Home » Featured » Origin says big solar to dominate large-scale renewable energy market

Origin says big solar to dominate large-scale renewable energy market

Let’s hope that Tony Abbott and his government, should they remain in power, like solar power, and the prospect of rows and rows of solar modules.

Origin Energy, the biggest energy retailer in the country, says that large-scale solar plants will quickly overtake Abbott’s bets noire, wind energy, as the most cost competitive renewable energy technology, and will likely dominate the new build required to meet the reduced large-scale renewable energy target.

Origin CEO Grant King says wind energy is not likely to fall in costs, because of the declining Australian dollar, the distance from new projects to transmissions sources, and because it is a mature technology. (And, if you believe New Zealand’s Meridian Energy, because the political opposition to wind energy will likely raise costs too).

But large-scale solar – little of which has been built in Australia to date without additional government grants – is looking more attractive, both in terms of costs and because solar projects can be built more quickly, from planning to construction, than wind farms.

Origin Energy produced this graph to show the transition between solar and wind costs. But it says that even these estimates of the falling cost of solar may prove conservative.

wind vs solar costs

“Wind, which has traditionally supplied renewable energy, is unlikely to come down in cost,” King told a media briefing following the company’s annual results on Thursday.

“If anything, wind energy will go up in cost in our view because sites are becoming further removed from transmission and are costing more to connect.” The appreciation of the dollar and the fact wind was a “mature” technology, meant it was unlikely wind costs would fall, he said.

“The big story is that solar costs continue to come down and come down quite dramatically,” King said. “We suspect that this chart in a few years will have underestimated the falling costs of utility-scale solar.”

Indeed, solar module manufacturers such as Canadian Solar believe that large-scale solar costs will fall to around $75/MWh by 2020 – a good 20 per cent below Origin Energy’s estimates.

“We think people will be surprised by the rate that utility-scale solar will be able to take up a significant amount of the renewable energy target.

King said the best way to predict what the future holds was to look at “where the prospectors are”. And by prospectors, he meant project developers lining up solar project sites. Origin, which has a share in a 69MW project in Chile, has also bought the rights to develop a 280MW project in northern Chile, albeit for just $1 million.

“Chile is at the leading edge of large-scale solar in terms of costs and deployment,” King said.

King, however, does not share the bleak view of the Australian market held by of his major counterpart AGL Energy, or of New Zealand renewable energy giant Meridian Energy.

AGL CEO Andrew Vesey said last week that lingering uncertainty about clean energy and climate policy meant that companies were still holding off on investment, and may do so until after the Paris climate conference.

Meridian CEO Mark Binns said on Wednesday the Abbott government’s antipathy to wind energy meant there was no point pursuing wind energy developments in Australia at the moment.

origin black and green pricesKing said even meeting the 33,000GWh target would require significant investment – and, if anything, renewable energy targets were likely to be raised in future, not cut. “It is not going to be reduced,” he said.

Indeed, the market was already responding to the new policies, and the combined “black price” (the wholesale market), and the “green price” (renewable energy certificates) were trading in an area where new renewable energy projects were feasible, and was matching the levellised cost of energy (LCOE) or wind and solar.

King said that the 26 per cent emission reduction target from the Abbott government was “not lacking in ambition or effort” and would require significant investment. Even Labor’s proposed 50 per cent renewable energy target for 2030 would meet less than one half of those required emission reductions.

Other highlights from King’s analyst and media briefings were:

The future of rooftop solar:

Origin Energy has ambitions to claim the top spot in the rooftop solar installation market, but it still has a long way to travel. It currently ranks number 7, and installed only around 700kW from the May launch of its rooftop solar PPA deal (where it owns and installs and maintains rooftop solar while charging customers for the output) until the end of June. That compares to a total installation market of around 60MW in that month.

King expects rooftop solar will continue to grow at around 800MW a year – despite the changing tariffs in the market – and says that future revenue growth from energy markets will come from rooftop solar, metering and technologies such as battery storage. “We are not afraid of the future,” he says, but King expects battery storage take-up to be relatively slow, because of the high costs. We explore this issue in more detail here.

