JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Solar subsidy death spiral: $2 billion in Australia, rising 50% pa as electricity prices rocket

Solar Panels cost more than people realize.

A few Australians are just beginning to realize that they are paying for their neighbour’s solar panel. As news spreads, the shine of good-citizen-solar is going to tarnish fast, but it is going to take a concerted campaign to spread the word.

In one corner are 2 million households which have solar PV and thought they paid for it themselves. In the other corner are 7.5 million households which have exorbitant electricity bills. And in every corner and all across the spectrum is mass confusion thanks to the mass media. The fog of advertisements disguised as “news” means if you ask a dumb-enough-question 70% of Australians will say they want the government to set a high RET target to make electricity cheaper. It’s almost like 2 out of 3 people think we need the government to force us to buy cheap stuff, because everyone would buy the “expensive” planet killing volts if we only had the choice. Doh.

That’s $200 per household (and the rest!) added to the electricity bill in 2019

This is just the direct SRES (Small Renewable Energy Scheme) cost. It doesn’t cover the burden of stabilizing the grid, of covering the cost of baseload power sitting around waiting for when solar users need it. Unreliable power makes the whole system less efficient, costs go up and all the cheap electricity generators have to charge higher prices too (at least, the ones it doesn’t drive out of business). Then there are the price spikes — so wild they make these subsidies look cheap.

Households’ $2bn hit for solar roof panel subsidies

Perry Williams, The Australian

Households will pay nearly $2 billion for rooftop solar installation subsidies this year, costing every home nearly $200 and threatening to derail Scott Morrison’s pledge to cut power bills.

The cost of the federal Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme (SRES) and state-based rebates combined is forecast to rise by 45 per cent from $1.2bn last year to $1.74bn this year.

However, analysis of the cost of small-scale technology certificates, which are handed to consumers installing solar panels and then bought back by electricity ­retailers, shows a soaring cost for all power users.

How’s this for confusion?

Energy companies say the subsidy is 15% of the bill, but the Minister says it is just 3%. We don’t even know what the cost is. Therein lies a free-market disaster. How is anyone supposed to make sensible decisions?

Origin Energy ­revealed last year that the government’s SRES and state-based solar feed-in tariffs accounted for up to 15 per cent of bill charges.

Mr Taylor, the Energy Minister, said the cost of small-scale technology certificates — created to increase the incentive to install rooftop solar — was just 3 per cent of an average household bill.

Big energy blames big government and big government blames the big energy companies and in a way they’re both right. The big energy companies are playing the market for profits, but big government is screwing the people for power — selling “green electrons” at the election to win seats.

The Liberals are tossing away their best proven election winning advantage. They won’t win votes by aiming for the empty dead centre. The killer comments and lines are left on the cutting room floor.

They can’t show what fools the Labor Green candidates are while they try to be better managed fools themselves.

Just call it quits on the Solar PV subsidy — save householders $200 this year, and even more the year after that.

But read the comments at The Australian. Even at the most informed masthead in the nation many people have no clue.

Sawdust

I pay 28c per kWh for electricity I use from the grid. I get 11c per kWh for electricity my solar panels feed into the grid. Tell me again how I am costing other users money?

 The only clever thing about renewable energy is the way the true cost is hidden.

h/t Pat and Dave B.

REFERENCE

Demand Manager (2019) Australian Rooftop Solar Subsidy, (PDF) 2019 Outlook, February 2019.

Solar Panels Photo: Ulleo

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.9/10 (76 votes cast)
Solar subsidy death spiral: $2 billion in Australia, rising 50% pa as electricity prices rocket, 9.9 out of 10 based on 76 ratings

162 comments to Solar subsidy death spiral: $2 billion in Australia, rising 50% pa as electricity prices rocket

  • #
    a happy little debunker

    Didn’t the progressive left try and blame excess electricity price increases on the GOLD plating of the Grid?

    Now, it seems – this gold plated grid needs encrusted diamonds.

    340

    • #

      As I posted elsewhere, a subsidy is nothing but a euphemism for government gambling with other people’s money.

      And by gambling I mean making a bet and trying to pick a winner. Governments are notorious for baking losers.

      240

    • #
      Geoff

      The main problem is that both parties are corrupt.

      130

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Speaking of rats…funny how under climate change, the two legged rats multiply , namely Politcus Hyenas, Rodentus Carpetbaggius & Greenus Loonius

        https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/bramble-cay-melomys-first-climate-change-mammal-extinction/10830080

        “For thousands of years, generations of Melomys rubicola lived and bred on a sandy bank in the Torres Strait known as Bramble Cay. Some time between 2009 and 2014 the last of this species died; probably drowned in a storm surge.

        Unlike koalas or whales, the small rodent was never cute enough to rate much of a conservation effort. It’s only with its extinction – noted for the first time by the Federal Government, in a press release from Environment Minister Melissa Price – that it’s attracted interest from beyond the circle of biologists and conservationists that warned of its demise.

        This was probably the first recorded mammal species-loss because of human-induced climate change, according to the Queensland Government, which reported on the extinction in 2016.

        Bramble Cay
        Bramble Cay.

        Supplied: Queensland Government

        John Woinarski, a professor at Charles Darwin University who has published research on the species, said its loss was entirely foreseeable and preventable.

        “It’s been known for a couple of decades it was in a pretty precarious position,” he told Hack.

        “It suffered from living a long way away from anywhere else, and being a rat and being not particularly attractive.

        “It didn’t have much public advocacy for it.”

        He said the extinction of the Bramble Cay melomys is a story of underfunded conservation programs, plans that were written but never implemented, and the fact that the public simply cares more about charismatic animals.

        It’s also a clear warning that other Australian animals are at risk – such as the spectacled flying fox, which saw a third of its population wiped out in Queensland’s recent heatwave. Announcing the extinction of the melomys, the government noted it had also upgraded the spectacled flying fox to endangered.

        ‘The rescue mission was too late’

        Living on an island just three metres high and five-hectares in area (the size of two MCGs), the melomys survived on washed-up vegetation. A survey team in 2009 noted the vegetation on the island had declined, possibly because of occasional storm surges. They also noted substantially fewer melomys.

        “There was less and less vegetation on the island, and then there was probably a major storm surge event and the whole island went underwater temporarily,” Professor Woinarski said.

        He said that climate change would have “substantially contributed”.

        Ah….sea level rise….

        OK…any takers for debunking this nonsense?

        50

        • #
          beowulf

          This is only a half-hearted debunk because I can’t be bothered tracking down the links to the original version of this drivel. It is the same recycled extinct rat story that did the rounds in 2016 and was treated with appropriate derision then. This is in fact the 3rd time it has been announced to my knowledge. It also reappeared last year when WUWT dealt with it.

          Bramble “Cay” is/was a large sandbank offshore from the mouth of the Fly River delta in the SW of Papua New Guinea from whence the rat probably floated out on driftwood during a flood. Back in 2016 it was claimed to be an extinction on the GBR in order to raise its profile and gain traction. As for that claim, Bramble Cay is about as much a part of the GBR as Tasmania is a part of NSW. It is a dot off the coast of PNG.

          Significantly, back then the same scientists that declared it extinct due to global warming admitted that they hadn’t bothered looking to see if it still existed on the PNG mainland. Yawn, move on.

          60

  • #
    Yonniestone

    I pay 28c per kWh for electricity green ideology I’ll use from the grid. I get 11c per kWh for electricity my solar panels neighbours pay for so I can pretend to feed into the grid. Tell me again how I am costing other users money?

    FIFY clueless clown.

    271

    • #
      GD

      And in 15 years’ time, you’ll have to replace the panels with new ones. What’s the break-even point?

      281

      • #
        yarpos

        I think you are understating panel life GD, although the basic principle of accounting for depreciation and replacement is valid from an accounting perspective. Most people only spend 7-10 years in a home, until they get older.

        The break even (if it ever arrives) is a very specific calculation per user/location/installation.

        103

    • #
      yarpos

      I dont think he is a clueless clown. He is most likely a reasonably intelligent person who doesnt study renewables and the energy market for a hobby, just like most of the population.

      He has forked out a fair sum for his panels and sees the FIT as far lower than his own cost. Its not unreasonable that he would feel he is not leeching on anyone, and just based on what he experiences wouldnt take the accusation seriously.

      We are very disconnected from the everyday domestic consumer in this blog. Unfortunately there are very few with any reach that will tell them the truth. Then you strike the old issue of “I can explain it to you, but I cant make you understand”

      161

      • #
        MudCrab

        I wouldn’t say clueless, but I wouldn’t say reasonably intelligent either.

