17 May 2011

Let a thousand solar farms bloom

| johnboy
Join the conversation
30

Energy Minister Simon Corbell has proudly unveiled a 30kW solar roof farm in Hume leased by Energy Matters.

He’s hoping other roofs across Canberra can be similarly used:

“There are a number of large buildings and open space across the Territory which could be suitable for a solar installation of this size. It is pleasing to see local businesses making better use of this space by allowing others access to harness renewable energy.

“I applaud both Energy Matters and Ullrich Aluminium, the tenants, for their cooperative approach into achieving this great renewable energy outcome.

The proponents will also have access to the ACT’s Feed-in Tariff scheme.

So much for the economies of large scale production

Join the conversation

30
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

wotsinaname said :

(or – Enron cried all the way to the bank….)
———————————————————-
The California electricity crisis, also known as the Phony Energy Crisis of 2001 was a situation where California had a shortage of electricity caused by market manipulations and illegal shutdowns …by Texas energy consortiums.
A demand supply gap was created by energy companies, mainly Enron, to create an artificial shortage.
Energy traders took power plants offline for maintenance in days of peak demand to increase the price.
This enabled them to sell power at premium prices, sometimes up to a factor of 20 times its normal value.

I made a graph and some notes from NSW electricity demand and price data for 2 months this year – using Australian Energy Market Operator data.
Prices are $20 per MWH most of the time but jumped to over $10,000 per MWH on a couple of occasions!!!
No wonder prices are going up and AGL is happy to start up a huge gas-fired power station for less than 400 hours per year. Talk about winning the lottery!
Can anyone explain how this can happen? The graph with some notes is here: – http://goo.gl/51BOv
The Australian Energy Market Operator data came from here: http://www.aemo.com.au/data/aggPD_2011to2015.html

shadow boxer8:02 am 19 May 11

Gungahlin Al said :

shadow boxer said :

No i’m talking about the fact this scheme is middle class welfare, i’m all for solar panels, just think roll out should be fair.

Welfare? To me it seems more like leveraging the buying power of those who can buy, into a particular direction that has more profound benefits for the wider community than just that household, that is, driving the unit price of PV downward, making it more affordable for many many more people than it ever was before, and decreasing the degree to which the network infrastructure needs to be over-engineered to cope with the aforesaid heatwave peaks.

This is a bit simplistic Al.

The problem is the utility has its price set by an independant arbiter who sets the price at what is required to deliver the service and make a reasonable profit (same with water).

If the utility pays 8c but is paying out 60c to those that can afford panels, the price will rise for everyone else.

The only way to partially avoid this would be to have enough people doing it that new infrastructure is not required (although prices would still rise as the existing infrastructure must be paid for).

Given prices have already tripled and quadrupled to pay for this infrastructure and all the pundits are predicting a further tripling to support new infrastructure it seems unlikely this scheme is having any impact on the backend requirements and those that can’t afford solar will face higher and higher bills.

The money being used to fund the 60c figure would be better used as a tax incentive for solar producers or a cash back for consumers.

Gungahlin Al said :


a) it is not the daily peaks that are causing the big infrastructure costs – it is the heatwave days. …

c) again you are not comprehending how extensive the expense is to upgrade the network to cope with summer heatwave loads due to the incredibly rapid roll-out of household a/c. I worked in the Brisbane City Council Air and Energy Team in 2004 and the industry was getting freaked about it back then. It has got a whole lot worse now. Exacerbated by the complete intolerance of blackouts we now have.

So the industry finds themselves having to spend billions (yes billions) to cope with VERY infrequent but VERY big peaks. …the industry feels boxed into it by unrelenting media criticism following any blackouts.

To Regulate – and reduce electricity prices for 75% of customers?
—————————————————————————————–
Queensland Energy and Water Utilities
The Honourable Stephen Robertson

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Bligh Government moves to create fairer system for electricity prices

Future electricity prices in Queensland will be set using a fairer pricing framework and new tariff structure from 1 July 2012, Energy Minister Stephen Robertson said today.

