Last winter’s debacle in Australia could be repeated this year, but at even higher prices.
Despite adding more cheap renewables per person than nearly anywhere on Earth, for some inexplicable reason our retail electricity prices rose 18% last year and are set to rise another 20 to 30% this winter.
Last year was a bloodbath on the wholesale electricity market. Those costs have fed through to retail.
The Energy Minister Chris Bowen blames the Russians, and says we need more renewables.
Shock power bill jump to hammer households
Perry Williams, The Australian
Power bills for households will soar by hundreds of dollars a year from July 1, adding to soaring cost of living pressures as the regulator blamed supply challenges and volatility for the steep cost hit.
Customers in Victoria face a 30 per cent jump on ‘safety net’ prices while households in NSW, South Australia and southeast Queensland will see bills soar by up to 24 per cent.
The Victorian ruling by the Essential Services Commission estimates power costs will jump by $426 for residential customers to $1829 a year while small businesses face bills surging by a third or $1738 a year to $7358.
Energy Minister Chris Bowen suggested measures would be introduced in the May budget to help households cope with the coming bill shock. … “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has seen energy costs skyrocket globally, and Australia has not been immune,” he added.
For 40 years electricity prices went down, but something changed in the last ten years. What could it be?
Source: OWID
Australia “invested” $4 billion dollars in renewables just last quarter.
Despite waves of inflation in the 1970s Australian electricity kept getting cheaper. Engineers were improving the system faster than the costs went up. Then the government joined all the separate state grids into one big bureaucracy and decided to change the weather as well, and we can see how that worked out.
Electricity prices in Australia were falling for 40 years, then we added renewables…
The bigger the bureaucracy is, the more it can screw things up.
REFERENCE
Share of electricity from low-carbon sources, Australia
The marginal price is generally cost plus of the most expensive supplier, which at the moment is gas because international prices are so high. The marginal cost of renewables is close to zero, as most of the cost is in the development of the underlying infrastructure.
3100
Without electricity generation by wind and sun these infrastructure developments aren’t necessary.
I’ll laugh next year or so about your joke if at all.
770
Simon, it’s almost like you are paid to drop in the permitted propaganda distraction at the top?
The true cost of renewable power is the cost it has on the whole grid, not the marginal cost.
Renewables are the vandals that waste the capitol invested in the rest of the network that works. They force up the price of 24/7 electricity, increase maintenance, transmission, storage and stability costs, and thanks purely to subsidies sucked from Australians, they also drive out the cheapest suppliers. The free market had to be distorted by dictat or most renewables would never have been built.
Grids without unreliable renewables are cheaper. Renewables are the parasites on the system. The total cost of fulltime retail electricity is the only thing that matters in the end. All quotes of sub-part costs is just cherry picking to hide this reality.
1291
probably because he is. People like Simon are all over social media. They usually have an anonymous handle. Twitter especially is full of them. I now call them out on it.
460
Jo,
They are finally starting to look at ‘Full Cost of Electricity “FCOE” and Energy Returns “eROI”’
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Full-Cost-of-Electricity-%E2%80%9CFCOE%E2%80%9D-and-Energy-Returns-Schernikau-Smith/476fe5e45bc70f42127bee1ecf6fca0cd06afd87
270
That used to be the the first requirement an engineer faced: work out the full cost of delivery.
Those up front costings are now “done” by politicians.
400
‘Costings’ done by the ‘Pollies’ (LOL) and paid for by the long suffering Taxpayer/Electricity User who is ‘DONE’ right good and proper.
100
And the Americans are at least waking up
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/03/rasmussen-poll-shows-60-of-americans-believe-climate-change-is-a-religion-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-climate/
Aussie sheeple are just eyes closed, sucking in the teet, lulled by their ABC!
410
Wind and solar are the cheapest forms of electricity if you consider the average net present cost of electricity generation for a generator over its lifetime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity
354
Wind and sloar are at least a small island solution in absence of any grid as a garden or a summer cottage.
Or have a look at that solution
The garden solution
80
Hehe! 🙂
For a look at… um… a POC, wander over to:
Marvel at the need for diesel backup. At the time of writing this, diesel is producing 85% of King Island’s power demand.
Even at this small scale they are failing to make renewables operate without the need for fossil fuel backup. Why? Could it be that it is just impractical and prohibitively expensive?
[Found in the Bin. No idea why. – LVA]
141
Simon — as I said, all other sub-part costs are irrelevant word games. The only thing that matters is the retail cost.
Levelized_cost_of_electricity (LCOE) is unknown at the moment, this being the first generation of unreliables. So LCOE is just a modelled guess based on assumptions about how long the equipment will last, how helpful the wind and clouds are ten years from now, and how the whole system will react. Plenty of other groups estimate very different costs.
141
Wiki, seriously ??? As I said, I may laugh later 😀
130
PAPV about PW IR where no truth is involved in the creation of the diatribe.
Pure
Absolute
Political
Verbalism
70
Wind and solar LCOE does not consider all the things needed to provide stable, reliable electricity. And far more importantly, does not consider the parasitic effects of increasing amounts of weather dependent electricity on the grid:
https://wattclarity.com.au/articles/2023/03/09mar-geninsights-q4-aggrot-semischeduled/
Both underperformance and over performance of renewables create problems for grid management, and as the charts at the above link show, these problems are only getting larger, and more frequent as more renewables are added to the grid.
Of course, the real problem is that no one has ever been able to demonstrate a grid functioning entirely from electricity generated by solar or wind. Anywhere in the world! So solar and wind are cheap, but ultimately useless as a replacement for traditional energy sources.
230
Wait until last remnants of ‘spinning reserve’ are driven off the system so there will be no ‘support’ for the ‘intermittency’ of wind and solar. Prices will spike in potential combination with power cuts. What will our dumb politicians do then?
20
Simon, you need to look at the full cost of electricity (FCOE) not the very flawed and incomplete ‘levelised’ cost of electricity (LCOE), as argued in comment #1.1.1.2. Read https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/471a/4a8215d0f871d85bd28111f51d618c7ba278.pdf
130
Rubbish. !
The cost of implementing them into the grid, and accounting for their totally erratic nature, makes their cost FAR MORE than coal or gas.