        A clueless person would say ‘I vote Green because only they care…’, I mean ‘but solar is free from the sun.’

        An intelligent person wouldn’t need it explained. An intelligent person would wonder where this 11c/kWh was coming from and at least rule out ‘unicorn farts’ from the possible answers. A reasonably intelligent would consider the claims that everyone else’s power is being driven up and connect the dots themselves. Studying the energy market has nothing to do with it, it is just being proactive enough to listen to the claims being made and reality checking them back using basic logic.

        An cunning person would say ‘if the government is stupid enough to give me money who am I not to exploit?’

        People who run solar are either clueless or cunning. The only people not running solar are those who can’t or those with a much higher ethics level, or the rare third group who can think long term.

        This group is above reasonably intelligent and understand that any cost analysis needs to consider disposal at the end of the life cycle and solar is going to cost them money regardless of how many shiney things the Government slaps onto the side.

        81

        • #
          Graeme#4

          Put me in the third group then.
          1. I am still not convinced that putting a solar system on my place in Perth will save me money in the long term, even though I’m home s lot of the day now.
          2. Although not of the medical profession, I firmly believe in their ethos of “Do no harm”. In this case it believe it applies to the poor and to the environment.

          40

    • #
      TedM

      “I pay 28c per kWh for electricity I use from the grid. I get 11c per kWh for electricity my solar panels feed into the grid. Tell me again how I am costing other users money?”

      Just where is the 17c difference? Its the 17c per kwh that you would be paying for grid use and maintenance if you were drawing from the grid. It’s just that it doesn’t cost any less to maintain the grid than it did before you got your solar panels. Guess who is paying the difference on your behalf. Apart from that the power that your panels/inverter are putting into the grid is dirty power; it contains numerous harmonics into the khz range. This stuff can be expected to shorten the life of your/my electronic equipment

      141

      • #
        ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N

        It’s not really the price per kW that matters right now, the hidden cost is the supply pro-rata per kW used. It’s more than that of the kW itself. THEN the illegal GST turd as topping over the lot. Even if you manage to bypass your meter you still pay through the nose for supply. The only thing keeping people connected to the grid are high fuel prices, or else generator sales would go through the roof.

        140

      • #
        George

        Just where is the 17c difference? Its the 17c per kwh that you would be paying for grid use and maintenance if you were drawing from the grid. It’s just that it doesn’t cost any less to maintain the grid than it did before you got your solar panels.

        Electricity bills have a separate fixed daily supply charge which reflects the network costs.
        Solar PV owners pay the same as everyone no matter how little they use.

        41

        • #
          TedM

          You missed the point George. When they draw from their own solar system they are not using the grid. If they didn’t have solar they would have had to have drawn that power from the grid and paid the 11c plus the 17c.

          40

          • #
            John

            Its the 17c per kwh that you would be paying for grid use and maintenance

            The daily supply charge covers grid use and maintenance,
            not the usage charge.

            10

        • #
          robert rosicka

          George you couldn’t be more wrong , your FIT reduces your Bill and your panels were subsidised and it’s the guy next door without panels that pays all that for you .

          50

          • #
            John

            I’m just saying the solar users pay the same daily supply charge as everyone and this covers the network costs.
            So saying

            Its the 17c per kwh that you would be paying for grid use and maintenance if you were drawing from the grid.

            is not really correct.

            40

            • #
              RobK

              john,
              You’re right. The issue is FiT applies at a flat rate at 11c/kWh, in the example. This is $110/MWh which is a pretty high rate given PV in a given area all peaks at the same time. FiT is a guaranteed return irrespective of the spot price. The small scale generators are getting paid more than the wholesale baseload producers, even though the usefulness of what PV produces is not high value at the time. Baseload is parked up on standby being paid FCAS, in some cases, while the PV generator is paid to offload unsolicited electricity. So the PV generator has loaded up the overall price to be recovered by everyone but he does get paid for it.
              Tangentially,the small scale certificates paid to subsidise the installation in the first place was derived from the RET which is an impost on the distributor and spread over all consumers. The PV generator is a smaller consumer by virtue of the PVs and the FiT.
              In summary; the difference in the rates quoted, in and out, are not poles and wires fixed cost they are the suppliers (distributors) on-costs due to federal RET and State FiT which are spread over all consumers. The PV generator is a major beneficiary of regulatory largess. Its very sad that many of these participants fail to see how it works like a serpent eating its tail. More RE begets higher prices, especially when the extra rising system costs, to accommodate RE are added in as well.

              30

  • #
    Spetzer86

    Green energy is always your green going into someone else’s pockets. As Jo points out, the true costs are just too well hidden for the average person to fully identify.

    251

  • #

    “The Liberals are tossing away their best proven election winning advantage. They won’t win votes by aiming for the empty dead centre. The killer comments and lines are left on the cutting room floor.”

    Globalism is repellent. Nobody with either a heart or head will vote for it. It has a top but no bottom, a doomed pyramid. Its only final goal is concentration of power, its policies are always secretive and graduated, its agents – down to the lowly GeeUp footsloggers – always programmed. Nothing is open or declared, because Globalism is repellent, even when it shows just a sliver of its true self.

    To push forward its nasty agenda it needs faux conservative governments to alternate with daffy leftist farces. When the punters get sick of faux-con they can only go with daffy. To keep things really tight, the Undead also need media-generated appointees waiting in the political dressing room who are 100% with the program. These appointees, unable to disguise their repellent natures, can’t last long, but they’re not meant to. In a democracy there would be no Turnbulls or Gillards. But who’s in a democracy?

    Think of the absurdity of loading up the nation’s roofs with made-in-China hardware while continuing to flog our domestic coal generation like a neglected but reliable slave, and while continuing to export coal in massive quantities to pay for the green waste.

    We keep wanting to tell the elites that rooftop solar is a wasteful folly. But they know that. They like that. If an energy program had any element of thrift or practicality they wouldn’t be doing it. If they could get away with painting every roof pink while we stood round in pink underwear saluting a giant pink rabbit…they would prefer that.

    The waste is the purpose, Winston.

    471

    • #
    • #

      Anyone interested in globalist creepiness knows that there are well-funded bodies all over the world to advance the agenda. A bit like those pop-up dummy parties at council elections which divert preferences, these globalist bodies have the most reassuring names and show only the cuddliest intentions.

      I was astonished to learn that Australia has been a member of the oldest of all the institutions of this sort. Did you know you have a voice in the the Inter-Parliamentary Union? Well, you don’t really…but you’re in it. It’s played down, maybe because the US is one of the few countries (along with Eritrea and Liberia) which is not presently a member (maybe due partly to criticism by a somewhat less creepy Roosevelt back in the 60s).

      I’m sure by now the IPU’s yet another front for spooks, lobbyists, trough-swillers and the like, but the messages are clear enough and scary enough: you don’t need no steenkin’ sovereignty…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2hN7CHGGqU

      140

    • #
      Interested

      I think ‘mosomoso’ is entirely correct.
      His quote from Jo’s essay: “The Liberals are tossing away their best proven election winning advantage. They won’t win votes by aiming for the empty dead centre. The killer comments and lines are left on the cutting room floor.
      They can’t show what fools the Labor Green candidates are while they try to be better managed fools themselves.”
      , is exactly the one I was going to pick out myself.

      I believe Jo is both right – and wrong – to say that. Because, at the very least, it’s a political game the Liberal/Nationals are playing and they have to ‘play the odds’ when it comes to voter sentiment.
      Jo touches on the reality of this when she says: “… but big government is screwing the people for power — selling “green electrons” at the election to win seats.”

      This is the problem. According to polls, a significant percentage (? 50%) of Australian voters have been persuaded that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) is real and dangerous. The electorate is price sensitive when it comes to electricity, it’s true, but somewhere at the back of their minds they’re worried about CAGW and believe something must be done about it.
      So there is a political advantage – especially in some electorates – in appearing to be ‘environmentally responsible’.
      But at what monetary cost to voters?
      It’s a tightrope act for politicians of all complexions.

      The globalist (Fabian?) push is winning hearts and minds because of the subversion of the education system over the last 30 years and also because of the relentless media propaganda of more recent years.
      CAGW is a baseless idea – but so was Nazism’s brutal attitude to Jews, and so is socialism’s empty promise of free money. All such falsehoods have gained traction – tragically – through the control of information. Most people believe what they’re told by ‘the authorities’.