“We …estimate that more than 75 percent of customers will be better off under this system than the current system.”

“Our research estimates that a family of four in South East Queensland could save up to $220 per year under the new methodology (based on consumption of 10,000kWh per year).”

Other proposed changes to the existing tariff schedule include: …
• removing the remaining declining block tariffs;
• removing access to notified electricity prices for all large non-residential consumers in south east Queensland who use more than 100 megawatt hours per year.

Minister Robertson said another proposed change is to establish a voluntary residential Time-of-Use tariff for those customers with an interval meter installed.

“This type of tariff gives customers the power to choose,” he said.

“It would allow for electricity prices to be varied across different times of the day and give customers an incentive to shift their major electricity consumption away from higher-priced peak periods to times of the day when prices are lower.”

“Knowing they will pay a lower price in the morning than during the normal early evening peak demand period means customers can pick and choose the best time to use energy. “

http://www.cabinet.qld.gov.au/MMS/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=74690

Or to partially deregulate, and trust in a “market mechanism”
———————————————————————————-
Julia Gillard: Speech to Australian Agenda UBS Lunch
posted Monday, 16 May 2011

“We will pursue the reforms at the heart of this Budget in tandem with our other long-term and profoundly economy-changing reforms – particularly our reform to price carbon.

We all know that we need to break the nexus between economic growth and emissions growth, and despite all of the huff and puff one would see in the daily media, in fact cutting our emissions by 5 per cent by 2020 is a bipartisan objective.

So, the only question we’re asking ourselves, really, is what’s the best way to get it done, what’s the most efficient way to get it done: using a market-based mechanism or using excessive regulation? Well, I’m in the cart for the market-based mechanism and that’s the reform that we will drive and deliver from 1 July next year. “

http://www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/julia-gillard–speech-to-australian-agenda-ubs-lun/

“…the industry feels boxed into spending billions by unrelenting media criticism following any blackouts???”
—————————————————————————————————————————-
(or – Enron cried all the way to the bank….)
———————————————————-
The California electricity crisis, also known as the Phony Energy Crisis of 2001 was a situation where California had a shortage of electricity caused by market manipulations and illegal shutdowns …by Texas energy consortiums.
A demand supply gap was created by energy companies, mainly Enron, to create an artificial shortage.
Energy traders took power plants offline for maintenance in days of peak demand to increase the price.
This enabled them to sell power at premium prices, sometimes up to a factor of 20 times its normal value.
California suffered from multiple large-scale blackouts.
At the time it had an installed generating capacity of 45 GW, but the blackouts occurred when demand was only 28 GW.
The crisis was possible because of partial deregulation legislation instituted in 1996 by Governor Pete Wilson.
Enron took advantage of this deregulation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

Does any Australian company have a profit-motive to copy Enron’s supply manipulation???
———————————————————————————————————————————–
AGL Energy held an information day recently to notify residents of its plans to build a $1.5 billion peaking power station.
AGL project manager Neil Cooke said the gas turbine power plant would only operate between 200 and 400 hours a year during periods of peak demand and could be switched off for months on end.

THE CANBERRA TIMES Saturday, May 7, 2011 page 15.

A better approach?
————————–
Identify the largest electricity consumers in peak periods and have them convert from electricity to gas. (i.e. “Peak Demand Management”)

Gungahlin Al said :


a) it is not the daily peaks that are causing the big infrastructure costs – it is the heatwave days. …

c) again you are not comprehending how extensive the expense is to upgrade the network to cope with summer heatwave loads due to the incredibly rapid roll-out of household a/c. I worked in the Brisbane City Council Air and Energy Team in 2004 and the industry was getting freaked about it back then. It has got a whole lot worse now. Exacerbated by the complete intolerance of blackouts we now have.

So the industry finds themselves having to spend billions (yes billions) to cope with VERY infrequent but VERY big peaks. …the industry feels boxed into it by unrelenting media criticism following any blackouts.