110
Simon >”Wind and solar are the cheapest forms of electricity if you consider the average net present cost….” i.e. “Levelized cost of electricity” [LCOE]
Following Pauly and Mike above, LCOE is an inappropriate measure. Levelized Avoided Cost of Energy (LACE) is recommended by the US EIA:
“The US Energy Information Administration has recommended that levelized costs of non-dispatchable sources such as wind or solar may be better compared to the avoided energy cost rather than to the LCOE of dispatchable sources such as fossil fuels or geothermal. This is because introduction of fluctuating power sources may or may not avoid capital and maintenance costs of backup dispatchable sources. Levelized Avoided Cost of Energy (LACE) is the avoided costs from other sources divided by the annual yearly output of the non-dispatchable source. However, the avoided cost is much harder to calculate accurately.”
From:
Wind Power & Avoided Energy Costs
OCTOBER 24, 2015 By Paul Homewood
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/10/24/wind-power-avoided-energy-costs/
Paul H’s analysis next comment
70
Paul Homewood’s wind analysis using LACE:
“I worked out the total cost of onshore wind, based on a capacity factor of 26%, which is all that is being achieved in the UK according to DECC.
[$97.64/MWh for wind output]
For every MWh produced by onshore wind, there is an avoided cost of not having to generate by another source. For this scenario, let us assume it is gas fired generation which is avoided. (If we compare to coal or nuclear, the avoided costs are much lower still).
The saving from this will be the variable cost of $57.80/MWh. (This does not take account of the likelihood of extra costs incurred from switching the gas turbines on and off).
In other words, we have to pay $97.64/MWh for wind output, but only save $57.80.
Clearly, in any sane world, this would be regarded as a no brainer.”
120
Simon – Note the date of Paul Homewood’s post:
OCTOBER 24, 2015
Paul was all over this 6 years and 4+ months ago.
If you actually read your Wikipedia link under Usage and limitations you will see this:
“Decisions about investments in energy generation technologies may be guided by other measures such as the levelized cost of storage (LCOS) and the levelized avoided cost of energy [hotlink] (LACE), in addition to the LCOE.[5]”
Follow the LACE hotlink to:
Cost of electricity by source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#Avoided_cost
There you will find this section:
Levelized avoided cost of electricity
“The metric levelized avoided cost of energy (LACE) addresses some of the shortcomings of LCOE by considering the economic value that the source provides to the grid. The economic value takes into account the dispatchability of a resource, as well as the existing energy mix in a region.[6]
In 2014, the US Energy Information Administration recommended[7] that levelized costs of non-dispatchable sources such as wind or solar be compared to the “levelized avoided cost of energy” (LACE) rather than to the LCOE of dispatchable sources such as fossil fuels or geothermal. LACE is the avoided costs from other sources divided by the annual yearly output of the non-dispatchable source.[example needed] The EIA hypothesized that fluctuating power sources might not avoid capital and maintenance costs of backup dispatchable sources. The ratio of LACE to LCOE is referred to as the value-cost ratio. When LACE (value) is greater than LCOE (cost), then value-cost ratio is greater than 1, and the project is considered economically feasible.[8]”
“…the US Energy Information Administration recommended[7]” next comment
70
“…the US Energy Information Administration recommended[7]”
[7] US Energy Information Administration, Levelized Cost and Levelized Avoided Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2014, April 2014.
Levelized Cost and Levelized Avoided Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2014
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/archive/aeo14/pdf/electricity_generation_2014.pdf
40
>”The ratio of LACE to LCOE is referred to as the value-cost ratio. When LACE (value) is greater than LCOE (cost), then value-cost ratio is greater than 1, and the project is considered economically feasible.[8]”
From Paul Homewood’s analysis:
$97.64/MWh LCOE cost
$57.80/MWh LACE value
Value-cost ratio: 57.80/97.64 = 0.59
Less than 1 so project NOT economically feasible according to [8]”
[8] EIA 2021 Levelized Costs of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2021
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_generation.pdf
Page 11:
“…the value-cost ratio (the ratio of LACE-to-LCOE or LACE-to-LCOS) provides a reasonable point of comparison of first- order economic competitiveness among a wider variety of technologies than is possible using LCOE, LCOS, or LACE tables individually. In Tables 4a and 4b, a value index of less than one indicates that the cost of the marginal new unit of capacity exceeds its value to the system, and a value-cost ratio greater than one indicates that the marginal new unit brings in value higher than its cost by displacing more expensive generation and capacity options.”
Simon #1 >The marginal price is generally cost plus the most expensive supplier”
It is the VALUE, or not, of that marginal unit to the system as returned from the value-cost ratio that is the economic consideration.
70
Make that – “Paul was all over this [7] years and 4+ months ago”
30
The LCOE costing method has already been disavowed by energy think-tanks such as IEA, IEEJ, OECD and EIA, with the EIA pointing out that the LCOE method is “incomplete”.
It is very unfortunate that Aurecon, CSIRO and AEMO continue to use LCOE instead of FCOE to advise the Australian govt.
50
Simon, that is totally Ignorant.
Essentially, you are saying that: If others pay for transmission lines, subsidize intermittency, pay for power that isn’t needed, back up the promised power when it doesn’t happen at no cost, ignore the parasitic costs, ignore the disposal costs, ignore the FCAS costs, then after all that ignorance, Wind and Solar are ‘cheaper’.
Wow. That’s some kind of stupid.
Electric rates were 50% cheaper before the magic of Renewables.
How about the Renewables Crowd pay their own way, instead of subsidizing their inefficient insolvent imaginary illusions upon the backs of the People?
You got no traction here and you know it. If you don’t know it, you’re either daft or stupid. If you do know it, you’re a thief, liar and troll.
Tell the truth, Simon. For once.
120
RUBBISH……………..
50
Well, you are right, but a teensy weensy bit more detail could be helpful.
40
The LCOE figures for wind and solar account solely for the cost of production when the wind or solar unit actually produces electricity, and not the cost of continuous production over the lifetime of the unit. The ‘cheaper cost’ for wind and solar needs to include the cost of providing an alternate source of power when the wind/solar unit is not generating. Unfortunately, wind and solar plants are being allowed to connect to the grids as standalone units, and it’s been the grid’s responsibility to deal with the intermittency of the resultant generation. Renewable generation needs to be held to the same reliability standard that conventional generation has been.
