PDA

View Full Version : Australia: Back to the Dark Ages


Joe Blake
7th July 2014, 21:22
Last night our ABC program "Four Corners" broadcast an article entitled "Power to the People", showing how it seems that our new government is, at the behest of the fossil fuel industry (which is a great revenue earner for this country) doing its best to stop the march of renewable energy here.

There have been articles appearing everywhere on the net (including this board) about the "death spiral" of non-renewable energy.

Interestingly, after a couple of years of contemplation, about 3 months ago I decided I was going to move to a "grid backup" system, with a large-ish battery bank and switching hardware. Must have known what was about to happen. I've ordered everything and now have a wait of a couple of months until it arrives from overseas. Will let you know what's happening.

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/07/07/4038488.htm

It may not be possible to access this video outside of Australia, so I've included a copy of the transcript. It's fairly lengthy, but makes (hopefully) interesting reading.
################################################## #
Power to the People - Monday 7 July 2014

KERRY O'BRIEN, PRESENTER: Politics, power and the new reality. Welcome to Four Corners.

The Rudd and Gillard governments had two key policy planks in response to the threat of global warming.

One was the carbon tax leading to an emissions trading scheme. The other was a mandated target to generate 20 per cent of Australia's electricity from renewable energy sources - like wind and solar power - by 2020.

The Abbott Government is in the process of abolishing the carbon tax; it is also reviewing the renewable energy targets (RETs) under urging from the coal and traditional electricity industries, with the strong prospect that the targets will be significantly cut back.

Businessman, Dick Warburton, the person heading that review is sceptical of claims that man made carbon dioxide is a major cause of global warming.

The Government also wants to shut down several related agencies, like the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.

The policy shift in Australia comes at a time when hundreds of billions of dollars are being invested in renewable energy around the rest of the world, and at a critical time for investment decisions here.

Australia's dilemma is underscored by the fact that we have just about every energy resource in abundance - old and new, dirty and clean.

Stephen Long looks at some startling comparisons on both sides of the Pacific.

STEPHEN LONG, REPORTER: The sun rises over the rolling hills outside Canberra.

In these fields, pasture meets power.

Every turn of these massive blades propels wind into clean energy.

It's not a new technology, but it may be the way of the future.

To supporters, renewable energy is part of a revolution that will eclipse fossil fuels and change the way we live and work.

But, not everyone sees it that way.

Recently, Australia's Treasurer took a tilt at these very windmills.

JOE HOCKEY, FEDERAL TREASURER: If I can be a little indulgent here, I drive to Canberra to go to Parliament and so on, I drive myself, and I must say, I find those wind turbines around Lake George to be utterly offensive.

ALAN JONES, RADIO PRESENTER: Correct. Correct.

JOE HOCKEY: And I think they are just a blight on the landscape.

ALAN JONES: And the people you're talking to are paying for them. When are you going to knock them off?

JOE HOCKEY: Well, we can't knock those ones off.

STEPHEN LONG: The wind farms that Joe Hockey finds so unsightly are owned and run by Infigen Energy.

MILES GEORGE, MD, INFIGEN ENERGY: So there's 90 turbines here, including the Capital and Woodlawn wind farms.

STEPHEN LONG: Miles George is managing director of the company, which operates 24 renewable power plants - six of them in Australia.

(to MILES GEORGE)

How much power does that generate?

MILES GEORGE: It's enough power to power about half the houses in Canberra.

STEPHEN LONG: He's worried about the Government's apparent hostility to clean sources of electricity.

MILES GEORGE: We could fit another 30 or so in and we have approval for that.

STEPHEN LONG: Oh! There's the view that the Treasurer Joe Hockey found so offensive: Lake George with the wind turbines.

How did you feel when you had heard Joe Hockey said that?

MILES GEORGE: Oh I was angry that that sort of statement would be made by our Federal Treasurer. I didn't think it was appropriate. Not so much the visual amenity issue, but talking about his inability to stop these things or something like that he said, which, you know he's talking about stopping an investment that Australian investors have made.

STEPHEN LONG: The Treasurer's comments are part of a broader backlash in the Coalition.

And, while it may be too late to "knock off" these wind turbines, the Government's review of the Renewable Energy Target might just kill the business.

MILES GEORGE: Well if the target was scrapped without any compensation, we would lose 40 per cent of our revenue and our business in Australia would fail.

STEPHEN LONG: (to Greg Hunt) If the Renewable Energy Target is cut, people are saying that they will have to close down wind farms.

It will kill existing investment. You're on the record as saying that you are not in the business of killing existing investments.

GREG HUNT, FEDERAL ENVIRONMENT MINISTER: That's correct.

STEPHEN LONG: What does that imply?

GREG HUNT: What that means is very clear, that my view and our view is that we support sustainable investment. We will approach the review with an open mind.

STEPHEN LONG: But to critics, it seems as if the Government has declared war on renewable energy.

JOHN GRIMES, CEO, AUSTRALIAN SOLAR COUNCIL: This Government has an ideological agenda.

They want to carve out the impact of renewable energy on the network and they want to stop renewals in their tracks.

JEREMY RIFKIN, AUTHOR, THE THIRD INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION: Australia's the Saudi Arabia of renewable energy. There's so much sun; there's so much wind off the coast, and so it makes absolutely no sense when you have an abundance of renewable energy, why would you rely on a depleting supply of fossil fuels with all of the attendant consequences to society and the planet?

It's absolutely makes no sense whatsoever.

STEPHEN LONG: Across the Pacific, it's a different story.

San Francisco, the cultural and financial hub of Northern California.

In the Bay Area and beyond, sun and wind power are merging with IT know-how to forge new industries and new ways of doing business.

We took a journey through the Golden State, as California powers ahead with renewable energy.

DAVID HOCHSCHILD, CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSIONER: It's quite exciting the job growth that we're seeing.

Today the United States has for example,150 000 employees in the solar industry, so about a third of those, 50 000, are here in California and that's actually a 50 per cent growth in those jobs just over the last three years.

