Emperor with no clothes: NEG could kill investment in storage

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

If the NEG could get one thing right, you might think it would be a signal for new investment in “dispatchable” capacity. But Tesla and Genex, the leading developers of battery storage and pumped hydro projects, say it could do the opposite.

share
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Source: AAP

It’s getting increasingly hard to find anything right about prime minister Malcolm Turnbull’s policy thought-bubble, the National Energy Guarantee.

It has been slammed from pillar to post since its rushed unveiling last year, because, according to the growing ranks of critics, it will do nothing to address Turnbull’s “energy trilemma” of emissions, prices, and reliability. In fact, there are fears it will make each of them worse.

Utilities, analysts, and activists have already criticised the NEG for doing little on emissions, putting an effective freeze on renewable investment, and creating a scheme of such complexity it would likely push up prices and reinforce the power of incumbent utilities.

The reliability component has also been slammed for being vague, ill-defined and possibly unworkable, and addressing a problem that may not even exist. Now developers of energy storage are also complaining, because it could have the opposite effect of what it intended and may stifle investment.

If you thought that the NEG would get one thing right, it would be to provide a signal for new investment in “dispatchable” capacity. But Tesla and Genex, the leading developers of battery storage and pumped hydro projects in the country, say it could do the opposite.

Tesla, as we report in this separate story, says the NEG and other market rules are designed to favour incumbent fossil fuel generators, and it accuses the Energy Security Board of not being abreast of new technologies such as its own big battery – the world’s biggest – in South Australia.

“Achieving an appropriate mix of generation assets is dependent on removing existing market barriers for battery energy storage as a technology type,” it says. Read more here: Tesla says Energy Security Board needs to catch up with battery technology

Genex, which is building a 270MW solar farm and a 250 pumped hydro facility in Queensland, in an old gold mine, says the NEG is likely to stop investments such as its world-leading project.

“We do not view the current concept design as providing the appropriate incentives for new investment in dispatchable capacity,” Genex says in its submission.

Retailers have also made their views clear, suggesting that there is no reliability gap and any reliability obligation would simply reinforce bigger retailers and push up prices.

“There is currently no forecast reliability gap,” the 10 retailers say in a joint letter accompanying their joint submission. Technology is likely to make today’s issues moot within five years. We need to proceed with caution to avoid making significant, costly changes that have dire consequences.”

Grid owners are also not happy. Spark Infrastructure, which owns networks in South Australia, Victoria, and a minority stake in Transgrid, says the scheme will likely do little, apart from adding costs to consumers.

“There is the potential for the scheme to result in further costs being imposed on end-use customers with little demonstrable improvement in reliability or emissions,” Spark says in its submission.

It also warns that the NEG would result in yet more market power in the hands of the big generators, a group it has previously accused of deliberately rorting the system to create scarcity and push up prices.

The Australian Renewable Energy Agency said it was concerned about the complexity of the contracting regime that the NEG seeks to impose, and the risk of reinforcing market power of the big incumbents.

It also wants the ESB to consider the “shape” of the reliability requirement, not just the scale. This is important to take into account “distributed generation”, and the up to 13GW of behind the meter storage that could be installed by 2030.

“Were AEMO to centrally procure additional capacity on the basis of an overly precautionary approach to forecasting the contribution of distributed energy resources, this could result in stranded investments in large-scale generation with costs borne by consumers,” it says.

ARENA’s own studies show that the cost of providing storage for up to 40 hours in a high penetration renewables grid would be in the range of $100-$150/MWh – far cheaper than the peaking plants that the current fossil fuel grid relies upon. And costs were likely to fall further.

It also noted that wind and solar, and battery storage could be installed much more quickly than traditional generation. Solar was being built in less than two years.

Some upcoming battery storage projects were likely to take less than 7 months to complete after contracting – just like the Tesla big battery. The lead times for demand response were even shorter than this.

Enel Green Power, part of the largest integrated utility in Europe, and which is building the 220MW Bungala solar farm in South Australia with the hope of adding battery storage, echoed some of Tesla’s complaints.

It said the emissions from batteries need to be differentiated to reflect they are likely to be charged by wind or solar.

It was also damning on the weak emissions targets, saying they would do nothing to attract new investment in clean energy technology.

“The proposed emission reduction target for the electricity sector (-26% of emissions by 2030 versus 2005 levels) is not very challenging and falls substantially short of the requirement for the 2 degrees scenario,” Enel Green Power says.

