Essay by Eric Worrall
“… the pace of the renewables coming forward is too slow, relative to the ambitions articulated for the nation …”
Coal back-up needed: Energy CEOs warn transition falling behind
Angela Macdonald-SmithSenior resources writer
Feb 25, 2024 – 8.00pmLeading energy chief executives argue a coal safety net to smooth the exit away from fossil fuel generation will keep the supply of power reliable and affordable, as 2030 climate targets are frustrated by the insufficient pace of new sources of renewables and transmission.
…
He said that in almost every aspect – whether social licence, the rising cost of capital and the need to attract skilled people to deliver the build-out – the situation had gone backwards in the last 18 months.
…
Mr Collette has been at the forefront of industry calls to consider a coal power generation reserve scheme, to have coal power plants generate during extended periods of low wind and solar output before they are completely turned off.
…
“That doesn’t mean the output has to be as high as coal-fired generators have been in the past, but it does mean that we see a transitional role and don’t just turn off and just expect that you can solve all weather conditions without the tools.”
…
Read more: https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/time-to-get-skates-on-transition-timeline-faltering-say-energy-ceos-20240216-p5f5he
Please understand folks, these aren’t long term coal plants which are being proposed, they are temporary coal plants, which will be switched off just as soon as the battery backup is ready.
Any minute now.
Chances are excellent that these coal plants will be in operation much longer that the authorities care to admit. In addition, no one should be surprised if a fair number of natural gas generating plants are added to the energy mix as it becomes increasingly evident that renewable can’t fill the bill.
Germany is reactivating “retired” coal and nuclear plants.
After 24 years of extremely costly ENERGIEWENDE, and many years of the highest household rates in Europe (the UK has the honor of surpassing Germany, largely because of mismanagement), the left-wing, headstrong German elite is waking up to reality to save their political power.
No, it’s not.
Not surprisingly, Mark Collette is managing director of EnergyAustralia, which owns and operates major coal mines.
ie.. Nick cannot counter one fact put forward. !
Got that wind turbine in the back yard yet Nick ??
Nick,
Does the position of Mr Collette disqualify him from making suggestions, including valuable ones?
The office of CEO in industry denotes excellence above competitors. It has some parallels to an author in academia with a record of publication of many peer-reviewed, widely read papers. Why knock it?
You must remember not so many decades ago when industry funded a lot of research, without plausible suggestions that it was tainted. (I, personally, approved the corporate cheques for a number of projects). Geoff S
Geoff,
No, he’s not disqualified. But as I said, unsurprising that a manager of a company running coal stations is commending their future use.
So again.. absolutely no evidence to counter the facts.
Energy Australia covers many types of electricity supplies, including wind and solar.
They want RELIABILITY… and wind and solar cannot EVER provide that.
Stop digging.. you only make yourself look like a very stupid person.
Nick, clearly you’ve picked a “side”, and so dispassionate, rational consideration of matters is no longer possible for you.
Sad, for a man of your undoubted intelligence.
Similarly, with his incisive insights, Karl Marx could have led global economic policy strategies to such heights of prosperity if only his flawed communist ideologies hadn’t rendered him a moron.
“No, he’s not disqualified”
You, on the other hand are totally unqualified to make any credible statements at all.
You have shown over and over again that your understanding of grid supply electricity is “very, very limited”… and that is being kind !
Nick,
Is he the CEO of a company that owns and operates coal mines, or coal stations, or both?
For goodness sake, Nick, EnergyAustralia is an ENERGY company. It supplies energy – reliable energy. “EnergyAustralia owns, contracts, and operates a diversified energy
generation portfolio that includes coal, gas, battery storage, demand response, solar, and wind
assets.”. EnergyAustralia could not operate without coal.
Well, they could but then they could only guarantee power 10% of the time and only to 5% of their customers
“EnergyAustralia could not operate without coal”
That makes him a very interested party. OK to hear from interested parties, as long as it’s declared. It wasn’t, so I did.
Yet you never do when renewables promoters say absolutely idiotic things about wind and solar.
No Nick, it was purely a slimy attempt to discount the FACTS..
You know that… everyone knows that.
And yet again it FAILED COMPLETELY
Twiggy Forrest comes to mind.
There being no future government subsidies for iron ore mining, Twiggy has now unashamedly converted to a leading investor and advocate for wind, solar and hydrogen, and a vociferous critic of coal, gas, and nuclear.
Unfortunately/Fortunately ???, I have a reasonable amount of FMG shares that were purchase when FMG was just starting.
Made sense at the time.. 🙂
Now, LOTS of gain, but with Twiggy’s recent ideology shift, I really can’t figure out if to keep them or not… Capital gains tax etc etc…
A quandry, to say the least.