So we actually have more employees today in the solar industry in the US than there are in auto manufacturing and than there are in coal mining.

STEPHEN LONG: California energy commissioner David Hochschild lives high in the hills above Berkeley, overlooking San Francisco Bay.

California, with a population of nearly 40 million, has legislated that a third of its energy should come from renewable sources by 2020.

Commissioner Hochschild says it will easily reach that target.

DAVID HOCHSCHILD: As a result of that law, we've seen a massive increase in investment and innovation in the renewable energy space, and today, California has the largest wind project in the world, the largest geothermal project in the world, the largest solar thermal and solar PV projects in the world, and the largest manufacturing operation in the state of California today is an electric car factory.

So we're seeing enormous momentum as a result of that.

STEPHEN LONG: Were you surprised by the pace of the growth of renewable energy?

DAVID HOCHSCHILD: You know it's actually not a surprise because history has shown quite clearly, when you establish a long-term target and provide that certainty for the market, you get investment and you get innovation and it drives down costs.

STEPHEN LONG: About half an hour away at the Port of Oakland is a company that's seized on California's support for renewable energy and innovation.

It's run by a sun loving Aussie entrepreneur. Danny Kennedy moved here seven years ago.

His business pioneered the use of satellite imaging and internet software to design and sell rooftop solar.

DANNY KENNEDY, CO-FOUNDER, SUNGEVITY: We had this idea that we could take satellite images and aerial photographs and mash them up and do the design and engineering and quoting and sales process to customers over the internet.

STEPHEN LONG: Although Australia pioneered solar power, Danny Kennedy had to leave his home country to realise his ambitions.

DANNY KENNEDY: You know, a couple of obvious reasons - one was the sort of risk capital available here in Silicon Valley and the software engineering.

But, also because California at that time had a very strong solar market due to the Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's support for the solar market back in 2006.

STEPHEN LONG: Today Sungevity is an international business with more than 500 employees, operations in the US, Europe and Australia and revenues in the hundreds of millions.

Its founder is dismayed by the drift of policy back home.

DANNY KENNEDY: The big risk for Australia is that we miss out on the biggest economic opportunity of the 21st century.

We get stuck in quarry Australia mentality from the 20th Century while the rest of world is phasing out coal and trying to move to these new industries and creating whole new ways of doing business and jobs which Australians may never benefit from.

STEPHEN LONG: As the sun sinks in the sky at Lancaster, California, a baseball game is underway under lights, in a solar-powered stadium.

The Lancaster Jet Hawks are leading the California league; their city is leading the way with renewable energy.

Heather Swan is an executive with the Lancaster Power Authority, which has overseen a radical shift away from fossil fuels.

HEATHER SWAN, LANCASTER POWER AUTHORITY: We've kind of gotten started with a grassroots effort that started putting solar on homes and getting the information out to our homeowners and our citizens. Then we took that step a little farther and became the example ourselves and we put solar on our major city facilities.

Those city facilities are now powered about 97, 98 per cent by solar.

STEPHEN LONG: Lancaster was aiming to be 100 per cent renewable powered by the decade's end.

HEATHER SWAN: Yes, I mean, we were originally given the goal of 2020, but you know I think we can make it happen by 2016.

STEPHEN LONG: Just two years away?

HEATHER SWAN: When you say it like that, you make it sound so close. But, I know, it's not far away.

STEPHEN LONG: It's now technically possible to supply all the electricity needs of a city or district without any reliance on fossil fuels.

That used to be a pipedream, but new technologies that allow renewable energy to be stored and used day and night are changing the ballgame.

And here at least, support for the new order crosses the political divide.

(to Heather Swan)

Your mayor is a Republican.

That side of politics in Australia is quite hostile, it seems, to renewable energy.

HEATHER SWAN: Well it is here too, so.

But, he is a Republican and he's been quoted in the New York Times as saying I may be a Republican but I'm not an idiot.

And he's very well educated and he's very well researched on the subject and he's an adamant believer in climate change. We are seeing it happening right here in our own backyard.

STEPHEN LONG: Tonopah.

This sleepy little town in the high desert country of the Sierra Nevada is at a crossroads, where the old economy is making way for the new.

Tonopah was one of the last frontiers of the Old West.

The discovery of silver at the dawn of the 20th century sparked a mining boom, before the town lapsed into fading glory.

They campaign hard out here, but there's little division about where the future lies.

It's in mining the sun.

Less than a half hour's drive out of town is a state-of-the-art solar facility known as Crescent Dunes.

If it looks space-age, that's because it is, considered by some to be the most advanced power plant in the world.

The project's technical director is Brian Painter, an industry veteran who's been running electricity plants for 30 years.

(to Brian Painter) It's amazing. It's like a mechanical forest.

BRIAN PAINTER, CRESCENT DUNES: It is exactly, you are walking through a mechanical forest. It's made up of steel and mirrors and all this sort of thing.

STEPHEN LONG: The huge mirrors on these mechanical trees are known as heliostats.

BRIAN PAINTER: Each heliostat concentrates the sun's energy on the top of the tower there, the black section that you see.

STEPHEN LONG: What's in the tower?

BRIAN PAINTER: What's in that black section is molten salt. Molten salt is pumped through the top. It's like a big energy absorber; it's absorbing all that sun's energy that's being concentrated on the tower.

STEPHEN LONG: While we were at Crescent Dunes, the process of pumping 31 million kilograms of salt into the tower was still being completed.

When the plant starts running later this year, 10,347 glittering mirrors will beam concentrated light onto the tower, where the molten sodium will act like a giant battery, storing the sun's energy.

DAVID HOCHSCHILD: Crescent Dunes is a remarkable thing to see. This is the first solar thermal power plant in the world to have molten salt storage, so what it does it takes the energy of the sun, produces electricity and then stores that as heat in molten salt storage and, at night, when they need to make use of that power, they can run it from the heat that's being stored in this molten salt storage facility.

BRIAN PAINTER: The thing with being able to store the energy is that we can shift the time of delivery; we can deliver night time, day time, when a utility might want power, we can deliver any time.

