Essay by Eric Worrall
First published JoNova; A just published Australian Energy Market Operator report highlights the urgent “opportunity” for the provision of reliable electricity to Australia’s East Coast grid.
2023 Electricity Statement of Opportunities August 2023
…
With up to 62% of its coal fleet now expected to close before 20331, Australia’s NEM is perched on the edge of one of the largest transformations since the market was formed over 20 years ago. The scale of opportunity to meet an imminent and growing need for firm capacity, new forms of energy production, and significant consumer energy investments is unparalleled in Australia’s energy history. This ESOO shows that imminent and urgent investment is needed to meet this opportunity, or the reliability of the NEM will be at risk.
In this 2023 ESOO assessment:
When considering only energy supply infrastructure developments that meet AEMO’s commitment criteria2, AEMO forecasts larger reliability gaps than were forecast in the February 2023 Update to 2022 Electricity Statement of Opportunities, and in some cases, larger than forecast in the 2022 ESOO. Over the next 10 years, in the 2023 ESOO Central scenario, reliability risks are forecast to be higher than the relevant reliability standard requires in:
South Australia in summer 2023-24 (against the Interim Reliability Measure [IRM] of 0.0006% unserved energy [USE]) and from 2028-29 (against the reliability standard of 0.002% USE).
Victoria this coming summer and over the entire ESOO horizon against the IRM, and from 2026-27 against the reliability standard.
New South Wales from 2025-26 against the reliability standard.
Queensland in 2029-30 and 2030-31 against the reliability standard.
Once federal and state government programs, actionable transmission developments, and orchestration of forecast consumer energy resources (CER) are also considered, beyond the short term, reliability risks have the potential to be managed within relevant standards over most of the next 10-year horizon.
While these programs and developments have not yet progressed far enough to implementation to meet the strict criteria to be included in the ESOO Central outlook, federal and state governments have policies and frameworks to develop and implement delivery plans.
All jurisdictions have a range of policies that support the development of new capacity to replace retiring generators. Each policy must now prioritise delivering the transmission, and renewable energy and firming generation they target, ahead of announced closures. Just-in-time investment may not maintain suitable reliability, and delivering on the current development opportunities is now essential.
The impact of potential coal, gas and diesel fuel shortfalls has been identified as a material risk to the reliability of the NEM. In addition to the need for new generation, transmission and other solutions, the ongoing availability of coal, gas and distillate fuels, and effective management of their supply chains, will be critical to the reliability of the NEM.
These forecasts highlight the high value of solutions in which resources owned by consumers, such as residential electricity generation and storage devices, and increased demand flexibility, can help meet power system needs. With a high level of consumer participation and coordination of consumer energy assets and demand to help meet power system needs, the need for utility-scale solutions would be much lower.
…
Read more: [Page 3-4] https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/electricity/nem/planning_and_forecasting/nem_esoo/2023/2023-electricity-statement-of-opportunities.pdf?la=en&hash=D8CC2D9AC8D9F353194C9DD117095FB4
Once you cut through the “opportunity” doublespeak, the stark reality is South Australia has already fallen below the interim reliability measure. Other states are set to join them in the near future – NSW (2025-25), Victoria (2026-27) and Queensland (2029-30 and 2030-31).
Any businesses operating in South Australia, New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland are sometimes required by the government to curtain operations to reduce the risk of domestic supply blackouts during periods of peak demand, like heatwaves or cold snaps.
Why has the outlook suddenly worsened?
The big problem is a perfect storm of neglect of fossil fuel assets, and the failure of renewable systems and battery grid firming measures to contribute sufficiently to grid stability. The green electrify everything push is also forecast to drive up demand for grid electricity, just as grid stability is on its knees from lack of dispatchable capacity.
Read more: [Page 4] Same link as above
- Generator unplanned outage rates are forecast higher than previously, reflecting recent trends of poor performance among some generator technologies.