      “How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.” – Adolf Hitler

      Sooner or later, though, the irresistible globalist Green fantasy will come up hard against immovable reality. So, it’s inevitable that people will eventually see ‘the emperor has no clothes’. But by that time, it’s not impossible that democracy as we’ve known it these past 200 years will have been replaced with centralised totalitarian rule by people who’ve never faced an election and never will.
      In the meantime, political parties like Australia’s conservative Coalition are ‘dancing with the devil’; walking that tightrope.

      190

  • #
    PeterS

    Green energy like any other scam always benefits the rich few and hurts the rest. The only ones that don’t understand that are those with memory holes inside their brain.

    221

  • #
    Just Thinkin'

    In 2010 I could see that power price were going to go up.
    In 2011 I put some panels up. I did not put them on to
    “save the planet”.
    Other people have been paying for my power since then.
    When the panels finally die there will probably be
    enough money in that “bank” to last for a couple of years.

    By the way, I am a firm believer in the cheapest power
    coming from coal fired power stations running at their
    most efficient output.

    We NEED more coal fired power stations. ASAP.

    And, take ALL the subsidies away from the ruinables; they’re
    helping to wreck our economy…and the landscape.

    Ruinables cheap? You’ve got to be joking…

    The greenies don’t realise that they are ruining the
    landscape and our bird and bat life in their quest to
    send us to being a third world country……

    451

  • #
    GD

    How cute! At this moment every comment bar one has one red thumb. No opposing view, just a red thumb.

    Well done, little GetUp person. You’re on the way to getting your quota.

    276

    • #
      yarpos

      I wonder what the point of the red thumb is? nobody cares about them, and without a alternative view they are meaningless. Can only imagine its someone who gets some weird passive satisfaction out of it.

      113

      • #

        When you don’t have the intelligence to debate something, the only way these people can communicate is with symbols, the simpler the symbol the easier it is for them. Remove the ability to hit the red thumb and they’d be speechless (literally).

        112

    • #
      sophocles

      Someone goes through every day … has done so for years … will do so for years … and gives every post a red one … so what?

      As for what point they are try entertainment :-) — especially when a very popular troll is given 45 RT’s and 1 GT for a post.
      (I’ve since wondered if the GT was meant to be RT #46 but missed … )

      60

    • #
      Serp

      It doesn’t matter; let’s not criminalize the inarticulate.

      10

  • #
    Kinky Keith

    Just imagine.

    Just imagine, that every household knew with certainty, the truth about All of the riotous “Electricity Free Market” practices that take money from us on an hourly basis.

    There would be severe consequences for Australian Politics and it might take a decade to bring the system back to a more streamlined version that is honest and forward looking.

    But of course no one is going to find out.
    It’s so well hidden behind government sponsored disinformation programs.

    This post gives a costing for one of the easily identifiable items but the total cost per Australian household is in the vicinity of $500 a year.

    Call it what you will, price transfer fixing, market rigging or whatever, this theft IS there and 7.5 Million households are affected.

    We have lost our freedom, our Democracy and can now officially be classed as:

    Slaves.

    KK

    311

  • #
    David Maddison

    I’d like to know if solar and wind actually produces any net electricity at all due to proper power stations having to be maintained on “spinning reserve” to back them up at a moment’s notice.

    240

    • #

      There is no Rolling Reserve any more.

      All 48 coal fired Units are running all the time now, delivering power. The only ones not doing so are down for maintenance.

      Coal fired power has a daily range from high to low of around 4000MW, give or take a little, from 15000MW to 19000MW, sometimes as high as 20000MW.

      They are constantly delivering 70% Plus of all generated power.

      Now, when a coal fired Unit goes down for servicing, the slack has to be picked up by natural gas fired Units or Hydro Units.

      Maintenance is scheduled so carefully, to the point that one Unit cannot go down unless another comes back up on line. For most of this last two Months of high Summer demand, there have only been (around) four Units off line.

      In earlier times, they could go down for maintenance any old time, because those rolling reserve Units would just come on line to fill the gap.

      Now, nothing to back them up.

      That 70% supply is the rolling total with the 5% supply from rooftop solar added in, because if it was just power plant power supply, then coal fired power is delivering closer to 75%.

      And wind power has no effect at all on what coal fired power delivers. When wind power is high, natural gas and hydro are lower, and when wind power is low, natural gas and hydro are higher.

      Tony.

      412

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Well, an engineer knows that if you push your machinery hard constantly with little respite for proper maintenance, it will fail.

        Of course the hyenas who set all this up with shriek that “coal is unreliable”.

        I would of course invite them to spend time in some third world coutries where they could experience what its like to live with no power and associated disease, poor sanitation, dodging warloards who steal thier young girls for prositution, their young lads to become child soldiers, and the arbitrary executions of people they dont like….

        290

        • #
          ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N

          Those green monsters don’t care for facts, but prefer to remain dreaming about “living off the land” and other such romantic notions they wouldn’t dare try themselves. Cowards.

          If they don’t already know their favourite policies will likely put their own children to work in gulags, they don’t CARE to know. We saw what happened with the “Safe Schools” thingy. Once adopted through careful propaganda to hide the real purpose, it morphed into the gender identity monster. Now I’m left wondering if those that advocated it have any remorse for the damage it did to their children’s minds, who will likely try and sue their parents because they didn’t first ask permission to make them. Seriously.

          These children will grow up as mindless socialist snowflake automatons “helping” the system supposedly care for their own ageing parents. That’s just scary.

          But if you ask me, we need more of it. More leftard insanity to the moon and back because maybe that’ll shock everyone into realising just what sort of vampire they beckoned into their house, begged for the bastard to have dinner with them just so they could schmooze and look virtuous to their neighbours.

          They deserve everything they get. Put them all in a playpen with tech going back 1000 years, tofu and carrot burgers only, no candles or campfires (CO2) and definitely no whale oil (because land right for gay whales an’ such). Just let them try and live off what they want us to, all the while keeping their children, parents and themselves out of the gulag because a virtue-signalling Bolshevik neighbour dobbed them in for lighting a smoke. Let them be the guinea pigs in their fantasy experiment.

          201

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            I think it has to crash before it gets better.

            The USA might be the difference to that – i suspect the Left will try and use force, but a lot of Americans are armed and will stop the nonsense before it gets going.

            90

            • #
              PeterS

              Civil war in the US is very likely if the left keep on acting like spoilt brats and escalate their violence. Here it’s very different. We’ll probably succumb to the leftist craziness due to our lazy thinking then crash and burn. It depends on the next federal election. It will be very revealing as to where this nation will be heading. Perhaps we will be sort of pleasantly surprised if the ALP+Greens get a kick back. I hope so but time will tell. To be honest if the people do end up placing ALP+Greens in majority rule then we deserve everything we get, including crash and burn.

              91

              • #
                Bill in Oz

                Strategic voting is the only way forward.

                Putting all ‘Greenists’ last whether Labor, Liberal, Green or minor parties, is a given, in the House of Representatives. ( Yes there are Greenists even in the Liberal Party who should be avoided as much as possible. )

                In the senate I’ve come to the conclusion that the Conservatives are the best first preference and then choosing the individuals on the senate ltickets again avoiding Greenists in all the other parties..

                61

              • #
                OriginalSteve

                True, although a few leftists shot dead in the USA, in self defence, will make them think before trying it on.

                Perhaps they are stupid enough to think Australians wont repulse them with reasonable force if they get violent here. Just because we don’t have a gun culture like the USA doesnt mean we wont defend ourselves with adequate means. I’m not advocating violence at all by the way.

                31

        • #
          Graeme#4

          They already are claiming that coal power is unreliable.

