More light relief. Wind supply in SA negative since noon yesterday

You have to see it to believe it. Victoria (the new wind leader) not much better, flat from 3pm yesterday to 6 this morning and lately producing almost 50MW. Better than nothing I suppose. The wind died in Victoria at noon on Thursday and was not measurable through Friday into Saturday apart from a brief appearance at breakfast time on Friday. Be warned, the wind in this AEMO Fuel  Mix display is in blue and the hydro is green. On the Aneroid site the colours are reversed.

For individual states look under the list of wind farms.

Across the NEM the wind was providing 1.5% of power with Queensland (2 wind farms) and Tasmania (four) doing the heavy lifting.

Bonus.   The story of The Spectator and the founding fatherRobert Rintoul (1787–1858), the workaholic Scottish Nonconformist and printer-turned-entrepreneur who founded The Spectator and edited it for thirty years. Backing the 1832 Reform Act and repeal of the Corn Laws, Rintoul made himself one of the great men of early Victorian England, a friend of Dickens and Walter Bagehot (mastermind behind The Economist) and an enemy of ‘toothless’ Lord Melbourne and young Disraeli (‘a spoiled child of parliamentary fashion’). Rintoul, the only editor with a mountain named after him in New Zealand, consciously emulated the spirit of Addison and Steele’s revered, eclectic Spectator of 1711 to 1712.

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to More light relief. Wind supply in SA negative since noon yesterday

  1. One thing about figures is that when they seem large, even when they are not, people will say ‘How good is that!’.

    What does that 50MW actually represent in terms of plated capacity? I think it would perhaps be more informative to list that 50MW as 1% (or whatever it is) of maximum possible capacity/efficiency (plated capacity usually means little to the average person).

  2. Mike O'Ceirin

    I did a web search there is no mention of this in the mainstream media that I could find. The output of wind is so small it just does not matter. https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/orthographic=-212.90,-29.77,1061

  3. Rafe Champion

    Yes I appreciate that sarcasm fails with a general readership but on this site I expect people to know that 50MW at grid scale is nothing. The picture tells the story. For general readers I would have a screen shot, in fact I will put one up later because the numbers can change very quickly and the post will soon be dated.

  4. I made that comment because when I talk to Joe Average about these things, I don’t have any accurate information as to what such figures mean, I can only really state that windmills only produce a small amount of electricity given what they are supposedly able to produce under ideal conditions.

    I’m unable to say what that percentage, as an example, actually is in real world figures. This is what was promised, but this is what we actually get.

  5. Rafe Champion

    To be clear, 50MW for a demand of 5.500MW or 5.5GW is 0.9%.
    That is about 1.3% of the installed capacity of the windmills (2.77GW).
    Currently they are not doing that well, producing only 38MW!

  6. The issue is that demand varies as does the output of windmills. I’m sort of thinking in terms of percentage (average) output or efficiency independent of what the demand is at any particular time. Maybe it doesn’t matter, but I’m trying to find different ways to convey what these monstrosities actually provide.

    We have to build energy efficient houses, buy energy efficient appliances, buy energy efficient cars etc. So how energy efficient are these windmills? Do they get a five star rating or half a star?

  7. Maybe the idea here is not so much the best possible energy system for humans but the best way for humans to save the planet from human activity.

    https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/03/30/the-humans-must-save-the-planet/

  8. Angus Black

    Tasmania has hydro … and would have had way more hydro if it hadn’t been for Bob Hawke caving in to Bob Briwn and setting the whole political green movement off here and overseas.

  9. Reference: Bemused link to John Hewson where we find “But his government has a split personality on the need to rely on SCIENCE. It so easily ignores climate SCIENCE, still swayed by a small rump of Coalition deniers. This reliance on the word SCIENCE as a synonym for truth has been described by a Brazilian analyst this way:

    “{Dr. Marcos Nogueira Eberlin, Brazilian Academy of Sciences: “The term SCIENCE has been used ad nauseam and repeated to exhaustion. Science, science, science. It is clear that the intention here is to lead all of us to the idea that their decisions are infallible and based on something like the law of gravity that cannot be questioned“}

  10. NoFixedAddress

    @bemused

    With wind and solar there is no ‘average’ as conventionally calculated.

    It is #GhostPower that you might catch a glimpse of out of the corner of your eye.

