May I offer a few corrections to your rose coloured, renewables investor vision ?
"Batteries ( energy storage actually ) has always been a critical component of a renewable energy grid."
That should be "energy storage or alternative 24/7/365 generation has always been a critical component of a renewable energy grid.
Grid batteries for the forseable future are a very low practical option but high on the renewables marketing agenda."
"What about the interconnectors ? You mean all the interconnectors that were built decades ago to enable the grid to be national ? The ones that were built to support the coal and gas industry ?"
Yes, done, dusted and adequate for the existing FF grid and power generation. Renewables now require additional connectors at additional costs. Nothing wrong with that as long as it is factored into the actual cost of renewables.
"The interconnectors that are going to enable surplus renewable energy to be utilised rather than curtailed thus making the system more efficient ?"
I'm glad you put a question mark on the end of that fantasy.
It's a classic example of the "best form of defense is attack" and typical of stuff that report writers have to claim when asked by politicians or "Corporate Managers" to justify a pre-determined course of action.
In other words .. fanciful rubbish and why government projects always run over time and over budget.
"What about the batteries ? What about the multiple power stations that were built to provide redundancy when units are off for months at a time ? What about all the gas peakers spread over the country to support slow moving coal ? Peakers are effectively batteries."
All that relates to provisions long since made for existing infrastructure and power generation. If additional provision is required for renewables ... which it certainly is, then that is part of the true cost of renewables.
"What about pumped hydro ? What about the existing pumped hydro that was built to give inefficient coal an overnight load ?"
Existing pumped hydro which is miniscule anywhere but in Tasmania was not built to give inefficient coal an overnight load.
That is nonsense.
"What about the Portand smelter that received ( and continues to receive ) subsidies for 25 years ?"
Please refer to the current scandal about government pork barrelling ... but on a much larger scale and to do with jobs, jobs, jobs, profits, profits, tax revenue.
Nothing to do with the merits of the source of power generation.
"You better get someone to explain to you how the grid actually works before you mouth off next time."
Oh, the irony ... classic.
.