“With such a low target, new investments in clean technologies – which are becoming more and more competitive with conventional generation – would be hindered rather than encouraged.” It also warns of the risk of reduced competition and higher prices from the contracting regime.

Pacific Hydro, one of the biggest renewable energy operators in the country, and with plans to launch a retailer, agreed that the consultation process has been rushed, with insufficient time to consider the potential impacts of such major changes.

“The real risk is that the reliability shortfall calculation further entrenches the existing players, with the result being less competition and higher prices in the long term,” it said.

Goldwind, the biggest wind turbine maker in the world, also says the reliability guarantee risks reinforcing the power of incumbents, pushing up prices, and is too complex to be introduced by 2019 as planned.

Indeed, it was hard to find many submissions that were supportive – apart from those among the big gen-tailers that stand to benefit, and the various lobby groups who have been supportive of the concept from the get-go, and may even have helped develop the concept.

These include the likes of the Energy Supply Council and the Business Council of Australia. Even Adani’s submission urged the ESB to recognise Australia’s resources and its ability to have high penetration of renewables in Australia.

Among the big retailers, Origin Energy did not appear particularly impressed.

It says the emissions targets are well short of what could be achieved -– Origin wants zero emissions by 2050, and it is concerned about the emissions obligation on retailers rather than generators, and the complexity of reliability contracting.

Given all this, the ESB must somehow absorb the enormous complexity and detail of the more than 106 submissions it has published – and however many more are not published – and put together a “high level” plan for the COAG ministers meeting ….. in just three weeks.

It has all the hallmarks of a rushed job designed to fix a political problem, a characteristic that has been evident from the start.

In the end, the fate of the NEG may well depend on the outcome of Saturday’s state election in South Australia.

The state Labor government has made no secret of its contempt for the scheme, and energy minister Tom Koutsantonis, in his submission, highlighted the numerous storage projects that his government has put in place.

He criticises the NEG on numerous fronts, on emissions, the failure to recognise new technologies, and the risk of higher prices and reinforcing market power.

“The South Australian government further holds concerns with the process of developing and consulting on the NEG, with these deficiencies exemplified by the reliability section of the paper.

“This makes no attempt to define the problem with the existing frameworks that needs to be solved, does not give any consideration to alternative approaches and does not offer any balanced assessment of the NEG proposal.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

68 Comments
  1. Erik 6 months ago

    “world leaking project” = RenewEconomy needs a proof reader I think

    • rob 6 months ago

      I’m a bit repetitive on that issue……..Mentioned it many times on this website……It truly pisses me off!

      • Hettie 6 months ago

        Giles has explained that his word processor changes text as it is saving. Which is no way acceptable. But considering the volume of work he produces every day, there is little time for rigorous editing. And there have been far fewer errors of late.
        Don’t forget that we, the comment writers, are by no means perfect, and we have an edit facility that remains active for weeks.

        • rob 6 months ago

          Hettie. they should send every article to you for proof reading at say $25.00 a pop!

          • rob 6 months ago

            A nice little side earner for you!

          • rob 6 months ago

            Wow ,that is not a side earner. Approx $1k per week.Hope Giles takes up my offer to you! LOL

          • Hettie 6 months ago

            But but but I’d lose my pension!!
            Seriously, others have suggested apps that do spell and grammar checks, and simply turning autocorrect off, and reading over each article would pay dividends.
            And $2.00 per article would provide my permitted $160 a fortnight allowable extra income. A significant boost.

          • solarguy 6 months ago

            Jesus, only $160 allowable extra income, that’s terrible. Grossly unfair.

          • Hettie 6 months ago

            Actually, I think it might be $164 per fortnight now, and if it comes from paid employment, $500. That does not apply to one’s own business. And that I think is grossly unfair. Anything more, 50 cents goes from the pension for every BEFORE tax dollar of extra income. Plus, of course, there is income tax to pay. An effective tax rate of 70%.
            No wonder so many older women are homeless. One in three of us retires with no super.

          • solarguy 6 months ago

            That sucks bigtime!

          • Rod 6 months ago

            Yes but $58,000 in dividend imputation credits in cash is OK, apparently.

          • solarguy 6 months ago

            Yes it’s disgusting Rod. And on disgusting, to many South Aussies voted as they where told by Murdoch, sadly.