    A more accurate measure of #GhostPower would be to quote the ratio of the nominal value of the #GhostEnergy produced verses the ‘pissed against the wall’ cost of #FreeEnergySubsidies.

  11. With wind and solar there is no ‘average’ as conventionally calculated.

    I realise that, but wouldn’t it be great to be able to give windmills, solar panels and unicorn farts a star rating like we do with other products?

    These symbols would be things that non-technically minded or disinterested people would understand eg, Bald Hills Wind Farm South Gippsland – 1 Star rating. Make the star rating from 1 – 10.

    Just think of the debates that would rage from the Left/Greens about how these star ratings are calculated and them trying to defend their position.

  12. John A

    bemused #3476384, posted on June 6, 2020 at 12:49 pm

    With wind and solar there is no ‘average’ as conventionally calculated.

    I realise that, but wouldn’t it be great to be able to give windmills, solar panels and unicorn farts a star rating like we do with other products?

    These symbols would be things that non-technically minded or disinterested people would understand eg, Bald Hills Wind Farm South Gippsland – 1 Star rating. Make the star rating from 1 – 10.

    Just think of the debates that would rage from the Left/Greens about how these star ratings are calculated and them trying to defend their position.

    \

    According to Rafe, the star rating scale would need to begin at -2 or -3 to account for the drawback of power when the avian destructors have to be forced to spin – for appearances sake.

  13. NoFixedAddress

    Not a star rating @bemused

    Should be a ‘Black Hole’ rating with a ‘Hot Rocks’, ‘Wave Energy’ or ‘Carbon Capture’ finance rating.

    I still prefer the perpetual motion machine though.

    ‘Thems’ were the days – https://makezine.com/2016/04/07/these-7-machines-may-just-convince-you-perpetual-motion-is-possible/

    But for all the latest on #GhostPower checkout https://www.greenoptimistic.com/

  14. Not a star rating

    I’m actually serious. If windmills/solar panels and wind farms/solar farms were given a star rating based on actual output vs plated output, people would begin to understand what renewable energy is all about.

    People understand appliance star ratings and buy products them based on those ratings. Giving renewable energy a star rating would give them no where to hide when it came to the pretense on how effective and efficient they were.

  15. NoFixedAddress

    @bemused

    I understand what you are saying and what you are trying to achieve but consider what the star rating system is supposed to portray,

    What is the star rating?

    The star rating is about energy efficiency – that is how efficient a model is relative to other models of the same size.

    More stars means more efficient – when compared to other models of the same size.

    Most products are given between 1 and 6 stars. However technology keeps getting better… as does energy efficiency! This is why nowadays you’ll see some super-efficient models in shops and online with an extra row for stars, as they can have up to 10.
    https://www.energyrating.gov.au/label

    What I am saying is that there is NEGATIVE efficiency in the output of a solar panel or a windmill because by the very nature of intermittent sunshine and wind supply they can only be considered with uninterruptible stored carbon energy or nuclear power.

    And that is not even accounting for the cost of handling the useless #GHOSTPOWER on the distribution system nor the cost of disposal of the toxic residue of the end of life junk that does and will litter the environment and suburbs.

    If people want wind and solar tell them to kill another Chinaman with their CCP mates.

    45 Shocking Photos Showing How Bad Pollution In China Has Become

    The dystopian lake filled by the world’s tech lust

  16. What I am saying is that there is NEGATIVE efficiency in the output of a solar panel or a windmill because by the very nature of intermittent sunshine and wind supply they can only be considered with uninterruptible stored carbon energy or nuclear power.

    I absolutely understand that, but the rating system that I’m talking about is intended to be very easy to understand by anyone. If someone sees a rating of one or say 0-5, they will immediately understand that it’s not good.

    The renewables industry has had it all over the sceptics because they talk in terms of plated capacity and get away with all manner of fudging of figures. We need to fight fire with fire and provide easy to understand concepts when it comes to renewables.

    You could even expand the rating system to price. A star rating to indicate the price of providing wind or solar compared to coal, gas, nuclear or whatever. There is absolutely no point in being intellectual about this, you have to be able to market the idea in easy to understand terms and sceptics have been behind the eight ball for decades due to being too intellectual.

    There is no point in claiming that your facts are correct when you are losing the argument.

