Next generation Porsche Macan will be full EV only.

[JWM]

1 hour ago, Coastr said:

Did you look at the Jag e-pace?  Or are they not out in Aus yet?

I tried to about a month (or maybe two) back and got blank stares from the Jag dealership when I asked to see one... Didn't have one and no clue when they would. They might be out by now but I'm not sure. In any event, I read a few things like the above that put me off them. 

To get totally off track, I actually ordered a Model 3 Performance, which I thought had more bang for the buck (3.4sec 0-100, yes please!) but she decided she didn't want to move away from an SUV... I wasn't keen on the base model and Performance Model X was too much $ for my liking...I just saw a GT3 on my side of the garage instead for those $s... 😁 Now just waiting for Elon to return my $3k...

Anyway, I guess that's enough of being a virtual signaller, EV considering, wanker... I hope we're all still comfortable with people discussing what petrol powered Porsches we are considering buying or have bought, or the forum will have to shut down... 🙄😂

[ArthurK]

10 hours ago, Redracn said:

A week of clouds in Melbourne which is common in winter may mean you can not drive your Porsche/VW/Audi and this is the problem with the unreliable intermittent power sources. You can not use some long term average number to determine if power will be available when needed. Wind has essentially been MIA these last few weeks and it is coal and gas doing the heavy lifting. Reality is that wind and sola require backup which is almost entirely fossil fuel. 

I'm not planning on just using solar for the use of an EV. We are currently export vs consumption positive for close to 10 months a year. We literally pay for roughly 2 months electricity. I can bank my export and use in down months from the grid or up the road from the Porsche centre charging station at a cost. As I said I'm no greenie with 4 cars in a 2 driver household, the thought of using my generation is better than giving it to the grid at half the price during the spring and summer months. Even during winter we produce roughly 1MW of power in June which is the worse month. 

7 hours ago, Redracn said:

A mega thread for virtue signalling EV buyers showing off their purchase or desire to purchase one also seems appropriate. 

 

 That's a bit of a rich and hypocritical comment in a Porsche forum 🤣

[Redracn]

59 minutes ago, ArthurK said:

I'm not planning on just using solar for the use of an EV. We are currently export vs consumption positive for close to 10 months a year. We literally pay for roughly 2 months electricity. I can bank my export and use in down months from the grid or up the road from the Porsche centre charging station at a cost. As I said I'm no greenie with 4 cars in a 2 driver household, the thought of using my generation is better than giving it to the grid at half the price during the spring and summer months. Even during winter we produce roughly 1MW of power in June which is the worse month. 

 That's a bit of a rich and hypocritical comment in a Porsche forum 🤣

I like it that people with sola panels and you seem to have a lot of them think that there is no cost in providing their backup for when the sun does not shine and that their unreliable sola electrons are of the same or greater value than reliable on demand ones . Sounds like you should be fully off grid to get a better idea of the true cost of a 24/7 reliable power supply. I assume when you say 1MW for June you mean 1MWh 

I get your point about showing off on a Porsche forum but hypocritical? I do not pretend EV are good for the environment or ignore child labour in third world countries mining the rare earth metals an EV requires or forget that the less well off help subsidise solar panels when I could easily pay full price.

Dont get me wrong, I am  not against EV as such just the invalid reasons for choosing them and having governments shove them down my throat. After all the more EV out there the more fuel for me to burn and I am doing my best to use as much as possible while I can.

 

[ArthurK]

45 minutes ago, Redracn said:

I like it that people with sola panels and you seem to have a lot of them think that there is no cost in providing their backup for when the sun does not shine and that their unreliable sola electrons are of the same or greater value than reliable on demand ones . Sounds like you should be fully off grid to get a better idea of the true cost of a 24/7 reliable power supply. I assume when you say 1MW for June you mean 1MWh 

How did you reach the conclusion that all people  with sola(r) panels don't value grid connection? My driver is purely economical nothing more nothing less. Got sick and tired of paying thousands of dollars a year for power. Prior to leaving for Singapore in 2015 we were paying  anything up to 12k a year for power. That's what I objected to, not the grid connection or the different value of electrons as you put it. You certainly went way off topic and target with your response.

Just like there is a place for ICE cars I also believe there is a place for EVs. Not going to bury my head in the sand and not look at an EV as a future purchase. After driving a number of them I can appreciate them and their future place. No-one is pushing it onto me I just think the tech is viable for my situation. 

