Hmmmm, so I work in renewables, and while I don't work in the Australian market, I would like to take issue with your assumption that a massive transition to renewables in 10 years is a joke.
If you look at most utility procurement plans, the vast majority are renewables, and prices are only getting cheaper. They are getting so cheap that new solar and wind are starting to beat currently running coal. Also, beating existing gas on price is expected within 5 years.
So the current behavior in the industry is that utilities are starting to close existing coal power plants and are expected to close existing gas power plants well before their lifespan is up simply because it's cheaper.
Hi! Yes I agree its entirely possible that renewables will make a big impact and that should be encouraged. I'm sure in Australia with enough backing they could get to 30% or even 50%.
I'm sure you realize though that even 80% renewables has some huge challenges with storage. Its hard to guarantee power will always be there. There are a lot of hot nights with no wind.
Combined with Australia having some of the cheapest coal in the world, such headlines are just click bait.
I think it will happen in Australia by overbuilding solar. Solar at utility scale is now regularly getting below 2c/kWh globally, retail electricity in Australia is 30c/kWh, we’ll probably just end up building twice as much as is necessary, then seasonal changes won’t matter.
Renewable energy will grow for sure, but every national survey in the US and every international survey of energy use definitively shows renewable won't be anywhere near majority anytime soon.
It's unrealistic to think that a national energy source is going to change drastically in such a short period of time. 10 years isn't that long of a time period.
At best you are ignorant of the real costs of renewables. The only way you (and that Forbes writer) can come to your cost conclusions is to ignore the intermittent nature of renewables, but then you no longer have a 24x7 power grid.
Ok, I was a bit too blunt there, but the fact remains that presenting the marginal generation capacity cost of solar or wind as the total cost to deliver that capacity in a 24x7 system is simply wrong.
If the cost for the next wind turbine or solar farm was just $1 it would be wrong to assume that your incremental energy cost is now just $1. You still have to build the coal/gas/nuclear plant to generate power when that turbine or farm is generating 0 energy. And because power from solar and wind can start and stop at any time you have to keep your other base load plants fired up and ready to go at any time.
> If the cost for the next wind turbine or solar farm was just $1 it would be wrong to assume that your incremental energy cost is now just $1. You still have to build the coal/gas/nuclear plant to generate power when that turbine or farm is generating 0 energy.
Only if you are starting from scratch. When adding a wind turbine or solar farm to an existing system, the incremental energy cost can even be negative, if adding the new generator means you can run your thermal power plants for less time or with less power (using less fuel and reducing wear on the mechanical parts).
> And because power from solar and wind can start and stop at any time you have to keep your other base load plants fired up and ready to go at any time.
"Start and stop at any time" is an exaggeration. Both solar irradiation and wind speed are predictable in the short term, so these backup power plants only have to be ready when a power shortage is predicted.
If you look at most utility procurement plans, the vast majority are renewables, and prices are only getting cheaper. They are getting so cheap that new solar and wind are starting to beat currently running coal. Also, beating existing gas on price is expected within 5 years.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/12/03/plu...
So the current behavior in the industry is that utilities are starting to close existing coal power plants and are expected to close existing gas power plants well before their lifespan is up simply because it's cheaper.