  17. NoFixedAddress

    Okay @bemused, I agree with where your coming from and will chuck in my 5 cents worth of ideas.

    Call it STAR POWER RATINGS.

    Or STARMAN’s STAR POWER RATINGS but you might have to dodge copyright infringement with STARMAN but STARWOMAN should be okay and probably the market segment, along with kids, that you need to sell.

    Produce numbers for big and small gas, petrol, diesel and bio fuel generators as well as gas turbines, coal powered, nuclear powered, bio fuels and hydro along with roof top solar pollution and wind ‘rubbish tips’ and solar ‘rubbish tips’ (I refuse to call them farms).

    Most of the information is already out there from manufacturers like Honda, MitsubishiGE, Caterpillar, whomever.

    Probably the most difficult numbers to pin down would be GhostEnergy equipment suppliers.

    There is a bloke called Tony from Oz that posts over at Jo Nova’s site who would be good to chat with or involve just as there are some on the Cat.

    Rafe may be able to put you in touch with Tony from Oz as well as having a lot of information and knowledge himself.

    Set up a website, invite/ask manufacturers to supply numbers and charge advertising, call yourself Starman Consulting, register the business as a lobbyist with the gubmint and collect fees.

    I’ll take 5% of the profits to handle all your administration.

    PS I grew up out bush where we had wood fired hot water and cooking and a Ronaldson &Tippett diesel generator with about 30 car/truck batteries for backup.

  18. Rafe Champion

    Tony from Oz has his own site and it is the real place to go for wind watching with a weekly report that goes back for a long time and any number of related pieces including one on the comparative costs of coal and wind.

    Bemused I don’t think you can expect to get anything like a star rating, more to the point is a regular, say hourly report on the amount of power coming from wind, that would really bring home the absurdity of the RE game. That plus promoting a better understanding of the choke point or worst case scenario problem which means that no amount of installed capacity or good wind days can make up for the several times every year when the supply of wind is effectively zero.

  19. We still use wood heating and often have to bring out our camping gear to make do when the power fails (with great regularity). I lived in Europe for a time at my uncle’s farm where just about everything was wood fired.

    As for me pursuing this star rating idea, that’s not going to get much traction. It really needs those who are much closer to the action. Hmm, that rhymes.

    Anyway, my point is that if you’re going to have any chance at competing with the renewables supporters, you’re going to have to become much smarter at delivering the message.

  20. NoFixedAddress

    @bemused

    What will change the minds(?) of the avaricious profligate scum that have their hands out in this GhostEnergy Utopia we exist in will happen when the coal divestment crowds and the Environmental pan lickers actually experience black outs.

    Every “green” voting majority electorate should be paying the unsubsidised cost and consuming only wind and solar farts.

    And the subsidies are an unequal tax.

  21. Okay, here’s two images then for wind generation in Australia.

    The first is at this link. This is for Victoria for Thursday just gone. Victoria has a Nameplate of 2774MW. As you can see, it went back to zero at Midday and stayed there till midnight, not only at zero, but actually sucking power FROM the grid.

    The second image is at this link. This is for South Australia on the following day, the Friday just gone. South Australia has a Nameplate of 2142MW As you can see, all of that State’s wind generation rolled back to zero at Midday, and stayed there for the rest of the day, and in fact did not come back up until Midday Saturday, so it was at or around zero for 24 hours.

    It’s such an immense waste of money .

    In the whole of Australia, wind has a Nameplate of 7728MW, a pretty large total really. However the ACTUAL Capacity Factor is just 29%, so in effect that Nameplate only generates the equivalent of 2240MW. Total power generation across the whole year for ALL wind power is around 17000GWH, and that’s roughly the same as the total power delivery from Bayswater ….. ONE coal fired power plant with a Nameplate of 2640MW, so wind’s Nameplate is almost THREE times higher, and it can only deliver the same power.

    Besides being that immense waste of money, it really doesn’t even work as designed. If anything else, ANYTHING, was this inefficient it would be laughed out of existence.

    Tony.

  22. Rafe Champion

    Thanks Tony, that reinforces the message signal I picked up on Thursday and I have a bundle of pictures to deliver to the NSW Inquiry into the grand prospects of RE that wraps up this month.

    The Fuel Mix will provide some more pictures for that period, it lags to we have to wait to see the end of the drought there.

Comments are closed.