60
And a very short lifetime at that.
10
Jo, Simon’s argument is the nameplate for the intermittents industry. On the face of it he is correct. The sunk capital is irrelevant, as it’s an asset, and therefore the operating cost of actually producing the product from intermittents is very low. This is all good from an operator’s perspective. But that is their entire argument, apart from the CO2 nonsense which they know is nonsense, but it’s useful nonsense.
Here are a few things they choose not to discuss:
1. The capital cost of establishing intermittents is staggering. Think 4,000 windmills to replace Lidell over its lifetime, and then there’s transmission, land purchases, rehab, and the absolutely essential storage capacity, the cost of which will blind-side us like nothing ever has before. This is an enormous opportunity cost, in which the national treasure could have been invested in productivity but instead is PUTW (think men’s toilets).
2. Asset depreciation is a cost that must be covered. The more capital invested, the greater the depreciation. Never talked about, but I guarantee it’s factored into the market.
3. Uncertainty cost, which is what happens when you have constant supply disruptions and changes. How do you price such a product? You can’t, so the market fluctuates wildly like a cryptocurrency, and that comes at a an overall cost.
4. Product resilience is another cost factor. If the product doesn’t work as intended or is often broken, then it costs the end user, beyond payment for the product itself. So, if our electricity suddenly stops working, and often, then what is the cost of that to the consumer? Nobody cares about working that one out.
300
In relation to storage, how much have Australians already thrown away on rooftop solar, to (very partially) replace a wonderfully efficient base load grid supply?
190
“If the product doesn’t work as intended or is often broken, then …”.
That’s a no-brainer. If one wind turbine isn’t generating, just crank up the others.
/sarc
60
Malcolm Roberts, One Nation will be at the Bushman’s Bar (Widgee Showgrounds) tomorrow , Friday 5 pm to 7 pm to speak out about Anastasia’s latest “White Elephant” transmission lines running from the Woolooga Solar Farm eyesore, south through Widgee to her proposed new folly – the Borumba Dam Hydro Scheme 2.0. The total cost will no doubt be eye watering – the benefit to the consumer somewhere around zero!
80
We know, the sun doesn’t send an invoice…..
330
Nor does the coal field.
530
My words were the partly translation of a book from Franz Alt, a German oecologic journalist.
Sun and wind never send us an invoice –new energy –new jobs
And it was of course ironic… 😀
150
Exactly, Jo. Coal is free.
All you have to do is dig it out of the ground. (And, in contrast to the ruinables that receive subsidies, pay some hefty royalties.)
180
Don’t give them ideas.
90
Well too much coal generated power is not totally free.
As the pollution indices of Beijing and New Delhi will attest. Or for those with longer memories, the British midlands in the early 20th century.
However, the Green movement wants us to consider “total cost of ownership” in the existing system while ignoring it in their preferred alternative solutions.
Meanwhile there are locations where roof top solar installations make financial sense. Car parks for shopping areas to power the lights and heat pumps while sheltering the vehicles from rain and (sometimes) heat.
And given the ever increasing distribution network costs, the home roof top.
And a question that needs research is – if the costs of energy for aluminium smelters and steel arc furnaces were removed from the grid, what would the requirements be? And what would the “fall out” from depending on other locations for those functions be?
15
Perhaps the downvoters could answer my questions?
Cheap energy is what gives an economy traction. Someone could enquire about this with the Chinese government?
Anyway I would much rather see a gas fired grid than coal simply because it is less polluting and is able to be started and stopped faster (which is likely to be a very big plus on the deliverance of stable grid power).
Solar electricity generation is by far best suited for the local deliverance of power, requiring no serious distribution and allowing the owners to avoid the overhead costs of large companies and the ever increasing costs of “oversight and regulation”. While there may be locations where farming the sun would seem to enjoy “enhanced efficiencies” those pesky power lines do seem to attract a lot of antagonism and have yet to be built. BTW I have a 130KV (approximate) line in my back paddock almost assuredly powered by coal and gas. Yes the house was (re)built as a Faraday cage.
Wind power? Perhaps the companies proving electricity to those islands just north of Tasmania could talk with Western Power about effective microgrids?
12
Pity a cost of grid integration wasn’t done for Australia, like it was for Vietnam.
https://i.ibb.co/VjtRrHP/VRE-Inegration-costs.jpg
Ignorant people might then understand the problems.
270
That’s a good layout of costs on that diagram.
Unfortunately Vietnam has still suffered the blight of wind turbines and solar “farms” and hasn’t escaped the consequences.
You can “know” the truth but there are often more important issues.
$$
120
The other problem with a high penetration of wind and solar, is of course, that on a windless night… THERE IS NO ELECTRICITY!
Now.. I dare you, next windless night, to turn off your electricity at the mains…
But you won’t, because you KNOW that you cannot exist without the dispatchable reliability of fossil fuels.
That would be rank HYPOCRISY!
430
It’s another mathematics problem, like the discussion from a few weeks ago about whether 2+2=5. The believers in the free green energy seem to think you can double the capacity of wind and solar generators and get double the amount of the free electricity produced. However in the real world, double nothing is still nothing.
200
Simon, who taught you that?
See #4.
150
Simon, in case you hadn’t noticed, the price of gas has crashed $9.50 peak to $2.50 approx.
Let’s test your theory and see if this feeds through proportionally to electricity costs in due course.
290
Wow, keeping a straight face while saying that? Like a famous South African Rugby player told the opposition in the 30’s when he was told how useless their rugby was: “Looks at the score board”, in this case the graphs above. Facts don’t care about your feelings and beliefs.
100
Is the price I pay the “marginal price”? If not, your analysis is an exercise in futility.
120
“most of the cost is in the development of the underlying infrastructure.”
Sure? And who pays for that? We do. How do we pay? It is buried in our electricity prices via the Renewable Energy(Electricity) Act 2001. So called investors are actually parasites. We pay and they get to own. Sweet.
