Fullscreen HTML5Med Res (??MB)HTML4

SILICON SILIC CHIP www.siliconchip.com.au Publisher/Editor Nicholas Vinen Technical Editor John Clarke – B.E.(Elec.) Technical Staff Jim Rowe – B.A., B.Sc. Bao Smith – B.Sc. Tim Blythman – B.E., B.Sc. Advertising Enquiries (02) 9939 3295 adverts<at>siliconchip.com.au Regular Contributors Allan Linton-Smith Dave Thompson David Maddison – B.App.Sc. (Hons 1), PhD, Grad.Dip.Entr.Innov. Geoff Graham Associate Professor Graham Parslow Dr Hugo Holden – B.H.B, MB.ChB., FRANZCO Ian Batty – M.Ed. Phil Prosser – B.Sc., B.E.(Elec.) Cartoonist Louis Decrevel loueee.com Founding Editor (retired) Leo Simpson – B.Bus., FAICD Silicon Chip is published 12 times a year by Silicon Chip Publications Pty Ltd. ACN 626 922 870. ABN 20 880 526 923. All material is copyright ©. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written consent of the publisher. Subscription rates (Australia only) 6 issues (6 months): $65 12 issues (1 year): $120 24 issues (2 years): $230 Online subscription (Worldwide) 6 issues (6 months): $50 12 issues (1 year): $95 24 issues (2 years): $185 For overseas rates, see our website or email silicon<at>siliconchip.com.au Recommended & maximum price only. Editorial office: Unit 1 (up ramp), 234 Harbord Rd, Brookvale, NSW 2100. Postal address: PO Box 194, Matraville, NSW 2036. Phone: (02) 9939 3295. ISSN: 1030-2662 Printing and Distribution: 24-26 Lilian Fowler Pl, Marrickville 2204 2 Silicon Chip Editorial Viewpoint Renewable energy costs are seriously understated by the media If you have read Dick Smith’s autobiography (that I reviewed in the January 2022 issue) or know much about the founder of Australian Geographic, you would know he is definitely an environmentalist. However, he has also been known to heap scorn on renewable energy policy, and he has a point. The costs and difficulties involved with renewable energy generation are grossly understated in the media, so much so that the public and policymakers are likely being misled. This isn’t helped by the somewhat vague “GenCost” reports from the CSIRO and AEMO, producing headlines like “Renewables cheaper than coal, says CSIRO” and “CSIRO/AEMO study says wind, solar and storage clearly cheaper than coal”. Having read the latest GenCost report (you can, too; see the link below), I think it’s hard to come to that conclusion without ignoring important facts. Firstly, I’m not sure exactly who the report is written for, but I don’t see how a journalist or politician could understand it. You would have to be an expert in the field, except that experts probably don’t need to read such a report. Also, I might have missed it, but I couldn’t find a proper comparison of the long-term costs of the different generation methods. Graphics and tables show capital costs per MWh for various generator types, but while they have a comparison of the “levelised cost of electricity” (LCOE) for various technologies, they do not have such a comparison that includes the cost of storage for renewables. Calculating such costs for coal, natural gas or nuclear power generation is relatively straightforward. Choose a reasonable lifetime for a power plant (say, 50 years). Take the cost of building the plant, add the expected maintenance, upgrade and fuel costs, then divide by the power rating in MW and lifespan in years. That gives you the dollars per MW per year. It’s harder to calculate that for renewables, though. For a start, you have to decide how much storage (realistically, batteries) you need for them to act as a base-load power source. The report implies that the cost of those batteries will be the largest single expense by far. They give a capital cost figure of around $2,859,000 per MW for 8-hour battery storage. You also need to determine how many times the batteries (and possibly generators) will need to be replaced in the period of interest. Most current battery technologies are unlikely to last 50 years, so they might have to be replaced several times. Multiply $2,859,000/MW by the number of megawatts and number of times it will need to be replaced, and the cost of batteries alone could easily exceed the cost of a traditional power plant. We aren’t even sure if the figures include the cost of recycling the battery at the end of its life etc. It all comes down to what assumptions you make about the need for batteries. However, it’s evident that neither wind nor solar power can always be relied on to deliver power when needed (especially at night!). The report discusses scenarios with up to 90% “variable renewable energy” generators. I question the stability of a grid with anything like that sort of percentage without enormous battery banks. Given the modest cost increase figures being presented, I doubt they have accounted for that fully. Read it for yourself and see if you think it is a helpful document for our policymakers. CSIRO report: https://publications.csiro.au/publications/ publication/PIcsiro:EP2022-2576 I would like renewables to be a viable source of large-scale power generation. However, wanting something to be the case doesn’t make it true. Policymakers can only make the right decisions with honest and transparent information on all the costs involved. by Nicholas Vinen Australia's electronics magazine siliconchip.com.au