Future of the Australian Electricity Market

One of many alternatives out there, and some are MUCH closer to market. Whenever I see an article out of a university, it usually means they've cobbled something together on the bench, initial testing looks promising, and they are desperate to attract funding to further their research. Unfortunately (in my direct experience) academics tend not to have much understanding of the "real world", so it could take them a while (and $$$) to get there :D.

Funny story - I did some consultancy work a few years ago for a university spinoff outfit developing a novel kind of optical sensor. They promoted it as a real "world changing" technology with all sorts of exciting applications, when in reality it had some pretty fundamental limitations (narrow operating temperature range, low bandwidth, very high cost) which really limited it to a few niche markets. All the hype was good enough to attract grant money though, and I'm sure they all lived it up for a few years, but inevitably the bubble burst leaving just a couple of sad little faces covered in soapy water. Website hasn't been updated since 2020, so I guess it finally crashed and burned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Brush

... Website hasn't been updated since 2020, so I guess it finally crashed and burned.

---

Zinc-Air batteries have been dominant in hearing aids for quite a few years, in part because they have the highest energy density of any commercial battery technology. But there seems to be a couple of constraints on the technology:

• It cannot be upscaled to larger batteries - like AAA size, and
• It is non-rechargable.

Many of the major battery companies are both using the technology and researching it. Here is a paper by Energiser:
https://data.energizer.com/pdfs/zinc...ichandbook.pdf

The scientists among you will remember that the utopian concept of nuclear Fusion has been trotted out as being around the corner for at least forty years: Probably more like fifty or even sixty years.

Is limitless clean energy possible? Nuclear fusion could be the answer (msn.com)

After all this time they have finally been able to produce more energy than it took to make it. The economic viability and large scale now remains. :rolleyes:

I don't think it will be in time to meet the net zero timeline.

Regards
Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

The scientists among you will remember that the utopian concept of nuclear Fusion has been trotted out as being around the corner for at least forty years: ...

---

Hell, Paul, I can remember when nuclear fission was going to be so cheap that it would not be worth the cost of metering electricity.

Still waiting.

If I have this story straight, back in (I think) the 1970s there was going to be some kind of nuclear reactor built at Jervis Bay (don't know if it was for power, more research or what). It got to the stage where they had poured at least part of the slab before it got canned.

I just had a look on Maps at where I thought I had previously seen it (in the flesh), and it seems to me it must have been at Murrays Beach, right at the southern tip.

Google Maps

Zoom out and check this horrible part of the world - definitely worthy of a nuclear bomb! Or not.

I should explain that I am not opposed to nuclear power in total: Just as it exists for the moment with the all the associated limitations. It is certainly worth continued research with the proviso any "solution" has to be safe, able to be built in a reasonable period of time, easily located to the satisfaction of any populace and the requirements of the transmission lines, eventually easily de-commissionable and, most importantly, affordable. The last one means it needs to be economically viable for private enterprise to pick up and run with it.

I don't believe it has to provide cheaper power than renewables, at least, not while they are unable to deliver reliable power 24/7.

Having said that, it is a big ask for such a venture to be viable if only competitive during the sunless or windless hours. It is the very issue thermal stations are experiencing right now and they are the cheapest form of continuous power we have, providing they already exist (ie. don't have to be built).

Regards
Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

If I have this story straight, back in (I think) the 1970s there was going to be some kind of nuclear reactor built at Jervis Bay (don't know if it was for power, more research or what). It got to the stage where they had poured at least part of the slab before it got canned.

I just had a look on Maps at where I thought I had previously seen it (in the flesh), and it seems to me it must have been at Murrays Beach, right at the southern tip.

Google Maps

Zoom out and check this horrible part of the world - definitely worthy of a nuclear bomb! Or not.

---

FF

That was nearly the first nuclear reactor in Oz back in 1969:

Jervis Bay Nuclear Power Plant - Wikipedia

As you can see from the Wiki article, it was planned to be a 500MW unit and was nearly a 600MW unit, but as you said, it got canned. Thermal power was just too damned cheap in comparison! However, according to the article, there was an underlying aspiration to make nuclear weapons too. The concept was for a nuclear fission facility rather than the nuclear fusion. There is quite a big difference. The only nuclear fusion reactor within four and a half light years is the sun.