To Regulate – and reduce electricity prices for 75% of customers?
—————————————————————————————–

Queensland Energy and Water Utilities
The Honourable Stephen Robertson

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Bligh Government moves to create fairer system for electricity prices

Future electricity prices in Queensland will be set using a fairer pricing framework and new tariff structure from 1 July 2012, Energy Minister Stephen Robertson said today.

“We …estimate that more than 75 percent of customers will be better off under this system than the current system.”

“Our research estimates that a family of four in South East Queensland could save up to $220 per year under the new methodology (based on consumption of 10,000kWh per year).”

Other proposed changes to the existing tariff schedule include: …
• removing the remaining declining block tariffs;
• removing access to notified electricity prices for all large non-residential consumers in south east Queensland who use more than 100 megawatt hours per year.

Minister Robertson said another proposed change is to establish a voluntary residential Time-of-Use tariff for those customers with an interval meter installed.

“This type of tariff gives customers the power to choose,” he said.

“It would allow for electricity prices to be varied across different times of the day and give customers an incentive to shift their major electricity consumption away from higher-priced peak periods to times of the day when prices are lower.”

“Knowing they will pay a lower price in the morning than during the normal early evening peak demand period means customers can pick and choose the best time to use energy. “

http://www.cabinet.qld.gov.au/MMS/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=74690

Or to partially deregulate, and trust in a “market mechanism”
———————————————————————————-

Julia Gillard: Speech to Australian Agenda UBS Lunch
posted Monday, 16 May 2011

“We will pursue the reforms at the heart of this Budget in tandem with our other long-term and profoundly economy-changing reforms – particularly our reform to price carbon.

We all know that we need to break the nexus between economic growth and emissions growth, and despite all of the huff and puff one would see in the daily media, in fact cutting our emissions by 5 per cent by 2020 is a bipartisan objective.

So, the only question we’re asking ourselves, really, is what’s the best way to get it done, what’s the most efficient way to get it done: using a market-based mechanism or using excessive regulation? Well, I’m in the cart for the market-based mechanism and that’s the reform that we will drive and deliver from 1 July next year. “

http://www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/julia-gillard–speech-to-australian-agenda-ubs-lun/

“…the industry feels boxed into spending billions by unrelenting media criticism following any blackouts???”
—————————————————————————————————————————-
(or – Enron cried all the way to the bank….)
———————————————————-

The California electricity crisis, also known as the Phony Energy Crisis of 2001 was a situation where California had a shortage of electricity caused by market manipulations and illegal shutdowns …by Texas energy consortiums.
A demand supply gap was created by energy companies, mainly Enron, to create an artificial shortage.
Energy traders took power plants offline for maintenance in days of peak demand to increase the price.
This enabled them to sell power at premium prices, sometimes up to a factor of 20 times its normal value.
California suffered from multiple large-scale blackouts.
At the time it had an installed generating capacity of 45 GW, but the blackouts occurred when demand was only 28 GW.
The crisis was possible because of partial deregulation legislation instituted in 1996 by Governor Pete Wilson.
Enron took advantage of this deregulation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

Does any Australian company have a profit-motive to copy Enron’s supply manipulation???
———————————————————————————————————————————–

AGL Energy held an information day recently to notify residents of its plans to build a $1.5 billion peaking power station.
AGL project manager Neil Cooke said the gas turbine power plant would only operate between 200 and 400 hours a year during periods of peak demand and could be switched off for months on end.

THE CANBERRA TIMES Saturday, May 7, 2011 page 15.

A better approach?
————————–
Identify the largest electricity consumers in peak periods and have them convert from electricity to gas. (i.e. “Peak Demand Management”)

Gungahlin Al said :

shadow boxer said :

No i’m talking about the fact this scheme is middle class welfare, i’m all for solar panels, just think roll out should be fair.

Welfare? To me it seems more like leveraging the buying power of those who can buy, into a particular direction that has more profound benefits for the wider community than just that household, that is, driving the unit price of PV downward, making it more affordable for many many more people than it ever was before, and decreasing the degree to which the network infrastructure needs to be over-engineered to cope with the aforesaid heatwave peaks.

