Essay by Eric Worrall
Establishment energy players wriggling on the hook of their own flawed green energy narratives.
Your power bills are going up, according to one energy boss. Here’s why
By national regional affairs reporter Jane Norman
You came here for truths and straight talk, so, here’s a doozy.”
Standing on stage at the National Press Club — being beamed live into offices and lounge rooms across the country — one of Australia’s top energy bosses was preparing to say what few in the industry will acknowledge publicly.
Jeff Dimery — CEO of Alinta Energy — looked up from his notes on the lectern and delivered the promised doozy to the audience.
“Australians will have to pay more for energy in future,” he says.
“We need to be honest about that.“
…
Yes, renewables are the “lowest cost, new form of generation”.
But building the wind and solar farms at the scale required to replace coal, together with the batteries needed to store the power, and the new network of transmission lines to distribute that power to consumers will involve tens of billions of dollars’ worth of investment.
The Australian Energy Market Operator’s own figures suggest the transition will cost around $383 billion between now and 2050.
When asked who pays, Dimery replied: “it all comes from consumers, whether through the bill directly or through the tax base.“
…
Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-12/power-prices-to-rise-in-clean-energy-transition/103696450
This is a big change from previous claims that renewables would bring down near term prices.
Electricity prices predicted to fall as renewable supply increases, gas price falls
Posted Mon 21 Dec 2020 at 5:32am
Key points:
- Electricity prices are expected to fall by 9 per cent over the next three years
- More renewable energy production is behind the fall
- Power prices in Canberra are predicted to buck the trend
Household electricity bills are expected to fall by 9 per cent over the next three years as more renewable generation joins the grid.
A new report by the Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) predicts all states in the National Electricity Market — NSW, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania — will have lower energy prices in 2023.
The residential electricity price trends report 2020, published by the advisory body today, projects the ACT will have a slight rise in electricity prices over the next three years.
…
The report says the main reason for the drop is lower gas prices and the introduction of new sources of energy generation like solar and wind.
It also says network costs and environmental costs are falling, too, although they contribute less to the overall reduction.
…
Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-21/electricity-prices-expected-to-fall-as-renewable-supply-increase/12999538
It is not just the ABC. The AEMO, the industry body tasked with regulating the East Coast Australian energy grid, has also frequently added to the confusion about the true cost of renewables;
Renewables push NEM electricity prices down to historical levels
23/10/2023
AEMO’s latest Quarterly Energy Dynamics report shows that wholesale electricity prices averaged $63 per megawatt hour (MWh) in the September quarter, down 41% from the June quarter ($108/MWh) and 71% ($216/MWh) from Q3 2022.
By region, South Australia recorded the highest average quarterly price at $92/MWh, followed by New South Wales ($81/MWh), Queensland ($65/MWh), Victoria ($49/MWh) and Tasmania ($29/MWh).
Total electricity supply by fuel type saw renewables (wind, grid-scale and rooftop solar, hydro and other sources) contribute 38.9% of total supply, up 4.6%, while black coal’s share fell 3.4%, primarily due to the Liddell Power station closure, and gas fell 2.3%. Brown coal’s market share increased 1%, mainly due to fewer unplanned outages.
AEMO Executive General Manager Reform Delivery, Violette Mouchaileh, said that the growing influence of renewables in the NEM was apparent in the warmer September quarter as prices returned to historical levels.
“Record renewable generation output helped push down average wholesale electricity prices by more than two-thirds, double the occurrence of zero or negative wholesale prices (19%) and reduce total emissions by 11% compared to the previous September quarter,” Ms Mouchaileh said.
“Renewables also supplied a record 70% of total energy used over a half-hour period, with rooftop solar contributing 39%, again highlighting the likely benefit from coordinating rooftop solar and home batteries.
…
Read more: https://aemo.com.au/newsroom/media-release/renewables-push-nem-electricity-prices-down-to-historical-levels
There is no excuse for this confusing messaging about prices. Renewables were always going to be expensive. It was up to the industry oversight body to keep people informed. Does leaving out the bit about how much renewables cost seem like a reasonable effort to keep people informed?
According to the AEMO “Who we are” page, “… AEMO provides the detailed, independent planning, forecasting and modelling information and advice that drives effective and strategic decision-making, regulatory changes and investment. …”. Do articles like the fluff piece above, which somehow fails to mention that any renewable driven cost reduction is temporary, that someone has to pay for all the green infrastructure, does any of this seem like the AEMO is adequately discharging its duty to provide independent advice?