You are quite right and it is probably the only carpark designed by so many high level technicians and physicists.

"About 70 staff were involved full-time in evaluating tenders, principally from the Australian Atomic Energy Commission and the Electricity Commission of New South Wales, and more than 150 others had a significant part-time role."

:)

Regards
Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

...nuclear Fusion has been trotted out as being around the corner for at least forty years: Probably more like fifty or even sixty years.

---

My late FiL, who was a plasma physicist, was working on the magnetic field containment of nuclear fusion in the mid 60s, so definitely going back sixty years.

The failure of fusion to become a working and economic source of energy is one of the great disappointments in modern science. The theoretical concept is sound but the engineering challenges to bring it into reality, let alone at a competitive price, were too great for it to replace power generation by nuclear fission at a time when it was most needed. I expect it is an idea that is past its used by date.

Unlike other fellow travellers on the left, I too have never been opposed to nuclear power. But, for all the reasons Paul points out, fission is also becoming a source of power that is close to its used by date, for most purposes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

That was nearly the first nuclear reactor in Oz back in 1969

---

Canned by Billy McMahon of all people. I didn't know that he'd made a good decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

... I didn't know that he'd made a good decision.

---

Me, either. Must have been a mistake?

Remember that the "Pyramid of Responsibility" applies. The fewer decisions made, the further up the hierarchy you get. The guy at the top of most organisations only got there by being very careful not to make ANY decisions at all.........:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Brush

Remember that the "Pyramid of Responsibility" applies. The fewer decisions made, the further up the hierarchy you get. The guy at the top of most organisations only got there by being very careful not to make ANY decisions at all.........:rolleyes:

---

Or in the case of Billy McMahon, because John Gorton voted against himself in a tied vote of no confidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Or in the case of Billy McMahon, because John Gorton voted against himself in a tied vote of no confidence.

---

True. The record shows that John Gorton had no confidence in John Gorton, and voted accordingly.

A unique situation of political honesty. Wish more were as insightful.

Seems more and more likely that eraring coal fired station in NSW wont be closing in 2025 after all. Its almost like they where planning this from the start to get a bunch of government funding

I hadn't heard anything about this event at Yallourn in July (presumably those of you in the business might have heard about it?):
Yallourn Power Station safety concerns are bad news as Australia enters long, hot summer - ABC News


What situations like this highlight is how badly Australia has dropped the ball in the conversion away from fossil fuel power generation. We have all these power stations closing down in recent years, but because of government intransigence and head-in-the-sand attitudes we are not ready to seamlessly transition to renewables...as we so easily could have been, had we started proper preparation even as few as 10-12 years ago. It would have been better to start in the mid-90s of course, but now we seem to be in somewhat of a panic.

With what promises to be another hell summer coming it will be interesting to see how the grid copes with the air-conditioning demand during daylight hours. On the one hand we have far more solar panels in place in the last few years, but on the other we have lost Liddell 6 months ago (and another?) since the 2019-20 summer, and Yallourn could pack it in any old time, apparently, particularly if it is put under stress. (it's surprisingly difficult to find a list of "what power stations have closed down already")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

What situations like this highlight is how badly Australia has dropped the ball in the conversion away from fossil fuel power generation.

---

I'm no longer convinced that Australia has dropped the ball any more than anyone else. I also believe there's an awful lot of creative accounting involved in the entire climate change and conversion to renewable energy "propaganda". For example, prior to the Ukraine situation I would have told you that Germany and most European countries were well on their way to converting to renewables, but that really doesn't align with the total panic caused by Russian threats to stop selling them natural gas! If they are so "renewable", then why does a shortage of natural gas create such a drama? Some countries may have indeed progressed, by I suspect the majority have just employed some statisticians!

The creative accounting doesn't stop there, of course. Everything that is "carbon neutral" is in fact based entirely on calculating some hypothetical relationship between the present and some imaginary future. For example, in the last month and a half, the monitoring system for my PV system tells me I have saved (i.e. avoided the release of) 2 tonnes of CO2. This is calculated as the equivalent of planting 42 trees. That statement, of course, relies on those 42 trees growing to full size, with no further intervention, watering, management etc., and then (presumably) either staying in the ground or being used in perpetuity as timber. So in reality, all those "carbon neutral" claims just means they planted some trees - it has almost zero impact on the current situation.