Al give it up. You’ve got solar, the Gungahlin Community Centre has solar that it didn’t have to pay for but we do. Solar on roofs is not a lot cheaper than it was three years ago. Solar electricity production falls due to high temperatures and also towards sunset at the very time it is needed on hot summers days. Electricity has to be brought in along transmission lines. You complain that there is no tolerance for blackouts. Maybe there is no tolerance for death by heatstroke. Not all of us live in five star insulated new homes.

Gungahlin Al,
surely there are far more efficient ways to reduce those summer peaks than providing more inefficient middle class welfare to house owners in Canberra?
And what are we paying for the reduction in carbon due to these panels $400-500 per tonne?
What a joke.

shadow boxer4:11 pm 18 May 11

Now we are talking, when I get my free panels my bill will drop, they could put it back up for 5 years to offset some costs and then i’m away.

We could have every house in Canberra with panels at no cost.

Gungahlin Al4:06 pm 18 May 11

shadow boxer said :

No i’m talking about the fact this scheme is middle class welfare, i’m all for solar panels, just think roll out should be fair.

Welfare? To me it seems more like leveraging the buying power of those who can buy, into a particular direction that has more profound benefits for the wider community than just that household, that is, driving the unit price of PV downward, making it more affordable for many many more people than it ever was before, and decreasing the degree to which the network infrastructure needs to be over-engineered to cope with the aforesaid heatwave peaks.

So we all agree?
Solar Panels are good and the government should do more about getting panels installed for every suitable household without costing those who can’t?

shadow boxer said :

No i’m talking about the fact this scheme is middle class welfare, i’m all for solar panels, just think roll out should be fair.

Oh wow, imagine if Julia had a National Solar Panel Scheme where they just gave out solar panels like they did insulation and set top boxes. 🙂

Gungahlin Al said :

MERC600 said :

Oh charming….

I’m going to be paying even more for me leccy to subsidise it. And I read where Parly House are looking at solar leccy installations as well.. Hell it won’t be that long that the power charges are up there with the water..

The primary reason you are paying more for electricity is because the network infrastructure was never built to handle the incredible peak loads caused by the boom in cheap and inefficient air conditioning systems all kicking in at the same time on hot days in summer. This is the case across the entire country. Feed-in Tariffs are merely the convenient ‘whipping boy.’

Some electricity rises in Canberra are due to upgrades to the transmission lines including a large new substation near Michelago and a new transmission line to ensure Canberra’s supply. A certain amount of this upgrade is to cope with a larger population. The ACT electricity prices are less affected than those in other states.

Fact is we are paying 45.7 cents for each kilowatt-hour for rooftop solar instead of the 4 cents average for fossil, a mixture of gas and coal fired electricity from the generators. Actew gets it into its grid for about 8 cents after paying for transmission costs and losses and some environmental taxes and regulator costs.

Like so many others you can bleat all you like Al about it only adding a bit to our bills. It only adds a bit because only a little bit of solar is being produced and even less carbon is being abated.

You’re a politician supposed to be concerned about the well being of your constituency including all those who will never have solar generators. Next time you smooze up to Corbell you should ask him to get ActewAGL to tell us just how much carbon dioxide yours and others solar generators have saved. It will be somewhere about zero because I doubt that ActewAGL has forgone purchasing very much electricity because of solar production. Ask him to show us the summer and winter power demand curves and how solar fits into those. Ask him to tell us why we have this scheme that has never had a cost/benefit analysis carried out on it.

shadow boxer3:48 pm 18 May 11

No i’m talking about the fact this scheme is middle class welfare, i’m all for solar panels, just think roll out should be fair.

Gungahlin Al2:52 pm 18 May 11

shadow boxer said :

You can’t just ignore the elephant in the room Al,

On the contrary, I am suggesting that some people are looking at the mouse in one corner of the room and blaming it, while they studiously ignore the real elephant in the other corner, having been convinced by the anti-carbon tax politicking currently emanating from a certain political party these days.