$383 billion is just under $15,000 for every man, woman and child in Australia, or $39,000 for every working person in Australia, just to pay for initial construction. All those extra transmission lines and renewable systems will have to be maintained, at a cost of billions of dollars every year in addition to the cost of maintaining existing infrastructure.
Australia’s peak demand was 31GW in 2023-24, serviced by a capacity of 55GW. According to Wikipedia, the capital cost of building new coal capacity is US $4,074 / Kw to around $1,201 / Kw for gas.
Isn’t climate change supposed to create superstorms and violent weather? If say a big hail storm comes along and wrecks a vast acreage of solar panels, as happened last year in Nebraska, well that will have to be paid for as well.
What are the alternatives to renewables?
Underinvestment in Australia’s energy infrastructure has left most of it in a decrepit state. Lets assume for a moment we have to replace it all.
55GW x 1000000 (convert to Kw) x $4074 = US $224 billion to completely replace all of Australia’s coal capacity with coal. Multiply by 1.54 to get Australian dollars, and you have $345 billion – well short of the $383 billion Energy CEO Jeff Dimery estimated for renewables. If the coal plants use brown coal, which has zero value except as fuel to be shovelled into an adjacent generator, that is a saving of $38 billion in capital costs, + the system does not incur higher transmission line maintenance charges, and a massive cost every time. We save at least $38 billion, and since coal is dispatchable, we wouldn’t have to panic every time the wind dies.
And of course there is the very real risk the $383 billion costing is a massive underestimate. A lot of rather arbitrary assumptions go into calculating such numbers, such as the battery capacity required to accomodate renewable intermittency. Extreme excursions from normal weather conditions such as season long wind droughts over large geographical regions occur often enough to be a problem.
Even when the power doesn’t completely fail, economically damaging spikes in electricity prices can devastate the finances of energy intensive businesses. No energy intensive business can afford $5000 / MWh on a regular basis.
Hands up who still thinks renewable energy sounds cheap? How many people who voted for this train wreck of a left wing green government fell for their dubious claim that renewables would bring down prices? How many voters knew the true cost of green energy, before they cast their vote?
Green energy is a bottomless money pit, always was, always will be. It is time for politicians to be honest with voters, and put a stop this colossal waste of taxpayer resources, before they burn even more money for no benefit.
This narrative will be harder and harder each year to keep up…see Spain this year.
Which narrative are you referring to –
the one about renewables consumer bills getting cheaper as more gets imposed?
or the now-becoming-obvious-to-all that domestic consumers are going to cop huuuge hikes in their electricity bills as more renewables are grafted (grifted?) on to the grids?
Spanish Power Is Almost Free With Renewables Set for Record
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-29/spanish-power-is-almost-free-with-renewables-set-for-record
How much money are European consumers saving thanks to renewables?
https://www.iea.org/reports/renewable-energy-market-update-june-2023/how-much-money-are-european-consumers-saving-thanks-to-renewables
The first article, no where close to enough actual information to judge just how wrong it is, and I am not going to waste my time researching the truth. Soain must be selling loads of electricity and getting as rich as Norway, no??
SO the second article claims a HUGE decrease in price from 2022, when prices spiked due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the natural gas price spike.
Nice cherry pick there.
But in the same graph it is shown that the current price is DOUBLE that of 2021.
So the growing unreliable generation and the availability of natural gas at much lower prices equals only a doubling of prices since 2021. Good job providing data showing YOUR @SS.
I love the “prices are 8% lower then they would be without unreliables”.
Wow, so instead of a 100% rise in prices, it would only have been 92%??
Spanish power is almost free? On what virtual modeled planet do you live??
Is no electricity free electricity?
Static Electricity
Lightning is free. The person wanting to experience this free electricity should stand away from trees during a thunderstorm, with a 10 foot copper ground rod held in both hands as high as possible. I’m told the experience is to die for.
/sarcasm! Don’t actually do this !!
Note the rapid zig zag swings in renewables generated! compared to fossil fuel. The shape of these curves is telling to a technical person. The fossil fuel delivery is solid, vertually without interruption. The crenulated top of the fossil fuel (FF) baseload is when added units of (FF) have to come on during renewables intermittentcy. Moreover, when add-on is necessary the thermal plants operate at greatly reduced efficiency. This inflates the FF costs. This backup is fraudulently no charged to the renewables. Nor are the interconnecting and rectification charges needed to operate renewables charged. They are not accounted for, but are paid for by the customers.