Where Australia does seem to have failed is the distribution grid, and energy storage. If we could easily shunt power from one place to another (a prerequisite for renewables) the actual conversion could be quite rapid - I have watched large wind and solar farms being built in very short order. Unfortunately, it seems that whilst the price we pay for the grid has jumped massively over the last 20 years or so, that money hasn't been used to improve anything. Renewables rely on "nature", and nature isn't constant, so a robust distribution system is required in order that power from one place can be used in the other side of the country when it's windy in one area but cloudy in another. Equally, on a smaller scale, power from rooftop systems can be used across the community - at present I have a 25kW PV installation that much of the time feeds 0.5kW to my house, exports at my 5kW limit, and has nearly 20kW of headroom that is simply throttled because the grid can't deal with it. Any excess energy, whether from rooftop systems or "commercial" generators, could be stored for later use, but only if the grid could transfer it.

I suspect that one of the biggest issues here is that the system, as has been discussed previously in this thread, needs to make a profit because it has been privatised. Sadly I don't think it would be any better if it were still publicly owned, because the government(s) don't have great track records themselves!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

With what promises to be another hell summer coming it will be interesting to see how the grid copes with the air-conditioning demand during daylight hours

---

Given that the price of power falls to negative due to over production of PV during the day, I'd assume there is nothing to worry about....... ROFL.....

The European gas problem is due to external politics (i.e. Russia). Our shortcomings are due to internal politics, when we should actually be leading the way, given the resources we have available. IIRC, we do have the highest per-capita take-up of solar panels but what you have highlighted in your 3rd para is the guts of the issue:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

Where Australia does seem to have failed is the distribution grid, and energy storage.

---

Decent energy storage is reliant on still-emerging technologies, so maybe we can't blame Govts for that, but our grid is like John Howard...sooo 1950s. It would have been obvious to any level of management 20 years ago that we needed to get cracking on preparing the grid for modern times.

The coming summer will stress test our system. Will it pass, or will we see multiple failures?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

I'm no longer convinced that Australia has dropped the ball any more than anyone else. I also believe there's an awful lot of creative accounting involved in the entire climate change and conversion to renewable energy "propaganda". For example, prior to the Ukraine situation I would have told you that Germany and most European countries were well on their way to converting to renewables, but that really doesn't align with the total panic caused by Russian threats to stop selling them natural gas! If they are so "renewable", then why does a shortage of natural gas create such a drama? Some countries may have indeed progressed, by I suspect the majority have just employed some statisticians!


Where Australia does seem to have failed is the distribution grid, and energy storage. If we could easily shunt power from one place to another (a prerequisite for renewables) the actual conversion could be quite rapid - I have watched large wind and solar farms being built in very short order. Unfortunately, it seems that whilst the price we pay for the grid has jumped massively over the last 20 years or so, that money hasn't been used to improve anything. Renewables rely on "nature", and nature isn't constant, so a robust distribution system is required in order that power from one place can be used in the other side of the country when it's windy in one area but cloudy in another. Equally, on a smaller scale, power from rooftop systems can be used across the community - at present I have a 25kW PV installation that much of the time feeds 0.5kW to my house, exports at my 5kW limit, and has nearly 20kW of headroom that is simply throttled because the grid can't deal with it. Any excess energy, whether from rooftop systems or "commercial" generators, could be stored for later use, but only if the grid could transfer it.

I suspect that one of the biggest issues here is that the system, as has been discussed previously in this thread, needs to make a profit because it has been privatised. Sadly I don't think it would be any better if it were still publicly owned, because the government(s) don't have great track records themselves!



Given that the price of power falls to negative due to over production of PV during the day, I'd assume there is nothing to worry about....... ROFL.....

---

Warb

Still the same issue of night and day in Europe. Renewables don't deliver at night or when the wind is in the doldrums. They are not 100% renewable even during the day (neither is Australia. Still a long way to go). Negative prices just point to an oversupply on the spot market. Contracts are still in place for the majority of power delivered.
As well as equipment needing replacement or upgrades, there is the issue of distribution, which is down to cable size in many instances. The greater the distance, the larger the cable required, so power from SA is not going to reach Cairns in QLD very satisfactorily.

