Big Canberra Battery powers on to next procurement stage

I am assuming you are supporting the big battery concept and you are scoping what services should be turned off first to allow a 250mwh battery to save the 90,000 residents for 4 hours.

Shouldn’t the first service to be turned off be the light rail, surely?

Don’t speculate on unknown unknowns.

Whilst I agree with you that small scale solar is not an efficient way to deliver electricity, small scale solar hasn’t had large amounts of subsidy since the feed in tariffs were closed many years ago now.

The alternative to schemes like this would be to put a tax on small scale solar to incentivise individuals installing storage capacity but if organised correctly, the government or business can use these batteries to store the power from solar when the market price is cheap and then feed it back into the network when prices are higher, making a nice profit.

Hold on. The ACT Smart website currently lists a roof-top solar subsidy program of 50% or up to $2,500. So the ratepayer/taxpayer is still subsidising roof-top solar installation in the ACT, and at the same time, paying for batteries to be installed across the city, to stabilise the grid made unstable by these numerous small inverters.

Also, how do you know this regime will make a nice profit, they don’t have a good track record of achieving their predictions.

Nobody,
Which scheme are you looking at?
There remains a low income subsidy for homeowners with a Pensioner Concession card. Which is accessible to a tiny minority of people. Is that the one you’re referencing?

“Also, how do you know this regime will make a nice profit,”

I did say if the proposal was organised correctly. And the evidence available is the operation of the energy market and when PV systems produce their peak electricity output. Due to the proliferation of these systems, their peak output drives the cost of electricity down enormously. This can be exploited with these types of battery systems for profit.

Now, as above, I don’t actually think this is the most efficient way of achieving the best outcomes but your comments that it’s all BS and large government subsidies, doesn’t line up with the evidence..

For many thousands of years civilisations made do with fires to keep warm, cook food and for light.

Going by your theory that we shouldn’t change because what we have works civilisation would never have moved forward.

The world is changing and we cannot continue to bury our heads in the sand and burn coal, gas and other carbon fuels. We need to change.

As for regimes interestingly regimes all over Australia and indeed much of the world are adopting renewable power. It’s hardly an issue specific to the ACT regime.

JC, I haven’t said we shouldn’t change, I think the subsidised change to roof-top solar, with the numerous small inverters destabilising the grid, with now the additional need for batteries to stabilise the grid, was the wrong change. I agree we need to get away from fossil fuels, but large scale renewables that don’t destabilise the grid would be better, with nuclear to supply baseload.

A lot of people are still getting .45c kWh feed in tariff which is twice the new usage charge will be.

Solar is so good it still has to be subsidised.

Capital Retro,
Thanks for mentioning a scheme that was closed to new entrants in 2011, fully 10 years ago.

Shows how far technology and prices can go in a short period of time such that solar doesnt need subsidy anymore. And similar things have been happening in the renewable sector overall.

Thanks for reminding us of how renewable energy is taking over from older fossil fuel generation sources due to the rapidly reducing cost.

Did I say the scheme was still open? No, but some lucky people were signed up to get 20 years of the those .45ckWh tariffs. You are happy to subsidize that – I am not.

One of the major retail suppliers is now offering several thousand dollars of RECS and a .22c kWh feed in tariff for at least 2 years.

Subsidies for part-time renewable solar that will replace fulltime coal are alive and well.

Capital Retro,
Can’t see where I’ve suggested the Feed In Tariff was a good idea.

Just that it clearly isn’t available now, nor for many years.

Although anyone with a house and a brain should have leaped at the opportunity, so silly was the offer. Sorry you seem to have missed out.

As for the rest of your claim, perhaps you can provide a link rather than bluster. I’m always interested in assessing these types of offers.

Although you’re right in that we don’t need more subsidies for the expensive coal plants, just an orderly transition to the cheaper renewable options.

I didn’t miss out on a brain if that’s what you are inferring but I simply didn’t have any spare cash at that time.

Rather than than me supply you with a link about the current solar offers why don’t you make a phone call to 1300 791468?

Speaking of “claims”, how about you supply some some details of the “subsidies to expensive coal plants”?

Capital Retro,
That’s the point though, you didn’t even need “spare cash”, the offer was so good that it made financial sense to take out a loan to get the feed in tariff. Payback periods of less than 2 years. It was breathtakingly generous at the time for anyone with some nous.

And I didn’t make a claim, i was just responding to yours. I’m interested in the evidence, because if there are good offers around, perhaps you should be purchasing now. Put up a link.