Well, take Warren Buffet’s advice (like Twiggy obviously did) –
“without the taxpayer subsidies and tax breaks, wind & solar make no sense at all”
Every single person whose income is somehow tied to AGW and/or “renewable energy” is an interested party in those things.
At root human beings are human beings and are interested parties in what is beneficial to their lives.
What he is interested in is his reason for being in the job.
He wants to supply RELIABLE electricity at the best price for customers.
Last thing he wants is for the grid to collapse because it lacks solidity of supply.
Of course he is an interested party…
It would be pretty ridiculous if was just another greenie suckophants like so many other stooges in important high paid positions.
You know… like your mates in CSIRO. !
“as it’s declared. It wasn’t, so I did.”
It WAS declared..
You just wanted to try to slime… and FAILED.
Energy Australia are also big investors in green energy Nick. They’re just saying the green stuff won’t be ready on time.
https://www.energyaustralia.com.au/about-us/energy-generation/energy-projects
Typical leftie response, attack the messenger, not the message.
Yes . Typical . In deep dodo , like some others ….
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-26/farmers-surround-eu-headquarters-as-agriculture-ministers-meet
Sweet Old Bob: Interesting choice of words… “In deep dodo… even if you meant “doo doo”, dodo works.😊
Ah one of our twin psychotics is back…so tell us Nick about all those Managing Directors of solar & wind farms telling everyone who will listen to “pump the brakes on this costly, unreliable, dirty energy source we’re providing”…instead they’re out there with their hands out looking for Billion$ of taxpayer money KNOWING their product sucks & is not capable in any way, shape or form of supplying the energy needs of a modern economy…but yeah, let’s dump on the coal guy cause he’s evil…
Meanwhile Twiggy (Sun Cable thought bubble) Forrest not surprisingly is intent on protecting his latest interests with all sorts of furphys-
Renewable energy proponents seem ‘very scared’ about nuclear push (msn.com)
There’s plenty of cash around for firmed up dispatchable energy that can actually make a return-
Analysis-Top global energy traders face multi-billion cash quandary (msn.com)
While those planet saving coal miners are just hanging out for all that renewable investment and green jobs they’re promised-
No projects in the pipeline for $43 billion Illawarra Renewable Energy Zone (msn.com)
Leftys don’t do tradeoffs eh Nick?
Green plan ‘mysteriously disappeared’ from government website (msn.com)
And on the other side of the coin, Twiggy Forrest touting green hydrogen because Fossil fuels are unreliable. 😉
True Nick.
Just like Twiggy Forrest (Fortescue Metals, iron ore behemoth) has now become a super crusader convert / advocate for “green energy” now that he’s put $5 billion of his loot from iron ore mining into government-subsidised wind & solar.
I’m shocked, shocked I tell you!
Yeah clean green Twiggy just digs the iron ore and ships it to China. It’s those yukky other dudes wot ship the coking coal for the Chinese to make the world’s steel and nothing to do with Twiggy. It’s a watermelon convert thing.
Seeing as it’s an Australian topic I’m going to use an Australian phrase.
You are so full of shit Nick.
Energy Australia runs one mine, Yallourn. It’s a relatively small mine, with moving of about 23Mt per annum. Most coal mines in Australia move hundreds of millions of tonnes each year.
You have no idea what you babble about.
They run a 1400 MW coal-fired station at Yallourn and a 1400 MW station at Mt Piper, NSW, with the associated mines.
They also run many other types of electricity supply.
Coal is just part of their portfolio.
COAL is currently providing MOST of the electricity in NSW, Qld, Vic.
Your continued attempt to SLIME and SMEAR is hereby noted.
Fortunately Coal is among the Reliable part
Usual tactic. The implication is that the only reason for Mr Collette to think and speak as he does is that its his financial interests talking. We then dismiss what he says.
This is a very common tactic at present. It is, for instance, impossible to express reservations about the social impact of Islamic beliefs and mores on UK society without being accused of being Islamophobic. After which anything the speaker has said can be dismissed out of hand.
Similarly, anyone arguing that trans-women should not be allowed to compete in women’s sport is transphobic, and their objections can be dismissed. Still worse, do not express doubts that as a matter of fact trans people are the sex they declare themselves to be. That is a form of hate speech. Any demand that the debate be conducted in terms of biology is also phobic. Probably heternormative and patriarchal also, and grossly upsetting to the LGBTQIA+ community.
Any white person claiming that their society is not institutionally racist is clearly disbarred from making any such argument because of the color of their skin. Notice however that if they make the argument that their society is institutionally racist, this is an argument to be received on its considerable merits which have nothing to do with skin color of the person speaking.