Privatisation is a major worry for the distribution. It is hard to know even who owns what compared to the previous arrangements. At least then you knew who to blame: Not that it would have done much good.

Your issue with 20Kw that can't be delivered is more to do with all the other people in your vicinity. It is the total amount of power. I know you have looked at storage and that would be your best bet so that you could feed into the grid at night. Down the track I would guess (but certainly don't know) that a premium will be paid for power during the dark and windless hours.

The irony of all this was that back in the fifties (1950 for NSW) the state governments took over the electricity systems to provide continuity of power. That is what they should again, but I won't be betting any body parts on that happening.

There is nothing to worry about with power through the day. Correct. It is the other sixteen hours, on average, that should concern you.

Regards
Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

I hadn't heard anything about this event at Yallourn in July (presumably those of you in the business might have heard about it?):
Yallourn Power Station safety concerns are bad news as Australia enters long, hot summer - ABC News


What situations like this highlight is how badly Australia has dropped the ball in the conversion away from fossil fuel power generation. We have all these power stations closing down in recent years, but because of government intransigence and head-in-the-sand attitudes we are not ready to seamlessly transition to renewables...as we so easily could have been, had we started proper preparation even as few as 10-12 years ago. It would have been better to start in the mid-90s of course, but now we seem to be in somewhat of a panic.

With what promises to be another hell summer coming it will be interesting to see how the grid copes with the air-conditioning demand during daylight hours. On the one hand we have far more solar panels in place in the last few years, but on the other we have lost Liddell 6 months ago (and another?) since the 2019-20 summer, and Yallourn could pack it in any old time, apparently, particularly if it is put under stress. (it's surprisingly difficult to find a list of "what power stations have closed down already")

---

FF

I had not seen anything about that. However, that hangar is a device that supports the large steam/water pipes. As things heat up, they expand so everything has to be able to move freely both longitudinally and vertically. I would expect that following that incident an inspection was made of every hanger in the plant for signs of structural failure. Not that big an issue unless you were under it when it fell. It is a sign that some checks that should be performed are being missed. The typical life of a thermal power station is fifty years and Yallourn is 47 years old. Not much incentive to plough wheelbarrow loads of cash into an ageing plant. I think WPHS would have been on to them.

Just out of the interest, the boilers in all these power stations are suspended on ginormous beams above the boiler. This is so that as the boiler heats up it expands ("grows") downwards. The beams at Bayswater were huge. Imagine a UB with a web 1.8m to 2m deep and flanges more than 50mm thick. I would expect the Yallourn boilers to be at least as big if not bigger, Although the units are smaller, the brown coal boilers are huge in comparison to black coal boilers.

Just on the "ball" aspect I saw that they are going to replace 1480MWs (24 hrs per day) with a 350MW battery (one or two hours?). What are these people thinking?

Regards
Paul

Power stations being phased out in the next ten years are (and this could change a bit):
2025 NSW Eraring (but will probably go full term to 2030 or so)
2028 VIC Yallourn
2028 QLD Callide B
2029 NSW Vales Pt B
2033 NSW Bayswater

And in the west:
2024 WA Muja 6
2027 WA Collie
2029 WA Muja 7

According to Wiki, the east has a total of 21,050 MW at max production, and by 2033 when those 5 above have closed we will have lost 9020 MW, or 43% of production.
If Eraring does close in 2025, and Yallourn hobbles through to 2028, we will have lost 5060 MW or 24% by 2028.


Hard to see how this is not absolutely spot on:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Down the track I would guess (but certainly don't know) that a premium will be paid for power during the dark and windless hours.
There is nothing to worry about with power through the day. Correct. It is the other sixteen hours, on average, that should concern you.

---

That then makes me wonder if selling power to the grid, at what should become decent prices for FITs in dark hours, will make batteries far more viable, even at their current costs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Still the same issue of night and day in Europe. Renewables don't deliver at night or when the wind is in the doldrums. They are not 100% renewable even during the day (neither is Australia. Still a long way to go). Negative prices just point to an oversupply on the spot market. Contracts are still in place for the majority of power delivered.
As well as equipment needing replacement or upgrades, there is the issue of distribution, which is down to cable size in many instances. The greater the distance, the larger the cable required, so power from SA is not going to reach Cairns in QLD very satisfactorily.

