Baldy, you bragged about having a degree, I would guess its not in engineering!
You still have conveniently not commented on how we get the energy for the electrification of industry (and domestic) or the projected demand for EV's.
Seeing I am currently at LYP I can assure yore that LYA and LYB can go much below what they were today. LYB LYA 250 has been tested done to 200 MW reliably so between these two stations there was the capacity for reductions of another 600 MW and this is on a perfect day for renewables wind, solar and, unfortunately for some more hydro available than there has been for some time. Running at low loads causing damage is absolute BS by the way. Cycling up and down not good so perhaps we can use this nasty brown coal to pump up some storages. By the way they have things called bypasses that can bypass steam around the turbine. leaving the boiler firing consistent during load changes and this can provide even more flexibility, but they are not allowed to do this as it creates more greenhouse gases, but lets build a PHS instead because only uses "green" power,
I used 4 MW as just an example of how many turbines are required, yes new ones are large, in fact they are higher than the MCG is long. I know that 20 MW is being touted but how long will each take to install? A 200-meter-tall tower is not something you go out with a spanner and a screwdriver and bolt onto a pole. Remember the very thing that makes these locations favorable (wind) will create quite some construction difficulties.
By the way, don't believe government spin coming to elections, or consultant's report sponsored by the same, i know that figures are "enhanced" to paint a picture having been through that
. Have you seen that during the week the 9GW of wind turbine installed, until today, were very rarely above 3 GW in total and at time were less than 1? Average about 2. That is 3 continuous days of a capacity factor of 22%, yes at times it will be higher but we need enough storage to cover this and you know what I think about it.
The pumped hydro argument is pure physics, if you can generate energy for 8 hours at a rate, pumping it back will consume more energy for the same rate. So if it draws down it 8 hours it will take 8 hours, at an elevated energy rate to pump the same volume back (using the same equipment) up unless you believe in something akin to perpetual motion. But as suspected it will be fossil fuel pumping these things over long periods so its best to keep a lot of base load available. You do realise that if the proposed Qld PHS site goes ahead (which it wont by the way) if proposes that it can draw done at 2GW for 48 hours, it would need about 2.4 GW of excess generation consistently for 48 hours to replenish the storage, if not it would probably pump up the about 10% and then it would be a total white elephant, but we are building these things years before we can get enough renewable energy to actually make them useful., if ever.
The wind farm you mention was supposed to have started construction at the start of this year, on their website they say planning etc has been completed and construction will start in 12 months, so its already 20 months behind!!!!
Trouble is I am all for renewables, just not the BS, energy efficiency is very neglected. Every MW saved by efficiency is worth 20 MW of wind farms and believe me there are heaps of opportunities out there, but that unfortunately our economy is built on waste ie we must use more to build more. Load shifting where possible, and once again there are many opportunities here, is far better than building expensive white elephants as well.
And yes, the SEC revisited i am in favour of for the good of everyone but let's run it as an efficient business not as another government department.
Expand
(20min delay)