Its worth remembering where this is coming from. Its post-modernism channelling Marxism. The underlying theory is that there’s no objective truth or falsity. The only reality is one’s place in the means of production, later on widened to one’s place in the plethora of sexual, class, racial etc identities. So when someone of the wrong identity makes a proposition that is politically inconvenient, all one has to do is point to his or her position to know its wrong. All anyone can do when speaking is a sort of testifying to their place in society.
Well, unless ones utterances are politically correct, of course.
I know, its completely contradictory, because there seem to be some propositions after all which are, or are to be treated as, objectively true and false and not just expressions of the speaker’s place in society. This is what happens when you cross Hegel with the nonsense factory on the Left Bank. The result is Hegelian nonsense.
Been known for centuries in simpler terms as the logical fallacy of the Ad Hominem argument, and a bit later the motor has been known as epistemological and moral relativism.
And so when a wind or solar company CEO speaks about the importance of moving power generation to renewables we must clap politely. And when a coal company executive makes any remarks about the inadequacy of wind and solar, cough, clear our throats, look away, and ignore him.
This is being awfully precious about a common situation. If an expert says we should drink more milk, he may well be right. If it turns out he is the CEO of a milk company, he may still be right. But in the words of a famous and canny Brit, he would say that, wouldn’t he.
If he has facts to offer, listen well. But there are no facts in this post. Just an opinion from an “energy exec”. Then it is relevant to know that he is in fact COE of a firm that would benefit from the proposal. That is the information I added.
Again.. you are DELIBERATELY ignoring the fact that Energy Australia runs many types of electricity supply.
They sell solar and batteries..
In fact, EnergyAustralia has committed to building Australia’s first four-hour utility-scale battery of 350 MW capacity – larger than any battery operating in the world today.
But the CEO knows that coal will still be needed.
Again, you are TOTALLY INCAPABLE of countering anything that he has said.
It is as though you are totally aware that the NEM desperately needs some more solid reliable supplies, but can’t bring yourself to admit reality.
Your pathetic whinging is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT
You are making a total goose of yourself.. AGAIN !!
Could say the same about Jon Butterworth, who has said quite often in the UK that without gas there would have been blackouts on 262 days in 2022. He would say that, wouldn’t he? He’s the CEO of National Gas.
BUT IS HE RIGHT?
And if he is then what are the implications for the Net Zero project?
Two simple points: he is right, and the implications are that the Net Zero project is either not going to happen, or if it does its going to be done at the price of social and economic collapse. Because for 262 days of a given year (a fairly good year for wind) wind and solar could not deliver adequate or reliable supply, that is the underlying fact. If there is a climate crisis or not, they don’t work and are not fit for purpose of generating reliable power, and cannot be made to.
And no, overbuilding will not solve this problem.
“BUT IS HE RIGHT?”
Dunno. But he is stating a testable fact. This article just has a coal miner saying we should use more coal. His opinion.
You mean like Twiggy? “”Fossil fuels will continue to be unreliable, expensive, be used as a weapon and cost more to every Australian household, so we know what’s going to happen.”
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-26/andrew-forrest-slams-fossil-fuel-industry-nuclear-distraction/103512770
Temporary government measures can last over a hundred years in the right circumstances. Some well-built coal-fired power stations can easily cope with that.
I went and read the underlying article. Mr. Collette is being half realistic. The real half is that old coal will be needed for longer as ‘backup’. The unreal part is that there will ever be any other solution to renewable intermittency than fossil fuel fired backup, whether old coal or new CCGT.
The question for the Australian government is how soon reality intrudes on their green dreams? Sooner better than later.
A single new high-efficiency coal-fired power plant in each of the Eastern states would solve most current NEM availability, unreliability and cost fluctuation issues.
In China, each new supercritical coal generating station is sized about 1-1.2 GW per single generating unit and runs about 43% thermal efficiency after flue gas scrubbers. Bet they would sell some to Australia.
Info… thanks.
Rud,
Our Federal government recently discovered for itself the present trendy concept of “ambition”. Build it and they will come, is the thinking that now rules. Prudent engineering, economic and scientific confirmation is now minimised of trivialised, because the “vibes” are enough.
It is problematic that we lack a long queue of bright, forward-thinking, educated candidates itching to become future political leaders. Geoff S
I’ll bet they are regretting this foolhardy move from several years ago.
South Australia nps west coal bunker and tower demolition
South Australia has enough GAS, interconnects and some diesel gensets to keep the lights on.. mostly. But it is a small user of electricity compared to NSW, Vic and Qld.