---

All true, and a major issue for renewables. The grid needs to be oversized to allow for renewables, and that hasn't been done or even started (AFAIK). The distance issue is very real, but to some extent we just need to suck it up - the loses are part of the foundation of the dream! On the other hand, perhaps smaller scale local storage systems could provide a stepping stone solution, allowing shorter distance transport to top up reserves? Australia grows a lot of wheat, but it's not all stored in one place - large storage facilities at export ports are supplied by a network of medium sized storage facilities in turn fed by local facilities, right down individual farm silos. These are all linked by rail and truck networks. Interestingly this system also comprises a large number of different businesses, but they make it work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Your issue with 20Kw that can't be delivered is more to do with all the other people in your vicinity. It is the total amount of power. I know you have looked at storage and that would be your best bet so that you could feed into the grid at night. Down the track I would guess (but certainly don't know) that a premium will be paid for power during the dark and windless hours.

---

It's not really to do with the people in my vicinity, it's because the grid can't deal with it. My previous property was very similar, as were the people in the vicinity, yet I could export without limit. The difference was that I had a large 3phase transformer connected to a "big cable" (and maybe higher voltage, just an assumption) section of the grid (the old irrigation pump had a 60kW motor!). My new property has a baby single phase transformer connected to a baby single phase (2 wire) arm of the grid. And the problems are going to get worse. We are being told to replace our fossil fuelled devices with electric ones. My induction cooktop can draw 11kW, and if I bought a Tesla that would be another 11kW. That's 22kW and my transformer is an old 100amp unit. Now imagine everybody on my grid arm doing the same thing. Yes, it's the people in my vicinity, but we're all trying to do the right thing (or at least what we're being told is the right thing!) and the grid simply can't cope!

I did actually get a pair of 10kWH batteries, and they're working very well. My first full month with the new system resulted in a bill with a $0.59 credit, even with the 5kW feed limit. At present the batteries last the entire night, even if I forget to run the "off-peak" water heater during the day, but cooking at night (all electric) plus water heating can run them close to flat (actually they keep a 10% reserve for grid failure events). I'm now looking at a heat pump water heater to reduce my water heating usage, and daylight saving should hopefully mean dinner is cooked with at least some direct solar usage!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

The European gas problem is due to external politics (i.e. Russia). ...

---

Yes, but there is also some basic economic factors at play.

As Europe increased it supply of renewables it also increased instability in the network - the periods when the sun don't shine and the wind don't blow - often largely unpredictable. It needed a source to fill in those gaps - batteries are not yet cost effective, pumped hydro has a 10+ year lead time, etc - and so they increased reliance on gas rather than coal fired power stations.

• Gas fired power stations can respond to changes in demand fairly quickly, but
• Coal fired power stations require Paul (or his equivalent) to go and tell someone to start shovelling coal and then we have to wait for the boilers to heat up.

But when you look at sourcing of gas, two big players emerge - OPEC and Russia. Frankly, I would never trust either. Europe did, but what was their alternative?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

I'm now looking at a heat pump water heater to reduce my water heating usage, and daylight saving should hopefully mean dinner is cooked with at least some direct solar usage!

---

Then you should research the NSW Govt ESS scheme for replacing old HWS with Heat Pumps for free - have to pay some installation costs, and not sure how that will work in your area. Here in Katoomba my total outlay for a 215 litre HP installed will be around $160.

Upgrade your hot water system | NSW Climate and Energy Action

Be warned that the have not organised this site at all well. You might expect that you could look for who does them in your area? Nope, got look at each website and get a minor clue, and then make numerous phone calls. Disgustingly poor organisation, done by a chimp.

Older aircon units can also be upgraded. Bon chance!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

• Coal fired power stations require Paul (or his equivalent) to go and tell someone to start shovelling coal and then we have to wait for the boilers to heat up.

But when you look at sourcing of gas, two big players emerge - OPEC and Russia. Frankly, I would never trust either. Europe did, but what was their alternative?

