web analytics
≡ Menu

We are exceeding renewables target for 2020

We are exceeding renewables target for 2020

Ah yes! When you open your electricity bill today or tomorrow and gasp with disbelief, pat yourself on the back and take comfort in the knowledge that this article, just like those before, have been carefully constructed by wizards compiling mostly unverifiable data to suit an agenda, an agenda never designed with the consumers’ or the nation’s best interests in mind. We are suckers!

Australia’s renewable energy capacity is set to exceed a target the Federal Government said was impossible to reach by 2020, according to new research from Green Energy Markets. In its quarterly Renewable Energy Index, GEM said the amount of renewable energy generated in 2020 was set to exceed the original 41,000 Gigawatt hour (GWh) Renewable Energy Target (RET) that was in place before being scrapped in 2015 by the federal government led by then prime minister Tony Abbott.

QLD. Spot Price (30min) $58.12/MWh  $64.99/MWh
SA.    Spot Price (30min) $88.73/MWh  $137.59/MWh @ 6:30am 18/4/18

Source: ABC

Renewable energy capacity set to exceed target Federal Government said was impossible

The original RET was put in place to help Australia meet its 2030 climate change commitment to cut emissions by 26 to 28 per cent from 2005 levels.
It was replaced by a less ambitious target of 33,000 GWh after the Abbott government characterised the original RET as impossible to achieve, while arguing there was already too much generating capacity.
The GEM study found estimated eligible generation would hit 41,381 GWh by 2020, not only exceeding the current RET, but the original RET as well.
“The Coalition’s argument that we can’t go any further than the target they’ve proposed without imposing some kind of huge economic shock and threat to reliability is obviously not true because we’re pretty much already there,” Green Energy Markets director Tristan Edis said.
“[Energy and Environment minister] Josh Frydenberg himself is saying that all the extra renewable energy that is about to enter the system will substantially push down power prices.”

NEG ‘meaningless’: report
Mr Edis said the Government’s National Energy Guarantee (NEG) would in effect deliver no meaningful emission reduction benefit, as projects already under construction and contracted exceed what is needed to achieve its established emission targets.
“According to economic modelling undertaken by Frontier Economics for the Energy Security Board, from 2017 onwards we’d need to install 9,271 megawatts [MW] of wind and solar in the NEM [National Electricity Market] to achieve the Government’s 2030 emission reduction target,” he said.
“Yet we already have 9,691 MW of projects that will be delivered in the NEM based on what has been committed to construction and what is being contracted under procurement processes currently underway.”
Those commitments include 650MW from the GFG consortium to power the Whyalla Steelworks in South Australia, a 500MW wind expansion from AGL, renewable energy auctions conducted Victorian and Queensland governments and a series of other contracts drawn up by generators such as Origin and AGL.
“We have already achieved what the NEG said it would do, it doesn’t add anything or do anything meaningful,” Mr Edis said.
Huge shortfall in CO2 reduction remains
Mr Edis said the NEG in its current form would deliver a result that is almost 120 million tonnes of carbon dioxide short of Australia’s commitment to the 2030 Paris Agreement.

Here’s a simple explanation of the agreement, and what it means for Australia.

“The maths on the Government’s emission target is pretty basic,” Mr Edis said.
“According the latest emissions projections from the Government’s own Department of Environment, the Government needs to find 128 million tonnes of CO2 abatement in 2030 to achieve its economy-wide 2030 Paris emissions target.
“Even if Frontier Economics’ modelling was right, it means the NEG delivers just 10 million tonnes in 2030 compared to business as usual.
“Where the hell is the other 118 million going to come from?”

Mr Edis said none of the options the Government had to make up the shortfall seemed likely to work.
“If the Government was to adopt the most stringent vehicle emission standard they’ve contemplated in their consultation paper — which is a big if — then the Government’s own estimates are it would deliver 11.7 million in 2030.
“The Emission Reduction Fund is almost out of money.
“Agriculture? Somehow I can’t see a Government made up of the Nationals regulating to control emissions from cows and sheep or land-clearing.
“They could pay for abatement but where’s the money coming from?”
Record solar PV installation
The Renewable Energy Index found renewables accounted for 19.7 per cent of the electricity generated on Australia’s main grids, or enough energy to power 8.7 million homes.

According to Green Energy Markets, rooftop solar installations in March were the highest monthly total ever, and over the first three months of the year are running at levels 50 per cent above those anticipated in economic modelling of the NEG.
“Households and businesses are continuing to install solar PV on rooftops at record rates in order to reduce their electricity bills. March installs set a new monthly record of 127 megawatts which will produce power equivalent to the consumption of 36,710 homes,” the report said.
“On top of the underestimates of large scale renewables, it suggests that the emission reduction target could be substantially strengthened at minimal economic cost.”