STEPHEN LONG: Overcoming one of the perceived problems of solar: that the energy's only available when the sun's shining. This technology could be the backbone of a power grid, delivering base-load power as reliably as coal or gas-fired generators.

When it's up and running, it will be providing energy into the night for the neon-light capital of the world.

DAVID HOCHSCHILD: That's right. The facility's going to be providing power to Las Vegas.

It's hard to think of a city in the world that uses more energy at night than Las Vegas, so it's a great validation of the possibilities of solar and storage together.

STEPHEN LONG: The company behind Crescent Dunes wants to bring this remarkable technology to Australia.

It's hoping the mining industry will embrace solar power at remote mine sites, which currently rely on polluting, and heavily subsidised diesel fuel to generate electricity.

It had planned to build large scale renewable power plants to supply retail electricity, but it's given up on those ambitions because of the drift of policy down-under.

KEVIN SMITH, CEO SOLARRESERVE: That policy change pretty much took the life out of the renewable energy sector as far as large scale projects for say utility applications.

Other markets around the world are advancing.

Australia is going to get left behind.

STEPHEN LONG: Kevin Smith is the chief executive of SolarReserve, the company that developed Crescent Dunes.

(to Kevin Smith) What was the reaction in your sector in the United States when people discovered that a man who denies that C02 is contributing to climate change was appointed to head the review of the Australian Renewable Energy Target?

KEVIN SMITH: Well, it's a little bit hard to grasp that, kind of that concept. I mean clearly you know that appointment was made because they want to move back towards conventional fuels: coal and oil.

It's pretty clear that the policy in Australia is now being centred around big coal. The coal industry clearly has rallied to move policy away from renewable energies because they view renewable energy as a threat and back toward conventional coal.

STEPHEN LONG: The new developments with renewable energy and storage seem to have passed the Prime Minister by.

(Excerpt from 2GB Radio, 2 July 2014)

TONY ABBOTT, PRIME MINISTER: The difficulty with renewable energy is that when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow, well the power doesn't flow. We've got massive supplies of coal; we've got massive supplies of gas; we should, we should be making the most of our natural advantages.

(End of excerpt)

STEPHEN LONG: The Environment Minister denies that the Australian Government is hostile to renewable energy or biased towards coal.

GREG HUNT: Well I think the long term future for renewable energy is actually very strong.

It's about balance and the right balance here is to ensure that we protect jobs and investment, we support sustainable growth, but we don't add significantly to power prices and we try to take the pressure off power prices.

STEPHEN LONG: What Australia has in abundance, and California and Nevada lack, is coal.

Coal has defined Australia's political economy, and while it can avoid paying for the impact of its emissions, coal is a cheap source of energy.

But as renewables gain ground, coal fired power generators are hurting.

RICHARD VAN BREDA, CEO, STANWELL CORPORATION: In Queensland and across Australia, there's actually a glut of electricity generation in the market.

There's probably 20 per cent more generation capacity in the national electricity market then we actually need.

In Queensland, it's probably higher than that.

STEPHEN LONG: Richard Van Breda runs Stanwell, a state government owned power company, and Queensland's biggest electricity generator.

(to Richard Van Breda)

Hence you don't want to see more renewables coming into the marketplace?

RICHARD VAN BREDA: Absolutely. Absolutely. And certainly our submission looked at renewables; our recommendation was that renewable energy targets be phased out over time.

STEPHEN LONG: The Tarong Power Station, 180 kilometres north west of Brisbane, is one of Stanwell's key assets.

At full capacity, this giant facility consumes up to 7 million tonnes of coal a year, and up to 28,000 megalitres of water to power its turbines.

But in recent years, Stanwell has been losing money. In 2012, two of the four power generating units at Tarong Power Station were shut down.

RICHARD VAN BREDA: We've lost 160 jobs on this site. Across our business, 35 per cent of our workforce has left, which was close to 320 jobs.

STEPHEN LONG: That's a lot of jobs.

RICHARD VAN BREDA: It is and it's a lot of people you need to speak to. It's very hard to make those decisions but we've had to do it, otherwise the business is just not going to survive.

STEPHEN LONG: The problem for coal fired power utilities like Tarong is two-fold.

Wind and solar power are pushing down the wholesale price of electricity.

And overall, demand for electricity has been falling.

RICHARD VAN BREDA: People are not using as much electricity as they used to with electricity prices going up significantly, people are a lot more circumspect about the electricity they use.

STEPHEN LONG: And there's a lot of people in Queensland who've moved to rooftop solar.

RICHARD VAN BREDA: Absolutely. I think, if you look at the capacity of Queensland's market, probably 10 per cent of that could be close to the solar installations across, across our rooftops here.

STEPHEN LONG: Ten per cent on rooftop solar?

RICHARD VAN BREDA: Absolutely. Very, very significant.

STEPHEN LONG: What would you say to people who would argue, we're better off losing these coal fired power stations that pollute the environment and moving towards renewables?

RICHARD VAN BREDA: First of all it's, it's the cheapest form of electricity we have and we need to have the debate around is it cheap electricity or is it a move to renewables?

STEPHEN LONG: Over the past five years, retail electricity prices in Australia have doubled. But how much is clean energy to blame?

Truth be told, the Renewable Energy Target's only had a minor impact on power prices - on the best estimates, about 3 to 4 per cent.

Offset by renewables pushing down the wholesale price of electricity.

What's really driven up power prices has been a massive investment in the network: the poles and wires, the infrastructure.

And, as it turns out, much of that investment was unnecessary.

JOHN GRIMES: They got the forecast wrong.

Power prices are going up because power companies have over invested in the network and those companies get a guaranteed return on their investment, guaranteed by the Government.

IVOR FRISCHKNECHT, CEO, AUSTRALIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY AGENCY: The main reason for the increase in electricity prices is the cost of networks.

So network infrastructure has been added to pretty dramatically in the last five years and that is roughly half of your total electricity bill today goes to pay for the poles and wires that carry electricity from the generators to your house or business.

STEPHEN LONG: As energy prices soared, for the first time ever, electricity consumption went backwards.