It is the old magician’s sleight of hand, combined with the old political adage of “if I say it enough times, some people will start to believe it.”

shadow boxer2:06 pm 18 May 11

You can’t just ignore the elephant in the room Al,

I should have had a NB: I rent an apartment and have no solar panels, nor investment in any solar related power generation or business.

It seems most of the complaints are about the money involved, especially for those who can’t afford the panels or feel they are subsidising the tariff recipients?

Right now I’m in the same boat, but if I was to own a house with suitable roof space, I would be using solar without a seconds thought!
If anything, we should be increasing the tariff and reducing the cost of panel purchase and installation. (Govn subsidy)

Surely if we didn’t pay for some of that brilliant Stanhope ‘art’, we could have afforded some more solar installations? 🙂

grundy said :

What’s with all the solar hate on here!?
The feed-in tariff is a great system in the ACT and any solar power being installed is better than none!

As for large scale production, well the federal budget just cut a bunch of funding for the solar flagship…… but there are still a lot of private companies working on large scale solar projects as we speak. 🙂
Having small systems built in the meantime is NOT a problem; it is a great move toward green energy production.

I subject to me – as a ‘low income’ (read: 1 income) renter – subsidising the well off for their solar installations which will allow them to not only have free electricity but earn money once they’ve earned back their investment. While I – like all renters and lots of lower income property owners – am not in a position to join the initiative and have to deal with ever increasing electricity bills for my badly insulated rental.

I would feel a lot happier to pay extra taxes for a solar farm that benefits all of the electricity users and would at least make me feel like I was doing my bit to reduce my own carbon footprint.

And related to the above, having a PROPER home insulation subsidy would probably have more effect and benefit more people too.

Also, it has long been proven that solar hot water is a way more efficient way to reduce carbon-based electricity usage.

So I object to having to subsidise an ill-thought out strategy with no long-term component to it.

Gungahlin Al1:29 pm 18 May 11

zig said :

grundy said :

What’s with all the solar hate on here!?
The feed-in tariff is a great system in the ACT and any solar power being installed is better than none!

As for large scale production, well the federal budget just cut a bunch of funding for the solar flagship…… but there are still a lot of private companies working on large scale solar projects as we speak. 🙂
Having small systems built in the meantime is NOT a problem; it is a great move toward green energy production.

I don’t hate small solar PV I just think it’s overvalued in terms of the overly generous tariffs in place.
That and the fact it lumps the rest of electricity users with subsidising other people’s electricity use whether or not the solar PV owners are actually reducing their use.

It only provides energy for a small amount of the day and it doesn’t contribute to the peak loads most often seen at 8am and 8pm.

What has happened in NSW really should be a wake up call to the pollies in ACT government. They need to tighten it up before it gets out of hand really fast.

Besides there’s better ways to generate clean energy that benefit all electricity users.

a) it is not the daily peaks that are causing the big infrastructure costs – it is the heatwave days. It is those days that PV is producing at its most efficient, therefore making it the ideal generation method to defray even more expensive network upgrades.

b) the reason for the “overly generous” subsidies was to stimulate the market and drive the per unit cost down closer to more polluting generation methods. It is achieving that, and the mechanism for reducing the subsidy is built into the scheme. So the $4b scenario you mentioned above could never occur the way the ACT FIT legislation is designed.

c) again you are not comprehending how extensive the expense is to upgrade the network to cope with summer heatwave loads due to the incredibly rapid roll-out of household a/c. I worked in the Brisbane City Council Air and Energy Team in 2004 and the industry was getting freaked about it back then. It has got a whole lot worse now. Exacerbated by the complete intolerance of blackouts we now have.

So the industry finds themselves having to spend billions (yes billions) to cope with VERY infrequent but VERY big peaks. It is somewhat comparable to the ACT Government having to build 16-lane roads out of Civic to cope with the sudden burst of traffic that occurs at 9.20pm following just two fireworks events per year. And it is that unrealistic, yet the industry feels boxed into it by unrelenting media criticism following any blackouts.