Don’t let yourself be taken for fool, posting these deceptions. You are on the global internet’s #1 science site with several top awards here. Learn stuff.
Top awards?
Note the rapid zig zag swings in renewables generated! compared to fossil fuel. The shape of these curves is telling to a technical person. The fossil fuel delivery is solid, vertually without interruption. The crenulated top of the fossil fuel (FF) baseload is when added units of (FF) have to come on during renewables intermittentcy. Moreover, when add-on is necessary the thermal plants operate at greatly reduced efficiency. This inflates the FF costs. This backup is fraudulently no charged to the renewables. Nor are the interconnecting and rectification charges needed to operate renewables charged. They are not accounted for, but are paid for by the customers.
Don’t let yourself be taken for fool, posting these deceptions. You are on the global internet’s #1 science site with several top awards here. Learn stuff.
This precisely sums up the perfidy being shamelessly practised by wind & solar propagandists.
Not the case. There are only 2 things cheap about renewables.
1) Their (low density part time) Fuel Source
2) Their manufacturing standard for over 80% of those imported from China
Renewables are very expensive
Part time fuel which can stop at inconvenient times (Wind)
Part time fuel that’s only available 4 hours a day (Solar)
3 times the cost of conventional generation over the 60 year conventional lifetime
Low density requiring hundreds of times the space of conventional to produce the same output
4-6 times required nameplate needed to generate desired capacity
Requires expensive back-up battery storage as generation isn’t guaranteed when peak demands
Non recyclable
Still requires unsustainable mining for minerals
Still requires Oil and Coal extraction for necessary components
Bryan,
also renwables cannot power a grid without support from conventional generation for technical reasons also. They cannot balance supply and demand as they are uncontrolled, they lack inertia and reactive power control.
Renewables are not an equivalent to conventional and should never be considered so..
Need to read a basic accounting textbook. You cannot show that renewables are cheaper than conventional with this evidence.
The way you assess the comparative cost of two technologies is using something called Net Present Value Analysis. Your Office suite will have a function to calculate this in the spreadsheet unit. Or you can download Gnumeric.
Its usually used to assess the profitability of projects. You take the total cash flows in and out by year, being careful to include all the costs for the project. You then apply the applicable interest rate to reflect the time value of money. The result is a number, the Net Present Value of the project.
To use it to compare costs, all you do is include only the cash out flows. This will give you an NPV cost figure.
You have to be very careful when doing this to make sure that the product delivered is the same. This means that the supply has to be dispatchable for both. Otherwise you are not comparing two comparable systems.
The problem with both the articles you cite is that they are only considering current prices which may be due to a variety of factors.
However this proves nothing. The whole problem with wind is not prices. It is that the capital costs of building it and the running costs of maintaining it add up to an NPV cost for a wind based system, when you include them all, including making the supply dispatchable, which is several times that for a coal/gas based system.
The LCOE method calculates NPV, but as usually used generates lower NPV costs by means of leaving out half the costs of using wind to supply dispatchable power to the point of use. Its a form of accounting fraud.
Governments can set the playing field so that prices are whatever they want. They can also set the playing field so that wind operators do not bear all of the costs of building, connecting and maintaining. But when a proper cost comparison is made using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, wind and solar always come out several times the cost of conventional.
Yep, your lies and mis-information will continue to be more and more exposed.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Here in the UK over the past year when using predominantly reliable energy sources such as gas, the cost was £67.30 / MWh.
It’s windy today in the UK, so wind is providing 46.2% of our electricity needs. The cost, however, has rocketed to £98.00 / MWh.
Quod Erat Demonstrandum
They pretended until they could no longer hide the truth. Let’s see what happens now.
I predict several more years of pretending.
One major blackout with a re-start period measured in weeks, might stop some pretending. I expect it will take MORE than one major blackout plus multiple fatalities before at least 84% of the pretending ends.
I could write the script:
Help!
It isn’t just Australia It’s here too
Too cheap to meter: could low-cost renewables create an abundance of energy?A trend towards cheaper, cleaner power could pave the way for creative uses of excess energy.
https://www.nesta.org.uk/feature/future-signals-2023/too-cheap-to-meter-could-low-cost-renewables-create-an-abundance-of-energy/
I couldn’t read much more, I was nearly throwing up. Poor s*ds who believe that rubbish.
Beyond belief
Yep, it will be so cheap they will be able to replace the solar and wind at the end of their useful lives without government subsidies. Right.
Last 48 hours in the 3 main eastern states of Australia.
COAL IS KING !!
All we are asking is for an honest discussion. For this we are the bad guys.