          10

      • #
        Robber

        I have been tracking Tony’s excellent daily reports since January 1 and they show some interesting facts.
        Lowest daily minimum generation 17.9 GW
        Highest daily maximum generation 34.0 GW
        Average daily generation varies from 20.3-29.5 GW
        How are those variations supplied?
        Coal 13.9-20.6 GW
        Gas 0.5-7.2 GW
        Hydro 0.5-5.1 GW
        Wind 0.2-4.0 GW
        Large solar 0-1.5 GW
        Small solar 0-4.8 GW
        To provide that highest daily peak of 34.0 GW on Jan 25, coal 19.3, gas 7.2, hydro 5.1 = 31.6 GW or 93% of demand, with those unreliable renewables wind 1.8 GW and solar 0.6 GW.
        So despite all that investment in 5.6 GW of wind generators and over 10 GW of large and small solar generators, they failed to deliver when required.
        Peak demand was met primarily because coal, gas and hydro were able to deliver on demand. Coal and gas delivered 26.5 GW from a nameplate of 34.7 GW, and hydro 5.1 GW from nameplate of 7.6 GW. Gas and hydro provide the required peaking supply to complement base load coal that can also provide daily variations on demand.
        And even to provide that minimum of 17.9 GW, coal/gas/hydro provided 14.9 GW, solar 0.0 and wind 3.0 GW (happened to be blowing strongly that night).
        Now can anyone explain how another 5-10 GW of wind and 5-10 GW of solar that only deliver an extra 1-2 GW to meet peak demand can possibly replace coal, including 2 GW from Liddell, 2.5 GW from Bayswater, and 5 GW from the Latrobe Valley?

        100

        • #

          I have a sneaking suspicion about power pricing.

          I started doing this data in the middle of last year, and it actually came from an original suggestion in April of last year from freddyflatfoot. (at this link, and scroll to the comments at the bottom)

          I always had a problem with this sort of data, and I’ll show you why.

          Electrical power data is actually done by the FedGov, but it’s always so far out of date, anad here’s the link to the latest data. See the top link there in the main body of the text, titled Australian Energy Update 2018. Note in the text immediately following that heading it says this; (my bolding here)

          contains the latest report and dataset for 2016-17

          So, that data is from the time ending Jun30 2017, so more than 25 to 13 Months behind real time at the date of publishing, August 2018, and now more than two and a half years out of date ….. and that’s the most recent data you can find.

          The data I use is compiled with a 15 HOUR lead time. Admitted, it takes me three to four hours a day to compile, and five and a half on Mondays with the weekly and rolling totals.

          The U.S. publishes all its electrical power data with a two Months lead time, and in China, well they do it with a one Month lead time.

          So now, back to the Australian data from that Government document. (pdf 39 pages) it shows coal fired power only delivering around 62% of all generated power from power plants.

          So, going on that, you’d think there was a decline in coal fired power, considering it had been falling each year, and I had been using these documents since 2009, and it was falling (slightly) each year.

          So now, scroll forwards to the time I started doing my data.

          Now, I have coal fired power delivering (around) 75% of all power plant generated power, and 70% when you add rooftop solar to the totals.

          I kept thinking I was missing something, because for the Winter, the first set of my figures before I moved home, coal fired power was around that same percentage, and now at a fairly settled set of percentage totals, it’s still stubbornly at 75%.

          And yet here we are, now with less coal fired power than we had even with that most recent Government data, and we are getting more power from coal fired power than before with a number of now closed plants still operational when they collected their data.

          Okay, I use a combination of sites for the data collection, and one of them shows actual power consumption, the AEMO site, which also shows Price and Demand. From that page at AEMO, it’s plainly obvious that the cheapest power on any (and every) given day, is at the 4AM minimum power consumption time, the Base Load. It’s always cheapest at that time in all three major States which still have coal fired power.

          Now, from my Base Load Series, which lasted 16 Months to cover the full four Seasons, at that same Base Load time, coal fired power delivered on average, across the WHOLE year 82% of all generated power, and keep in mind here that at that time there is NO solar power at all, from any source, and power generation is at its lowest point for the day.

          Coal fired power – 82% of that Base Load

          So, that leads to the fact that coal fired power IS the cheapest power being generated.

          Since all this kerfuffle has come up about power prices being so high, it has snowballed from a small start to where it is now.

          That has (roughly) coincided with the time I have been doing this data collection for all sources of power.

          So, if coal fired power is the cheapest generated power, that could be a good reason why the actual percentage of supply from coal fired power has risen from 62% two/three years back to the 75% it now stands at.

          On the pricing structure pyramid, everybody gets paid the same amount for the total for that half hour. Coal fired power is at the bottom of that pricing structure, because it is there all the time. It ramps up and down on a daily basis by anything up to and more of 4000MW, and that cost is at their original quoted price ….. at the bottom lowest side of the pricing structure pyramid.

          It would be an obvious conclusion that in an effort to keep power prices as cheap as they possibly could, then they are using MORE coal fired power, and that actually is what is the case now.

          I know what I have written here may seem convoluted, but the data bears it out.

          Tony.

          121

          • #
            Bill in Oz

            Tony. I just read all of your comment.
            And at the end I was confused.

            But I think you want to say :
            1 The government data is out of date or not yet available
            2: The work you have done for the past year makes you the expert on which form of power generation is actually happening & how many maga wats per day.
            3: All Coal fired power constitutes 75% of all power generated per day over the past year
            4: Gas on Tuesday provided 10.51% of total power
            5: Hydro electric power ( which is NOT REALLY a renewable ) provided 4% of power generated on Tuesday
            6 : Solar & Wind together provided ~ 13.5 % of total power generated.

            In other words the gold plated solar & wind ‘renewable’ sector did not provide ~ 86% of the power we use !

            The ideologues who promote wind & solar are constantly trying to confuse us with lies & propaganda.

            Our Poliies have been bluffed & bullied by these lies and propaganda as well.

            Telling the truth simply and clearly will expose this whole charade

            Please keep up your work !

            Bill

            72

          • #
            ivan

            Tomy, I don’t know if you have seen the excellent site that gives electricity produced and power consumption in the UK with a very short lead time http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

            From what you say I think a site like that might be possible for Australia and it might drive the information home for everyone.

            40

          • #
            Kinky Keith

            Hi Tony,

            Maybe I’ve misunderstood the situation but aren’t there a lot of diesel plants in place now as backup.

            Are they just lumped under the Wind/Solar banner which they provide backup for, or is gas now used exclusively for backup.

            The “bidding” structure for electricity pricing is now so deliberately complex it should be an embarrassment to any thinking government but there’s no doubt that the only concern politicians have is Re-election.

            When the use of oil and gas for power is apparently seen as “carbon neutral” and the potential of significantly reducing CO2 output through HELE plants is dismissed by the green blob, we are pushed to ask just what’s really the point of all of this drama.

            KK
            KK

            00

    • #
      Bill in Oz

      Ask Tony from Oz.
      He has data going back for most of the last year.
      https://papundits.wordpress.com/author/tonyoz/

      71

  • #
    robert rosicka

    Alan Moran was on the Bolt report last night tearing strips off the renewable sector and gave solar a good kicking , can’t find a link to the Bolt report but this is the guy .

    https://stopthesethings.com/2015/06/28/alan-moran-on-the-insane-pointless-cost-of-wind-power/

    180

    • #
      Mark M

      via twitter … WATCH: Alan Moran discusses the increase in household costs on energy due to a shift toward renewables.

      https://twitter.com/theboltreport/status/1097784298717949952

      50

      • #
        Geoff Sherrington

        Mark M,
        Dr Moran was with Tasman Institute when Warwick Hughes brought in some Uni of East Anglia data to see if funding could be got from companies like mine supporting Tasman, to investigate data oddities.
        This was the genesis of the famous Phil Jones events and that email “Why should I send you my data when you just want to find fault with it” or words to that effect.
        Al Moran has been around these topics for enough time to have enhanced his wisdom. Do listen to him, you will learn.
        Geoff.

        70

  • #
    Robber

    The ACCC published a report on retail electricity prices in June 2018 after a year long study, but it seems governments don’t even listen to their own advisers. Among the ACCC’s findings and recommendations:
    Solar customers are paying, on average, $538 per year less than non-solar customers. Meanwhile, non‑solar households and businesses have faced the burden of the cost of premium solar feed-in tariff schemes and the SRES. While premium solar schemes are closed to new consumers, the costs of these schemes are enduring. Reducing these costs will have efficiency and equity benefits.
    The ACCC is recommending that any costs remaining from premium solar feed-in schemes should be borne by state governments through their budgets, as Queensland has done, rather than being recovered through charges to electricity users.
    Further, the ACCC is recommending that the SRES should be wound down and abolished by 2021 to reduce its impact on retail prices paid by consumers.
    In 2016-17 the ACCC estimated that environmental programs were adding $106/year to comsumer bills, 50% from LRET, 17% from SRES, 10% from State government policies, and 23% from FIT. In SA total additional costs were $170. Those costs have undoubtedly gone up since then with more solar subsidies and uptake, more wind generators etc. In Vic, wholesale prices have risen from $67/MWhr in 2016/17 to $92 in 17/18 to $112/MWhr in 2018/19.