We have paid up to $6Billion a year inside our electricity prices to buy solar panels and windmills for third parties while making fossil fuel suppliers second class citizens who earn half the money when they are already established and had no such costs.
Now our electricity supply is paid by the consumers but we don’t own it.
If the RET (the above Act) which is illegal in its conception was repealed, electricity costs would halve overnight. We would then have to deal with the fact that foreigners own our free wind and free solar and can charge what they please.
170
Gas prices are only high because the west has dramatically reduced production and in many cases banned extraction and further exploration. Our own gas supply is in freefall, all due to left wing ideologically driven policies, especially in Victoria where Andrews has gone full climate woke, and we’re now forecast to have a severe gas shortage within 12 months. The situation unravelling is crazy in a country where we have gas, coal and oil reserves for hundreds of years and large nuclear reserves which are banned for local use.
160
Yes, it is a complete mystery. Another LayBore Federal Guv’ment Broken Promise on reducing Power prices.
220
It is not in the best financial interest for both governments and power companies to reduce power prices. The higher the rates, the more revenue they make. Both governments and power companies want power prices to be as high as they can get them. They are in bed together on this.
140
Australian renewable energy transition. Part 3
by Chris Morris and Planning Engineer (Russ Schussler)
https://judithcurry.com/2023/03/14/australian-renewable-energy-transition-part-3/#more-29837
Part 1 covered renewables impacts so far on the major power system in Australia: https://judithcurry.com/2023/03/02/australian-renewables-integration-part-1/
Part 2 covered how the renewables hype doesn’t match the reality: https://judithcurry.com/2023/03/08/australian-renewables-integration-part-2/
150
Wind and Solar drive the price. When you don’t have them, price goes very high because demand has little elasticity. You have to have supply capacity for every 30 minute price slot. Wind and solar must have 100% reliable backup. Then you ask, why do you need wind and solar at all.
Governments subsidies and regulations distort the pricing mechanism. You don’t know the real costs of the production.
530
As ever was so!
130
Great article
121
Is that the “real” PF?
130
I agree, its strong and should be picked up by the MSM.
140
I can confirm this is the account of Peter Fitzroy but is also the identical response his previous comment was two days ago. Is Peter running a test?
Given his other hostile and strangely inane responses, we have to doubt the sincerity.
50
Jo, post this on MSM mastheads.
They should love it.
150
The abuse of trust involved in this “renewables” deception is beyond belief.
The Political Class has taken our trust and finally reached an end point we didn’t vote for; total subservience, dysfunctional industry, massive national debt and an education system that stopped working completely three years ago.
We are in the middle of a gigantic swamp with no land in sight and no way out.
Leadership is abusing us.
440
We are being ‘gaslighted’.
120
Promises, promises, promises. For years Australians have been told how wind and and solar will create jobs and lower prices, choose green, save the planet! Information on grants of public money. Typical lies not “misinformation” from our politicians. How about governments in this country publish real costs, real information on government grants that fund this impossibly expense foray into national stupidity. I think the jobs are in China and its cohorts and as for saving the planet, a proper photographic report on what happens to the parts of the planet that has the mining in rare to “prove” we are trying to save it.
330
Yes Dave. If the sheeple were to know the truth about clean, green renewables and where the money goes they would vote against them every time. I blame John Howard for starting this rubbish and every government since for making it worse. The biggest contributors to our current position is without doubt the MSM that has allowed the lies to go unchallenged and that have failed miserably to give their readers and viewers the facts. They became propagandists and have destroyed faith in the media. Fortunately along came the internet and small publishers like Jo here to spread the truth. Outlets like WUWT and Gateway Pundit are winning support and a following. It is up to us as readers to tell others what the facts are, to laugh at Chris Bowen and Matt Kean and to send information to our politicians. David Gillespie is a pro nuclear member of Parliament and knows the value of coal generation and I keep him informed of latest finding here and elsewhere.
In the coming state election I will be voting for a National in the Legislative Assembly (Lower House) and One Nation in the Upper House ( Legislative Council).
290
Howard was also responsible for giving away much of Australia’s gas supplies on a bizarre 30 year contract and the clowns who wrote the contract, by incompetence or more likely design, failed to include any provision for market prices or inflation.
The Chicomms now get Australian gas at world’s cheapest prices. Not just cheap, it’s almost free.
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/how-australia-blew-its-future-gas-supplies-20170928-gyqg0f.html
150
“The biggest contributors to our current position is without doubt the MSM that has allowed the lies to go unchallenged ”
They’re quick enough when they’re challenged.. Fairfax papers have been running a “Promote war with China” series, and the ABC got into them about it. The SMH editor took to the typewriter to personally defend their propaganda-
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/we-are-not-above-criticism-but-these-attacks-go-too-far-20230315-p5cscr.html?js-chunk-not-found-refresh=true
“Defence Minister Richard Marles summed up the situation well on Wednesday by saying we live in the most strategically complex and threatening period to exist since the end of World War II.”
Sooo.. what did they say about Korea?? ..and then Vietnam? Just little incidents that were not threatening? Why were we there?
80
The wind might be “free” but it costs an enormous amount of money to collect it.
Just ask any sail boat owner.
And it comes at random and therefore highly undesirable. Sailors of yore dreaded being becalmed in The Doldrums or elsewhere. The superstition was that if you whistled it would bring a breeze. At least it prob ably gave sailors something to do to prevent madness.
Today, due to the the random and diffuse nature of the wind, there is no practical commercial use for sailboats and hasn’t been since the mid to late nineteenth century when steam power was adopted.
400
Notice how they blame the energy price crisis on the war, a fake excuse. It saved the a Democrat’s in the midterm elections.
421
That’s probably why Biden allowed the war to happen and encourages it. It’s a good all-purpose diversion onto which all his* policy failures can be blamed.
Ukraine wouldn’t have been invaded under Trump’s Presidency.
*When I say “his”, I know he is incapable of independent thought or action, it’s just shorthand to save having to say that he is told what to “think” and do by others.