---

Graeme

Actually we have some pretty impressive "coal shovelers", although they can turn up their toes during prolonged wet weather events. However, the response time of coal fired units is dictated by the boiler capability. All units have ramp rates, although they will be very variable from station to station. Typically, they will be between 3MW/min and 5MW/min in the raise direction and likely a little faster in the lower direction. Unfortunately, coal fired units are better suited to more consistent loading hence part of the reason why they have traditionally been regarded as "base load" power plants, but not solely, as base load relies heavily on economics first and foremost, particularly in today's competitive market. Conversely, Gas and Hydro have very fast response times in times of crisis.

It may be a very long time before anybody can count on Russia. As for OPEC, I am guessing that their aim is to make a few shekels before they become a total pariah so no economic relief there.

Regards
Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

... but our grid is like John Howard...sooo 1950s. It would have been obvious to any level of management 20 years ago that we needed to get cracking on preparing the grid for modern times.

---

Well, yes the powers that be DID see that. That's why it was all privatised. Not their problem any more. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Then you should research the NSW Govt ESS scheme for replacing old HWS with Heat Pumps for free - have to pay some installation costs, and not sure how that will work in your area.

---

Thanks!

I've just had a quick look and there seems, at least on the face of it, to be no overlap between Sanden dealers and ESS approved (A)CP's in my area (NSW but near Canberra). Unfortunately I'm finding that there are so many people in Canberra who can be easily separated from their money that the tradies don't really want to drive 30 minutes out of the city. Equally, and perhaps because of this, they are very cluey about the government grants in the ACT, but often less so about NSW.

Having said that, I'll phone the dealers that Sanden list for my area (even though at least one lists the suburbs they cover and mine isn't amongst them) because Sanden do say their heaters are now ESS approved.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

Sanden do say their heaters are now ESS approved.....

---

Interesting. The two companies I have spoken to only use EcoGenica. Be prepared for whomever you speak to act like they are doing you a giant favour by letting you give them business. Both of them had to be told in no uncertain terms to stop emailing, texting and calling me at peril of not getting the business, and that I will let them know when I am ready.

Warb, this might help:
Find a Dealer – Sanden Hot Water Heat Pumps

On the right there are three dropdowns, and I am currently checking the Rebate Calculator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Be prepared for whomever you speak to act like they are doing you a giant favour by letting you give them business.

---

This I'm having to get used to! I lived on the same farm for the last 20odd years, and along the way I gathered a group of "old men" tradesmen who I could deal with on sensible and friendly terms, would give me honest opinions and turn up when they promised. Having sold the farm, retired, and moved to this new area, I'm dealing with younger tradesmen who charge like a wounded bull, don't always turn up, often don't have the right parts when they do turn up, and charge a callout fee for each visit - very annoying when the second and third visits are because they didn't bring the parts they should have known they needed the first time! The only thing they can be relied upon to do in a timely manner is to send the invoice........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Warb, this might help:
Find a Dealer – Sanden Hot Water Heat Pumps

On the right there are three dropdowns, and I am currently checking the Rebate Calculator.

---

Sadly it doesn't cover the ESS, only the STC's. I got a "quote" from one of the three dealers listed for my area, and it was a painful process. I called them and was told to use their website to get a quote. Not interested in talking. The quote page doesn't allow for selection of system, it basically just emails a standard quote (from what I can see) for the smallest Sanden tank. They want pictures of the existing system, including serial number etc. before they go any further (presumably to calculate rebates?).

Unfortunately my system is in a 45 degree corner in the basement, the nameplate is hidden, I want a bigger tank than standard, and WiFi, and the heat exchanger outside. So their quote is useless to me. When I looked further I noticed that whilst they say they service my area, no physical address is given. My suspicion is that they are a web-based company in an office somewhere who just find a local plumber wherever the customer happens to be. I could be wrong, but it didn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling!

Sanden list two other dealers in my area. One specifies the suburbs it services, and mine isn't listed. The other seem to have a physical address in Canberra, but their webpage is big on hype and short on detail. I think I may pay them a visit and see if they can help!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

Sadly it doesn't cover the ESS, only the STC's.

---

Yes, I noticed that. They may be having some teething problems trying to fit into the clunky NSW system. I have sent an email to one supplier and a text to another, but I may also ring Sanden direct. The ESS scheme is not due to finish until "sometime 2025" so there is no rush (even though the installers pretend there is).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

They want pictures of the existing system, including serial number etc. before they go any further (presumably to calculate rebates?).