Next to this, the FIT cost impact is minor but the benefits are manifest and multifaceted.

troll-sniffer11:01 am 18 May 11

grundy said :

What’s with all the solar hate on here!?
The feed-in tariff is a great system in the ACT and any solar power being installed is better than none!

As for large scale production, well the federal budget just cut a bunch of funding for the solar flagship…… but there are still a lot of private companies working on large scale solar projects as we speak. 🙂
Having small systems built in the meantime is NOT a problem; it is a great move toward green energy production.

I don’t think it’s as simple as just put power in to the grid save the equivalent generating power/cost etc. For solar to replace generating power it has to reach a level that contributes in a way that actually cuts the peak power demands of the generators, not just the average. I can’t see that happening at the moment as the generators have to be run to cope with the fluctuating output of the solar inputs. The feed in returns seem to have been based on some wild premise that all the power that is generated and fed into the grid automatically results in the same power being deducted from the generating plant, rather than going into a power dump with the rest of the unused reserves that the grid has to retain.

grundy said :

What’s with all the solar hate on here!?
The feed-in tariff is a great system in the ACT and any solar power being installed is better than none!

As for large scale production, well the federal budget just cut a bunch of funding for the solar flagship…… but there are still a lot of private companies working on large scale solar projects as we speak. 🙂
Having small systems built in the meantime is NOT a problem; it is a great move toward green energy production.

I don’t hate small solar PV I just think it’s overvalued in terms of the overly generous tariffs in place.
That and the fact it lumps the rest of electricity users with subsidising other people’s electricity use whether or not the solar PV owners are actually reducing their use.

It only provides energy for a small amount of the day and it doesn’t contribute to the peak loads most often seen at 8am and 8pm.

What has happened in NSW really should be a wake up call to the pollies in ACT government. They need to tighten it up before it gets out of hand really fast.

Besides there’s better ways to generate clean energy that benefit all electricity users.

shadow boxer10:03 am 18 May 11

grundy said :

What’s with all the solar hate on here!?
The feed-in tariff is a great system in the ACT and any solar power being installed is better than none!

As for large scale production, well the federal budget just cut a bunch of funding for the solar flagship…… but there are still a lot of private companies working on large scale solar projects as we speak. 🙂
Having small systems built in the meantime is NOT a problem; it is a great move toward green energy production.

Well did you read the posts, the problem is those of us that can’t afford solar or don’t own a house are subsidising your electricity bill.

What’s with all the solar hate on here!?
The feed-in tariff is a great system in the ACT and any solar power being installed is better than none!

As for large scale production, well the federal budget just cut a bunch of funding for the solar flagship…… but there are still a lot of private companies working on large scale solar projects as we speak. 🙂
Having small systems built in the meantime is NOT a problem; it is a great move toward green energy production.

Very disappointed, I thought there would be at least one MacArthur or Jerrabomberra resident whinging about how their residential nirvana was being destroyed.

Whichever way you look at it, this is simply poorer people and renters paying house owners and now commercial operators cash to have these inefficient and expensive systems on their roofs.
How anyone can think that is fair is beyond me.

Gungahlin Al said :

The primary reason you are paying more for electricity is because the network infrastructure was never built to handle the incredible peak loads caused by the boom in cheap and inefficient air conditioning systems all kicking in at the same time on hot days in summer. This is the case across the entire country. Feed-in Tariffs are merely the convenient ‘whipping boy.’

Fail…..in the case of the failed solar scheme trainwreck in NSW:

“The review found that the scheme has been extremely successful in driving increased small-scale renewable
energy generation in New South Wales. Modelling forecasts installed capacity under the scheme will grow to around 960 megawatts by the end of the scheme, if it remains unchanged. Total scheme payments under this scenario reach around $4 billion. Under the National Electricity Rules, these payments will be passed on to customers in the form of higher electricity network charges.”

I’d be a little concerned if I had ACT solar PV with what has happened in NSW.

eyeLikeCarrots said :

What all seems to smell like crap is the wankers with thier I dont have to pay for power ACTEW bills and thier shit eating grins.