    160

    • #
      David Maddison

      Weren’t the original feed in tariffs something like 60c per kWh in Victoriastan and they lasted for many years (10 or 15?)?

      80

      • #
        Robber

        Yes, if you look at the tariff rates for any of the Vic retailers you will see Premium feed-in tariff 60 cents/kWhr (closed). The Premium Feed-in Tariff (PFIT) started in late 2009 and closed to new applicants at the end of 2011. The tariff expires in 2024.
        The new single-rate tariff of 9.9 c/kWh is slightly lower than the previous rate for 2017-18 (11.3 c/kWh) because the value of energy at times of the day when solar systems generate power has fallen, due to the growth of solar generation in Victoria and other States. However some retailers still offer higher FITs.

        90

        • #
          RickWill

          Till this year LGCs were considerably more expensive than STCs so retailers were getting a benefit buying rooftop solar around wholesale electricity price compared with buying power from grid scale intermittents at wholesale price plus LGC:
          http://www.demandmanager.com.au/certificate-prices/
          As the RET gets closer to being met, price of certificates will continue to tank. That is why the subsidy farms need “policy certainty”. Their business model fails without ramping the RET.

          100

          • #
            Bill in Oz

            Rick, part of the reason why mug punters don’t understand is that this who;e area is filled with such things as STS’s and LGC’s and FIT’s and REC’s etc etc. etc…

            Mindless mumbo jumbo makes it impossible even for me to understand your comment..

            61

      • #
        yarpos

        Yep , a car club friend was bragging about his 10 year contract and berating me for not applying for FITs on our panels. He doesnt pay for power in summer and does the grey nomad thing in winter (puts what he would have paid for electricity into diesel)

        110

    • #
      robert rosicka

      Wether the subsidy is hidden in the cost of electricity or taxes it shouldn’t be there , for those that want green electricity and opt in they can pay the extra charge to feel good and remove this burden on the rest of society.

      210

      • #
        Bill in Oz

        Rob, you should have written every word of that comment in Capital letters !

        THOSE THAT WANT ‘GREEN’ ELECTRICITY, SHOULD BR ALLOWED TO OPT AND BUY IT,

        AND THEY SHOULD PAY THE EXTRA CHARGES OF GENERATING THE SOLAR POWER THEY WANT TO BUY.

        AND THE REST OF SOCIETY WHO DO NOT WANT TO BUY ‘GREEN’ ELECTRICITY ARE NOT FORCED TO PAY FOR IT.

        DEAD BLOODY SIMPLE

        A SIMPLE MESSAGE THAT 99% OF PEOPLE WILL UNDERSTAND.

        111

    • #
      ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N

      As the ACCC has shown on almost every occasion, it’s toothless and does nothing but cost money to run. All it makes are pointless “recommendations”.

      80

  • #
    Eddie

    Everybody loves a virtuous electron till they have to pay for it, yet didnt get to use it but paid for everybody else to not use it either because it wasn’t needed at the time yet payment for it was guaranteed.

    140

  • #
    • #
      AndyG55

      That’s what I don’t get, I would have though the Greenies would have wanted things greener.

      They seem to be very ignorant about the effects of increased atmospheric CO2.

      Zero evidence it causes warming, certainly nothing “catastrophic”

      Plenty of evidence that the biosphere is luvin’ all that extra atmospheric plant-food.

      Such a DUMB idiotology, this anti-CO2 scam/agenda is

      151

  • #
    Greg in NZ

    Good morning possums sunshine! Another most-beautiful day here in our neck of the woods – with both surf AND snow on the way, who could complain? [no doubt some grumpy, triggered, woke red-thumber will]. Great news everyone – yet another NZ council mayor voices her non-commitment to the Agenda2030 pixie-dust Local Government Leaders’ Climate Change Declaration.

    https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/382892/climate-change-declaration-politically-charged-thames-coromandel-mayor-sandra-goudie

    “It would be irresponsible for the declaration to be signed because the council did not know what it would be committing ratepayers to, she said. ‘It’s got statements which bind you to outcomes that you’ve got no idea of, so I wouldn’t sign a contract without knowing specifications’… Mrs Goudie said she was not obliged to reveal her stance on climate change because ‘I think it’s incredibly highly politically charged and driven and I don’t think that makes for a good basis for sound judgment.’” Also –

    https://www.metservice.com/mountain/canterbury-high-country

    South Island high country: Saturday “snow lowering to about 1700 metres”, Sunday “snow lowering to about 1000 metres”. Two days in-a-row of cold snow? In the middle of summer? Surely in official Alarmist-Scientism-Speak (ASS*) that’s a heatwave coldwave, no? Doomed, I tells ya!

    200

    • #
      James

      I am glad to hear that there are some people in local government in NZ with brains. Can some be exported to Australia perhaps?

      120

      • #
        theRealUniverse

        Thats only the West Coast Council in NZ that has any brains (as far as Green idiotology goes). The rest are as bad as Aus especially that whats her name PM. Mad a s a hatter green as a cow pat. Both countries have some good ideas need some swapping of good NOT the bad.

        41

    • #
      ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N

      It reminds me of Pelosi (was it?) that said “But we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it”, but obviously in reverse.

      80

      • #
        Greg in NZ

        ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N, “reverse”? Well we are down under here too, the Antipodes if you will: upside-down and back-to-front plug holes (like Nancy Pelosi in Washington DC), the moon waxes and wanes in reverse, people drive on the right wrong correct left side of the road, and that international climastrological cult of brave new world politricks – “Just sign here, then we’ll tell you what you’ve won!” – is 97% topsy-turvy upside-down bass-ackwards non-science and 3% you-know-what. Besides, both the Coromandels and Westland were major gold mining areas in their day… ya don’t think it’s about the (lost) gold, do ya?

        10

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Hmm thats now 2 places to live in NZ, Westland or Coromandel, both very scenic. Good on Thames mayor.

      30

  • #
    RickWill

    This statement from the Australian article:

    Households will pay nearly $2 billion for rooftop solar installation subsidies this year, costing every home nearly $200 and threatening to derail Scott Morrison’s pledge to cut power bills.

    Is clearly WRONG. I, as well as many other households, do not have an electricity bill. It is a statement of income. The author of the article, Perry Williams, is another who has no idea how the SRET works. The SRET takes from the poor to give to the less poor but is being gradually phased out year-on-year. The burden now is the abundance of lunchtime power that the dispatchable generators need to accommodate.

    However the SRET is not as punitive on the poor as the LRET. It enables wealthy owners of grid scale intermittents, like a certain Turnbull, to gouge the poor till 2030.

    If knowledge on the RET becomes widely known before the next election it could see LNP back in power providing they promise to scrap the RET now rather than leave it linger till 2030 or get ramped up and extended as Labor wants.

    130

    • #
      AndyG55

      “The burden now is the abundance of lunchtime power that the dispatchable generators need to accommodate. “

      They shouldn’t have to.

      Just turn off the feed-ins if there is too much.

      Why should they pay for something not needed,

      and why should regular dispatchable suppliers have to move down to less efficient production just to make way for erratic supply from somewhere else.

      Its economic idiocy..

      141

      • #
        Kinky Keith

        It’s economic idiocy.

        Maybe, but it’s also Electoral Gold Plating.

        51

      • #
        RickWill

        Andy asked:

        and why should regular dispatchable suppliers have to move down to less efficient production just to make way for erratic supply from somewhere else.

        Under present market rules there is no obligation to guarantee supply. If generation is available, it is scheduled on the basis of merit order, which is determined by marginal cost. The marginal cost of wind and solar is zero so they get dispatched first.

        The NEG was a means to ensure a guaranteed level of supply from individual generators at grid level but would not alter the “take whenever available” for rooftop.

        Australia should see increasing complaints from rooftop owners concerning local over voltage and inability of the grid to absorb lunchtime power. It has already emerged in SA and should be an increasing concern in Queensland in cooler months when air-conditioning demand is low. At some point rooftop output will need to be regulated. In remote grids like Broome it is already regulated.

        The one guaranteed outcome is grid electricity will continue to rise. The grid was destined to became uneconomic at the instant operators permitted intermittent generators to connect.

        I personally cannot imagine the circumstances where things will change in the next decade. At best the grid is stuck with the current level of intermittents and what is already in the pipeline. With LGCs tanking it will become less attractive for grid scale investment. If Labor do their worst the RET will be ramped up and extended ensuring grid prices accelerate.