140
I understood that the Red wave was thwarted by the three Mcs. McConnell, Rhonda McDaniel and Kevin McCarthy
70
This is a clear example of stupid. Capex on poles and wires and fake power from windmills is not going to lower electricity prices. Free money promotes mistrust in government and attracts spivs who use young and dumb as believers in stupid. Such schemes inevitably cause massive inflation driven by energy costs (there is energy in everything), sharp rises in interest rates and a collapse in the existing bond price stripping out bank capital. The bubble is bursting on the Renewable Titanic. There are plenty of free deck chairs and the orchestra is playing a jolly tune. The bond iceberg is even now ripping the guts out of the lower deck.
If you are over 60 you have seen all this before. We were told that new regulations would prevent the next melt down. Bull. Nothing negates greed. The only way of tempering greed is competition, not regulation.
300
The modern socialists are just repeating what the National Socialists tried and failed at.
Rupert Darwall wrote:
Where have we heard that last sentence before?
National Socialist inventor Dr Franz Lawaszeck wrote:
Where have we heard that before?
And National Socialist engineer Hermann Honnef wrote:
Where have we heard that before?
References:
-Rupert Darwall “Green Tyranny: Exposing the Totalitarian Roots of the Climate Industrial Complex”
-http://en.friends-against-wind.org/realities/how-renewables-and-the-global-warming-industry-are-literally-hitler
300
‘The surplus electricity from the windmills, situated along the sea coast, will be used for the production of very inexpensive hydrogen.’
And here is where we should look for those who reap benefit from the next ‘Great Idea’. They have already moved to the idea of hydrogen as a store of energy having left a trail of wreckage both capital and operational in their wake. Same names and same enthusiasm for the next ‘new’ (insert previously abandoned) technology.
90
Wind might be “free” but the more we get, the more we pay.
It’s like “free stuff” (sic) from government, beloved by socialists. The more you get, the more taxes you pay.
250
https://jackdevanney.substack.com/p/nuclear-and-windsolar?utm_campaign=post&fbclid=IwAR1vyxWMSEo25Ahwf19SWkEa6jp2yzM4yMC8UqOHDlVJ5Vg-FN_79Kpm7eU
50
Electricity generated from solar and wind is not “free”, it requires investment in generators and the network, and investors seek a return on their investments. (some of that has come through the imposition of the renewable energy targets requiring retailers to buy this electricity when available).
But consider this: Across the AEMO grid last night at 7.30pm, solar delivered just 5 MW from a nameplate capacity of 20,000 MW, wind delivered just 1,600 MW from a nameplate capacity of 10,000 MW. Oh, and the “big batteries” delivered 100 MW.
What kept the lights on? Hydro 3,900 MW, gas 4,000 MW and coal 17,100 MW
Yet all those assets were largely on standby during the day – what a waste of resources.
At 12noon, solar 14,900 MW, wind 800 MW, hydro 800 MW, gas 500 MW, coal 12,100 MW.
Jo, as you say, solar and wind are parasites, eating away at the economic foundations of reliable, dispatchable generators.
240
As with all globalist UN and WEF schemes, you can be certain that Australia will be the most fanatical adopter of all nations.
The Lib/Lab Uniparty is absolutely committed to more of this madness, even while other countries take coal power stations out of mothballs. Of course, that can’t happen in Australia, we destroy our proper power stations as spectacular media events as soon as they are removed from service.
210
The Germans were more far-sighted in that they “moth balled” their coal-fired plants. So they were able to restart them.
14 coal-fired power plants were put back into operation, supplying 33.3% of the electricity fed into the grid in Germany (up from 25%).
Wind energy, despite having a high level of installed capacity, supplied just 24.1 percent, followed by solar with 10.6 percent.
Nuclear power’s share halved in 2022, accounting for only 6.4 percent of the electricity fed into the grid.
And there were times when wind energy dropped to a very low level.
100
Just as socialists are just one more execution away from Utopia, so too, are they just one more wind subsidy farm away from Energy Utopia.
200
At least Labor can now ‘claim’ that they have saved households $275, by implementing price controls over gas.
Oh … how I wish I could include ‘sarc off’ tabs.
130
UK politicians keep telling us we can save a few hundred quid a year on the electricity their policies made 6 times more expensive by spending £30k insulating our houses ‘properly’. Save????? Hmmmmmmmm.
90
How about albipromise?
60
“Oh … how I wish I could include ‘sarc off’ tabs”.
On most input devices (mine is a Logitech keyboard and MS Windows) there is a key combination** that will bring up a dozen emojis. I pick a laughing face. 🤣
** Windows and period keys
50
W & S + batteries are TOXIC parasites and can never generate BASE-LOAD energy and a new grid has to be built to link the entire SCATTERED TOXIC mess.
We should be building new Coal, Gas or Nuclear plants because they are cheap, reliable and BASE-LOAD or 24/7, DAY or NIGHT, WINTER or SUMMER and RAIN or SHINE.
W & S are TOXIC because they foul the countryside and the entire mess has to be buried in LANDFILL every 20 years, or sometimes 15 years. Then you have to start all over AGAIN.
They are definitely NOT CLEAN or GREEN and the necessary inputs are purchased from Chinese slave Labour Gulags and from the vilest child labour areas like the Congo etc in Africa.
And when you add up the TOXIC turnover every 20 years the so called saving on co2 emissions would be very small.
OH and the TOXIC wind power to be built in the sea has a much shorter lifespan of about 15 years.
150
Senator Matthew Canavan posted this on 9th March 2020.
===
Last week at Senate estimates, it was revealed that an average wind turbine could expect to receive $600,000 a year in payments from the government imposed Renewable Energy Target. This is funded from your power bills.
A few people have asked me to explain how this works so if you’re interested here’s what happens.
The Renewable Energy Target is a government scheme that requires companies that generate electricity to buy a prescribed amount of “Renewable Energy Certificates” or RECs every year. Because they have to buy these certificates from renewable energy producers (like wind turbines) these certificates become valuable.
Every megawatt hour that a wind turbine generates earns 1 certificate or 1 REC. At Senate estimates last week, the Clean Energy Regulator confirmed that 1 REC is valued at about $35 at the moment.