[Sustenpass]

56 minutes ago, Redracn said:

 

Dont get me wrong, I am  not against EV as such just the invalid reasons for choosing them and having governments shove them down my throat.

 

 

Which Australian government is shoving EVs down our throat?  A lot of European cities are introducing extensive IC restrictions on driving into city centres, but that seems a very long way from political reality in this country.  I’ve seen bugger all political pressure to switch. 

Coal and gas get plenty of government support and subsidy in Aus, and I really don’t understand the need to be partisan about where the generation is coming from. There are plenty of very lucrative business opportunities in renewables also. Give them all an even playing field tax and subsidy-wise and let the market figure it out. 

My feeling is that getting the average Corolla buyer to transition into an EV over the next decade or two is more likely to prolong the internal combustion option for the enthusiast if anything. If overall fleet emissions drop substantially on the prosaic stuff that means more CO2 left in the kitty for the performance cars.

Australia is in a good position to power a lot of ‘boring’ things with renewables. It might be what keeps us in our fun stuff for longer than most.

 

 

[Redracn]

25 minutes ago, ArthurK said:

How did you reach the conclusion that all people  with sola(r) panels don't value grid connection? My driver is purely economical nothing more nothing less. Got sick and tired of paying thousands of dollars a year for power. Prior to leaving for Singapore in 2015 we were paying  anything up to 12k a year for power. That's what I objected to, not the grid connection or the different value of electrons as you put it. You certainly went way off topic and target with your response.

Just like there is a place for ICE cars I also believe there is a place for EVs. Not going to bury my head in the sand and not look at an EV as a future purchase. After driving a number of them I can appreciate them and their future place. No-one is pushing it onto me I just think the tech is viable for my situation. 

Someone with multiple cars including Porsche's complaining about high electricity prices and then using subsidies from those less fortunate to reduce their  cost is a bit rich.

Perhaps it is your very reaction to the price rise caused by others that is causing the price to rise even further. The RET is a major factor in this with the end result that only the well of can afford electricity.

The use of EV will drive the costs of electricity even higher. Hang on for a wild ride.

 

 

[Redracn]

5 minutes ago, Sustenpass said:

 

Which Australian government is shoving EVs down our throat?  A lot of European cities are introducing extensive IC restrictions on driving into city centres, but that seems a very long way from political reality in this country.  I’ve seen bugger all political pressure to switch. 

Coal and gas get plenty of government support and subsidy in Aus, and I really don’t understand the need to be partisan about where the generation is coming from. There are plenty of very lucrative business opportunities in renewables also. Give them all an even playing field tax and subsidy-wise and let the market figure it out. 

My feeling is that getting the average Corolla buyer to transition into an EV over the next decade or two is more likely to prolong the internal combustion option for the enthusiast if anything. If overall fleet emissions drop substantially on the prosaic stuff that means more CO2 left in the kitty for the performance cars.

Australia is in a good position to power a lot of ‘boring’ things with renewables. It might be what keeps us in our fun stuff for longer than most.

 

 

At this stage the shoving is not local but cars are not manufactured here so we are beholding to overseas manufactures who are at the mercy of much larger governments. What happens over there will absolutely affect us as in most of the future Porsche range being EV only. 

What subsidies do coal and gas get in Aus?  Yes an even playing field would be great but the RET (Renewable Energy Target) along with priority acces to the grid for wind and sola is far from a level playing field. Why should other forms of generation have to change their output  which comes at a cost to them which is passed onto us just because the wind blows harder or clouds come over. 

I agree 100% about more EV leaving more liquid fuel for performance cars but as far as CO2 budget while the EV are coal powered there is no real reduction. 

The current CO2 evaluation is a big con as it only looks at tailpipe emissions and not the actual mine to recycle emissions which are what actually matters. 

[Sustenpass]

3 minutes ago, Redracn said:

At this stage the shoving is not local but cars are not manufactured here so we are beholding to overseas manufactures who are at the mercy of much larger governments. What happens over there will absolutely affect us as in most of the future Porsche range being EV only. 

 

Sure, but that’s the reality. There are still plenty of low km IC Porsche available for us to drive wherever we choose. If you live in Europe, soon you won’t be able to drive your existing car into many town centres. I don’t actually need to buy a brand new 911 every three years. 