The decline of base load gas:

Origin received a boost in its energy market trading, thanks to the so-called “ramping” period for the huge LNG projects, which allowed Origin to profit from sales to LNG customers. But the future of gas generation in Australia is not looking good. AGL Energy has decided to close down half of its Torrens facility in South Australia, and Snowy Hydro announced last week that it would close the 210MW base load facility at , which was only built in 2009. It says it is base load gas is simply not needed. But Snowy Hydro and Origin will continue to use peaking gas plants, which they say will be needed to address the increasing volatility of prices as more renewables are introduced into the system.

origin gas and RETOrigin on Wednesday called for measures to accelerate the removal of brown coal generators from the system. This graph shows that gas generation could fall by nearly three quarters out to 2020, while large-scale renewables adds another 14GWh out to 2020, and small scale solar another 14GWh out to 2030. Some, such as Bloomberg New Energy Finance, anticipate twice that amount of rooftop solar.

The rocky future of LNG:

Origin Energy’s biggest investment has been in the LNG businesses, but the falling oil price is making that investment look less profitable than it once was. At $100/barrel, Origin could be expected to be delivering a dividend of $900 million a year from its share of the project, but with each $10 fall in the cost of oil, the returns fall by $200 million from 2017 Hence its focus on cutting costs ($200 million a year from 2017) and paying down debt. The oil price is currently trading at less than $60.

Comments

16 responses to “Origin says big solar to dominate large-scale renewable energy market”

  1. Sunbuntu Ltd Avatar
    Sunbuntu Ltd

    What a load of rubbish.

    Goldwind the world’s 2nd largest wind turbine company is producing low wind speed turbines. There are many more low speed wind sites than high wind speed sites.

    Where Vestas, Siemens and other European wind companies are making 5MW or even 10MW ‘monster’ wind turbines for deployment in the North Sea. Goldwind is making turbines for low wind environments for China.

    Onshore wind is the cheapest renewable energy and it is falling in price but solar is falling in price even faster. But it is not either wind or solar but both replacing coal.

    Wind has a much higher utilisation rate (35-45%) than solar (15-20%).

    Wind will be the premier non-hydro renewable energy for many years but roof top solar will be the end users choice.

    1. Peter F Avatar
      Peter F

      Not only Goldwind but Siemens, Vestas, Gamesa, GE etc. are making low wind turbines as well with longer blades and taller masts. That is why the generator size of many new onshore projects are between 2.1 and 3MW. They can generate full capacity at wind speeds that prevail at 100m+ hub heights more than 50% of the time. At ground level those winds are scarcely more than a breeze. One manufacturer claims that their new model is increasing output by 28% compared to the previous model at the same wind speed

  2. Ben Rose Avatar

    Thanks for reporting this Giles. What Origin have not taken into account though is that an approximate 50:50 mix of wind and solar PV is optimal because wind energy often peaks in the evening and night when it is most needed while of course PV does not generate all all at night. . Modeling I am conducting with SEN (Sustainable Energy Now) in WA using real time NASA data from past years shows this and also the fact that solar falls far short of load for periods of 2 weeks or more in winter, while wind usually (but not always) provides more significant energy during these periods.

    Some solar thermal with molten salt storage changes the solar equation, with up to 10 hrs storage enabling all of it to be dispatched at night. It is of course much more expensive than PV but the Tonopah plant in Nevada recently came on line at about 13 c/ kWh.

    Storage is of course part of the equation for shorter term (overnight to a few days) but even large amounts of hydro cannot cover weeks of still cloudy days. Some fueled generation is always needed in winter but this may be as low as about 7%.

    1. Chris Fraser Avatar
      Chris Fraser

      Exactly. The state of the technology should be the determining factor in the generation mix not the politics.

    2. Malcolm M Avatar
      Malcolm M

      Solar thermal with storage only has a single recharge-discharge cycle per day, whereas battery or pumped storage can potentially be used for 2 recharge-discharge cycles per day (with the night-time recharge from wind or coal). So as a ball-park costing a battery-based system could cost twice as much per MWh of storage than solar thermal and still be viable.

      AS I understand it, only the direct component of solar radiation can be used in solar concentrating systems, whereas both direct and indirect radiation are used in PV. Do the NASA data separate between these forms, and at what timestep ? (I have a month worth of 1-minute data on direct and indirect radiation data, from which I’ve developed some prediction algorithms.)

      1. James Fisher Avatar
        James Fisher

        Solar thermal can be charged over night in the same way batteries are charged. The round trip efficiency is a little over half Li-ion batteries when charged from the grid but the substantially lower cost of solar thermal more than makes up for this cost difference.

        1. JonathanMaddox Avatar
          JonathanMaddox

          It’s not “solar thermal” if you’re using electric power to heat it when there’s no direct sunshine!