        70

        • #
          RickWill

          I found an interesting article from QUT on poor voltage regulation at distribution level. Its concludes that poor regulation has always been there, might be worse with solar, but there is a simple fix:

          They have not managed/reset distribution transformer tap changers to manage voltage fluctuations at a transformer level even though their analysis suggests that 26.6% of currently non-compliant LV networks could be resolved through a transformer tap change. However, due to the high cost and small number of qualified and specialized manufacturers for on load tap changers, they consider it is not possible to equip on load tap changers to distribution transformers to actively manage voltage across a day or season. Therefore, load shedding is needed to reset the distribution transformer tap. This requires considerable planning and notifications to affected customers.

          So all distribution transformers should have on load tap changers. Now all they need to do is burden the poor households with these upgrades so the less poor households can continue to export lunchtime power.

          This paper is a perfect example of why grid electricity prices will continue to rise:
          https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/4/1224/htm
          Complete disconnect between the proposed fix and the cost for the fix. The costs just get tagged as “network gold plating” without any understanding of how simple solutions can be incredibly expensive when you are dealing with a large network.

          70

  • #
    pat

    sign a pledge showing your support for the coal industry, or else:

    AUDIO: 12min16sec: 19 Feb: 2GB: Wake Up Australia: Michael McLaren: CFMEU Queensland takes stand against Green elements within the ALP
    It was reported yesterday that the Queensland branch of the CFMEU is poised to demand Bill Shorten’s Labor candidates across the state pledge support for the coal mining industry or face the wrath of the union at the upcoming federal election. And that support should include Adani Mining’s Carmichael coal mine.

    Stephen Smythe, CFMEU District President – Mackay tells Michael the coal pledge would leave no “grey area” for MPs to support the Palaszczuk government’s approach to Adani.
    https://www.2gb.com/podcast/cfmeu-queensland-takes-stand-against-green-elements-within-the-alp/

    120

    • #
      RickWill

      Hard for Labor to get back to grass roots. All those union funds invested in intermittents need ongoing “policy certainty”. Who needs coal miners!

      Can you imagine a world where coal miners are voting LNP!

      This makes me laugh.

      One of the emerging issues is the labour inefficiency of intermittents. There are now about 20,000 employees in the wind and solar industry in Australia so a big number given that the industry produces about 20% of Australia’ electricity.

      50

  • #
    pat

    segment begins 16min09sec to 21min44sec: Alan Moran on solar panel subsidies, RE costs – $7bn/year. $72bn over last decade:

    AUDIO: 19 Feb: Sky News Bolt Report: Tuesday, 19 February
    http://more.skynews.com.au/podcasts/the-bolt-report-podcast/

    40

    • #
      Kinky Keith

      That’s $700 per household.

      30

      • #
        RickWill

        That’s $700 per household.

        You make a huge error when you present an average like this. In fact the subsidies are not a “cost”. they are a transfer payment from poor households to not so poor households or from poor households to wealthy investors or fund managers.

        My average income from electricity sales over the last 8 years is about $1600 I net about $800 on electricity sales and purchases. The net pays for gas heating. I know of a household that nets more than $2000pa on electricity sales and purchases.

        20

        • #
          Kinky Keith

          I, haven’t “made a huge error”.

          You have in extrapolating my comment to your situation.

          You aren’t the centre of the universe, there are many mouths to feed, like union super funds, people like MalEx444, China and the 20,000 employees in the Australian renewables industry.

          Maybe you aren’t getting all of it, nobody here is criticising you for having rooftop, but at least acknowledge that there’s a lot of cash being creamed off our once efficient Electricity System.

          KK
          S 23,098,115

          60

          • #
            RickWill

            You absolutely missed the point. It is silly working it out on an average basis. Poor households pay a disproportionate amount. Around 2M households are benefiting at the expense of the other 8M households who fund the benefit through their electricity bill.

            Once you start averaging it you are diluting the impact. The RET is pure evil in the way it works.

            20

            • #
              Kinky Keith

              Yes,
              the RET and other cross payments are pure evil, and have been instituted and carried forward by both major parties.

              True, the average can make the effect look different than the reality.

              I estimate my personal contribution of “cream” annually to be nearer $1,000 than the average I quoted.

              Thats a lot of money but the worst, hidden effect is the damage done to manufacturing jobs and commerce here.

              The abuse of trust by politicians has been monumental and it makes me happy that Jo has tried to emphasise the craziness of the current situation.

              KK

              11

              • #
                Geoff Sherrington

                KK,
                In macro thinking terms, the most serious of these voluntary political self-flagellations is the distortion of the free market.
                You cannot insert a device like RET into an important national market without serious repercussions. This would have been totally known to the RET designers who were not stupid, so it has to be seen as deliberate, destructive bastardry.
                Ever since the RET was started, I have refused funding requests from the Libs until they removed all aspects of the RET from the system.
                It is absolutely alien to fundamental Liberal principles, as well, so it will alienate former Lib voters. Geoff

                60

              • #
                Kinky Keith

                Geoff,

                Very important points.

                Those looking at a parliamentary pensions and those in secure government jobs can afford to look the other way when RET type mischief is implemented. They are secure.

                The full implications of the renewables dream are known to very few voters and while the ABC TV and radio outlets are controlled by the self elected Elites, very few people will get to understand the reality of renewables.

                KK

                11

  • #
    George

    If you go off grid completely for electricity (with batteries and/or generator) the cost is very high compared to a grid connection.
    I believe if we transitioned the grid to mainly renewable energy then the cost per user would be roughly equivalent.

    52

  • #
    Drapetomania

    If knowledge on the RET becomes widely known before the next election it could see LNP back in power providing they promise to scrap the RET now rather than leave it linger till 2030 or get ramped up and extended as Labor wants.

    Bingo
    But..there is no one home in the LNP..
    They dont get that.
    They are afraid of winning an election by telling the truth and being called naughty names by the greens.
    So they aim their memes at the centre..and lose voters.
    And..lets face it..nothing non green will ever get through the senate anyway
    enjoy the decline :)

    120

    • #
      el gordo

      Morrison is waiting, patiently, for the NSW election to be done and dusted to see which way the wind blows.

      The masses have been brainwashed and so Angus Taylor has been given the task to nullify the green slime. Reading between the lines I imagine he will tender for new coal fired power stations to begin a debate on climate change, RET, renewable subsidies, Paris etc.

      Its a risky strategy, but they are still on a hiding to nothing, so a revolution is in order.

      91

      • #
        Serp

        What! Wasn’t Victoria enough? Andrews, notwithstanding all the public scandals around Speakers and Red Shirts, was returned with an increased majority and really, the liberals ran dead.

        Everybody’s complicit in this RET filth. And Labor is sworn to revivify the aborted NEG.

        I’m mystified as to the evidence justifying the continual el gordo expressions of wishful thinking about Morrison’s program for HELE and whatnot as there is none and something material should have happened well before this eleventh hour if there was.

        As I see it we have to hope that Tony Abbott holds Warringah and takes back the leadership after the election.

        Then he can prepare the financial community for the repeal of the RET after he wins the next election which may come well within the three years normal life of a government.

        41

  • #
    Mark M

    One from the USA …

    What Happened When I Bought a House With Solar Panels

    Third-party ownership and decades-long contracts can create real headaches.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-sunrun-solar-panels/

    90

    • #
      Annie

      That was an interesting read Mark M. I wasn’t very surprised by what was in it.

      61

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        In some countries , if a house with solar catches fire, often they cant safely isolate the panels, so the firies just have to stand back and let it burn. You cant use water on live panels…zap!!

        51

        • #
          theRealUniverse

          Thats a bit weird, as the panels should have fuses, so what if the short with water, they will burn anyway. A house doesnt have to be disconnected from the mains AC for the fire dept to hose it.
          I guess if its at night then its ok to wet them.

          31

          • #
            Eddie

            Solar panels are a source of energy, like a battery is. You can isolate them at a switch but if they are part of the conflagration they are still going to produce voltage (day or night) which water will short to produce current, adding fuel to the fire.