---

They want to be able to see the installation site so they can calculate how much the "heavily subsidised" installation will be, and they want to know what they will be taking away for recycling. They also want to see your circuit board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

I want a bigger tank than standard

---

HP HWS can be smaller capacity than what it is replacing. It starts heating up water as soon as you turn the tap on, so that, e.g. a 215 litre tank can give you 300, maybe 400 litres a day if necessary. You have 215 litres before you hit the water that is still being heated, and IIRC they heat about 60 litres per hour. In my case, because I am using Amber Electricity at wholesale prices, I will aim to have showers at around 11am to 2pm when sparks are usually super-cheap. It will also mean that I will not have Controlled Load needs, and will save that daily connection fee.

Perhaps you could consider relocating the HP and Tank somewhere else outside (hot water pipes and circuits permitting).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

They want to be able to see the installation site so they can calculate how much the "heavily subsidised" installation will be, and they want to know what they will be taking away for recycling. They also want to see your circuit board.


HP HWS can be smaller capacity than what it is replacing. It starts heating up water as soon as you turn the tap on, so that, e.g. a 215 litre tank can give you 300, maybe 400 litres a day if necessary. You have 215 litres before you hit the water that is still being heated, and IIRC they heat about 60 litres per hour. In my case, because I am using Amber Electricity at wholesale prices, I will aim to have showers at around 11am to 2pm when sparks are usually super-cheap. It will also mean that I will not have Controlled Load needs, and will save that daily connection fee.

Perhaps you could consider relocating the HP and Tank somewhere else outside (hot water pipes and circuits permitting).

---

There's really no need to relocate the system, the current location is perfect and simply requires the pipework to go through the outside wall that the tank sits against. The issue in this case is simply that the nameplate of the existing system is hidden because it's tight in a corner.

The circuit board requirement is also strange, though not really an issue. Replacing a 5kW (ish) system with a 0.9kW one shouldn't require anything other than a smaller breaker, I would have thought! Equally they wanted to see the meter box. Why? My only thought was to see if the existing system was on a controlled load circuit, and it's not, it simply has a timer which isn't in either the circuit breaker box or the meter box and so wouldn't be covered in either p[icture!

Our existing tank is 400L. I'd like the 315L Sanden tank (from memory) because 200L is too small by their own reckoning, and the "usual" 300L tank is too tall. The 315L is wider but somewhat shorter and would fit the space (assuming all the connections are on the same side!).

My concern was more the way they seem to do business than the details of the system, especially as they also fail to mention the ESS anywhere in their quote, they simply list STC's etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

The issue in this case is simply that the nameplate of the existing system is hidden because it's tight in a corner.

---

Can you see the compliance plate with the aid of a mirror? Take a pic of the reflection, and then reverse it with software?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Can you see the compliance plate with the aid of a mirror? Take a pic of the reflection, and then reverse it with software?

---

I don't think so. The tank is tight in a corner of two brick walls (45 degree angle or so). There's no nameplate on the visible side, and no room to get around (or over) the tank to see the other side. I'd have to use a long inspection camera, and even then it would be tricky because I have no idea where the plate might be!! I'm guessing it won't be visible until the tank comes out, but I also can't see why that should be an issue - why do they need the serial number in advance, especially as they're not even quoting for the ESS replacement scheme.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

why do they need the serial number in advance, especially as they're not even quoting for the ESS replacement scheme.

---

Maybe they need pre-approval for the STCs? I suspect you may need to talk to Sanden about who can do it under ESS. One of the local (small) operators here has just told me he does them under ESS so the available operators might be a bit more widespread than the website suggests. The previous two I dealt with were both Adelaide based. I'll know more in a day or two.