Although the problem is partly of the industry's own making, the fall in consumption has driven a backlash against renewable energy.

Incumbent power companies are saying, why build more capacity when there's already oversupply?

MATTHEW WARREN, CEO, ENERGY SUPPLY ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA: The simple reality is the RET, the Renewable Energy Target as designed was designed to fill anticipated growth in the market and the market conditions have changed.

STEPHEN LONG: Matthew Warren is chief executive of the Energy Supply Association.

It represents the big electricity retailers and generators, and its pushing to cut the Renewable Energy Target.

MATTHEW WARREN: We've seen an ever accelerating decline in demand since 2009 and so that's meant that, what was 20 per cent is now looking more like 25, 28, 29 per cent, and that's a much bigger target.

STEPHEN LONG: Although it's often called a 20 per cent Renewable Energy Target, that's not in fact what the legislation says.

The law calls for a fixed amount of electricity to come from renewable sources by 2020.

Forty-one-thousand gigawatt hours from large scale schemes. At least 4,000 gigawatt hours from small-scale renewable energy schemes, such as roof top solar.

Australia's small scale sector is booming, but it's a long way off the large scale target.

To meet it, there needs to be significant new investment in renewable energy.

MATTHEW WARREN: The market conditions in Australia, with so much over supply of generation means that we think that the RET, as designed currently, is likely to fail and half, up to half of the RET will never get built.

STEPHEN LONG: As the lobbying to cut the target finds sympathetic ears in Parliament, in the national capital, there's a new dawn for renewable energy.

If all goes to plan, Canberra will be 90 per cent renewable powered by 2020.

STEPHEN LONG: Wow.

SIMON CORBELL, ACT ENERGY MINISTER: That's the Royalla solar farm.

STEPHEN LONG: That is impressive.

SIMON CORBELL: it's 80,000 solar panels - enough power to meet the needs of about 4,500 thousand Canberra homes.

STEPHEN LONG: Simon Corbell is the ACT Energy Minister.

He's taken me to a power utility 23 kilometres south of Canberra.

It'll begin operating in a few weeks' time.

SIMON CORBELL: When it does connect, it will be the first large-scale solar power facility connected to the national electricity market.

STEPHEN LONG: And still tiny by world standards.

It costs a lot to build a plant like this, and that does feed into electricity prices, but in the medium term, the energy will be cheaper because the fuel input, sunlight, is free.

SIMON CORBELL: The economics is a no brainer and it also drives down the cost of electricity more generally in the market because, often, at times of peak demand, renewables is the cheapest source of energy into the electricity market

STEPHEN LONG: He's having a hard time convincing some of his counterparts in the states.

SIMON CORBELL: Well the other state governments have vested interests in maintaining the status quo.

They collect the royalties from the coal mines; they collect the dividends from the coal-fired generators; they own these assets. And, they are not interested in disrupting that business model, even though that's locking consumers into higher energy costs over the medium to long term.

STEPHEN LONG: It's a big day at the Orange City Bowling Club in the central west of New South Wales.

A troupe of Canberran bowlers has bussed in to take on the locals.

STEPHEN LONG: G'day. How are you?

PAT EGAN, ORANCE CITY BOWLING CLUB TREASURER: Hello Stephen, nice to meet you.

STEPHEN LONG: You've got a fair crowd in for the tournament?

PAT EGAN: It's a fairly big day; a bit unusual because we've got about 50 visitors here today.

STEPHEN LONG: Pat Egan is the club's treasurer

(to Pat Egan) Sun's shining; good day.

PAT EGAN: It's fantastic for bowls mate. That green is probably running about 15 seconds which is pretty good for bowls.

STEPHEN LONG: Pat's penny-wise, but in the face of rocketing electricity bills he convinced the board to have 360 solar panels installed on the roof of the bowlo'.

PAT EGAN: Yeah you can see a good view of them there now; they are in banks of 10.

STEPHEN LONG: So you were the inspiration for this, Pat?

PAT EGAN: Yeah, only because of my personal experience at home where I put a system in, in 2012, and the savings were coming as I expected.

So I became treasurer here recent, just after my own installation, and I was trying to find ways to save costs.

STEPHEN LONG: As you would.

PAT EGAN: And increase our revenue. But saving costs, what springs out to you straight away is the cost of electricity.

(Footage of Stephen and Pat having beers inside the bowling club)

STEPHEN LONG: Ah yes. Cheers Pat!

PAT EGAN: Nice to have you over for a couple, mate.

STEPHEN LONG: Cheers.

(to camera) Over a beer at the club, Pat shows me how much money the rooftop solar has cut from the power bills.

So that was a month's power bill?

PAT EGAN: Yeah.

STEPHEN LONG: Ten thousand bucks or close enough

PAT EGAN: And this one's $4,891.

STEPHEN LONG: That's a huge saving.

PAT EGAN: It certainly is.

STEPHEN LONG: An electricity bill that was running at $116,000 a year has fallen by more than a third, and the investment in rooftop solar will pay for itself in three years.

This humble bowling club may be part of a paradigm shift, a new era for the economy.

Danny Kennedy calls it the rooftop revolution, power to the people.

DANNY KENNEDY: What we've had is these big power stations at the middle of a hub and spoke model, shunting electrons down a one-way fire hose, telling us what we should pay for it.

What we're getting now is the ability to participate in the creation of electricity. We're going to have our own power plants on our own roofs. There's going to be a community level storage system, a solar farm or a wind farm out the back, and all those are going to take part in the creation of electricity and the economics of electricity, and it's all going to be managed through software and information communications technology.

JEREMY RIFKIN: We now have millions and millions of small players, home owners, small businesses, cooperatives, even large businesses that are producing their own solar and wind generated green electricity at near zero marginal cost.

In 10 years from now, 15 years from now, we'll have tens of millions of local sites producing green electricity on micro-grids. In 20 years, from now we'll have hundreds of millions of people producing their own green electricity.

Economist and author, Jeremy Rifkin, argues that green energy and new communications technology are ushering in a period of radical economic change.