          • Rod 6 months ago

            Yes. for my sins I have been haunting the Mudrake forums to no avail.
            The bias is so blatant it is incredible. The editorial on election day was “It’s time for change” For fooks sake!

          • Calamity_Jean 6 months ago

            There’s a reason autocorrect is sometimes called “autocorrupt”.

        • neroden 6 months ago

          Giles should turn off the feature in his word processor which changes text as it is saving. It is always an option. Turn it off.

  2. Ray Miller 6 months ago

    With 3 major VIC coal burning intermittent, inefficient, air polluting, globe warming machines off line, LOYYB 560MW, YWPS3 370MW & YWPS4 370MW combined approximately 1300MW. I hope we are not going to depend on these unreliable machines for much longer?

    • Peter F 6 months ago

      where do you find these stats Ray

      • Rod 6 months ago

        This might help. It will show zero generation for the past day. It doesn’t actually show outages
        http://nemlog.com.au/gen/region/#VIC1

      • David Osmond 6 months ago

        See also the Australia Institute coal and gas watch, showing the 55 coal and gas failures since December:
        http://www.tai.org.au/gas-coal-watch

      • Ray Miller 6 months ago

        I looked on PocketNEM app for units not generating in Victoria. Last Thursday there seemed to be a network event and since then the total VIC lignite plants have been only generating a little over 3 GW. Since all the companies have stated they want to run all their plants flat out to make as much $ as possible.The size of the units YWPS Energy Australia web sites states combined generation capacity of 1480 MW. LOYYB is the same as LOYYB? yes it an assumption if it is the same capacity as LOYYA? I’m sure someone has the exact nameplate or commissioned rating of each of the plants.
        And the brown coal plants are usually generating in excess of 4GW, so it does seem pushing the engineering of these old plants decreases the reliability, which is funny since the big perceived NEM issue is reliability. I think they call it shooting oneself in the foot.

        • Gary Rowbottom 6 months ago

          Loy Yang A is 4 units 525 MW each, Loy Yang B is 2 units 525 MW each. Loy Yang B is about 9 years younger than Loy Yang A

  3. ben 6 months ago

    “Thought bubble” is being charitable. “Brain fart” would be more accurate.

    • Hettie 6 months ago

      And a particularly foul one, at that.
      Comments on these pages have been saying much of what Tesla now says, since the original 8 page memo was released.
      Seems it has only become worse with each passing week.
      Voters of SA, we pin our hopes on you!.
      With JW and SK at the COAG table the Nasty Emissions Guarantee can be killed stone dead.
      Without them, Australian electricity consumers are in for a very bumpy ride.

      • rob 6 months ago

        Hettie, I so wish but after 16 years in Government I don’t think it is going to happen. Well at least I get to put Nicky boy number 7 and the liberals number 6. FFS the last thing I want is xenophobe as my local member!

        • Hettie 6 months ago

          Fingers crossed.

      • Rod 6 months ago

        Well, Mrs has pre voted Labor 1 Greens 2 and Libs last. I’ll do the same on polling day but even the bookies are now shortening the odds with Labor just ahead.
        It doesn’t look good.

        • Hettie 6 months ago

          Not long to wait now.
          How many hours after polls close do you guys usually have a result?
          Midnight? Monday?

          • Rod 6 months ago

            If it is a landslide either way it could be the next day. I think it will be mid week with the No Pokies preferences complications.

        • rob 6 months ago

          similar rod………except I put XENOPHONE AT 7 AND THE LIBS AT 6 but like I said above Hartley is [email protected]@ked and of course we now have the empty Marshall Battery as our dear leader……

          • Rod 6 months ago

            I only had a choice of four, Dana Wortley got back in. I am a bit depressed about it all and Mayhem Turmoil has come out stating this is a vote for his NEG.

  4. Mike Westerman 6 months ago

    It should be obvious that if emissions, security and reliability obligations rested with the generator or curtailer of power, whether behind the meter or in front, that apart from ease of verification, the generator/curtailer would price their products to cover their obligations and take advantage in any supply/demand imbalance. Retailers would then have a clear choice of wholesale products to suit their customers. Each party managing the risk they are best suited for. Transparency. Economics 101.