            20

  • #
    TdeF

    That’s the great thing about a massive hidden tax

    According to the clean energy authority who manage this ripoff

    http://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/About/Pages/Accountability%20and%20reporting/Annual%20Reports/Annual%20Report%202017-18/Renewable-Energy-Target.aspx

    In 2017–18 we validated 20,023,012 large-scale generation certificates compared with 19,374,654 validated in 2016–17 (@$65 each, so $1.3Billion at cost)

    We validated 25,567,897 small-scale technology certificates in 2017–18. This is a significant increase from the 18,620,810 small-scale technology certificates validated in 2016–17. (@40 each statutory limit, so $1Bn)

    However this is not what the people pay. This is what energy retailers and installers have to pay.
    In a normal business you double your costs, so the ‘Murdoch’ press is right.
    The total cost of solar gifts is $2Bn. $1Billion is raw gross profit.
    The total cost of wind gifts is $2.6Bn. $1.3Billion is gross profit.

    The convenient lie is to assume that buried in the distribution system these core costs are not marked up.

    If you consider say 8 million households in Australia

    The total cost of solar gifts is $2Bn. $1Billion is raw gross profit. $250
    The total cost of wind gifts is $2.6Bn. $1.3Billion is gross profit. $325

    So a total $575 per household, non tax deductible.

    Then you have to add all the other taxpayer gifts.

    Subsidies to factories to stop working. Subsidies to smelters like Alcoa ($80,000 per worker), Port Kembla, Port Pirie.

    Plus pay in rates.

    Plus all the infrastructure paid by State governments. Plus the loss of revenue from selling coal, which is free.

    The evil ‘Murdoch’ press is spot on. The publicity from governments pretend no one marks anything up. After all, that would be stealing.

    191

    • #
      TdeF

      I sent this quick reply to Viv Forbes who is championing a group called the Salt Bush Club to get a public voice.

      The key is the invention of worthless ‘Certificates’ for which you get absolutely nothing.

      This is not payment for anything. Well meaning Green community group Hepburn Wind investors still get $800,000 a year gift. This is NOT for electricity. They have no debts and you paid for their two windmill with previous gifts in the country with the world’s highest electricity prices. Your State government helped out with a grant too.

      Even better, they get to depreciate the multi million dollar windmills and pay no tax on the gift. How many small businesses receive $16,000 a week cash for doing nothing? Plus other people buy all your equipment. Plus the people pay for all the infrastructure to deliver it. The same with solar. You pay half the cost and then you have to pay the ‘owners’ for electricity they produce and you do not want and cannot use.

      The biggest Carbon Tax in the world, $200 per tonne for coal, $400 per tonne for gas and no one knows they are paying it by law at the wholesale level. What a lark!

      It also enables governments to balance their budget as you are paying for the whole thing, without your knowledge. No tax deductions.

      According to the governments, the reason we have the highest electricity prices in the world is unknown but has nothing to do with environmental ripoffs. Ha!

      201

      • #
        TdeF

        Also you can ask the obvious question. Hazelwood was bought on a 40 year lease. It was not just maintained but billions spent on improvement. It was forced to close because it was not financially viable in a country with the world’s highest electricity prices, prices which jumped even further when Hazelwood closed.

        Was Premier Daniel Andrews concerned? Ha! He tripled the price of coal overnight to help them along.

        Now why would they close because they could not make money? After all the price of electricity was soaring, far higher than when they bought it. Explain that and you have the answer.

        As for Green Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, his comment was that it was a ‘private company matter’. So an essential service was now of no interest to his government? You cannot pry into ‘private’ matters. Like Bank fees.

        171

        • #
          TdeF

          Why would AGL be so desperate to close Liddell? They paid nothing for it. It was public property but not worthless. After all they turned down a $250Million cash offer. Their profits will go through the roof when Liddell closes. Everyone knows it, but why should that be the case?

          So much for the ‘free market’. It is all rigged by the Federal Government which used to have nothing to do with electricity. It all started with the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2001. A totally Green document there are two words completely missing. Carbon and Tax. It was carefully crafted in the swamp to not ring alarm bells. If you want an explanation for the awful mess, look no further. It was all planned.

          150

          • #
            TdeF

            And now you are told solar panels are costing you $500 a year at wholesale, $1000 a year at retail per family.
            Now add the cost of the windmills.

            Or do you really think the government is paying for the windmills? If so, check their budgets. Not a windmill in sight.

            110

  • #
    pat

    these lengthy pieces on the cold and snow never seem to mention a single temperature, despite all the maps:

    19 Feb: Accuweather: More than 200 million in path of major winter storm sweeping northward across the US
    By Faith Eherts
    A major storm will bring snow, rain, ice or a wintry mix to more than 200 million Americans beginning Tuesday and continuing through Wednesday night, impacting roughly 60 percent of the U.S. population.
    Parts of 39 of the 48 contiguous United States will be impacted by the massive storm, including every state east of the Mississippi River. The storm will have such a large impact on so many because it will reach parts of 26 of the 30 most populous states.

    As the large storm rolls up the Tennessee and Ohio valleys at midweek, it will bring snow, ice and difficult travel to the Midwest and Northeast. The storm will then reorganize along the mid-Atlantic coast before heading toward the Maritime provinces of Canada.
    GIF(?): A NOAA satellite loop of the continental U.S. taken on Tuesday, Feb. 19
    https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/soaking-wintry-storm-to-overtake-eastern-us-at-midweek/70007473

    70

    • #
      pat

      19 Feb: Radio Iowa: Matt Kelley: Here we go again, more heavy snow in the forecast
      Snowfall records set in Iowa more than a century ago are expected to be broken with the massive approaching winter storm.
      Meteorologist Allan Curtis, at the National Weather Service in metro Des Moines, says most of the state is under a Winter Storm Warning from 6 p.m. through noon tomorrow — and heavy snow is expected…
      Most areas of Iowa have seen repeated snowfalls in recent weeks with little melting, so the mounds along our driveways, sidewalks and parking lots are already resembling small mountains. Soon, they’ll be even higher…

      Many Iowa communities have already broken or will soon break snowfall records, some of them more than 100 years old. “Des Moines and Waterloo are just a couple of inches shy of their record February snowfall and they’ll almost certainly break it come this time tomorrow morning, and obviously, we’ve still got some time to go in the month,” Curtis says. “There’s other records, like 2019 year-to-date snowfall records that are potentially going to fall at a number of sites as well.”…

      Des Moines has received 19.1 inches of snow this month. The record is 22.7 inches set in 2008. Waterloo’s gotten 21.7 inches of snow during February, while the record is 24.3 inches set in 1962. Also for Des Moines, the city had 43.5 inches of snow during the winter of 1912, the most ever in a 40-day period. The capitol city is currently at 37.4 inches for the past 40 days.
      https://www.radioiowa.com/2019/02/19/here-we-go-again-more-heavy-snow-in-the-forecast/

      80

  • #
    pat

    excellent piece:

    19 Feb: Breitbart: Aaron Klein: Who’s Behind the Green New Deal? Big Money Backs Ocasio-Cortez Socialist Dream Project
    The Green New Deal blueprint introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was crafted by three far-left organizations and is being pushed by a coalition of well-funded professional progressive groups and known leftist agitators…

    The Green New Deal was crafted by Ocasio-Cortez along with three groups — the Sunrise Movement, Justice Democrats and a group calling itself New Consensus…

    The New Yorker reported (LINK):
    - The document was written over a single December weekend by the staff of the freshman representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and three like-minded progressive groups, none of which existed two years ago: the Sunrise Movement, a grassroots climate organization; the Justice Democrats, which recruits and supports progressive candidates; and an upstart policy shop called the New Consensus. -

    Sunrise markets itself as an “army of young people” seeking to “make climate change an urgent priority across America, end the corrupting influence of fossil fuel executives on our politics, and elect leaders who stand up for the health and wellbeing of all people.”

    Sunrise co-founder Varshini Prakash described his organization’s expansive goals for 2020: “We, along with our partners, are going to be attempting to build the largest youth political force this country has ever seen.” Markey invited Prakash to be his guest at President Trump’s State of the Union address two weeks ago…
    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/02/19/whos-behind-the-green-new-deal-big-money-backs-ocasio-cortez-socialist-dream-project/

    40

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Ok – buy the whole solar thing, panels and solar invertor, yourself (import if needed), have a BIG switch labeled GRID or SOLAR. Dont use both, keep any cowboy installers well away from your property. Forget subsidy. Then your neighbors cant complain you are ripping them off!

    40

  • #
    Vensaint

    Now here’s a solution to the problem. According to our most recent council newsletter, pensioners can access affordable loans for the installation of high-quality rooftop solar through the Solar Savers program. “Through Council’s involvement in the Eastern Alliance for Greenhouse Action (EAGA), low income and vulnerable households can install solar, take control of their bills and protect themselves from future price rises.”