Time to organise a few raiding parties with ladders and cans of spray paint.

As for air conditioners, it needs to be mandated that if you have air con, you run it with a solar array. Makes sense, you need it on very sunny days.

MERC600 said :

Oh charming….

I’m going to be paying even more for me leccy to subsidise it. …

Gungahlin Al said :

The primary reason you are paying more for electricity is because the network infrastructure was never built to handle the incredible peak loads caused by the boom in cheap and inefficient air conditioning systems all kicking in at the same time on hot days in summer. This is the case across the entire country. Feed-in Tariffs are merely the convenient ‘whipping boy.’

An alleged “boom in cheap and inefficient air conditioning systems” is just another convenient ‘whipping boy.’

Our nonsensical energy marketing policies and regulations are more to blame, along with politicians being carried along with the solar money generator craze and the great carbon tax distraction.

If any government in Australia built a public hospital or school with a plan to keep it empty for 11 months every year, there would be a justified outcry over such a waste of money.

AGL announced last week a $1.5 billion gas power station, adding that it would be idle for months at a time!! (Canberra Times, page 15, 7 May 2011)

Electricity consumers will be paying far more for electricity because of this extravagant waste of money. The $1.5 billion needed to finance it will bring hefty interest charges that WILL be passed on to electricity consumers.

Happily for AGL, but not so happily for electricity consumers, the pricing regulators follow policies to pass on these costs: AGL is guaranteed a profit from this investment that plainly defies commonsense.

Gungahlin Al4:35 pm 17 May 11

MERC600 said :

Oh charming….

I’m going to be paying even more for me leccy to subsidise it. And I read where Parly House are looking at solar leccy installations as well.. Hell it won’t be that long that the power charges are up there with the water..

The primary reason you are paying more for electricity is because the network infrastructure was never built to handle the incredible peak loads caused by the boom in cheap and inefficient air conditioning systems all kicking in at the same time on hot days in summer. This is the case across the entire country. Feed-in Tariffs are merely the convenient ‘whipping boy.’

eyeLikeCarrots4:24 pm 17 May 11

There is also apparently a viable tidal energy solution prototype (heard about it on Radio National).

Going the way we are, shouldn’t we be investing in developing energy sources that don’t require buring stuff thats all a bit messy (although cheapish).

What all seems to smell like crap is the wankers with thier I dont have to pay for power ACTEW bills and thier shit eating grins.

A friend put a solar money generator on his roof, and now receives quarterly ActewAGL “credit notices” showing how much more he is owed. Luckily, he can use 4x more coal-fired power than the solar money generator makes and still break even. By the time every second home in Canberra has one of these solar money generators installed, Canberrans living in the other half will be paying double for electricity – for their own electricity plus all the coal-fired power their neighbours use.

It is a pity Canberra politicians are swept up in the solar money generator craze, when Australian-developed technology is so much better:

For background, have a look at “Why You Need to Pay Attention To Bio Natural Gas (“BNG”)” – http://t.co/3Mavw81 – on how to fast-track replacement of fossil energy with renewable.

This week the Australian-developed BlueGen high efficiency and low emission gas-to-electricity fuel cell generator won the 2010-11 CEO Award for innovation and the Design for a Sustainable Future award- http://goo.gl/5Ctt6 .
This technology, and the Honda micro-Combined Heat and Power gas-to-electricity freeWatt generator, can dramatically reduce CO2 emissions when fueled with natural gas. These benefits are even greater when BNG becomes available.

Unlike solar PV panels, BNG has embedded solar energy stored, so electricity can be generated 24×7 – rain, hail or shine.

Imagine using lawn clippings and leaves to produce BNG. Canberra’s lawns can be a large solar energy collector. Plants have evolved to capture solar energy. Unlike solar PV panels, grass grows all by itself.

Oh charming…. I’m going to be paying even more for me leccy to subsidise it. And I read where Parly House are looking at solar leccy installations as well.. Hell it won’t be that long that the power charges are up there with the water..

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.