Just as the steam engine, the telegraph and the printing press drove the first industrial revolution, petrol-fuelled motor cars, the road network and the electricity grid the second, renewable energy and the internet are combining to create a new industrial revolution, which could be a jobs bonanza.

JEREMY RIFKIN: That second industrial revolution of the 20th Century is clearly on life support. It's not coming back; it's waning.

We are right now on the cusp of a third industrial revolution. We have to transform our energy resources from fossil fuels to renewable energy. That's extremely labour-intensive.

We have to convert every building in Australia and around the world to your own micro-power plant, installing solar, wind, geothermal technologies right there, retrofitting the buildings.

STEPHEN LONG: The pillars of this revolution include transforming the world's building stock into micro-power plants that collect and store renewable energy, shared via an energy internet.

And transitioning the transport fleet to plug-in electric and fuel cell cars.

Palo Alto, California is home to the new green machines of motoring.

The Tesla is an electric vehicle that's winning the hearts of motoring enthusiasts.

Put one of these through its paces, and you'll give a hoon in a gas-guzzling V8 a run for their money and help save the planet at the same time.

This may be the future of motoring. This is a high performance vehicle: it does 0-100ks in 4.4 seconds and it can drive up to 502km on a single charge.

There's zero emissions and zero noise. And, I love this: there's no exhaust pipe.

Teslas aren't cheap.

When it goes on sale here, the high-end model will cost close to a 100,000.

But a mass-market model's coming, with a price tag of about $30,000.

And the cost of electric vehicles is set to plummet.

DAVID HOCHSCHILD: Well, I think the Tesla is analogous to the iPhone, okay. When it first came out it's a beautiful well-designed product, but expensive. But, what you see over time is, as you get to scale, the prices come down and that's exactly what's happening with Tesla. This is a car that is actually headed towards being a mainstream technology.

And, honestly it's actually part of a family of electric cars. You look at what the other auto manufacturers are doing - GM and Toyota and others - they're really headed towards a mainstream ah technology.

STEPHEN LONG: At Tesla's futuristic factory, specialised robots turn out hundreds of cars each week.

The company now employs 6,000 people.

Soon, it plans to build what it's calling the "gigafactory": a mass manufacturing plant for lithium ion car batteries which will create economies of scale and dramatically reduce the cost of electric cars.

MATTHEW WARREN: We think that they are potentially another game changer.

If you look at the cars being made out of Tesla in California, they're faster; they're cleaner; they're quieter and they're safer than conventional petrol driven cars.

They are a lot of things that consumers will like about electric cars if they're priced correctly and they could have a material impact on the electricity and energy supply in Australia as well.

STEPHEN LONG: Big, incumbent power companies are hoping that mass take up of electric cars will boost electricity demand, saving them from a death spiral of falling revenues and rising unit costs, as more and more people generate, store and share their own power.

But there are no guarantees.

MATTHEW WARREN: Oh look, I think we are seeing in the energy industry, it's going through a transformation that's not dissimilar to telephony to retail to newspaper media and that is, we're seeing, you know, quite radical transformation that is driven by technology and driven by changing market conditions.

DANNY KENNEDY: It's disruptive like media was disrupted a decade ago.

Once upon a time, the ABC and New York Times were all the news that was fit to print and they shunted the news of the day down the one way fire hose, and now we use social media and Twitter and whatever else to co-create what is the news stream and what makes for big news.

And, the economics, we know well, has been completed transformed. That's coming to electricity. The coal and other protected, vested interests of Australia are going the way of the Dodo if they don't adjust to this reality.

STEPHEN LONG: When super storm Sandy struck the United States in 2012, Americans discovered what it's like when the power grid breaks down.

Millions of people across the east coast were left for days without electricity: no light, no heat and no communications.

RICHARD KAUFFMAN, CHAIRMAN, ENERGY AND FINANCE, NEW YORK STATE: The thing that people had the hardest time with during Sandy was the fact that they were cut off from communications.

If you're without power for days, it is, not just inconvenient, but it really feels like you can't live your life.

Individuals and communities want to have more and more control over their energy system. We again saw this after Sandy where communities have asked for their own micro-grids because they don't want to be as reliant upon the grid.

STEPHEN LONG: Former investment banker, Richard Kauffman, is known as New York's Energy Tsar.

He's overseeing a move to decentralised electricity.

RICHARD KAUFFMAN: In the last 10 years, we've invested $17 billion just to keep the grid as it is. And, in the next 10 years, if we keep just doing exactly as we've been doing, it's, we have to invest another $30 billion.

The Empire State is instead planning a radically different electricity system, with community micro-grids and technology that allows buildings to create and store their own energy.

RICHARD KAUFFMAN: It used to be that you had to get the electricity that came through the central grid because that was the only alternative.

Well that's not true anymore, so we have had, across a whole range of industries, the benefit that customers are now in charge and the technology exists now for that to be true in the power sector.

The cost of all these solutions are going down, while the cost of the traditional central station power and distribution systems goes up.

DAVID HOCHSCHILD: In 1980, it cost $35 a watt to buy a solar panel. Today, it's 70 cents a watt.

STEPHEN LONG: Maiden, North Carolina.

A sleepy little southern town.

Maiden happens to be home to a major facility of a titan of technology.

Apple's data centre at Maiden processes vast numbers of messages, photos, videos and other content being shared in cyberspace.

The computing power needed to process all that content shared on the web and on mobile devices is a massive drain on electricity.

The power demands have led to accusations that technology companies have a "dirty cloud".

This is the solution: a vast solar farm, generating 167 million kilowatt hours of power. Enough to make Apple's data centre 100 per cent powered by renewable energy.

It's the largest solar farm in the United States not owned by a power utility and it's supplemented by fuel cells that store electricity generated from biomass.

LISA JACKSON, VICE PRESIDENT, ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS, APPLE: The direction towards clean and green energy is one that I believe is the right one and is where the world is going.