- AEMO has observed that the initial target delivery dates provided by developers of new generation and storage investments often have not accounted for delays that could occur during the project financing, planning, development and delivery stages of projects. To ensure the accuracy of its reliability outlook, AEMO now applies delays to reflect observed development and delivery risks of new projects in the reliability forecast.
- New and improved weather data and modelling for renewable generation has improved the accuracy of variable renewable energy (VRE) correlations with maximum demand, identifying a higher forecast occurrence of low wind and high demand conditions in Victoria, resulting in higher forecast reliability risks for South Australia and Victoria.
- Many new wind, solar, battery and pumped hydro developments have advanced sufficiently to be considered in the 2023 ESOO, however solutions which orchestrate and coordinate consumers’ generation and storage devices to support reliability have not yet demonstrated success at significant scale. Consistent with other reliability input assumptions, AEMO has now only assumed consumers will install CER and make them available to be orchestrated to help meet power system needs at current levels; this is lower than the levels of CER orchestration previously assumed.
- Forecasts of energy consumption and maximum demand are higher in some NEM regions, driven by projected electrification of households and businesses, and forecast expansion of industrial facilities.
When will the blackouts start biting? The coming southern hemisphere Summer, December this year to February, is looking very iffy in Victoria and South Australia.
2023-24 outlook
Reliability risks are forecast to be greater than the Interim Reliability Measure in South Australia and Victoria this summer. Any adverse conditions for wind or solar generation, which happens quite frequently with Victoria’s notoriously unpredictable Summer weather, coupled with expected El Nino heatwaves, could tip the grid in Victoria and South Australia over the brink.
Read more: [Page 5-6] Same link as above
- Electricity consumption over the year is forecast to be marginally lower than in 2022-23, as growth in newly electrified loads (switching to electricity from alternative energy sources such as gas and diesel) is more than offset by business energy efficiency savings and lower household disposable income, lessening previously forecast growth.
- Annual maximum demand forecasts for 2023-24, however, remain similar to those previously forecast, because consumer demand during hot weather is forecast to be less impacted by energy efficiency investments and potential consumer responses to high prices. Annual maximum demand occurs close to or after sunset in most regions, after the impact of distributed photovoltaics (PV) has subsided.
- Approximately 3.4 gigawatts (GW) more new generation and storage capacity from a range of technologies is expected to be available compared to what was available last summer.
- The reliability of the thermal (coal and gas) generation fleet generally stayed at historically poor levels in 2022-23, and most plant operators have advised that overall plant reliability is unlikely to materially improve.
- Expected unserved energy (USE) is forecast to be above the IRM of 0.0006% USE in South Australia and Victoria in the coming year, although risks remain in all regions under extreme conditions. Table 1 shows the forecast risk for a larger USE outcome3 for the coming summer. The probability is provided for all possible maximum demand outcomes, and under 10% POE demand conditions. Factors that influence when and how USE occurs include occurrences of generator outages and high demand at the same time as low wind and solar generation conditions.
- For the coming summer, the Bureau of Meteorology is currently advising that hot dry conditions, with elevated bushfire risks, and El Niño weather patterns are likely. The maximum demand forecast range is forecast based on all climate conditions and does not target these specific forecast weather conditions. Hence there is an increased likelihood this summer that demand outcomes will fall in the upper end of the forecast range (that is, the 10% probability of exceedance [POE] forecast is more likely), in most regions.
What will bring relief to Australia’s faltering East Coast grid?
The AEMO included the development of hydrogen electrolyser energy storage capacity, as a major source of grid stability post 2032. Hydrogen energy storage technology which has not yet been developed.
…
Potential development of hydrogen electrolysers is forecast to increase NEM electricity consumption by up to 10% by 2032-335. The forecast for hydrogen electrolysis development has increased significantly since the 2022 ESOO, due to the introduction of the New South Wales Renewable Fuels Scheme, which is legislated to commence in 2024, and the South Australian Hydrogen Jobs Plan, which includes a 250 megawatts (MW) electrolyser with a target to commence operations in 2025-26.