5 minutes ago, Redracn said:

 

What subsidies do coal and gas get in Aus?  Yes an even playing field would be great but the RET (Renewable Energy Target) along with priority acces to the grid for wind and sola is far from a level playing field. Why should other forms of generation have to change their output  which comes at a cost to them which is passed onto us just because the wind blows harder or clouds come over. I

It’s far too complicated to cover in a short forum post, but the coal and gas industry are very well looked after in this country in myriad ways. Don’t understand your ‘priority access’ comment. The free market is pricing renewables favourably over fossil fuels even without government intervention. Forget about the RET, the bigger problem for local power pricing has to do with export deals set a decade ago. Hence we pay more for the gas we produce than our international customers. 

The average low to middle income person was shafted royally, but not by the RET or renewable industry. It’s as a result of this that rapid take up of household solar by wealthier people has the potential to really fuck the poor. But it’s not the burgeoning renewable industry that created the problem. Bad short term deals were done by both sides of government, and the working class will pay the price.

15 minutes ago, Redracn said:

. 

The current CO2 evaluation is a big con as it only looks at tailpipe emissions and not the actual mine to recycle emissions which are what actually matters. 

I don’t think life-cycle assessments are favouring IC over EV. There are substantial problems with both approaches. You don’t buy your way into environmental salvation. Manufacturing more of anything, EV or IC is environmentally unhelpful.

I suspect there will be enough petrol and freedom left to enjoy this hobby, for our broad demographic here anyway. My observation of the younger generation is one with far less interest in cars and driving than ours.

You look to have a pretty special garage there @redracn, get out and spank them I say.

[Dave997S]

The biggest conspiracy about power usage is that home consumers have been convinced that their electricity usage is to blame for rising costs and impacts on the environment.

[ArthurK]

 

6 hours ago, Redracn said:

What subsidies do coal and gas get in Aus?  Yes an even playing field would be great but

You are right it isnt a level playing field and under the Fuel Tax Scheme the miners get roughly $7B this year alone - not bad for "no subsidies". Again way off topic on my EV position.

[Nick987]

9 hours ago, Sustenpass said:

 

Which Australian government is shoving EVs down our throat?  A lot of European cities are introducing extensive IC restrictions on driving into city centres, but that seems a very long way from political reality in this country.  I’ve seen bugger all political pressure to switch. 

Coal and gas get plenty of government support and subsidy in Aus, and I really don’t understand the need to be partisan about where the generation is coming from. There are plenty of very lucrative business opportunities in renewables also. Give them all an even playing field tax and subsidy-wise and let the market figure it out. 

My feeling is that getting the average Corolla buyer to transition into an EV over the next decade or two is more likely to prolong the internal combustion option for the enthusiast if anything. If overall fleet emissions drop substantially on the prosaic stuff that means more CO2 left in the kitty for the performance cars.

Australia is in a good position to power a lot of ‘boring’ things with renewables. It might be what keeps us in our fun stuff for longer than most.

 

 

Australia is in a good position to power a lot of ‘boring’ things with renewables?

Renewables don't work, are incredibly expensive and bad for the environment, so that's a no. If you want, for some reason, to reduce fossil fuel use then nuclear is currently the only viable option. 

[Sustenpass]

40 minutes ago, Nick987 said:

Australia is in a good position to power a lot of ‘boring’ things with renewables?

Renewables don't work, are incredibly expensive and bad for the environment, so that's a no. If you want, for some reason, to reduce fossil fuel use then nuclear is currently the only viable option. 

Interesting comment. 

I’m not on here to get into a big divisive argument, so will leave it at that.

[Redracn]

9 hours ago, Sustenpass said:

Sure, but that’s the reality. There are still plenty of low km IC Porsche available for us to drive wherever we choose. If you live in Europe, soon you won’t be able to drive your existing car into many town centres. I don’t actually need to buy a brand new 911 every three years. 

It’s far too complicated to cover in a short forum post, but the coal and gas industry are very well looked after in this country in myriad ways. Don’t understand your ‘priority access’ comment. The free market is pricing renewables favourably over fossil fuels even without government intervention. Forget about the RET, the bigger problem for local power pricing has to do with export deals set a decade ago. Hence we pay more for the gas we produce than our international customers. 