    The scheme could potentially deliver,….wait for it, “…immediate net savings of at least $100 per year on electricity costs…”

    Pensioners taking loans to lower power bills, talk about exploiting the vulnerable, it’s sickening.

    10

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    With a lot of effort, I chased down the report from the AEMC and found the following in figure 4 for the SRES for the average residential customer ($1335/pa)

    FY18 $19 FY19 $32 FY20 $34 FY21 $36

    So how did they get the $200.00 then? You could just divide the cost by the number of residential consumers, that gets you around $200.00 but that ignores business and industry. Or you could assume that business will pass on their own SRES (which for the averaged business electricity cost of $6800/pa) is $163.00 + $32.00 (residential) that would add up to nearly that $200.00.

    So you might be paying and extra $200 in SRES, but only a 1/6th of that will be in your electricity bill, the rest will be passed on by business.

    https://www.aemc.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-12/2018%20Price%20Trends%20-%20Final%20Report%20-%20CLEAN.PDF#page=78

    29

    • #
      AndyG55

      So nearly $200 per average household bill.

      PLUS what is passed on by businesses (which by the way, usually have substantially high electricity bills than households)

      Thanks pfutz. :-)

      92

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        I wish you had read all of my post. The AMEC states for the average residential consumer it will be $32.00.

        37

        • #
          AndyG55

          In 2016-17 the ACCC estimated that environmental programs were adding $106/year to consumer bills, and wholesale prices have doubled since then.

          Of course the AMEC needs to tell a much lower story. Swallowed gullibly as always.

          31

          • #
            Peter Fitzroy

            that is true AndyG55

            Total Environment breaks down like this:
            17/18 18/19
            37 41 LRET
            19 32 SRES
            17 16 Network JS
            6 7 Efficiency Schemes
            79 95 Total

            Figures A1 and A2 from the report

            33

        • #
          robert rosicka

          Seriously putz you don’t even know what you pay for electricity in NSW ! Why do you keep going ?

          12

    • #
      RickWill

      Averaging the amount across all customers is silly. A significant number of solar households will get income statements from their electricity retailer rather than a bill. The transfer payment from the poor households to better off households burdens the poor households and that burden will continue to rise until the grid is no longer an economic entity and needs to be funded from general revenue as has occurred in SA.

      The grid was destined to be uneconomic at the time of permitting the first intermittent generator to connect. There remain a vain hope of adding more intermittent generators will somehow make it economic – it won’t.

      31

  • #
    Robber

    Current typical electricity retail prices in Melbourne including GST:
    Supply charge 96 cents/day
    Flat usage charge 17.9 cents/kWhr
    Controlled load 9.4 cents/kWhr
    Feedin tariff 11.3 cents/kWhr
    Or
    Peak/offpeak usage 22.5/12.0 cents/kWhr
    Or
    Peak/shoulder/offpeak 33/23/14 cents/kWhr
    Or
    Summer/other peak/shoulder/offpeak
    Confusing? You bet.

    20

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Supply charge at our house hold is almost exactly 50% of the bill! Thats allot just to be connected. why the …. is it so expensive? Isnt that where allot of the ‘extra’ charge/pay for windmills useless output is going too?

      40

      • #
        Chad

        The “Supply Charge” (sometimes called the connection fee, or Fixed charge, etc) .. Is just a fudge by the retailers to get more income without increasing the cost per kWh, which is regulated.
        Each retailer will give a different “explanation” to justify the charge, but the reality is its just an extra charge.
        If yours is half your bill, you must have a very low usage ?? > 5kWh per day ??

        20

    • #
      Kinky Keith

      Profitable.

      You bet!

      10

  • #
    John

    How’s this for confusion?
    Energy companies say the subsidy is 15% of the bill, but the Minister says it is just 3%. We don’t even know what the cost is. Therein lies a free-market disaster. How is anyone supposed to make sensible decisions?

    Origin Energy ­revealed last year that the government’s SRES and state-based solar feed-in tariffs accounted for up to 15 per cent of bill charges.

    UP TO makes the comparison meaningless when I don’t know what the difference between Origin’s worst case scenario and the average, and indeed the Origin case compared the average across Australia.

    50

  • #
    Dean

    Maybe its just me but isnt the real issue with this statement “I pay 28c per kWh for electricity I use from the grid. I get 11c per kWh for electricity my solar panels feed into the grid. Tell me again how I am costing other users money?” that other people using the 11c per kWh could be using power which costs 5c per kWh.

    Instead they are forced to use the expensive green electrickery.

    20

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    The whole pricing thing looks like a mess. Who understands it totally? I see no real clear explanations. Not the fault of the posters.

    70

    • #

      theRealUniverse,

      this is not all that easy to explain, but I’ll try.

      Okay, then, go and open this image of the bid stack from the NEM, and this is just indicative, but it’s how it works across the whole day. The colours mean nothing, just used to differentiate one power supplier from the other. The costs are also only indicative as well, and are in dollars per MWH.

      See the bottom scale, well that shows each five minute interval.

      The vertical scale (left side) shows power being consumed, and the right side vertical scale is the cost from each of the bidding power suppliers needed to be added to the ‘mountain’, as demand rises.

      See everything below the number 1, the dark brown colour, well that’s the existing supply going across the day, and that stays pretty much stable, and that cost is what they have already bidded at, ($35) and because they are always supplying, then that bid price stays the same.

      As more power is needed, then the next lowest bidder (the blue colour between 1 and 2) comes on line delivering their power at the price they bid at. ($38)

      Then as demand rises even further, the next (light green at $48/MWH) comes on line.

      Then next is dark green at $51/MWH.

      Then a little more is needed, so orange at $60/MWH, only needed for a short time and then back off.

      At the end of the half hour, the costs are averaged and however much power you supplied in that half hour, then you get that average price for every MWH you delivered.

      Then the whole process starts again for the next half hour.

      Here, coal fired power is the dark brown and lowest cost and as they ramp their power up and down throughout the day, then that of itself keeps the overall cost lower, the most power at the cheapest cost keeps the power price as low as it can be.

      As considerably more power is required, then the minnows who supply tiny amounts at an immense cost artificially increase the cost of power.

      You’ll see this at the AEMO site for demand and price with a huge spike, instantaneous in nature, lasting for the time that plant comes on line, and then settling straight back down, but at a now increased average.

      When considerable amounts of power are needed, exceeding the expected demand, then those smaller suppliers with the huge cost will cause the whole cost structure to stay high.

      Bid prices are all set in advance, and the next one to come on line is the lowest cost supplier of all those waiting in that queue.

      Not easy to explain, or to understand, but I hope I helped.

      Tony.

      91

  • #
    Maptram

    Water has arrived at the Birdsville town common. Probably on it’s way from the Queensland floods, more climate change no doubt

    71

    • #
      Bill in Oz

      On it’s way to lake Eyre in South Australia..
      In the midst of drought
      There is a flood !

      Only in Oz !

      :-)

      62

      • #
        Bill in Oz

        Good grief !

        Two red thumbs for my little comment.

        Why ?

        It is statement of fact, not an opinion.

        But perhaps someone doesn’t like all that flood water ‘escaping’ down to lake Eyre ?

        21

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    This non story was also covered on the 18th of July last year
    http://joannenova.com.au/2018/07/ten-years-late-the-accc-says-rooftop-solar-deals-must-stop/
    We did not see the ‘massive’ increase then and we won’t this time either.

    Trust ‘The Australian’ on anything except LNP boosterism, is, as I have said before, an oxymoron.

    34

  • #
    robert rosicka

    I’m loving the independent report into the cost of emission reduction in Australia just released , 50% increase in electricity prices and a hit to the economy of $500 billion .

    20

  • #
    Ve2

    A few Australians are just beginning to realize that they are paying for their neighbour’s solar panel.

    It’s taken them 10 years to figure that out?

    I realised that 7 years ago, got in when the power companies were desperate to get customers to meet targets forced on them the government and I now have a feeding tariff of 71.3 cents, and do I rub it in the face of every Labor voter who complains about the price of electricity,

    21

  • #
    John Falting

    is actually not that hard to work out 80% (coal) of all power generated has to pay 8c/kw as a fine or buy certificates (same) I pay about 35c/kw in SA 8/35*80% works out to at least 15% gov is wrong. So 15% of the entire Australian power bill is the cost of renewables

    00