{ 12 comments… add one }
  • Muphin 18/04/2018, 5:08 am

    And HOW is all this going to reduce my power bill???

    More lies and deceit from the TURD and his lackey’s.

  • DT 18/04/2018, 5:40 am

    Wind turbines are an unreliable source of energy because they are dependent on wind velocity to operate, and that is unreliable in most locations. And timing is often at night when the electricity grid has the lowest demand.

    For example: Yesterday at 12:00 hours wind turbines provided only 500 MW of the total 22,000 MW (according to Australian Energy Market website). At 18:00 demand was 26,000 MW and wind provided 1,000 MW.

    Noting that for some time to date wind has been below expectations.

    I understand that the “nameplate” capacity of a wind turbine is the calculated design maximum in perfect operating conditions. However, because of wind fluctuations the wind turbine operators contract to provide an estimated on average “registered capacity or capacity factor” and on average that is most often 30-40 per cent of nameplate. So, the present Renewable Energy Target is 23 per cent, of what? Nameplate or Capacity Factor?

    Politicians tend to talk about “Installed Capacity” which must be Nameplate, and therefore 23 per cent at best would be 40 per cent of 23 per cent being 9.2 per cent. SA claims to have 40 per cent but that would be based on Nameplate or Installed Capacity, and therefor Capacity Factor 16 per cent.

    Whatever, wind turbines are a very expensive, unreliable supply source, working lifetime less than half that of a power station and in Australia profits subsidised with taxpayer’s monies in addition to world’s highest electricity pricing for all electricity and the businesses also have the legal tax deductions relating to expenses incurred making profit.

    Solar provides the best output on cool and clear days between 10 am and 2 pm. Also taxpayer subsidised, solar farms and rooftop solar. And also have about 20 years satisfactory operating life.

    At best wind and solar are supplementary sources of energy but as SA has shown the more installed the more likely the electricity grid will become destabilised, and need the big battery to provide a few minutes energy until the diesel and gas generators kick in, and the interconnector to the Victorian coal fired power stations. Noting too that the SA grid is one of the smallest in the world’s largest interconnected electricity grid.

    The future should be the cheapest and very reliable coal fired power stations, latest HELE technology and Nuclear not wind and solar farms.

  • DT 18/04/2018, 5:43 am
  • DT 18/04/2018, 5:44 am
  • DT 18/04/2018, 5:45 am
  • DT 18/04/2018, 5:48 am

    What our governments should be doing …

    http://joannenova.com.au/2018/04/love-those-30-year-old-coal-and-nuclear-plants-nothing-gives-cheaper-electricity/

    There are many more articles at JoNova on energy.

    • Zoltan 18/04/2018, 7:32 am

      If only we had access to some uranium……………………

      • DT 18/04/2018, 7:51 am

        Radioactive ores were first extracted at Radium Hill in 1906, and Mount Painter in South Australia in the 1930s, to recover radium for medical use. Several hundred kilograms of uranium were also produced. Of the world’s proven estimated uranium reserves (5,404,000 tonnes), 31% are held in Australia (1,673,000 tonnes), ahead of the second largest, Kazakhstan (12.1% or 651,800 tonnes).

        In terms of production, Canada is the largest supplier to export markets, followed by Kazakhstan and Australia. Uranium mined in Australia is mainly for export. Australia exported 50,235 tonnes of uranium oxide concentrate in the five years to 2008, worth A$2.9 billion.

      • Neville 18/04/2018, 11:02 pm

        In any case, nuclear seems a WAY better option, but it appears that the Thorium-cycle plants will be best. Many details available online, just search; but generally: safer (MUCH), cheaper to fuel and run, enormously more fuel available (Thorium is MUCH more prevalent than Uranium, and can “burn” (so to speak) the byproducts of Uranium reactors (among many other reasons it seems better than Uranium).
        Except for the fact that the lefty-greeny-socialist-marxist alliance has that good ol’ hidden agenda operating, and always oppose nuclear electricity for that reason, it still sorta surprises me a little that Thorium cycle nuclear electricity is not more widely discussed.

  • Biking Voter 18/04/2018, 9:38 am

    Windmills are renewable energy, yes? The lead article on this page states they failed to meet their quotas yet something called ‘Green Energy Markets’ crows about how we exceeded the RET. Rubbery figures …… or just plain bullshit?

  • angry 18/04/2018, 11:09 am

    It is impossible to operate a modern economy by relying on the weather (wind/sun) to generate the electricity that it requires…………….

    Anyone who thinks so is a deluded cretin !

  • Lorraine 18/04/2018, 7:25 pm

    when you have the PM and he has money in the game thru his son……..there will be no change. He is not a deluded cretin, he has millions of dollars , and plans to have many more to bank

Leave a Comment