The Clean Energy Regulator also confirmed that a modern wind turbine has a capacity rating of 5 megawatts. That means that each hour that the wind turbine is working it produces 5 megawatts. There are 8760 hours in a year so in theory the wind turbine could generate 8760 x 5 = 43,800 megawatts a year.
Wind turbines don’t run all the time. The Clean Energy Regulator claimed they run about 40% of the time. So that means on average the wind turbine would produce 43,800 x 40% = 17,520 megawatts a year.
Remember that means that the owner of the wind turbines will receive 17,520 certificates a year and each of these are valued at $35 each. So all up the turbine in an average year gets 17,520 x $35 = $613,200.
Over $600,000 a year then gets paid to a wind turbine through this scheme. The costs of this get hidden in your bill. And, the owner of the wind turbines get paid whatever the price of electricity is at the time ON TOP of these payments.
The Renewable Energy Target has been running since 2010 and over that time wholesale electricity prices have almost tripled, increasing by an average of 180 per cent across the National Electricity Market. The force feeding of intermittent renewables into our electricity grid has been an unmitigated disaster. Fortunately, the Renewable Energy Target closes this year for new entrants but payments will continue for another 10 years for those that have been registered beforehand.
For the last year on record the costs imposed on your power bills were valued at just $2 billion. Next time you drive past a row of wind turbines, remember that if there is 10 of them in a row, the owner of those turbines is getting a cool $6 million a year from your power bills. Not bad work if you can get it!
370
Yes David and Matt is a very good Qld Senator and always provides the hidden facts, unlike the Labor and Greens loonies.
In this linked article he states that our power prices are very high because we don’t use our own resources and instead rely on unreliable, expensive, TOXIC W & S rubbish.
We have very cheap Coal and Gas but the fanatics want to close them down and force us to use very expensive, parasitic W & S instead.
https://www.mattcanavan.com.au/if_renewables_are_so_cheap_why_are_prices_going_up
180
“Fortunately, the Renewable Energy Target closes this year for new entrants but payments will continue for another 10 years for those that have been registered beforehand”. If Tony Abbott had had his way the RET would have been closed down quicker and those “green certificates” ( subsidies) tapered for existing beneficiaries. We’ve been subsidising wind now for at least 20 years, it’s time to stop.
140
Ross:
And the joke is that if we ever got over 50% renewables then the value of “green certificates” would collapse – a bigger supply than the demand.
90
Do not forget that it was Clive Palmer in association with Al Gore who “protected” the RET.
How did Al Gore get to be determining Australian government policy?
40
So with more than 4000 wind turbines on the “National” grid, that’s $2.4bn in subsidies annually, for a start.
20
The biggest mistake was, #1 NEM. #2 to subsidise, with Tax incentives, the construction/manufacture of equipment to capture rays and wind #3 then subsidising its use with “feed-in” tariffs. The whole thing has been a colossal balls-up! Not that dissimilar to the dumb act of making free water a commodity.
120
A rare win for rational thinkers.
https://www.cfact.org/2023/03/11/illinois-town-nixes-solar-desert/
Illinois town nixes solar desert
By Bonner Cohen, Ph. D. |March 11th, 2023|99 Comments
In a stunning setback for solar, the City of Pontiac, Illinois has scuttled plans to construct a solar energy project that would transform a vacant lot in town into a shiny solar desert.
SEE LINK FOR REST
140
AGAIN the King island generator is about 80% diesel this morning and W & S hopeless and the battery is flat.
But Flinders island is better for wind and solar is very little use and very low battery.
But Diesel was still operating when I last checked.
https://www.hydro.com.au/clean-energy/hybrid-energy-solutions/success-stories/king-island
90
Fossil fuels save the day…again!
100
If they were truthful, TasHydro would acknowledge that the only benefit of the alternative energy generators is they reduce the cost of diesel fuel used. Whether this is economic is another matter altogether.
70
I am in northern Tasmania this week. They do not have smart meters here so still have meter readers. The meter reader came in yesterday to record the numbers and we had a chat about electricity and solar panels.
He told me he bought a house two years ago that has solar panels. His largest bill over the two years was $15 and he often gets a credit. He had not checked the balance over a year but felt his sole panels made money.
It would be interesting to see who is actually paying more for electricity now than 20 years ago. Prices have gone up but there are a lot of people on the gravy train now.
Solar panels in Tasmania are an economic proposition because they conserve perched water, which is the key issue for Tassie Hydro.
91
“ he bought a house two years ago that has solar panels.
The cost of those would now be included in the selling price of the house.
{I would not buy it.}
So, if he paid 30,000 dollars for the solar installation, he needs to consider that as part of his electrical bill. One needs an accountant to figure this out for a month or a year.
Then there is the “opportunity cost” he may want to contemplate.
80
Rick: “It would be interesting to see who is actually paying more for electricity now than 20 years ago.”
I am. I’m paying for other people’s solar panels. Everyone without solar is. We know exactly which householders are paying more, just look at their roof. But you know that?
60
The question should be, when he is getting these credits, who is paying for the power?
30
The opportunity cost can add around one third additional cost over a 10-year period.
10
What???
20
Increases in electricity prices can probably be afforded by the bulk of Australian households. For some it will be tough but most can maybe economise in other spending to make do. However, my worry is industry. I’m not talking the big end of town, I’m talking about the small to mid size businesses constructing all manner of products and use bulk power. Plus, all other enterprises using power for production, even agriculture. It’s going to hit them big time. That probably means closing of business, reduced production and then loss of jobs where those industries are price takers. Loss of jobs for future Australians. The governments can do all sorts of deals for the likes of Alcoa ( aluminium production), VIVA energy (fuel refinery) but for Mum and Pop Joinery, no way. There’s too many of them. You cant have a model that increases power prices ( via subsidies ) and then subsidises businesses to then reduce the effect of those higher power prices. That’s crazy. But then again, Chris Bowen thinks solar panels contain lithium and told us the boats couldn’t be turned back, so anything’s possible with that bloke.
130
Electricity and heating bills have increased drastically over 2022 (87% electricity, 162% gas in one account).
SME business bankruptcies have increased a lot over 2022 in the EU.
I wonder if there is some connection.
90
There is no question that households are suffering and many can no longer afford to keep cool or especially keep warm in the southern states.