The average low to middle income person was shafted royally, but not by the RET or renewable industry. It’s as a result of this that rapid take up of household solar by wealthier people has the potential to really fuck the poor. But it’s not the burgeoning renewable industry that created the problem. Bad short term deals were done by both sides of government, and the working class will pay the price.

I don’t think life-cycle assessments are favouring IC over EV. There are substantial problems with both approaches. You don’t buy your way into environmental salvation. Manufacturing more of anything, EV or IC is environmentally unhelpful.

I suspect there will be enough petrol and freedom left to enjoy this hobby, for our broad demographic here anyway. My observation of the younger generation is one with far less interest in cars and driving than ours.

You look to have a pretty special garage there @redracn, get out and spank them I say.

I agree with a fair amount of what you say and yes I do drive all my cars a lot.

I don't think you understand how the RET works particularly in conjunction with solar and wind priority access to the grid. In eastern Aus the conventional generators bid to supply power. Typically coal would start at $40 then closed circuit gas say $70 then hydro $100 then open circuit gas $150 then diesel $300 and so on up to the legal max of $14,000 per mega what hour. The AEMO accepts these bids to supply until they have satisfied the expected demand which let's say was reached at $100. Then everybody gets the $100/MWh. If we had enough coal generation to cover the demand then it would be $40/MWh. Wind and large scale sola also get the final price ($100) but also get about another $90 on top of the wholesale price thanks to the RET. Now it gets interesting as the grid must accept all power generated by wind and sola which could be practically nothing or even 100% as can happen is SA. This is the priority access they have so the AMEO tells some of the traditional generators to take a hike or produce less power. These traditional suppliers have costs and need to increase prices to cover them so they do so. The wind generators and large scale solar get even more money and benefit from a problem they caused. Not only are we being forced to pay for an inferior product that has a random supply but we are being forced to pay more for it. And then of course to really make coal less viable Dan the man doubles the royalties on coal to help pay for rooftop solar. It makes no sense for coal used for domestic electricity generation to have any royalties at all.

Export deals for gas have only become an issue due to the closing of coal power plants and no conventional exploration or fracking for gas in VIC a problem entirely caused by politicians. 

If by enjoy you mean at 80kh then yes as in VIC there is currently a push to reduce all C roads and below to 80 and it is the C roads that are the most fun.

3 hours ago, ArthurK said:

 

You are right it isnt a level playing field and under the Fuel Tax Scheme the miners get roughly $7B this year alone - not bad for "no subsidies". Again way off topic on my EV position.

All users of diesel fuel that is not used on road can claim the excise back. This includes farmers, miners etc. I guess you think that claiming expenses incurred in earning an income are subsidies?

If you use petrol or diesel for domestic power generation you can also claim back the excise on your tax return. Now there's a though for recharging your future Porsche EV at home. (on Topic)

[Nick987]

12 minutes ago, Redracn said:

I agree with a fair amount of what you say and yes I do drive all my cars a lot.

I don't think you understand how the RET works particularly in conjunction with solar and wind priority access to the grid. In eastern Aus the conventional generators bid to supply power. Typically coal would start at $40 then closed circuit gas say $70 then hydro $100 then open circuit gas $150 then diesel $300 and so on up to the legal max of $14,000 per mega what hour. The AEMO accepts these bids to supply until they have satisfied the expected demand which let's say was reached at $100. Then everybody gets the $100/MWh. If we had enough coal generation to cover the demand then it would be $40/MWh. Wind and large scale sola also get the final price ($100) but also get about another $90 on top of the wholesale price thanks to the RET. Now it gets interesting as the grid must accept all power generated by wind and sola which could be practically nothing or even 100% as can happen is SA. This is the priority access they have so the AMEO tells some of the traditional generators to take a hike or produce less power. These traditional suppliers have costs and need to increase prices to cover them so they do so. The wind generators and large scale solar get even more money and benefit from a problem they caused. Not only are we being forced to pay for an inferior product that has a random supply but we are being forced to pay more for it. And then of course to really make coal less viable Dan the man doubles the royalties on coal to help pay for rooftop solar. It makes no sense for coal used for domestic electricity generation to have any royalties at all.

Export deals for gas have only become an issue due to the closing of coal power plants and no conventional exploration or fracking for gas in VIC a problem entirely caused by politicians. 

If by enjoy you mean at 80kh then yes as in VIC there is currently a push to reduce all C roads and below to 80 and it is the C roads that are the most fun.