Funnily enough, there's a new Matt Ferrell vid on Heat Pumps.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npqz...zRFZzw&index=3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

It's not really to do with the people in my vicinity, it's because the grid can't deal with it. My previous property was very similar, as were the people in the vicinity, yet I could export without limit. The difference was that I had a large 3phase transformer connected to a "big cable" (and maybe higher voltage, just an assumption) section of the grid (the old irrigation pump had a 60kW motor!). My new property has a baby single phase transformer connected to a baby single phase (2 wire) arm of the grid. And the problems are going to get worse. We are being told to replace our fossil fuelled devices with electric ones. My induction cooktop can draw 11kW, and if I bought a Tesla that would be another 11kW. That's 22kW and my transformer is an old 100amp unit. Now imagine everybody on my grid arm doing the same thing. Yes, it's the people in my vicinity, but we're all trying to do the right thing (or at least what we're being told is the right thing!) and the grid simply can't cope!

!

---

yeah, dunno what its going to be like in 20 years.. the poor old power lines above will be glowing red when everyone is trying to cook dinner and fast charge their electric car at the same time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

... I'd have to use a long inspection camera, and even then it would be tricky because I have no idea where the plate might be!! ...

---

Or put your phone on a wanker stick, hit the video button, and record all of the back of the cylinder. Then take a still of the compliance plate from the video. If it is not clear, then you will now know where the compliance plate is so you can take a high res photo.

This news article highlights why we need to sort out storage asap (like we didn't know...but)
Rooftop solar '''cannibalising''' power prices as Australian generators pay to stay online - ABC News


I'll serve this over to those in the industry that know better:

• we know we are facing a problem that needs a solution with regard to providing industrial quality power, and any rating of power when it's dark, no wind and so on.
• Referring back to my post about losing ¼ of our FF power in five years, and 43% in ten years (remember the Covid pandemic started just under 4 years ago – time flies),
• and also given that we aren't going to economically solve the storage problem for at least 5 years (maybe longer),
• what would be wrong with building 1 or 2 Gas fired power stations with current technology being cleaner than previous, as long as we can stay within the net zero target?

Wouldn't that be better and more reliable than pouring $12(?) billion into Snowy 2.0? IIRC, GF can be pumping out sparks within 60 minutes of being asleep (as it would be during the day, and NOT having to pay to be awake).

Industry needs certainty for confident investing, and I'm sure that they are not particularly confident of having their power supply demands met in the next decade or so. All well and good for households with rooftop becoming so dominant and relatively cheap, but industry needs a different quality of power.

We can still put out some CO2 as long as we compensate for that output with sequestering, or other reductions. GF power stations would have to be a whole lot less CO2 (et al) than Eraring and co.

FF

That article is quite a good summary of the situation, although I don't quite agree with the apportioning of blame.

Home owners, primarily although not exclusively, dig into their pockets and place solar on their roof to mitigate their rising electricity bills. Solar farms build their facilities to make money. Did they do their research? They had no problem taking money when fossil fuelled stations were back to negative prices (negative prices are typically in effect between 0900hrs and 1500hrs, but this does vary considerably). There is a shoulder period either side of the negative prices where the cost is in the black, but still uneconomic. To say that roof top solar is to blame for the issues is a little trite and quite disingenuous.

However, it has to be remembered that we are talking about the spot market, which is a small section of the market. My guess is that the spot market could be somewhere in the vicinity of 20% to 30% of the total with the rest being under fixed contracts. At the start of Spring demand is low (same situation when we come to Autumn) and the pricing anomalies are exacerbated at this time.

As the article pointed out and we have stated so many times on this thread, we have been at the point for some time where we really need to concentrate on storage more than straight renewables. The dilemma is that the renewables cannot cope with continuity of supply and the fossil fueled stations cannot compete economically only operating at night. As more renewables come online and supply through the day (solar), the thermal stations will be less able to renew their fixed contracts at economic prices.

Regards
Paul

Edit: On the Gas Stations, most of them are remote controlled. The "once through" units are only marginally better regarding CO2 emissions than the supercritical coal fired units. The HRSG plants with a conventional, but low pressure, boiler tacked on to the back end to utilise the heat in the exhaust gases are a little slower to reach full load, but the Gas Turbine component is still pretty quick: Just a few minutes to start and reach full load. They have about two thirds of the CO2 emissions of the supercriticals assuming they get to use their conventional boilers, which may not be the case. Consequently, I don't see too many investors jumping in to make some hay (when the sun isn't shining) as the life expectancy may not justify the outlay.: Sorry to repeat this, but it has to be viable or subsidised.