To say a bulk of households can still afford some of the world’s most expensive electricity is something I’d expect a “green”, a politician or an Elite to say. Many can’t! They suffer. I know this as I do a lot of charity work as a volunteer.
Apart from that small businesses and all businesses are suffering.
130
Am I right in saying the true cost of renewables is only partly reflected in the high prices to consumers. On top of this billions of dollars are paid to various suppliers and consumers by way of subsidies and assistance which should be divided by the number of taxpayers and added to the cost. I suspect the real additional cost is probably 50% higher if the hidden taxes and subsidies are included. This is a disaster.
130
AGAIN we should all understand that their so called dangerous CC is definitely BS and nonsense.
Even the UN IPCC tells us that UNMITIGATED CC would reduce the wealth of the average person by just 0.02%. This would be the cost in 2100 for everyone if we do NOTHING NOW.
IOW if they’re about 4.4 times RICHER in 2100 they won’t miss ZIP.
Here’s Lomborg’s article quote and we should WAKE UP to the BS we’re fed by loony pollies, religious fanatics, the MSM etc before it’s too late.
“This is the standard alarmist media account, reinforced by politicians claiming climate to be an “existential threat.” But the UN Climate Panel does not support such alarmism. It confirms that climate is a problem, but impacts are far from cataclysmic. In its latest report, it finds that the damage from unmitigated climate change will cost the world 2.6 per cent of GDP by 2100. By then, the UN expects the average person to be 450 per cent as rich as today. Negative climate impacts mean we will only be 438 per cent as rich.” End of Lomborg’s quote.
90
Sorry here’s the link to Lomborg’s Financial Post article and see 5th paragraph for my linked quote.
Can Jo or anyone dispute what Lomborg is stating or 4.5 reduced to 4.38. I’m certainly NOT a Maths whiz, I’m just asking.
https://financialpost.com/opinion/bjorn-lomborg-make-climate-policy-in-legislatures-not-courts
70
450x(1-2.6%) = 450×0.974 = 438…
What were you asking? To verify the above calculation, or that we will be better off by a factor of 4.5 in wealth, or that the estimate of 2.6% is correct?
If inflation in the USA continues along at 6% per annum we aren’t going to be any better off at any time in the future as our savings and retirement incomes will be eroded away. At 6% reduction in purchasing power per annum, and nominal rates of return on retirement savings earning 3-5%, then the real growth of retirement savings is in the range of -1% to -3% per annum. Yes minus returns…
This has not tumbled for most people as yet. However, we need somewhat higher interest rates (or more sane fiscal/monetary policy) to combat inflation, but doing so threatens the rickety banking system grown fat and stupid with near zero interest rates for 15 years.
40
In Vicdanistan they are “giving” away a taxpayer subsidy of $250 to every domestic consumer who pays an electricity bill. Paid for by….the taxpayer.
Yes, it really is that insane.
But most of the Sheeple are too stupid and clueless to know that the “free stuff” Comrade Dictator Dan gives them comes out of their very own pockets.
They were stupid enough to vote him in a third time.
https://www.energy.gov.au/rebates/power-saving-bonus-all-victorian-households
130
About a year ago I heard part of a segment on an ABC Radio outlet in which some solar farm developers in the NT were complaining that they weren’t being allowed to sell their power into the NT grid (on the grounds that the power they proposed to supply was unreliable and inconsistent and would de-stabilise the grid). This seemed to me at the time to be a rare example of common sense prevailing. Does anyone have any info on how the NT grid is managed with respect to admitting unreliable power supplies into it, and whether common sense is still prevailing up there? A lesson for other parts of the Nation, perhaps?
90
They have very few generators and mostly not interconnected on a grid as population is small and widely dispersed.
They cannot afford instability with so few indeoendent generators.
https://territorygeneration.com.au/about-us/our-power-stations/
80
Nick, in Broome, an even smaller grid than Darwin, they had to limit solar panels to 10% of total generation a few years ago as it threatened to surge the little grid.
https://joannenova.com.au/2017/10/only-10-of-people-allowed-to-use-solar-in-broome-wa-to-stop-grid-fluctuations/
2017
50
Do you have a figure for the NT’s average consumption?
30
ABC Radio covered this in an approved manner yesterday:
1. War in Ukraine
2. High gas and coal prices.
You see, renewables are the answer and Bowen is the Messiah.
60
Like most people here, I often wonder how this suicidal RE transition endeavour will end, but now it’s becoming clearer as the process unravels. The move to RE caused deindustrialisation and very high energy prices in the west and that’s lead to soaring inflation and created large government debts. In the latest phase of the transition we see company profits and markets fall and now a run on the banks has started as it becomes clear that money printing can only last so long before the subsequent inflation kills bond yields. To counter the inflation, governments are now providing subsidies (ie: welfare) to lower paid people to counter the negative effects of their energy transition policies, but because they can’t print or borrow more money, they are now looking to raid the savings of workers that put more aside for later. This will cause people to liquidate assets, such as withdrawing bank accounts or super funds or selling their investment properties to avoid taxes, and stashing the cash under the mattress.
Unless our leaders have a revelation, the next phase of the transition will be company collapses due to unaffordable energy and continued inflation, along with rapidly rising unemployment, rapidly falling government revenues, rapidly falling property prices and a big collapse of the markets. At this point we see domestic banks start to go under and the government could possibly ban or severely restrict cash to prevent a total overnight collapse, but this is where the transition to the new RE economy of net zero begins. This is where we all try and survive with no money, no food, no energy and no economy.
110
Oh Serge, what a bleak picture you paint. I truly hope you are wrong, but I agree with every word.
80
The last chart – Electricity prices in Australia were falling for 40 years, then we added renewables… – says it all. Beyond argument. Brilliant.
110
This tells me that inflation will be going higher and so will interest rates (the cash rate). Hold onto your hats people.
30
OT.. But which would be the best Australian coal company to buy shares in?
60
Whitehaven Coal.
60
Read very carefully what Joanne writes about the cost of renewables.
Now, in conjunction with that, read very carefully what David Maddison writes in Comment 20 about the ‘explainer’ from Senator Matt Canavan.