…
Assuming that electrolysers operate to provide new energy options to consumers, including potential hydrogen-ready gas generators that are not yet advanced enough to consider in the Central scenario. The development of hydrogen generation sources is, however, noted among numerous jurisdictional plans.
…
Read more: [Page 7] Same link as above
But all predicted storage capacity, including all known pumped storage dam projects, even if completed on time, are insufficient to provide the backup and stability that the grid will require once coal plants are closed.
…
While generation, storage and transmission developments continue to connect to the power system, the assessment shows these committed and anticipated developments (generation, transmission and other solutions) are not yet sufficient to offset the forecast impact of higher electricity use and advised generator retirements. Delays to any other currently considered development may further worsen the reliability outlook.
…
A much larger pipeline of proposed generation and storage projects – totalling 173 GW of VRE and 74 GW of dispatchable resources (including battery, pumped hydro, and other technologies) – demonstrate the opportunity for the market to respond to emerging reliability gaps, if projects are developed in a timely manner. Numerous federal and state government schemes and programs have been implemented to further incentivise or fund the required developments in the NEM.
…
Read more: [Page 9-10] Same link as above
The AEMO is open to ideas to fix the grid reliability crisis opportunity, they published a tender for reliable energy provision a few days after publishing their latest report. So if you happen to have a multi-gigalitre dam and hydro generator which you forgot to tell anyone about, tucked away on an alpine back paddock, the AEMO is waiting for your phone call [h/t JoNova].
Hands up who wants to invest in energy intensive manufacturing jobs and building new factories in East Coast Australia?
The AEMO report provides the following helpful explanation to what the percentages on the vertical graph mean in terms of grid reliability.
0.0006% (the lower dashed line “interim reliability measure”):
When expected USE is forecast in a region at the level of the IRM, the following reliability risks are forecast:
- USE events would statistically occur approximately once every six years.
- Larger USE outcomes would occur approximately once every 10 years (equivalent to approximately 10% of average regional demand for five hours, or comprising multiple events that aggregate to this total).
- Load shedding events of even greater magnitude are possible, particularly if combined with transmission outages, and/or persistent generator or transmission outages following power system security events.
- Out of market mechanisms may be available and could be utilised to mitigate some of these risks with associated costs.
0.02% (the upper dashed line “Reliability Standard”):
When expected USE is forecast in a region at the level of the reliability standard of 0.002% USE, the following reliability risks are forecast:
- USE events would occur approximately once in every three years.
- Larger USE outcomes would occur approximately once every five years (equivalent to approximately12% of average regional demand for eight hours).
- Load shedding events of even greater magnitude are possible, particularly if combined with transmission outages, and/or persistent generator or transmission outages following power system security events.
- Out of market mechanisms may be available and could be utilised to mitigate some of these risks with associated costs.
According to page 18 of the report, The AEMO is considering retiring the 0.0006% interim reliability measure, or changing how it is calculated. In my opinion this re-consideration is likely because there doesn’t seem to be any point keeping the current 0.0006% definition, given that all East Coast states other than Tasmania have or will shortly begin prolonged breaches of the interim reliability standard. The Net Zero push is explicitly mentioned as a reason the AEMO are considering redefinition or retirement of the interim reliability standard.
For more information on the devastating impact on grid reliability of the Net Zero push, click here.
South Australia loves to brag on days when solar and wind supply 100% of the power, but in reality the state is mostly almost totally dependent on NSW and Victoria and their coal and gas power.
SA has never and will never be 100% renewables self generated for 24 hours of a day, maybe just a few hours now and then.
Can someone cut through the Technobollocks and confirm that there won’t be enough electricity to go round very soon?
If you think of electricity demand like the tide, largely predictable but also subject to storm surges and other intermittent events, they’re already worried they won’t be able to handle the next unusually high tide. But nobody can say exactly when that high tide will strike, because it requires an unlikely but not improbable alignment of different factors.
