IFN and Batteries, page-87

Thank you for your post, jezyh, and your kind words to all.

This forum is very different from eg RenewEconomy and other renewable energy sites. They begin and end with the the assertion 'fossil fuel bad, renewables good' and look entirely at the macro picture. Here we consider how IFN can usefully and profitably evolve through an unprecedented energy revolution where sound strategy could deliver prosperity, while a misstep would bring disaster.

This is an entirely different perspective to those of government, engineers or climate activists.

May I ask your thoughts on a few of the propositions developed here. Some are idiosyncratically mine, others are shared:

1. The widest arbitrage or value uplift in the NEM is in shifting unsaleable off-peak intermittent wind generation to peak demand and pricing with batteries.

2. W + B gets two charge/discharge opportunities a day into peak pricing periods where S + B only gets one daylight charge opportunity. So, W + B, all else being equal, with generate double the revenue of S + B and run rings around it. This wears out the battery twice as fast, not necessarily a problem when battery prices are falling 18% a year.

3. Utility solar competes directly with price-insensitive, publicly-observable rooftop solar and is thus a far less attractive investment proposition than wind.

4. IFN's despatchable assets, Bonny Bess, Smithfield OCGT and the SA diesel plant, cap the cost to it of market purchases at ~$150Mw as it can use these instead.

You view with enthusiasm K2H's leading edge variable speed mechanicals and 16 second start up. A battery in the mix with Kidson's W + S + PH would provide near-instant full power and avoid the expense and complexity of variable speed. I appreciate engineers love innovation, yet a battery solution would neatly resolve intermittency and provide a range of other FCAS services while the PH can operate ON/OFF.

Best Wishes

Ash