It's amazing that people actually believe that renewables are cheap and keep voting for more of them. In an actual free market there would be no renewables apart from solar hot water which actually does make sense. I guess it's going to get worse before things get better.

[Sustenpass]

38 minutes ago, Redracn said:

I I don't think you understand how the RET works particularly in conjunction with solar and wind priority access to the grid. In eastern Aus the conventional generators bid to supply power. Typically coal would start at $40 then closed circuit gas say $70 then hydro $100 then open circuit gas $150 then diesel $300 and so on up to the legal max of $14,000 per mega what hour. The AEMO accepts these bids to supply until they have satisfied the expected demand which let's say was reached at $100. Then everybody gets the $100/MWh. If we had enough coal generation to cover the demand then it would be $40/MWh. Wind and large scale sola also get the final price ($100) but also get about another $90 on top of the wholesale price thanks to the RET. Now it gets interesting as the grid must accept all power generated by wind and sola which could be practically nothing or even 100% as can happen is SA. This is the priority access they have so the AMEO tells some of the traditional generators to take a hike or produce less power. These traditional suppliers have costs and need to increase prices to cover them so they do so. The wind generators and large scale solar get even more money and benefit from a problem they caused. Not only are we being forced to pay for an inferior product that has a random supply but we are being forced to pay more for it. And then of course to really make coal less viable Dan the man doubles the royalties on coal to help pay for rooftop solar. It makes no sense for coal used for domestic electricity generation to have any royalties at all.

 

I understand how the RET works, and disagree with your figures. The wholesale price varies wildly, changing every 15 minutes. Sometimes fossil comes out on top, sometimes renewable. Renewables do very well during peak load periods, and this is improving with batteries.

 

Have look at these figures:

https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6401.0Mar 2014?OpenDocument

You’ll see electricity prices increased rapidly, with RET having only a tiny impact - less than 5%

The government themselves costed the impact of the RET at $1/week for the average household.

Renewables are driving wholesale prices down not up according to the facts, which offsets that over time.

 

Sure the RET is not perfect, but this is such a politically charged subject that we will continue to get shoddy legislation from both political camps. We are in a period of transition, and every statistic I can find is pointing toward renewables becoming ever cheaper.

 

 

[Redracn]

5 hours ago, Sustenpass said:

I understand how the RET works, and disagree with your figures. The wholesale price varies wildly, changing every 15 minutes. Sometimes fossil comes out on top, sometimes renewable. Renewables do very well during peak load periods, and this is improving with batteries.

 

Have look at these figures:

https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6401.0Mar 2014?OpenDocument

You’ll see electricity prices increased rapidly, with RET having only a tiny impact - less than 5%

The government themselves costed the impact of the RET at $1/week for the average household.

Renewables are driving wholesale prices down not up according to the facts, which offsets that over time.

 

Sure the RET is not perfect, but this is such a politically charged subject that we will continue to get shoddy legislation from both political camps. We are in a period of transition, and every statistic I can find is pointing toward renewables becoming ever cheaper.

 

 

Wind and large scale solar get their $90 regardless of bid prices so use this to stick it to the real generators who must recover this cost when they can . Yes the prices are all over the place and that is due to the unreliables. The actual data does not support your position that wind/solar in our current market push prices down.  If that was the case we should be seeing the price drop with higher renewable penetration but it is rising.

 

 

 

 

[Simonk]

I blame the Carbon Tax! 

[Nick987]

20 minutes ago, Redracn said:

Wind and large scale solar get their $90 regardless of bid prices so use this to stick it to the real generators who must recover this cost when they can . Yes the prices are all over the place and that is due to the unreliables. The actual data does not support your position that wind/solar in our current market push prices down.  If that was the case we should be seeing the price drop with higher renewable penetration but it is rising.

 

 

 

Every single country that has gone for renewables has ended up with much higher power prices, it's not a coincidence.

Because renewables are intermittent, you need just as many 'normal' power stations as without renewables, to cover the gaps. You can't turn a power station on and off at the drop of a hat, so you end up shedding the extra power when renewables do happen to be generating. It's easy to see why renewables make power prices go up.

Battery tech has already been a failure in SA, in that it's made no difference to SA energy problems, and is totally incapable of providing base load power. it was more of marketing ploy for Tesla than anything else.