The shame is that this scenario was able to be forecast by competent experienced engineers, a decade ago.
Make no mistake, the cause of this crisis is belief in the anti-science green global warming fable, in one word “woke”, at work.
Those who deliberately forced this disaster appear to be able to walk away without consequences. Certain players are identified – they should be subject to Inquiry and if found incompetent, held to account with severe punishments.
We, the people of Australia should be able to regard electricity supply as an essential service, whose delivery is above political whims. A decade ago, we had about the cheapest and most reliable supply in the world. Now we have one of the worst. Industry is departing, remaining big users are pressured to turn off in desperate times. The single factor of woke electricity is about the largest part of a huge drop in national living standard.
Most of this was predicted before the rot set in.
We have to weed out the incompetents who planned, instigated and allowed this, often with disgustingly dishonest tactics.
Enough! Time to build new coal generators, the obvious, tried and true solution that a defeated Germany is now planning.
Geoff S
Politicians and bureaucrats will never be held accountable, they’ll just point to the ‘experts’ and claim they were relying on those reports … those same rent-seeking ‘experts’ who wrote the reports they were told to write by the self same politicians and bureaucrats.
Mask up!
“The shame is that this scenario was able to be forecast by competent experienced engineers, a decade ago.”
Careful, they were educated in the 1960s and move reaaaallllllyyyyy ssssllllloooooowwwwlllly and if they’re still working they might have f@$%%$d up their IRAs by speculating/daytrading through eras of vibrant economy.
Your point stands, the disaster was predictable, lets just don’t lean too heavily a generation that wants to be left alone to make it.
“We have to weed out the incompetents who planned, instigated and allowed this, often with disgustingly dishonest tactics.”
This needs to happen in Ontario too.
Such a sad event will be needed to stop this green renewable madness. There are presently three crash test dummy candidates:
I’d include Germany as well.
Rud Istvan: CA, but interconnects to 4 Corners Coal and PNW hydro might save them.
The entire Western Interconnect is at risk, not just California. It is not a sure thing at this point Diablo Canyon can be saved. Anti-nuclear activists are engaged in a vigorous and well-funded campaign to force its closure in 2025.
If the Biden administration or some variant thereof is in the White House in 2025, the EPA’s new carbon emission rules will still remain in force, rules which are specifically designed to bybass the major questions doctrine of West Virginia versus EPA.
Four Corners is scheduled to close in 2031. That schedule could easily be moved up if climate activists inside and outside the Biden administration begin using the EPA’s new rule to their full advantage. As could the scheduled closure of every other coal-fired power plant in the United States.
Diablo Canyon is a big deal that not enough Americans outside California know about. It might be a good blog topic.
Cognitive dissonance: the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioural decisions and attitude change (Oxford).
The current Australian government is hell-bent on eliminating fossil fuels from the country’s energy delivery while simultaneously heavily reliant on the taxes and royalties paid by fossil fuel producers and exporters.
Mineral fuels, oils and distillation products account for 43% of Australia’s exports by value (2022 Trading Economics), the country’s economy would be rightly stuffed without them.
This reality clash has no impact on policy because cognitive dissonance can be resolved simply by ‘people blindly believing whatever they want to believe’ (Wiki).
What would it take for the government to convince some potential investors to take the risk? Haven’t reliable (i.e. fossil fuel based) generators got the government over a barrel right now?
Kindof, but the situation is still too precarious to risk building new fossil fuel plants. Nobody knows exactly what the government is paying to remaining operators to keep operating, but I’m guessing it is a lot – every time the government threatens a new carbon tax or other crackdown, they threaten to walk away, or accelerate plant closure and demolition for the sake of the planet.
Many remaining players WANT to dispose of their reliable energy assets, that way they can make a killing out of gaming the electricity market.
As I read the situation, most of the remaining coal generating assets in AUS are reaching end of design life. Gonna be a problem soon. You can nurse them along in old age, but increasingly unreliably.