You know when you look at air pollution or water pollution issues, when you look at the challenges that we'll face as our populations grow, it just makes great sense and, in this case it also makes great business sense, for Apple and other responsible companies to step up to the plate, acknowledge that climate change is not just a challenge, but also an economic opportunity.

STEPHEN LONG: It's quite amazing; it looks like a spaceship.

LISA JACKSON: It does, doesn't it? Some people call it the Mother Ship.

STEPHEN LONG: Lisa Jackson is Apple's environmental director, a role she took on last year after serving under President Obama, as head of the U.S. Environment Protection Agency.

She shows me a scale model of Apple's coming campus.

(to Lisa Jackson)

How many employees are going to be here?

(to camera)

Thirteen-thousand employees will work at the new Silicon Valley headquarters, and it will be 100 per cent powered by renewable energy.

For Apple, it's not just about doing the right thing for the environment.

LISA JACKSON: The power that we use, the renewable energy that we use, is competitive and, in many cases, cheaper than conventional brown power.

And, for us, it's more than just the initial price; it's also the reliability of having our own power. For us, we know that power is going to be there; we don't have to worry about changes in the price.

STEPHEN LONG: Energy security and price certainty are key benefits of renewable power.

DAVID HOCHSCHILD: Fossil fuels are subject, over time, to enormous price volatility, and as you move to renewable energy future you're not subject to that because there's no cost for sunlight or wind or tidal power. And, so you actually become I think more stable as a country and more competitive internationally.

STEPHEN LONG: A view echoed by Miles George, when we met at those wind farms outside of Canberra.

MILES GEORGE: Well, once you've established renewables, the fuel is free forever. Whereas if you have coal and gas fired power generation, you're exposed to gas prices and coal prices forever.

GREG HUNT: Look, whether it's wave or solar, whether it's wind or geothermal, whatever the source of energy, there are always operating costs and the renewable energy companies actually make that point to me almost every day.

STEPHEN LONG: While Environment Minister Greg Hunt does see a growing role for renewable energy, he's also pinning much hope on "clean coal".

GREG HUNT: For Australia, I think the message is clear: we can move to reduce significantly the emissions from our current generators. The technology which is emerging now, and which I think will be available over the next three to five years, cleans up very significantly, not perfectly, but very significantly by up to 30 to 50 per cent the emissions from current generation.

That can go around the world and nothing would make a bigger difference, along with protecting the great rainforests, to reducing global emissions.

STEPHEN LONG: Perhaps.

There's also a risk that global action on climate change will push up the price of fossil fuels, leaving Australia with stranded power assets and soaring electricity prices.

JEREMY RIFKIN: So we have enough of these renewable energies distributed in every square inch of Australia and the world to power our species' needs till kingdom comes, at near zero marginal cost, without pollution to the planet.

So what kind of cockamamie thinking, if I may say this, keeps us into these old polluting dinosaur energies and technologies of the 20th Century, when we could be in the new energies of 21st century and have unlimited amount of renewable energy?

STEPHEN LONG: Yes, it costs money to create the infrastructure for renewable energy, a lot of money.

But existing fossil fuel generators and power utilities were subsidised: by and large, built with public funds.

If renewable energy becomes ubiquitous, the economies of scale should deliver a radical reduction in power prices that could transform the world economy.

Will Australia be leading the revolution, or will it be left behind?

KERRY OUTRO

KERRY O'BRIEN: The Warburton Review of the Renewable Energy Target for the Abbott Government is imminent, but given the confusing signals that are coming from Clive Palmer's new senators on support for renewable energy targets and the future of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, this debate is far from over.

Andy Rhody
9th July 2014, 22:39
Joe, quite a read!

From over here in the opposite hemisphire and other side of the world (The USA) we have attitudes against renewables too. Here we have the so called Obama "War against Coal". It's so stupid. I live in the heart of coal country USA. For whatever reasons coal mines started shutting down in my area in the late 1970's. At that time people were griping all kinds of idologies for why this was happening. Some poeple were saying, "This shouldn't be happining, we still have 300 years of coal left in the ground". If 300 years was accurate or not I don't know but lets use that as a standard.

Okay, this planet's coal was made something like 600 million years ago. If we had started using coal at the time of Christ at the rate that we are using it now, we would have run completly out of coal almost 7 times by now. Think about it. So if we do burn coal for the next 300 years, raise the temperature of the planet enough to flood ALL THE WORLDS coastal cities and have dike projects costing ZILLIONS that still don't really work, we'll still have to wait another 600 million years for more coal. Is that the time to start thinking about renewables because you know sooner or later, renewables will be the final answere.

Even if coal was absolutely clean energy with no global warming concerns, do you think that it would it hurt to save a little bit of coal in the ground considering that we may only have 300 years of coal left and have to wait 600 million years to get some back?

Yes it frustrating!

Joe Blake
17th July 2014, 05:28
Well, things just got even worse. Our Upper House of Federal Parliament (Senate) today voted out the previous government's carbon pricing scheme, which was intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by imposing a price on the carbon that polluters would have to pay.

Somehow or other, our leaders have come to the conclusion (quite publicly) that the "average" household will be $550 per annum better off. :blink:

We now move "forward" to what is euphemistically called "Direct Action", which, inter alia, will have the Government paying polluting industries money to stop polluting! Not sure if/how that is supposed to work.:confused:

One tiny spark of comfort though. Our Prime Minister has admitted in the last week that whilst the demand for (non-renewable) power has gone down due to the increased take up of domestic renewable power generation, the cost of non-renewable power has gone up - so that those people who have been sitting on their butts doing nothing about climate change and moving to renewables, will wind up paying a bigger "carbon tax" as the price goes up. (In my home state we had a 4% increase as at 1 July this year - with more promised next year.)

Roll on my new grid-back up system.

Rob Beckers
19th July 2014, 08:22
The human capacity for denial and rationalizing continues to amaze... (See the new Australian PM).

No doubt that more people will turn to renewable sources as the price of energy rises, while renewable energy continues to decline in price. The bad part about that is the time it takes: We will have to contend with the worst of climate change because we acted too late and too little.

Sad to see it unfold in my lifetime!