Okay, now read carefully what Simon writes in Comment 1.1.1.4 about how wind and solar are the cheapest forms of power generation.
Okay, they are getting free money not ever disclosed (Matt Canavan) and that is in ADDITION TO what they receive from their generated power.
Now, keep all of that in mind.
Let’s just look at New South Wales, because these power plants I mention are all in NSW.
The the total cost of the power plant needs to be recovered as part of the unit cost for electricity.
The total cost of the maintenance of the plant needs to be recovered as part of the unit cost for electricity.
The total cost of wages for the people working at the power plant needs to be recovered as part of the unit cost for electricity.
The total cost of the plant’s connection to the grid needs to be recovered as part of the unit cost for electricity.
So, all of those costs need to be recovered as part of the unit cost for electricity.
YESTERDAY, (and remember, this is just in NSW)
ONE ancient dinosaur decrepit 52 year old coal fired power plant, just ONE of them, the now soon to be closed down Liddell. It had three Units in operation. Those three Units, now coughing their last are running at literally half rat power, (literally) and only operating at 293MW each of their original 500MW, and their total Nameplate comes in at 880MW. They operated at that level across the whole day, so they delivered 21.12GWH of power. So, all that needs to be recovered here are all the costs associated with this one plant.
16 Wind plants with a total Nameplate of 3266MW.
32 Solar Plants with a total Nameplate of 2224MW.
So here we have FORTY EIGHT separate power plants with a total Nameplate of 5490MW, so 6.25 times the Nameplate of that coal fired plant. That’s 48 times part of the original cost, 48 times the maintenance, 48 times the wages, 48 times the grid connection.
Those costs are recovered in the Unit cost per MWH.
The total power generated across the whole day for Liddell was 21,120MWH
The total power generated across the whole day for ALL 48 Wind and Solar plants was 24,000MWH. (so just 13.63% more than THREE Units at ONE ancient coal fired plant.)
Oh, and add on the cost of the coal they burned. Hmm! Wait a minute, the plant owners also own the coal mine and all the coal in it, so the costs there would be so minor as to be insignificant for the 7200 tonnes of coal they burned across the day.
Please don’t even begin to try and tell me that wind and solar are cheaper than coal fired power.
Tony.
180
Read Uber’s comments earlier up at #1.
Good stuff.
60
I’m a simple guy.
Power was half the cost before the smart people tried to help me.
That’s my take on it. My bills prove it. The rest of the excuses don’t change things.
It ain’t me getting a benefit from them who tax me more for less. Tired of the liars and thieves.
160
“Australians invest billions in free wind and solar, but prices rise another 20-30%”.
One pleasant way to truly experience free wind and solar is down the beach on a breezy, sunny day. This natural freeby ends when we want electrical energy. That technology requires investment and research. These cost money and the cost has to be passed on to the consumer plus setting some capital aside for further improvements and a bit for reasonable capital return on investment. Sounds logical and fair no? No! That’s not how things have worked out for consumers. Instead of reaping the rewards of the oft promised cheap electrical energy from wind and sun, consumers are faced with the spectre of out of control energy costs dictated by the big-gov big-energy cartel which foists the exorbitant cost of electrical energy to helpless consumers. However It’s no mystery that our energy prices are rising by another 20 to 30%. We’re being overcharged and we’re being rorted.
50
Gas supplies running low just in time for winter.
‘East coast residents will be hit with huge electricity bill increases as authorities warn that dwindling gas supplies could plunge the market deeper into turmoil.’ (SMH)
40
“Net Zero” almost achieved in SA and Victoria!
“Before breakfast on Wed 15 March wind was delivering practically nothing in South Australia (5% of demand at 1.4% Capacity Factor). ”
“Wind power in Victoria (0.4% of demand at 0.7% Capacity Factor).”
Via Rafe Champion email
40
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Bowen is an absolute drop kick. How the hell he’s got to where he is is beyond me. The blatant lies telling us with a straight face that so called renewables will become cheaper and they all crap on about the so called energy mix . It’s only an energy mix when the sun’s shining and the wind is blowing.
Have a look at Europe they are going back to coal . You can’t blame Russia for our debacle here, it’s simple build a few clean coal power stations and get vicdanistan to start mining all the gas they have locked up ,get back to some cheap energy. Heaven knows we might make Australia competitive again in manufacturing or don’t you want to do that
50
Brett
“I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Bowen is an absolute drop kick.”
How about “an own goal”?
30
For some reason Australia has lost the political strength that normally had it refusing to bend the knee to any foreign demands. For some reason it bows to the pressure from the EU that it will suffer gross penalties if it doesn’t follow the extreme orders emanating to it from the EU.
Look at the current position of those EU countries. When the importation of huge amounts of oil and gas was exposed and the source shutdown, the EU and the UK couldn’t move fast enough to reopen the old fossil fuel energised power generators, build new ones in record time and import the fossil fuels from wherever they were available. The UK did the same and is moving to nuclear power asap, but utilising fossil fuel burners in the meantime. Not a lot of environmental activism got stirred into action when threat of lights going out became real.
Why does Australia not loudly criticise the hypocrisy of the EU/UN demands on it and our governments move accordingly to salvage our fossil fuel burners, build new ones on an interim basis if necessary and transition to nuclear.
In the USA, Biden is going to mine the Alaskan oil fields and told the environmentalists they can go jump.
Our government under a control of an ideologically manic Minister for Climate Change is paralysed from changing course. Bowen races ahead with what is now apparent to everyone to be an economy destroying, rapid people impoverishment exercise chasing renewables to the end. Warnings of lights out mean nothing to him. Labor is done at the next Federal election if this continues. Our governments don’t see what is now apparent from the EU, the home of AGW theory. It is done. Finished. Caput. The necessity for full and functional power systems in this period of wartime threat is taking precedence over all else. It’s just the politicians have to get their word manipulators to present the rationale of why the theory of AGW is dead and buried. Albanese better get the message real quick or his submarine building plans are also dead and buried.
30
I wonder if some of you more informed people could add comments about the proposed administration of the ‘new energy’ – if it’s anything like the disaster in South Africa, it’s goodbye to any sort of reliable power system/supply here too.
20