The loss of Hazelwood in Victoria then Liddell in NSW were a much bigger problem as they significantly reduced the amount of reliable, dispatchable electricity available to the NEM.
My understanding is that those were very large but very old facilities due for retirement. The shame is that they were not replaced by dispatchable generation—either supercritical coal or CCGT.
South Australia should be a prime site for nuclear, they have world class Uranium reserves. The SA Premier actually suggested this in 2022, before he was shouted down by the green fanatics in Canberra.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/12/05/south-australia-pushes-for-zero-carbon-civilian-nuclear-power/
He wasn’t shouted down. What he actually said was:
“South Australia’s premier has comprehensively rejected the future use of nuclear power generators in Australia, saying the “completely uneconomic” technology had already been thoroughly investigated and dismissed.”
He also said ““Nuclear power is a source of baseload energy with zero carbon emissions. So, for someone like myself, who is dedicated to a decarbonisation effort, I think we should be open-minded to those technologies and I think it would be foolhardy to have a different approach.” – then later clarified his position with the rejection you quoted, after getting slammed by Canberra.
Nix cranial space only works in vacuum mode.
GAS and the interconnects is what SA relies on to cover the HUGE gaps left when there is no sun and no wind…. plus diesel gen-sets.
SA uses very little electricity compared to the big 3 states.
A decent size nuclear plant in SA would require a significant up-size in the interconnects to send to Vic and NSW to be of much use.
But get all the idiot-green and anti-nuclear nonsense out the way, and nuclear power would be quite worthwhile and would end up being quite economical for NSW, Qld and Victoria.
Far more economical than wind and solar can ever be, because it would be close to 100% reliable.
ultra supercritical coal and CCGT
At Hazelwood, the 3 units still functioning were operating at just over 100% of their rated capacity for something like 7 weeks straight.
Liddell had similar output over its last few months.
Again, Unit 3 was out of action,.. why repair it knowing they were shutting it down.
Currently, (9:30am) NSW, Qld and Vic are each running on about 70% coal.
ps.. overcast again….
.. grass areas, usually rather dry this time of year… are growing mushrooms !!
Remember, according to green religious doctrine a few hours backup capacity is all that will be needed to stabilise supplies – except at night, when the wind will always blow reliably.
So “renewables” are weather control tools?
That’s the part that grabbed my attention. Was that a slip or a statement of belief? Do some of the activists actually believe we can create Camalot by not driving SUVs?
I think it’s a variant of communist glorious future thinking.
“The future is certain, it is only the past which is unpredictable” – old Soviet joke.
Who in there right mind would invest in a coal plant when it as been signaled that it will be closed as soon as possible
What about the guarantee of supply of coal and purchase of electricity generated contact
this is meaningless fence sitting
Australia currently has an energy deadlock.
The countryside is so angry if they go ahead and seize land by eminent domain, I wouldn’t be surprised if the pylons are sabotaged – so nobody can connect new renewable stations to the grid. Nobody can effectively patrol thousands of miles of new power lines, they need the cooperation of the countryside to make it happen – and that cooperation is not on offer.
Nobody is investing in enough backup storage to make a difference.
The existing power stations are crumbling and on the verge of catastrophic failure.
Nobody is investing in fossil fuel, because they all expect to be shut down any minute, or slammed with punitive carbon taxes.
There is literally no way forward, until someone blinks.
They should just import some South African recyclers to do the job, those thousands of miles of copper wire and steel towers would disappear quick smart.
Great comment Eric.
And all based on a manic anti-science anti-CO2 “gas-of-life” agenda.
It really is absolute IDIOCY !!..
A mindless anti-science cult/fad of virtue-seeking IDIOCY !!
Fire up all fossil fuel and nuclear generators, build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators and remove all wind and solar from the grid.
The reporter has no clue. A deluded idiot could cover Australia (including 120GW in Port Phillip) in wind turbines and solar panels and Australia will still not meet the 70% by 2030.
NEM is already close to zero increase without storage now. Building more just lowers the CF of all existing intermittent generators. There is no usable sun for about 16 hours every day. Lunchtime power saturates nearly every day now in Australia. Lunchtime Tuesday and WDGs in Victoria and South Australia backing off. The wind often goes missing for two weeks at a time. Even Port Phillip losses wind on balmy days:
http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDV60801/IDV60801.95872.shtml
Been under 10kph since 0730 this Tuesday.
The only sensible thing option for households and businesses in Australia is to make your own. Have a solid plan in place and progressing toward getting off the grid. There are clowns in charge.
If you DIY you get hit with carbon taxes and carbon audits.