-RoB-

Joe Blake
21st July 2014, 01:08
No doubt that more people will turn to renewable sources as the price of energy rises, while renewable energy continues to decline in price.

I hadn't realised HOW quickly the price is declining. I installed my first 1,600 watts of grid connected power in 2009 at a cost (ignoring government subsidies) of roughly $AUS16,000. In July last year I installed another 1,600 watts at around $6,000. Last night I saw an advertisement on TV (I very seldom watch commercial television) saying that 5 kW would cost under $3,000! Wow. :bigsmile:

That's VERY good news (for a change).

Joe

Joe Blake
21st July 2014, 20:37
Hmm. Only saw the advert in passing. I tracked down the website and watched the commercial on youtube. It seems (in the small(er) print) that this offer is for a 5 kW capacity inverter, and 8x250 watt panels. Not as good as it seems prima facie but still a good indicator of price drops.

(It pays to check, doesn't it? if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.):rolleyes:

Andy Rhody
21st July 2014, 21:59
The human capacity for denial and rationalizing continues to amaze... (See the new Australian PM).

No doubt that more people will turn to renewable sources as the price of energy rises, while renewable energy continues to decline in price. The bad part about that is the time it takes: We will have to contend with the worst of climate change because we acted too late and too little.

Sad to see it unfold in my lifetime!

-RoB-

Me Too Bro. So frustrating!

Joe Blake
8th August 2014, 20:52
An interesting report on the ABC (Aust) Newsfeed this morning.

(Cue the sound of chickens coming home to roost.):amazed:

*****************************

*Australia faces unprecedented energy oversupply: report*


South-eastern Australia will not need to ramp up energy generation for the next 10 years, even under a worst-case scenario, a report says.


The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) report says Australia is facing an energy glut never before seen in the history of the national electricity market.


It raises serious questions about the ongoing viability of existing coal-fired power stations, but might also result in more pressure on the Federal Government to reduce the Renewable Energy Target (RET).


A spokesman for AEMO, Joe Adamo, says there is no additional generation required to maintain the reliability.


"Now, that's under all three scenarios that we model. So what we're saying is that there's an oversupply of generation capacity at present. It doesn't affect the reliability," he said.


For the next year alone, Australia will produce up to 8,900 megawatts more than is needed. That is around four times the power produced in a year by Australia's largest coal-fired power station.


Electricity use in Australia has been falling now for about four years due to the take-up of rooftop solar systems, greater use of energy-efficient appliances and the downturn in some manufacturing industries that use lots of electricity.


audio


The principal consultant of energy strategies with Pitt and Sherry, Hugh Sadler, says the upshot is that if the coal-fired power stations want to stay running, they will be competing in a buyer's market.


"Many of them will have to trade unprofitably as many of them already have been doing for the last year or two," Mr Sadler said.


Just last week energy company HRL announced it would close a small coal-fired power station in Victoria's La Trobe Valley.


"It was one that was kind of earmarked for closure some three or four years ago but was propped up by some of the industry assistance measures of the previous Labor government," the Alternative Technology Association's Damien Moyse said.


"Those measures have now run out and so as soon as they have that power station has found that it's no longer economical to operate.


"That's really because there just isn't the need for so much base load power at the moment," he said.


Energy in oversupply, but prices still rising


Despite the oversupply, Australians have continued to pay more for their electricity.


"The prices have been rising because of the other parts of the cost of electricity, which is the cost of getting it from the boundary of the power station through the meters of all the individual consumers," Mr Sadler said.


"And that's considerably more than half of the total cost of the total electricity that's supplied to households or small businesses.


"That's the part that's been rising very rapidly over the last three or four years."


While all this has been going on, the Federal Government has been reviewing the Renewable Energy Target, which stipulates a certain amount of renewable electricity should be in use by 2020.


The big electricity companies have been lobbying the Government to axe or at least reduce the RET because renewables like wind and solar are hitting their bottom line.


"On a demand basis we don't need any additional investment for generations for some time, and that's what the AEMO report says," Mr Moyse said.


"But the mechanisms that leverage investment into renewable energy and into low-carbon technologies like the Renewable Energy Target are not about, ultimately, providing enough electricity supply to match demand.


"What they're about is industry development and restructure mechanisms. They're trying to, over time, restructure the industry so that more of our generation, irrespective of what the demand level is, comes from renewables or low-carbon technology and less from carbon-intensive generation, such as coal and gas."


At present there are millions of dollars in renewable projects sitting on the shelf while their developers wait to see what the Government does with the RET.


The bottom line, Mr Sadler says, is that there is no future for the large-scale renewable sector in Australia without the RET.


But he says that goes for other technologies too.


"In fact, some of the very new gas-fired power stations are going to be withdrawn from the market in a few months' time even though they are the newest power stations in Australia, apart from the renewable ones, because of the high price of gas means that they can't compete in the current market," he said.


In the meantime, Australians are increasingly voting with their wallets as electricity prices continue to rise.


There are around 1.5 million rooftop solar systems in the country and the number is increasing.

Joe Blake
30th October 2014, 20:09
Just when one thought things couldn't get any worse, yesterday our Upper House (Senate), after some fairly shonky horse trading with a couple of minor party and independent members on the cross benches, agreed to the LNP Government's so-called "Direct Action" on climate change.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-31/direct-action-passes-senate-with-support-of-pup/5856060

This means that $2.5 Billion is effectively going to be given to those industries who pollute the environment to encourage them to reduce their emissions!! :mad: No, I don't how that is going to work, especially when there was a functioning carbon pricing scheme which made polluters PAY for their sins. Now they get rewarded.

And this despite the fact that our cigar chomping treasurer has been crying poor mouth since this government was elected and making swingeing cuts to all and sundry to get the budget back into surplus, education, health, defence, social services. *sigh*

Rob Beckers
6th November 2014, 18:17
Yeah, a classic political giveaway!
You have to love the advertising slogans of "clean coal", an oxymoron if there ever was one. Due to all those carbon atoms in the coal molecules it can never burn "clean", there will always be lots of CO2, due to basic chemistry. The only thing that would make it "clean" is to pump it back underground (Canada just started up a pilot plant doing this). Putting CO2 back in the ground works, but will never be used at a large scale. It's horrendously expensive, taking away the one incentive coal has (its low price).