  5. Peter F 6 months ago

    Keep up the pressure on this stupid idea, but It is possible that because the NEG is such a ridiculous concept, it is becoming less of a concern every day.
    a) The many complications you and hundreds of others have highlighted means that the practical start if not the formal launch will be delayed months to years
    b) The reliability bit won’t actually matter for the next couple of years and if Queensland and Victoria follow through on their current plans, it will only be NSW that has a reliability issue.
    Not only did Victoria get through its highest Sunday demand day ever with power to spare, it is installing more renewables and storage and expanding its demand response market. Murra Murra, Stockyard Creek, Mount Gellibrand, Bulgana, Kiata and Salt Creek wind farms are under way as well as about 600 MW of solar farms. These projects will supply around 10% of Victoria’s annual demand even before the current tenders for renewables and storage are awarded.

    As Victoria is surviving (at some cost) with three of its eight remaining coal generators off line now and will have 220 MW of new wind and over one GW of new solar on line by next summer what help is the NEG going to be. By the following summer when the NEG is supposed to take effect there will be a few hundred MW of storage behind the meter and another 1,000 MW or so of wind and yet another 1,000 MW of solar

    Further Victoria will more often be able to draw from SA and Tasmania as both of those states are installing more wind and solar and in SA more storage

    c) A future government can easily turn up the renewable dial in the guarantee and the need for reliability will be seen to be impossible to provide from old coal plants

    d) After Abbott/Turnbull government insults the state government at every opportunity and wriggles out of federal obligations . Do you think Ms D’Ambrosio or the Premier will stop their renewable projects to suit a farcical NEG

    • rob 6 months ago

      Sorry but Victoria is a disgrace! It is receiving inputs from everywhere. You need to increase your renewables 10 fold today. Your love affair with the filthy brown shit is disgusting!

      • Rod 6 months ago

        Agreed, sort of. They really could have, should have been moving faster this past year. Vic and SA dodged a bullet this Summer, partly due to the worst days falling on weekends. Vic. storage is six Months late already. However it looks like with Vic and SA having a lot coming on line this Year, next Summer will be less nail biting.

        • rob 6 months ago

          Are you crying today with me over our election results….?

          • mick 6 months ago

            im just pissed off

          • Rod 6 months ago

            I cried into a green beer last night.

      • Peter F 6 months ago

        Didn’t you look at the above list. There are at least half a dozen other windfarms with planning permission and the state government renewables tender is about to be completed so I think Victoria is transitioning quite quickly.
        As for the filth brown stuff it has very low ash, zero fugitive methane, very low sulphur and extremely low heavy metals. In all respects but CO2 it is cleaner than NSW coal and when NOx and fugitive methane is properly accounted for, may even be better on GHGs as well

        • rob 6 months ago

          A decade to late! Have you looked at NEM WEBSITE today? S.A. has had negative power prices……up to -$1500,00 at one stage….but consistently negative for the last 4 hours! Solar running at max and wind at 1200 Mw…….. gas generation is the minimum we are allowed at 390 Mw and exporting 650 Mw in your direction! ie as much as the interconnector can take

          • Peter F 6 months ago

            This is a silly argument. SA boasted about the transition which was caused by high gas prices and a Commonwealth RET almost nothing to do with the State government.
            Victoria on the other hand had cheap abundant relatively clean ( low in ash, particulates, heavy metals, SOx, zero fugitive methane) coal and an area of high unemployment dependant on the coal industry. The transition to renewables up until now was very costly financially and politically. A completely different scenario to SA

          • Rod 6 months ago

            Well, the RET was/is available to everyone. SA was cunning to take advantage.
            And as for political costs. Ask Jay how that went.

    • Rod 6 months ago

      “Do you think
      Ms D’Ambrosio or the Premier will stop their renewable projects to suit
      a farcical NEG”
      I can see them both supporting the NEG which will make RE investment less attractive and may lead to another investment drought.

      • Peter F 6 months ago

        Why???

        • Rod 6 months ago

          The reliability onus will come down to the generator. At current costs local storage for every project is not economical. Contracting firming will be slightly cheaper (I can see Snowjob 2.0 rubbing their hands in anticipation)
          We’ll never see a privately funded coaler built but these additional costs make coal refurb and more gas a possibility. IMHO

      • RobertO 6 months ago

        Hi Rod, They could have canned the NEG at the last COAG meeting but they agreed to kick the can down the road. If Turncoat offers enough incentive to Vic they could turn on the NEG for Australia benefit, and even make it harder for the Labour Fed Gov to can the NEG. As it stands the NEG will support coal until the NEG is canned. And how would we transition out of the NEG. What will the NEG contract say and what terms and conditions do they have (protecting coal power stations). I believe the NEG is rotten to the core!

