8 billion is enough to buy eight large-scale nuclear reactors.

This $72.8 billion figure doesn’t even include the wind turbines and solar panels themselves, or the long list of battery projects currently underway, or the future transmission and storage projects that a renewables-dominated grid will need by 2050.

How many reactors could we afford if we added in just one more chunk of these significant costs?

A recent Centre for Independent Studies paper, The six fundamental flaws underpinning the energy transition, calculated the cost at today’s prices of all the consumer batteries we’d need to support the grid by 2050 according to AEMO’s Integrated System Plan, using GenCost’s capital cost estimates.

The total comes to $229 billion.

Adding the cost of these consumer batteries to the transmission and pumped hydro costs gives you an eye-watering $301.8 billion. That means the amount Australians are set to spend on firming infrastructure in the next few decades is enough to buy 35 1GW reactors.
 
I’m no expert and don’t produce long posts. But hydro is both generator and storage of power

Hydro is a generator

Pump hydro is a storage (net less of energy)
 
From your own link please refer how dodgy the report you referenced was and….,,,


This means Australians are set to pay $72.8 billion for pumped hydro and transmission that don’t produce any electricity and are simply there to firm intermittent wind and solar energy.

Taking at face value GenCost’s capital cost estimate of $8.7 billion to build a 1GW reactor, $72.8 billion is enough to buy eight large-scale nuclear reactors.

This $72.8 billion figure doesn’t even include the wind turbines and solar panels themselves, or the long list of battery projects currently underway, or the future transmission and storage projects that a renewables-dominated grid will need by 2050.

How many reactors could we afford if we added in just one more chunk of these significant costs?

A recent Centre for Independent Studies paper, The six fundamental flaws underpinning the energy transition, calculated the cost at today’s prices of all the consumer batteries we’d need to support the grid by 2050 according to AEMO’s Integrated System Plan, using GenCost’s capital cost estimates.

The total comes to $229 billion.

Adding the cost of these consumer batteries to the transmission and pumped hydro costs gives you an eye-watering $301.8 billion. That means the amount Australians are set to spend on firming infrastructure in the next few decades is enough to buy 35 1GW reactors.

Batteries are included in the cost of firm renewables….

Can you name a country that doesn’t have renewables , that experiences negative prices???
 
Batteries are included in the cost of firm renewables….

Can you name a country that doesn’t have renewables , that experiences negative prices???

Confusing batteries with firming which includes gas, coal, batteries, hydro and others doesn’t help a sensible and honest debate.

Keep the debate to a reality, as citing negative prices is also not helpful to good decision making:

1) your confusing markets with OPEX
2) investments don’t work unless there is a return.
3) the average cost is the meaningful number PLUS the cost reliability
4) further it highlights the actual problem. They are not effective in delivering low CO2 outcomes


Do you really advocate something that is proven to not being effective? Can you confirm how long you give ineffective technologies to be effective in a climate emergency?
 
This is just gaslighting. But I guess not as bad as Turnbull buy your kids an investment property at birth



I suppose of you build acres of shit boxes with poor thermal performance on the fringes it’s more power for your nuclear plants to sell.

But it’s not much of a life. Really wondering why we are still an attractive destination for folks
This is the same tired old shit. Throw money at first home buyers to buy their votes, and property prices go up further.

Build more 'houses' that are actually glorified units 12 centimetres away from the neighbour's home, with prison-style windows 190 cm off the floor to tick the box 'yes this room has a window'. The roof is black because nobody can have any other colour these days, and the street has no footpaths because developers definitely can't afford that. And it's a gazillion kilometres from the city, there is only one road in and out of the suburb and there is one bus stop where the bus comes once an hour.
 
So what is snowy 2?

pumped storage hydro

around 150 hours of energy of 2.2GW



but expect around half of that when finished
 
Batteries have their place but can you point to a justification on the planet after 34 years, where a renewables strategy has delivered clean energy without hydro or nuclear?

It isn’t about good vs evil, rather what is effective and what is not.

How long should we wait in a climate emergency to adopt technologies that work?
Sunk costs mean that existing end of life plants are cheap up until the point they need to be upgraded, then renewables are far cheaper.
 
Confusing batteries with firming which includes gas, coal, batteries, hydro and others doesn’t help a sensible and honest debate.

Keep the debate to a reality, as citing negative prices is also not helpful to good decision making:

1) your confusing markets with OPEX
2) investments don’t work unless there is a return.
3) the average cost is the meaningful number PLUS the cost reliability
4) further it highlights the actual problem. They are not effective in delivering low CO2 outcomes


Do you really advocate something that is proven to not being effective? Can you confirm how long you give ineffective technologies to be effective in a climate emergency?
Proven not affective?
Ask south Australians how many black out since they had batteries….
Brocken Hill now has power again thanks to FIRM renewables which includes batteries …. 👍
 

Remove this Banner Ad

What would a Dutton Liberal leadership mean for the Liberals and the country?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top