In the US, about 1/3 of the remaining coal generation capacity will be beyond typical US 42 year retirement age by 2025. Easy US solution is faster to install, cheaper to operate replacement CCGT. Thanks to shale fracking, US has abundant natgas resource.
They’re already well past projected end of life in many cases, and even the newer plants are suffering severe defects, because nobody is maintaining them. Coal plant operators are expecting to be told to shut down with minimal compensation at any moment, so they are running bare bones maintenance regimes.
Rud,
Sure, it is now fashionable to state that Australian coal generation assets are increasingly costly to keep going. AEMO said that bluntly in its latest report.
I have not heard any engineering talk about his. It is quite possible that continued maintenance from now is already planned, is already normal, is already understood. So I am asking engineers if the plant can be kept goling adequately as to cost and reliability. That is better than asking theoretical model makers in AEMO.
The important complications I see involve ownership. Some of this plant has Chinese ownership, but one seldom sees any policy statement that reads like “As Chinese owners of this Australian coal electricity plant, we have this staged plan, year by year, from 2020. It Australian consumers have questions or improvements, please contact us at …..”.
The next complication is pricing by quote. As I understand it, the current system asks generators or the sellers of electricity to bid for supply at stated costs, sometimes just hours before supplying. This includes wind and some solar as well as coal and gas, I think. Having tried to learn how this works, and having failed, I am left with the possibility that price mechanisms contribute to high consumer costs as well as obfuscation.
This is especially the case when we blend in the third complication, which is govt requirements for consumers to favour purchase of “renewables”, leaving coal plant to operate to fill in between renewables intermittencies, which is a costly and non-optimum way to operate. The extra cost, of course, forces spending on routine repairs and maintenance and major upgrades into a hard place.
…
It is complicated, but I feel it is complicated by intent, so the man in the street cannot understand it and cannot frame useful questions or objections.
I have reached the stage of now regarding governments as just another special pleading group who interrupt smooth flows of goods and information between electricity suppliers and we, the people. They are in the class of Greenpeace. We have to work to spread this type of regard, to dilute the current public impression that governments are supreme authorities, not to be questioned. In reality, most are money-seekers who have little interest in helping you or me by sensible conduct that is of benefit to us.
Geoff S.
I think that routine repairs and maintenance are still getting done – the infrastructure still needs ongoing fixes. What is not being done is the preventative maintenance – the complete overhaul necessary to prevent excessive wear and extend the life of the plant.
The coal plants are expected to last for 18,000 years? I want to know who their architect is.
I’m guessing a typo :-). The coal plant operators want to close well before 2030, because they’ve just been slapped with a carbon tax, which on top of this government’s readiness to impose price controls, and the age of their plants, is making running a coal plant a very unattractive proposition.
If they are still operating through 2025, it will be because the government has quietly handed them big bags of cash.
Perhaps it was supposed to be 2030-31. It wouldn’t take too many fat finger errors to convert one into the other.
You realize it September 2023 right?
History repeats, I can remember using candles during the power ratioining days of the 1970’s and 1980’s.
https://wongm.com/2020/06/1982-new-south-wales-power-crisis-backup-gas-turbines/
Good news is when the grid fails the masses take notice. Problem is there is we have no alternative party standing up to kill off net zero madness once and for all.
One Nation’s Federal Senator Malcolm Roberts has consistently attacked Net Zero madness. If you want change you need to support politicians who have consistently and outspokenly demanded the change you want.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/tag/malcolm-roberts/
It will only take a few percentage points of extra support for climate skeptics, for mainstream parties to start panicking. Mainstream politicians’ support for Net Zero is skin deep, winning elections is much more important to them.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/26/climate-shock-an-anti-ulez-candidate-just-won-a-london-election/
Other politicians like Matt Canavan have also made outspoken comments in support of coal, but Matt’s party is very inconsistent in terms of their Net Zero positioning. Its difficult to separate support for Matt from support for his party.
What if both present-day parties go anti-net zero at the same time?