I don’t think energy intensive businesses have a future in Australia unless there are radical changes. Mining companies are struggling on generating their own onsite power, but punitive resource royalties and threats of carbon taxes are strangling that loophole.
“Mining companies”… are you referring only to coal? If referring also to precious metals mining… would the lack of generation for precious metals mines not seriously affect prices in some way? Comments appreciated, if this is not too dumb a question.
International mining companies have big spreadsheets full of cost benefit analysis run by Actuaries. I spent some years helping Actuaries extract data for their models, and debugging scaled up Actuarial models, so I have some idea what they do.
The moment that profitability line drops below break even, or even too close to break even, new investment capital is diverted to other countries.
That appears to already be happening in the Aussie coal industry.
Precious metals, I haven’t really paid much attention. But it seems likely there are marginal precious metals operations which are paying close attention to costs right now.
Thank you.
Precious metals; I believe nickel in Australia is in trouble due to Indonesian supply . .
It depends.
I’m currently working with some coal mining companies doing strategic planning and the Safeguard Mechanism pricing starts to kick in significantly from about 2030 under their modelling. By 2035 the “tax” is almost equivalent to the mine’s total cost of getting the coal out of the ground. It is a huge impost and will drive many mines to the wall. Which is what the lunatics want.
Precious metal mines will not be as exposed as most of the safeguard cost is associated with fugitive emissions which they do not typically have many issues with. They will however be exposed to diesel usage.
It also depends on how they are financed and hedging activity. They may be able to offset some exposure by the use of such instruments, though many mines have been sunk by hedging as well.
If margins go slightly negative for a short time they may try to ride it through, as putting a mine on care and maintenance has significant costs.
tt will not be a DIY. You have to use licensed/approved installers to get the various State government handouts in Victoria. My plan is to go all electric apart from wood burner for heating and operate off-grid. I already run half my electric load off-grid. A bigger battery once my 66c/kWh FIT ends and I can ditch the gas and electricity connection fees. They alone are heading toward $1000 a year in Victoria. The connection fee is where all the capital cost has to be levied because WDG fuel cost is zero. Increase in connection fee will pay for Snowy 2.
I will have a small generator to make up if the need arises but my preference is to instal more solar panels tilted to maximise winter sunlight.
State and Federal governments are doing everything they can to de-industrialise Australia as is every other western nation. If you want something manufactured then go to China or India. These are developing nations so their carbon is all virtuous – blessed if you will by the hand of God.
As long as citizens don’t mind paying for a triple-system that provides the electric load of one, who cares? I think Hillary said “What difference does it make?”
Way to go OZ — following the lead of a failed US crook/politician.
Given the current trajectory, soon the system will likely not even provide the electric load of one.
I’m not alone in this concern, the AEMO, the main industry body responsible for overseeing the Aussie electrical grid, recently warned the grid is in danger of shortages and blackouts.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/09/03/aemo-east-coast-aussie-states-are-failing-or-about-to-fail-energy-reliability-standards/
Well Black out Bowen is trying to follow that and also the rejected EU material. But Black Out like Airbus Albo everything is on more than one A4 page is totally confusing and they only read the first page so long as it is the “VIBE”. Facts are not omportant.
The fact that the EU, UK and USA are down grading their EV vehicle mandates does not worry Ole Black Out as that is some document he has not read yet, if ever. They don’t match the “VIBE” so why bother.
Stand by generator on its way for purchase.
Oh dearie me.
Its evening in Australia, and solar is all but gone.
Now the breeze has dropped.
NSW is using 72% Black COAL and 15% hydro..
Queensland is using 70% Black COAL and 22% GAS
Victoria is using 70% brown COAL, 10% Gas and 11% Hydro
Even little South Australia is using 70% gas and 9%diesel (still a bit of sun there) plus some brown coal power from Victoria…… Cost in SA is $9,900 !!!
COAL IS STILL VERY MUCH KING !!
If the Albanese government did something as theoretically simple as guaranteeing a 10% annual rate of return on every dollar invested in renewable energy infrastructure — i.e., the wind turbines, the solar panels, the transmission and distribution equipment, and the backup batteries — wouldn’t there be a mad scramble by RE developers to close the gap between the vision and the reality of Australia’s Net Zero transition?
And coal has the advantage of adding significant amounts of life-giving oxides of carbon to the atmosphere and thereby sporting the thriving of life on Earth. Since no-one has proven any negative effects of this strategy, other than what appears in computer models that fail consistently to model accurately future climate metrics, this should be a slam dunk decision. And why only temporary? Coal plants are efficient, relatively inexpensive, reliable regardless of the weather and last a very long time.