-RoB-

Joe Blake
6th November 2014, 21:34
Aah, some slight relief. Received an email about an hour ago saying the batteries for my "grid back-up" system had (or were about to be) landed on shore. Then I can look forward to virtually being off grid. I'll start a new thread when it's all up and running.

Sticking with the topic of going back to the Dark Ages. Be interested to see how the new landscape vis-a-vis terrorist attacks starts to sit with those people who are against renewable energy. It seems that most of them are also non-believers in global climate change. They seem to have spent so much time and energy in the hopeless quest to show the science behind the concept of climate change is wrong, therefore renewable energy is wrong, let's stick with coal, gas and oil, and let's build more nuclear power stations(!), that they ignore the fact that there are reasons for going to renewable energy OTHER than trying to minimise climate change. For example, reducing the domestic power bill(s) by paying for energy ahead of time, ie, buying solar panels and inverters, while the cost of non-renewable energy climbs inexorably; reducing dependence on grid power during outages, especially with a battery backup, and not subsidising the NRE sector by selling them excess power at microscopic rates whilst they then resell it to their consumers for 4-7 times that cost, and make a profit.

Now of course the threat of terrorism has increased so greatly that it is a very real possibility that electricity infrastructure, whether it be NRE generation stations, distribution infrastructure such as poles and wires, transformers or even the computers which run the system could become prime targets. How long can a major (or even minor) city last without electricity? Not long. (cf New York when Frankenstorm Sandy struck.) So one way of minimising this threat is to decentralise power generation and distribution, which is in effect what happens when a household goes off-grid, either partially or totally. Even nuclear power is pointless without wires to deliver the power to the factories and homes.

But this seems to be lost on the climate change denier fraternity, and their strident calls to discredit climate science has blinded them to the fact that (a) the cost of their power is going to go up as more and more people move to renewable energy and (b) they will become more vulnerable when the power system is damaged, whether by natural or human agency.

(Climbs down off soapbox and walks away muttering and clasping and unclasping his hands.)

Brian McGowan
8th November 2014, 00:44
Joe, Very good on your batteries. What are you getting?

As for the climate change argument, I have never leaned in that direction when arguing for renewable energy. It is just too hard to argue the point to the average person. There are hundreds of other really good and more immediate reasons to move in that direction that people understand more readily. The points you mention and national security in general are very good reasons. Pollution in general cause by burning fossil fuels is another really good reason.

For me, being able to survive without the grid is a good deal. It served me well when we had the ice storm here last winter and lost power for 56 hours. 1.05kW of panel and 500Ah of batteries was enough to keep me in heat and light for that period. On the second day when we didn't get as much sun as the first day even my stupid little wind turbine kicked in and made up the difference.

Joe Blake
10th November 2014, 20:56
These are the batteries I've ordered. x 12. $AU385 each.

http://www.systems-sunlight.com/uploads/image/2V_6_OPZV_420.pdf

Joe Blake
10th November 2014, 22:50
A phone call saying the batteries are in the shop. Now to schedule time to do the installation. Still waiting for the box to put the batteries in.

Yayy

Brian McGowan
10th November 2014, 23:07
Very nice good luck and keep us posted.

Rob Beckers
11th November 2014, 06:39
Pretty good size battery bank Joe!
Please post a picture when it's all done.

Good luck with the installation!

-RoB-

David Sterrar
6th January 2015, 08:09
I love that people are trying to sell the concept of “clean coal” still – oh I am sorry, did everything we ever learned about chemistry suddenly change? Does burning something suddenly not release specific elements into the air? I just wonder why people would readily eat this up – kind of frustrating. :eek:

Joe Blake
6th January 2015, 23:00
Have just created a thread about my NEW hybrid solar "off-grid" (almost) system.

http://www.greenpowertalk.org/showthread.php?t=20783

Joe

Joe Blake
24th March 2015, 08:00
Absolutely Incredible!!!!

Something I never thought I'd see in my lifetime.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-24/wa-energy-minister-mike-nahan-announces-energy-shake-up/6345020

After literally years (or decades) of prevaricating (by both sides of politics) the current West Australian government has bitten the bullet and said it is, over the coming 4 years, going to remove subsidies on electricity costs. These subsidies currently equate to about $500,000,000 a year.

There has been increasing pressure to remove subsidies on renewable energy, with people claiming that renewable households are being supported by the non-renewable consumers. Yet up until now few people have even acknowledged that massive subsidies support the non-renewable sector.

Needless to say I've been pushing for reduction of non-renewable subsidies for about 5 years now. Interestingly I sent a letter to Dr Nahan yesterday on this subject. The last straw perhaps?:toung:

The next 18 months or so are going to be EXTREMELY interesting, and there will be much cursing and swearing by the recipients of these subsidies who may suddenly find themselves having to swallow an extremely large and bitter pill, as, despite the political pap being espoused by the minister, prices for power will rise at an unprecedented rate. I suspect that there will be a rush to move into the sale of solar energy systems, as well as concerted efforts to try and screw money out of the renewable energy generators. (I'd better move off-grid pretty damned pronto I think.)

No doubt there will be more political backflips than in 10 circuses over this matter.

Watch this space:eek:

Rob Beckers
25th March 2015, 06:53
Joe, I honestly doubt that they'll ever remove all subsidies on electricity costs. It's something that upsets voters, and therefore not likely to be followed through by politicians. Then there's the traditional energy lobby that fears competition on an even footing, they'll never let it happen either.

We have a similar situation here in Ontario (electricity is a provincial matter in Canada). Lots of subsidies for traditional power sources, and, that's true, some for renewables in the form of the feed-in-tariff. Those on the renewable side have always welcomed the removal of subsidies, but politicians don't have the balls to present the user with their actual bill. And so electricity is partially paid through tax rather than through the electrical bill.

-RoB-