          Is that seriously what you’re proposing? If so, your round-trip efficiency isn’t going to be “a little over half li-ion batteries” from electric resistance heat unless you’re using very large temperature differentials. Consider instead using a heat pump with a high COP ratio, and storing the cold side as well. Then you can forget the whole “solar thermal” part too, because using electricity (from PV, wind or whatever) to run the heat pump would be more convenient than using direct solar heat to heat one side only. And you wouldn’t have to site it in the middle of a solar field in the desert, you could put it anywhere.

          Not my idea, it’s already in development: http://www.isentropic.co.uk/

          1. James Fisher Avatar
            James Fisher

            You have the solar thermal plant that operates normally and then overnight if you have exhausted the energy stored from your normal daily solar operation you charge your thermal storage from the grid when power prices are very low or negative (in the same way you boil water in your kettle). You then use this stored thermal energy to generate steam and drive the turbine in the morning or if it is cloudy the following day during the next peak time. This way you can have 2 charge and discharge cycles from your molten salt storage.

          2. JonathanMaddox Avatar
            JonathanMaddox

            Yeah.

            If thermal storage interests you, check out the Isentropic link, also this one, Highview Power.

            http://www.highview-power.com/technology/

      2. Ben Rose Avatar

        Malcolm, you are quite right in that frequency of use is crucial to the economics of any type of storage. In my simulations I have the grid batteries taking care of the last, occasional deep shortfalls of which there are less than 20 a year. Li-ion batteries are ideal for this because they can provide high power instantly but for quite short periods. For example only 1000 MWh of battery would give up to 3000 MW but only for 20 minutes. Of course this makes them very expensive if that is the only use. But they also have an important function in replacing ‘spinning reserve’ for grid stabilization.

        Behind the meter batteries (owned by consumers) are another matter – they are economic in their own right compared to retail power because of the high network costs and markups of the latter. The more of these the better; at no cost to the grid they provide a valuable load leveling function and bring the LCOE down a few dollars per MWh because less of the expensive ‘peaking power’ is required.

        Re the NASA data, it is DNI (direct radiation – used to calculate solar thermal) and GNI, which is dispersed radiation, used to calculate PV. If a cloud goes over the sun, solar thermal (CST) stops whereas most PV these days will keep on generating albeit reduced amounts of energy. That’s why CST is really only practical in desert – semi-desert climates.

      3. Ben Rose Avatar

        Oh I forgot to say, the NASA MERRA data is hourly. It is generated from satellite data and goes back to the 1970’s. There is gridded data available for most land areas of the Earth.

        1. Malcolm M Avatar
          Malcolm M

          Could the hourly time-step be hiding some of the intermittancy that would occur as clouds pass over ? Power output plots at a 5-minute scale I have seen of output from the Nyngan solar farm show quite jagged output on some days, which I presume is that when a cloud passes over it affects close to the whole solar farm. In a city the effect on rooftop PV is reduced because the PV panels are spread over a much larger area, which is much larger than the individual clouds on days of scattered cloud. Solutions are either to attain a much greater geographical spread of large-scale solar (as we do for wind), or combine solar with some battery storage. My bet for the optimal location for battery storage is with a solar farm, because the inverters, transformers and grid connections can all be shared with PV.

          In your simulations, did you have any metric for how well you were simulating panel temperature ? (given that PV performance reduces with panel temperature). The 1-minute data I referred to were to simulate the temperature of apples on orchard trees, and the model I used could get to within 3 degrees C of observations. The main input parameters are wind speed, and solar beam strength normal to the apple surface. (I could send you the paper). Has someone produced a similar solution for solar panel temperature ?

  3. Maurice Oldis Avatar
    Maurice Oldis

    Origin opposed maintaining the RET-King has zero credibility!

  4. Ian Avatar
    Ian

    You have got to wonder why a large utility spruikes utility solar against wind, when wind is clearly complimentary with distributed solar having its peaks at different times. Low velocity wind is hardly a problem in this country, many of the wind resources in Victoria and South Australia have very high capacity factors and very high wind speeds. I suspect they are trying to muscle out distributed solar which is in direct competition to their business model. This country has no problem coming up with money for all sorts of pet projects, yet they balk at investing in wind. Look at the tunnels under Brisbane or the money thrown at the Pacific Highway- close to $100M a km as examples. We have got to get serious about renewables not p-ss around like old Tony.

  5. James Wallis Avatar
    James Wallis

    Is it just me or does the first paragraph make no sense?

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.