If EVs do become popular at the same time as the grid is being compromised, then we'll really be in trouble. I'm hoping that before too long, our politicians will come clean and admit renewables can't work. You never know.

[Sustenpass]

36 minutes ago, Redracn said:

Wind and large scale solar get their $90 regardless of bid prices so use this to stick it to the real generators who must recover this cost when they can . Yes the prices are all over the place and that is due to the unreliables. The actual data does not support your position that wind/solar in our current market push prices down.  If that was the case we should be seeing the price drop with higher renewable penetration but it is rising.

 

 

 

Some fair points there, although I can’t analyse that graph you’ve provided as the resolution is too low.

Narrowing the focus exclusively to wholesale costs is misleading though, as the wholesale cost only makes up 22% of your power bill. The primary driver in cost increases has been network-related.

 

 

See here for more detail about data that supports my position:

 

https://www.csiro.au/en/News/News-releases/2018/Annual-update-finds-renewables-are-cheapest-new-build-power

[Redracn]

1 hour ago, Sustenpass said:

Some fair points there, although I can’t analyse that graph you’ve provided as the resolution is too low.

Narrowing the focus exclusively to wholesale costs is misleading though, as the wholesale cost only makes up 22% of your power bill. The primary driver in cost increases has been network-related.

 

 

See here for more detail about data that supports my position:

 

https://www.csiro.au/en/News/News-releases/2018/Annual-update-finds-renewables-are-cheapest-new-build-power

I'm not sure how cheapest new build power translates into anything other than big profits for the wind operators. Given that if it is true then it is time for the RET to end. From all reports I have seen the LCOE for unreliable sources does not take into account making them dispatchable. To do this requires adding in the cost of their backup batteries, pumped hydro or open circuit gas. Once these are added in the picture for renewables does not look so good and well above coal.

You are quite right about the generation only being part of the cost problem and the network being another. Wind and large scale sola are generally remote and require substantial new or upgraded poles and wires to get the power to where it is used. A wind/sola farm has a nameplate capacity which is what it can produce in perfect conditions. Problem is that for wind the actual energy produced is only around 30% of that nameplate and sola is worse at 25%. The cost is that the transmission infrastructure, wires, transformers etc need to handle the full 100% nameplate capacity making them more than 3 time bigger than would be required if the remote generator was a base load coal or gas unit to deliver the same amount of energy. That is a very poor return on investment and a lot of expense for an under-utilised asset. 

Wind and sola also cause the cost of ancillary services to increase search as inertia, load following and frequency stability. These cost were lower when spinning generators inherently provided it for free. See SA for a good example of AEMO interventions and ancillary costing.

Then you have some operators gaming the system such as AGL but that is probably another story.

We pay a lot extra to cover issues caused by remote unreliables. 

And if you think network costs are high now just wait until we need to more than triple the capacity to residential estates to charge cars and that would be more than 2 cars / house. I would also have a couple extra cars as well just in case I needed to go out again and for when the power system fails as it is going to do. Along with a decent generator >30KVA.

A trailer with a very large battery and a diesel generator would also be a good investment for longer trips😀

[Redracn]

"wholesale cost only makes up 22% of your power bill"

Not sure where this comes from but it is incorrect for my bill.

My peak rate is 16.5cents/KWh and controlled load 9.5cents plus GST. Spot prices today have been averaging around $100MWh which is 10cents/KWh. I seems wholesale prices are much than 22% and more like 50% even after connection charges and GST. 

That is just me everyone else is probably different. 

 

Graph update 

[edgy]

So I guess its fair to say no one on PFA is ordering a Macan in EV? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sustenpass]

12 minutes ago, Redracn said:

I'm not sure how cheapest new build power translates into anything other than big profits for the wind operators. Given that if it is true then it is time for the RET to end. From all reports I have seen the LCOE for unreliable sources does not take into account making them dispatchable. To do this requires adding in the cost of their backup batteries, pumped hydro or open circuit gas. Once these are added in the picture for renewables does not look so good and well above coal.

The RET has performed its function better than expected, so agree there’s a good case for it to be wound up earlier than 2030. But seeing as it contributes less than 5% to our power bills I don’t really see it being a focal point.

LCOE is a flawed comparison tool as currently used, as is mentioned in the CSIRO report above. Even so renewables are dropping in price far quicker than tradition fossil fuel generators.