  6. Joe 6 months ago

    I doesn’t matter that opposition to the NEG is growing and growing. The NEG is Two Tongue Turnbull’s climate and energy policy…when The COALition doesn’t have a climate and energy policy.

  7. mushalik 6 months ago

    My analysis:

    16/3/2018
    NSW coal power maxed out in hot summer (part 2)
    http://crudeoilpeak.info/nsw-coal-power-maxed-out-in-hot-summer-part-2

    14/3/2018
    NSW coal power maxed out in hot summer (part 1)
    http://crudeoilpeak.info/nsw-coal-power-maxed-out-in-hot-summer-part-1

  8. Hettie 6 months ago

    No. NO NOOOOO.
    SA, how could you.

    • Mike Westerman 6 months ago

      When boredom and short attention span out guns intelligence…

    • Rod 6 months ago

      Most of us croweaters voted the same way we did four years ago. There was a 7% swing away from the Libs (probably due to the Xenophon circus) The three seats that changed hands were all victims of the boundary redistribution.
      I’m a bit depressed today but it’s ONLY four Years.

      • Ren Stimpy 6 months ago

        I read that Labor actually had a one percentage point improvement in their 2pp vote from the last election, which is kind of an endorsement of what they have achieved. But yeah it was not enough given the redistribution.

    • solarguy 6 months ago

      I’m afraid it’s the old time for a change mentality and the Murdoch media that Jay has lost.

      Flag is at half mast today, sadly!

      Stay tuned for some new FF generation announcement’s from the Libs.

      • RobertO 6 months ago

        Hi Solarguy, you did predict a change of Gov. I look forward to the new very expensive coal power station in SA, near the Vic boarder along with the new interconnect to Vic. The COALition is claiming people do not want RE so expect more from them, like new connection fee for new Solar ($1000 per connection, and monthly access fee for all Solar in SA of $25.00). Their main policy will be “How do we stop RE in it’s tracks today!”

        • Hettie 6 months ago

          But who would build such a thing?
          Not the new Lib Gov’t. They don’t believe in public ownership.
          Not private enterprise.
          They are ruled not by ideology but the profitability of a project. In any case, the banks would not fund it.
          Seven or so years before it could be commissioned, no income in the meantime, and ongoing fuel and maintenance costs forever.
          Multiple moderate sized wind and solar spread around the state up and running within 2 years, no fuel cost, bugger all maintenance. A nice big battery or two to smooth any intermittency not smoothed by geographic spread – what could possibly compete?
          It really is a no brainer.
          Marshall needs to have a quiet chat with Audrey to set him straight. Just keep him away from Kerry. Schott

          • RobertO 6 months ago

            Hi Hettie, the COALition only beleive in COALition and they have Right Wing Nut Persons (commonly called RWNJ). They will be thinking “How can I spend the taxpayers money to make money for my mates (built at taxpayer cost and sold to business mates for a song). About Kerry Schott I think she has been conned by PM and a much more dangerious organisation is AEMC and their leader John Pierce (He appears to be anti renewable energy). Look at the 5 minute rule, take 6 months to review it, take 6 months to install it, but no we will have it in July 2021.

          • Hettie 6 months ago

            Don’t forget, Robert, that AGL have categorically refused not only to keep Liddell open beyond its use by date, but to include coal fired generation in their plans to replace its somewhat unpredictable capacity.
            When a major gentailer is saying, by its actions, not just its words, that there is now no future for coal in power generation, that’s a very clear signal that coal’s day is over.
            The pollies can huff and puff all they like. Astute business people will do what’s best for business. Their planning time frame is way longer than the electoral cycle. There is no way known that by the time a new coal generator could be commissioned it would be able to compete with renewables and storage. It can’t do so now, and while the costs of renewables and especially batteries are plunging, the costs of coal and steel and concrete and all the other stuff needed for a coal plant are inexorably rising.
            No business of the size to undertake a new coal plant will knowingly court bankruptcy.
            And if they did, their shareholders would have every right to sue them.