That would nice but its the opposite at the moment. Power rationing i see as great hope to get the people to change their vote and the major parties to change their policies.
Australia, Germany UK US, – We are all on a path to economic suicide for absolutely no result even if you believe in CAGW; sending all your energy intensive business offshore solves nothing. Stupid Stupid Stupid.
Then add on the fact that China is targeting us in every way imaginable from collecting our genetic profile to learning every confidential detail about every business that still exists domestically, our intelligence and military data, pharmaceuticals dependence, chips on and on.
If we do survive I hope like hell someone is held accountable.
I’m surprise Stokes hasn’t shown up yet to claim that black is really white.
More likely, to argue over exactly what shade of black and what shade of white the authors actually meant.
Anyone who writes a report using that kind of mindless gibberish should be fired immediately. That kind of trash is a waste of time, money and resources.
Re: “Your grid reliability is stuffed zone”
Expression is not familiar to American readers.
As an American reader I can assure you that I had no problem understanding.
I thought about saying “your grid reliability is f*cked”, but Anthony likes to keep it clean…
I’m curious what the state of electricity is here in Western Australia. I know there was some chatter last year about issues they were having with one of the old coal power plants and the potential for blackouts in the summer. Thankfully that never materialized, although I do know this past winter while the east coast of Australia was hotter than usual Perth had a fairly cold winter, in particular June (coldest in 50 years they reported?). I know of at least one occasion where a diesel emergency generator had to be used to get Perth through a cold snap.
What Australia is doing just seems to mirror what so many of my long term cruising sailor friends have done. They go through a phase where they really become determined almost obsessed to have fully “ sustainably” power generation system right down to electric propulsion too. They spend gobs of money ( and constant upgrades)
But as they get a little older and encounter more of the limitations of the technology- including some very scary situations in bad weather ;they quietly revert back to a boat with good old reliable diesel propulsion and gen sets and all the modern comforts made possible by the technology.
It’s an interesting proposition. I certainly wouldn’t want solar electric to be my primary propulsion, but does it make any kind of sense as a backup, perhaps if you are doing blue water sailing? Even a couple of knots might be better than nothing, if all else fails?
When reading a document like the AEMO one, read (and understand) the assumptions very carefully. I am still working my way through it. By the very nature of grid management, they are invariably pessimistic. The crunch points on the grid will be evenings in summer and cold mornings in winter. That is why power issues, rather than energy will invariably dominate the risks.
Remember that invariably when large scale power cuts/ outages occur, it is triggered by transmission, not generation problems. The N-2 scenario catch people out. Having generation a long way from the load increases the risk. And another event like Callide will make all predictions academic.
Personally, I don’t put much store in these type of forecasting reports, People need to refresh on the Yogi Berra reports. I’m more interested in the analysis of when things have gone wrong and how they will fix it.
We have a significant Cause & Effect problem here, in that
1/ Governments diagnose some deleterious effect within the environment/climate or society in general
2/ They then impose some remedy to correct for whatever effect
3/ The remedy causes it all to get worse
UK is a lovely example of myriad of these occurrences..
1/ The Dot-Com Bubble of circa 2001/2 – where it was decided that UK plc should become a Service Economy
1a/ i.e. Not actually manufacture anything and that everyone should learn coding and sell 2nd hand junk on eBay
Result: UK now has rampant inflation and the 3rd or 4th highest deficit of anywhere in the world
2/ Diesel engined cars, circa 2003/4. Where it was decided that diesel was the best fuel for private cars because it emitted less CO₂ than did petrol cars
Result: The London ULEZ monstrosity, enveloped and proplelled by a blizzard of lies/exaggerations about ‘air pollution’
Diesel owners/drivers are now held in lower regard than an Elephant Man with Leprosy ever could be.
But taxing the life out of them makes them just about ‘puttable uppable with‘
for now
3/ That ‘Smart Motorways’ were a good way to reduce congestion and pollution.
Result: Yes they are once all the traffic is completely stopped while they clear away the crashed cars and corpses
4/ That Smart Electric meters would save energy.