Screaming “Burn the witch!”, is a much easier way to win a debate than actually defeating an opponent armed with facts, reason, and intellect.
Don’t worry, its only money. You’re going to waste it buying bright, shiny objects anyway, so instead let your government agencies waste it buying bright shiny objects instead. After all, they are professional money spenders, so they are better qualified to spend your money than you.
New strategy for Bideninflation — spend all your money on inflated costs, go bankrupt then live off the taxpayer dime.
The last one to go broke gets stuck with all the bills, so don’t delay. The longer you wait, the bigger your burden will be. Bonus point if you’re a breeder, as your kids and grandkids can take on your debt while working to support you. If they can find a job.
Got to get the money to your cronies so they can fund your next election.
Solyndra anyone? They lost half a BILLION and Obama got millions.
And didn’t Barry O’Bama tell the punters that their power bills would certainly see big increases as ‘green’ power saved the planet?
As an engineer, am I to belueve that engineers who work on these projects are okay with the way they cost renewables? Renewables should include all costs, including connection, power rectification and backup costs that are necessary for their addition to the grid. These unaccounted-for costs is malpractice!
Yes, LCOE constructs published so far with all the applicable costs omissions are bordering on blatant propaganda.
The engineers have been bribed with our tax $$. But there are plenty of other unmet needs they could use their talents on, honest work.
I used to have a beer sometimes with a senior wind engineer. He knew it was nonsense though he never admitted it.
One time I asked him why. He said “if you want to be an engineer in an English speaking country, there aren’t a lot of other options. It’s a well paid job.”.
Honest people can’t get a job at the IEA or the EIA.
You have to already be on the bandwagon.
At this point in time the main goal of the IEA is simply to keep itself going.
The engineers that objected were deemed Deplorable, patriarchal, or some other unapproved demographic … and fired.
Article says”Yes, renewables are the “lowest cost, new form of generation”.”
How is a 15th century technology like wind mills a “new form of generation”?
People have been using solar energy for millennia for drying clothes, meats, etc.
But why get rid of the much lower cost generation we have now?
Again language has been repurposed and/or hijacked. Now it is always implied the context is producing electricity.
Otherwise your points are spot on.
Energiewende works the same down under as it does up here, which is to say that it really doesn’t work. And if you can’t make it work in Australia, of all places, it sure as heck won’t work in North America or Europe.
Q: What percent of earth would be required to be covered with solar panels to meet Earth’s currect energy consumtion?
See Elon Musk…..he said something like a hundred square miles? More importantly, what does Larry Fink say?….The fink just blasted all his critics.
50%, in space. The entire portion facing the Sun.
Considering that solar only produces anything near nameplate capacity power from 10am until 2pm local time you would need enough panels to gather all the required energy for 24 hours in every time zone. Enough to not only supply what’s used as it gets produced but also enough to recharge the night time battery for when solar falls off…far before peak usage time.
Some time zones would require less than others (lower population density) but, all things being equal, some less populated time zones may need to “Share Generation” with other more populated time zones.
Solar capacity has dropped from 22% down to <5% at peak times so designing for that contingency would necessarily quadruple what’s required causing massive overcapacity during abundant times.
But the whole fiasco would still be dependent on not having any bad weather.
Clouds block the sun lowering available irradiance and diminish capacity.
Rainy days block the sun and…ditto…
Hail Storms, Hurricanes and Tornados destroy panels diminishing capacity until the panels get replaced
Extending estimates for just the US to the rest of the world, 25% of the land.
It’s “free” energy from the sun and wind. Why is it so darn expensive?
The Climate Change Industrial Complex (CCIC) is doing all it can to mask the true costs. First, the subsidies on so-called renewables keep the real price hidden from consumers. Second, burdensome regulations artificially boost the price of reliable, conventional energy sources. This makes it easy for the propagandists to spread disinformation about price competitiveness,
“It is time for politicians to be honest with voters”
Politicians honest! That’s a punch line.
Politicians are like bananas
They’re all yellow
Hang around in a bunch
And there’s not a strait one amongst them.
And like diapers, they need to be changed frequently.
For precisely the same reason.
Renewables: expensive and unnecessary. What a squandering of wealth and resources, a way to impoverish the West and the middle class.
Years ago I read that the story of energy is successive concentration, from windmills to wood to coal to oil to nuke.
What I want is a fusion-powered SUV. After that, a fusion-powered spaceship so I can visit Elon Musk on Mars.