          • RobertO 6 months ago

            Hi Hettie, it’s the Australian Taxpayers whom the COALition want to use to fund a coal power station. Never mind the losses the taxpayer can afford this (and watch out for “Capacity Payments” to old coal power stations from the Taxpayer in Australia. The COALition have the RWNJ to work with and they only care about how much money their mates make. They have no interest in the customer or wheather the taxpayer wants a new coal power station. The NEG will need a bunch of extra public servants to run the system and either the customer (higher electricity prices, and / or “Front Door Grid Fee” or Solar / Wind Connection Fee’s and / or taxpayers will pay for this to happen. Most people on this site know coal days are numbered, but the COALition does not care, so long as they can stop RE (somehow for the next 20/30 years) They want the NEG not able to be changed by Labour Fed Gov for as long as possible.

          • Hettie 6 months ago

            OK. Consider, then the tortoise like performance of the current Gov’t.
            They have at the max until May next year to lock the NEG in.
            Marshall may be a bit quicker on his feet than the feds, but will still have to organise EISs, approvals, all the minutiae.
            No coal in SA, so fuel transport costs will be high.
            We don’t yet know the final composition of the Legislative Council. With any luck, there will be substantial opposition there to such a silly proposal, especially once the wholesale price of power flows through to retail prices, and the populace realises how daft they have been.
            I would expect huge popular opposition to any move to unpick renewables. People vote where their wallets point them.

        • Cooma Doug 6 months ago

          Robert o
          A new connection between NSW/ Vic/SA
          will increase the value of RE in all states and lower the value of base load coal and peaking gas. SA
          Labor is aware of this but could not go down the logical addition of interconnection increase because it would wreck the economic value of the existing system.
          Snowy 2 plus interconnection increase will make load shifting and modern technology load side products way ahead. But this process introduction needs to be gradual and controlled.
          If you held a gun to my head I would still vote Labor in SA. However the
          SA libs are talking interconnector. They are in the game with the Feds and a combination of Snowy 2 and interconnection increases the value of all RE on the grid. It creates opportunity for all new technology. It can also inhibit the grid disconnect option.

          It used to cost us 20 cents to phone your next door neighbour. Ten dollars to call your cousin in London.
          Now it costs nothing to do this and the reason being the influx of products we never realised were becoming available at home.

          I believe the influx of products in the energy market will be a much bigger event. The energy you use at home wont be the measure of the cost.
          Just as the number and distance of phone calls is virtually insignificant.
          The value of your energy at home will be in the way you use it and share it.
          The problem with the base load concept is that it restricts this window and the individual large fossil gens cant play the same game. Large scale wind and solar plus battery can.

          Many on here will say ” oh this is being done to enable coal. Snowy 2 will pump coal and coal will back up adjacent states via new interconnection. The simple fact is, there isnt an energy trader anywhere who would agree with that idea. Any renewable plant in any location can out bid coal into the dust in such a grid. This is the case with the costs as they are now.

          • RobertO 6 months ago

            Hi Cooma Doug, Depending on where the interconnect is built, what it built for, will decide if it is RE friendly. It can easily be COALition friendly (for anti RE reasons). Built simply on cost only, shortest distance to link SA with Vic or SA only to Broken Hill will not help RE in general and if they keep it small say 100 MW, what the use.

      • Rod 6 months ago

        There is already one front page of the Mudrake rag with Turnbull crowing that this is a mandate for the NEG.

        • solarguy 6 months ago

          Yep, saw the goose on tv last night, uttering that crap. These nits would try to get political mileage out of a turd. Well Rod insanity still rules. SNAFU.

    • Ren Stimpy 6 months ago

      Jay made a good concession speech. It’s hard for one party to govern for 20 straight years. They were lucky to win the last election – actually the country was lucky they won the last election. The great shame of this result yesterday is that their solar and battery plan for 50,000 low income homes now won’t go ahead.

      But the Liberals did promise a $100 million household battery fund and a new interconnector to NSW. Will they make good on their promise – or wriggle out of it and drop the ball

  9. RobertO 6 months ago

    HI All, This idea of the NEG also has the potential to stop the AEMO ISP. I have written to my local pollies to ask them to stop the NEG (and SA not helping now)

    • Hettie 6 months ago

      Good man. So should we all. Senators’ contact details all on the Parliament House website.

  10. Stuart Gordon 6 months ago

    “and the up to 13GW of behind the meter storage that could be installed by 2030.”
    should this be GWh?

    • itdoesntaddup 6 months ago

      I do have to wonder whether individual installations are more economic than at a minimum communal ones, or perhaps rather better, grid scale PHES. Seems like a false premise to me.

Comments are closed.