Yes there is a cost to making them dispatchible, as too there would be for a new coal fired plant. But the report I linked found renewable with battery or pumped hydro still outperform fossil fuels.

It’s all there in the report.

 

31 minutes ago, Redracn said:

 

You are quite right about the generation only being part of the cost problem and the network being another. Wind and large scale sola are generally remote and require substantial new or upgraded poles and wires to get the power to where it is used. A wind/sola farm has a nameplate capacity which is what it can produce in perfect conditions. Problem is that for wind the actual energy produced is only around 30% of that nameplate and sola is worse at 25%. The cost is that the transmission infrastructure, wires, transformers etc need to handle the full 100% nameplate capacity making them more than 3 time bigger than would be required if the remote generator was a base load coal or gas unit to deliver the same amount of energy. That is a very poor return on investment and a lot of expense for an under-utilised asset. 

 

Poles and wires were the biggest contributor to our power prices doubling over the last decade. The ‘gold plating’ of the networks had nothing to do with renewables, and everything to do with corrupt politics. There’s plenty of great articles to read on that subject so I won’t go into it here. The cost of making renewables dispatchible is well worthwhile given the projected savings linked above.

 

 

42 minutes ago, Redracn said:

  And if you think network costs are high now just wait until we need to more than triple the capacity to residential estates to charge cars and that would be more than 2 cars / house. I would also have a couple extra cars as well just in case I needed to go out again and for when the power system fails as it is going to do. Along with a decent generator >30KVA.

A trailer with a very large battery and a diesel generator would also be a good investment for longer trips😀

Indeed. But we’re looking at what, 2040 here? 

This is why politicians would do well to stop bickering about the details and start making a plan.

33 minutes ago, Redracn said:

"wholesale cost only makes up 22% of your power bill"

Not sure where this comes from but it is incorrect for my bill.

 

ACCC Retail Electricity Pricing Enquiry

[Redracn]

18 minutes ago, Sustenpass said:

 

It’s all there in the report.

A political report by mates for mates which has been well debunked. 

We will have to disagree on a lot of your last post comments.

In most companies well at least the ones I have been involved in results are measured and people held accountable. If wind sola is so good even with battery backup included in its cost then why have prices risen in any country that has a high wind/sola penetration? The exact opposite of what we are told. This cheaper is all just talk and conjecture with no basis in real world situations. So where did SA go so wrong?. Heads need to roll. 

Batteries cost about $1200 a year per household just to own. This is also the case for a new battery backed solar farm in VIC. You pay a 25 to 30% penalty in loss of energy for everything that passes through a battery. So you need 30% more solar panels. Now batteries and sola cells loose capacity as they age so add some more cost to ensure you have the needed capacity. 

Like I said if wind/sola are so cheap then you would be ahead by going off grid especially given no wire/poles cost or middle men taking a cut. Do you really think that this would be the case?

[Sustenpass]

1 hour ago, Redracn said:

A political report by mates for mates which has been well debunked. 

Ok I’m curious  - can I see an apolitical source for this?

1 hour ago, Redracn said:

In most companies well at least the ones I have been involved in results are measured and people held accountable. If wind sola is so good even with battery backup included in its cost then why have prices risen in any country that has a high wind/sola penetration? The exact opposite of what we are told. This cheaper is all just talk and conjecture with no basis in real world situations. So where did SA go so wrong?. Heads need to roll. 

Well I linked to reasons why costs have risen. The gold plating of the network being the main factor. I appreciate that you’re disputing this, but there’s a few dodgy Labor politicians who are in jail right now who were in the thick of it (on different charges mind you) so I don’t think that pinning the blame on one or other political party is getting to the point here. Costs haven’t risen to where they are now because of renewables. If we’re arguing that they’re going to continue to rise as a result of renewables, I’m not seeing figures to support that.

As to SA, well it seems like mistakes have been made. But they don’t seem related to the effectiveness of the power source. Mismanagement is mismanagement - fossil or renewable, if the company or govt fucks it up, they should pay. When the lights went out it was because the transmission lines were blown over.

Again, renewables are getting cheaper and more efficient as it scales up, so expect the situation in SA and elsewhere to improve. This is where the market will take over, RET or not.

1 hour ago, Redracn said:

Batteries cost about $1200 a year per household just to own. 

For their entire useful life? Can I see your source on this?