And after fusion power, who knows? As long as the physicists union keeps demanding “rigorously defined areas of doubt and uncertainty.”
O/T. Miliband speaks
Mr Miliband, now Shadow Energy Secretary, told reporters it would be “a global embarrassment for Britain, if Susan Hall was elected as the Mayor of London”.
He added: “It would empower and embolden the anti-net zero, flat earth brigade across the world.”
Asked whether he was saying Susan Hall is herself a “flat earther”, he said: “I am. I absolutely am.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/ed-miliband-susan-hall-sadiq-khan-london-mayoral-election-climate-change-flat-earther-b1151159.html
What a guy…
If milli-brain thinks it is a “bad thing”…
… then it is most assuredly a very good thing for the people and all of the UK.
This is one area where they aren’t fooling anyone. Everyone can see their electricity bills rise in direct proportion to added ‘renewable’ energy and those with limited income are hurt the most. I’d be stretched to think of one aspect of renewable energy that hasn’t been lied about by the government, compliant media, and companies producing the hardware.
they are not renewables … the are REPLACEABLEs generators that use solar and wind as fuel sources …
The CAGW crowd are liars, cheats and robbers. Even if they weren’t lying about the cost the point is wind and solar are not a substitute for fossil fuel and nuclear. Wind and solar can’t come close to providing the product and services we all want and need. Fossil fuel and nuclear can do it easily.
Of course they’re going to be expensive and what’s worse is the strong likelihood that they’ll be unreliable into the bargain, so consumers will be hit with a double whammy. We’ll be seeing a variation of the EV con job here. Just as these things are overpriced from the outset, now they’ve been proven to be more unreliable than their ICE counterparts, more expensive to fix and with declining resale values. Solar and wind are showing the same shortcomings: reliable only during ideal weather conditions with no way to store any surplus energy as large-capacity batteries don’t exist, and with an increasingly obvious necessity that fossil fuel backups will be needed to keep the electricity flowing. What a bargain at a higher price yet and with no guarantee they’ll significantly reduce emissions.
The reason the so-called renewables of wind and solar cost so much is that they take more energy to produce and operate than they will ever produce in their lifetimes. They are an elaborate perpetual motion machine scam.
It can’t be that expensive, Australia thinks they are going to do it, and quickly too:
https://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/apr/12/australia-could-reach-an-ambitious-emissions-cut-of-up-to-75-by-2035-advisers-tell-labor
Hilarious
Just for interest, I compiled graphs of the last 48 hours of electricity supply for the 3 main states in the Australian East Coast NEM.
Notice anything 😉 Those big black and brown COAL-powered supplies of very reliable electricity.
Good thing it is currently beautiful Autumn weather, and there is not much heating or air-con being used, because wind is a nothing burger, and solar only works during sunny parts of the day.
It’s false to call it an investment. An investment is an expense that you expect to return a profit.
There is an error in the scaling factor. Not billions. Trillions.
Quote without comment, from the UK Telegraph:
An unmentioned further cost is the fact that coal, oil and gas plants can often operate for 60 years or more.
Indeed, according to Global Energy Monitor (GEM) there are currently 90GW of such power operating in the 51 – 60 year bracket and 10GW in the 61 – 70 year bracket.
You would have to replace wind turbines up to 3 times to reach these sorts of ages
GEM ‘Oil and gas plants need to be retired five times faster to meet long-term climate goals’ (Feb 2024
With $300 Billion, the world´s Climate Crisis can be solvedThe investment necessary to solve the world’s climate crisis by implementing Climate Solution Technologies is calculated to cost 300 Billion USD
COST OF THE NEW CLIMATE ELECTRICITY THAT SOLVES THE CLIMATE CRISIS: The electrical generation cost of the patented SunCell®, that use Dark Matter in the form of Hydrino® as a clean energy source fuel by water, is anticipated to be 200 times cheaper than any known power source.Specifically, BrLP is operating a SunCell® at commercial scale (250 kW) producing power levels that, upon finalization of engineering and design, can power essentially all power applications with no fuels or grid connection, projected $20/kW cap cost, $0.001 kW/h generation cost with no transmission, distribution, or demand charges, no supply chain issues, and zero pollution and no CO2. The SunCell® is modular scalable, so you can scale up to any power and aggregate amount.
The 15TW peak generating capacity of the world can be supplied by implementing 60 million SunCell® (250kW each) without any pollution including greenhouse gases. Price: 300 billion USD
https://www.climatesolutions.tech/the-300-billion-solution
Coal is good for baseload power, quite poor as dispathcable.