Result: Folks feel tortured and threatened inside their own homes, not knowing what price the power is gong to be or whether they’ll be simultaneously criminalised and switched off without a word or warning
5/ That stuffing people’s houses with insulation and draught-proofing would ‘save the environment’
Result: Mouldy and damp homes increasingly occupied by asthmatic children and folks with Emphysema & COPD. That Air Quality inside those homes is worse than the gasous muck that fills the London Underground = 10 to 100 times more polluted than even the worst outdoor air in any city centre
6/ That ‘locking down’ was a good way to protect from Covid.
Result: A now epic/record number of unexplained Excess Deaths and now seemingly new and more infectious version of Covid itself
7/ That ‘working from home‘ was a good idea to protect from Covid.
Result: Dismal productivity, mostly from the extremely low productive civil service.
And more ill-health coming from (5) and (6) above.
Result 7(2) Health expenditure has doubled in the last 3 years and STILL, more people are dying.
8/ That forcing multiple vaccinations onto people was better than letting them acquire natural immunity. Witness Sweden for a stellar debunking of that policy
Result: An epidemic of what is now called ‘Long Covid‘ which is in fact Aluminium poisoning.
I could rave away for hours here, frequently do, but let’s wrap it up with:
9/ Aerated Concrete ##
i.e. A device to reduce building costs, also to save the environment by its using ‘less time, materials and emissions‘ in its usage. especially in the construction the cost conscious ‘Public Buildings’ and other infrastructure
Result: Multiple, presently unknown numbers of, schools and other public structures are in serious danger of simplay ‘falling down‘ – without any warning for people inside.
## High Alumina Cement (HAC) was another epic fail.
Similar to aerated concrete it was intended as a money-saving device = primarily because it set so fast. Thus allowing major projects to complete faster and ‘on time’ and thus allow more projects to be built.
HAC’s notable single fail was in the Gravelly Hill interchange on the M6 motorway near Birmingham.
The High Alaumina cement crumbled, de-icing salt started eating the rebar and the World Famous ‘Spaghetti Junction‘ threatened to fall down into the canal that runs under it.
It cost ten times more to repair the thing than it originally cost to build
So it continues with heat pumps, windmills, solar panels and electric cars
Anything that Westeren Governments have touched inside the last 30+ years have turned into mountains of expensive and Planet Destroying Shyte – also insane tortures for the people who have to pay for and live with them.
The UK’s current Aerated Concrete debacle is a perfect example of a Reverse Midas Touch = everything they touch, literally, turns to dust.
Climate is yet another – a diabolically mis-diagnosed problem being compounded by the most childlike science and remedies ever imaginable.
We are governed by clowns, demented illiterates, liars and gullible fools – and there is seemingly no way of getting rid of them.
“4/ That Smart Electric meters would save energy.
Result: Folks feel tortured and threatened inside their own homes, not knowing what price the power is gong to be or whether they’ll be simultaneously criminalised and switched off without a word or warning”
The “Result” wanders a long way from the statement used as its category.
Read and think critically.
Do Smart Electric meters save energy or not?
Can anyone be held responsible for how folks feel?
Did people ever know what the price of power would be?
Are people having electricity switched off without a word or warning?
The most basic definition of Smart Electric meter is a meter that doesn’t need a human to read it.
The significant Cause & Effect problem is that effects are a list of complaints and the causes are not what created them.
This is more proof critical systems that support modern society are now being managed by “leaders” immersed in cult thinking and completely removed from logic and reason. The only sane answer to this issue, unless one fully intends to dismantle modern society, is to build more reliable electrical generation as in gas, coal, nuclear thermal plants. The fact they could consider the hydrogen fantasy as a solution is all voters needs to know to decide it is time to fire the current crew of incompetents.
Sounds like everyone is expected to have their own home genetic. CO2 solved.
I don’t know what a home genetic is.
Doesn’t matter to any govt puke pol.