🔍A Not-An-Engineer’s Guide to Australia’s Energy Future: Part 2 Cutting through the noise and the rhetoric to explain what makes our grid tick—and where it’s headed—in language we can all understand. In Part 1, we talked about how baseload generators, like coal plants, are great at producing lots of energy all the time but really struggle to respond when demand fluctuates. If you missed it, check out my previous post. Now let’s dive into Australia’s National Electricity Market (NEM) to learn how energy is priced, and how the inflexibility of Big Baseload can drive up your power bill. ⚡The NEM’s Auction System and Pricing Dynamics 💸 The NEM uses a five-minute 'auction' system to ensure energy supply meets demand at the lowest possible cost to the consumer. Here’s the gist: every five minutes, the market operator (our friends at the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO)) forecast the spot market, or the energy load in the NEM, for the next five minutes. Then, power generators of all kinds (renewables, gas, coal) submit bids to supply that demand. AEMO accepts the lowest bids first, setting the final price based on the highest bid needed to meet demand. Five minutes later, we do it all again. So, what happens when renewables, with their low operating costs, are bidding alongside baseload generators with high fixed and fuel costs? Renewables like solar and wind cost little to operate once built, so can even afford to bid in at zero dollarbucks (there you go, Zoe Kemp) during low demand periods. 💡 Supply, demand, and negative pricing As we established in Part 1, supply and demand in the grid must always balance. When there’s more energy being generated than the system needs, prices can go negative. This often happens in periods of low demand (like during the day when rooftop solar is pumping but household demand is low). In this scenario, inflexible baseload plants often have to pay to offload generation they can't just switch off. Kind of like when you over-cater for an event and are left desperately trying to palm off half-eaten charcuterie boards to all your mates because that cheese alone cost $20 and you've already eaten your weight in prosciutto di Parma. 🤔 What this means for consumers? Negative pricing sounds good for consumers, right? Not quite. Ever heard of a not-for-profit coal, gas, or energy company? Me neither. Inflexible baseload generators have to recover these costs during periods of elevated demand, which impacts the market and often leads to higher costs downstream. Plus, all that excess power can reduce overall grid efficiency, especially if it leads to curtailing cheaper renewable energy. ☢ Up next in this series: a deep dive into small modular reactors—distilling fact from fiction from both a system and economic perspective. Are they the game-changer we've been waiting for, or just another piece in an evolving energy puzzle? Let’s find out. #EnergyFuture #AustraliaEnergy #NEM #Renewables #ElectricityPricing
Lara Lavers’ Post
More Relevant Posts
-
The truth behind the MAGIC 45%! I keep seeing the mass media publications with big, bold headlines proclaiming, "Renewables made up 44.7% of EU electricity production" — e.g. Eurostat article published on June 27, 2024 - btw that’s my birthday - funny coincidence! You might think, “Crikey, renewables are really about to take the lead, and soon we will only need wind turbines and solar panels in the EU", right? But let’s pause for a moment and unpack that claim, because, in my opinion, the reality isn’t quite as green as it seems. Let's start with the fact that there is a significant difference between electricity consumption and energy consumption. Total energy consumption is the sum of energy used for electricity, transportation, heating, etc. And we need them all, not just electricity. Although the terms “electricity” and “energy” are often used interchangeably, it’s important to understand that electricity is NOT the same — it is just one component of total energy consumption. Even experts use these two terms interchangeably, which is incorrect! The share of energy consumed in the EU during 2022 generated from renewable sources was 23% (European Environment Agency), which includes electricity generation, transport, and heating. This means that 77% was generated from other sources. There’s more to unpack here: 63% of EU's energy needs in 2022 were met by imports. This leaves us with only 37% produced domestically. When looking at the energy produced in the EU, renewable energy (43%) was the largest contributing source (European Commission, March 1, 2024). That means that out of that 37% of domestically produced energy, 43% being renewables translates to… only about 16% of the total energy mix for the entire EU. Yes, you read that right — 16%! And the final kicker: Oil and petroleum products accounted for the largest share (36.8%) in the structure of final EU energy consumption in 2022, followed by electricity (23%)— European Commission data from August 23, 2024. So, according to the Eurostat title "Renewables made up 44.7% of EU electricity production" that would translate to only 10% of the EU energy consumption. So now, could you please help me understand something? Am I the only one who feels a bit manipulated by how the news are presented? Will the real meaning of the MAGIC 45% and what lies beneath this number likely to be understood by the average person? It feels like a classic case of numbers dressing up in their Sunday best! No one titles their publications "We still need fossil fuels, and we need them a lot!" because "Green electricity generation reaches 45%" sounds bigger, better, and greener! You want renewables to constitute the highest percentage in the EU total energy mix and the main source of electricity generation? Fine by me, but can we please get the numbers right instead of this unclear messaging that just makes things look better than they really are? #Fossilfuels #Renewables #EnergyMix #GeoModes
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
CAN WE HARNESS ELECTRICITY FROM LIGHTING Can you imagine harnessing electricity from lightning to solve the current grid issues all across America and the world? With scientists working on renewable energy sources every day, being able to harness energy from lightning would be a breakthrough that would benefit millions across the world. Renewable energy often provides energy for: electricity generation to a grid, air and water heating/cooling, and stand-alone power systems. About 20% of humans’ global energy consumption is renewables, including almost 30% of electricity. About 8% of energy consumption is traditional biomass, but this is declining. Over 4% of energy consumption is heat energy from modern renewables, such as solar water heating, and over 6% electricity. A single bolt of it carries a few billion joules of energy, sufficient enough to power a tens of homes for a day. Humanity since the time of Franklin and Maxwell has been contemplating the idea of capturing lightning in a bottle but thus far we have got very little success. Although projects like Project First Light are ongoing with a mission to harvest energy from lightning, it is still under nascent stage. Perhaps it would take years before we could start using lightning as a renewable source of energy. The Bradbury Science Museum did an article about this interesting topic and you can read all about it below: While it’s true that a single lightning bolt could power the entire city of Santa Fe for about a minute, there are some issues with capturing lightning as an energy source. But even if we could entice lightning to routinely strike precisely where we wanted, we’d be faced with the problem of a strike’s intensity and duration. Lightning is both incredibly powerful and crazy fast. Each strike would force about fifty thousand amps of current into a battery in just microseconds. No existing battery could survive this onslaught; batteries need to charge up more slowly. Then, even if we could design a battery that would not be vaporized by the strike, all the lightning in the world would still power only a small fraction of households. It’s true that each stroke produces up to perhaps five or ten gigajoules of energy, and a household in the U.S. needs only about five gigajoules per month—and that’s just one strike! But actually, only a fraction of that energy is in the form of electrical current—much of the energy goes to heating the air. And the process of storing the energy in a battery and then retrieving it is pretty inefficient. So, now you need a few strikes per household per month, and in the end, even if we could find a way to capture, store, and use the energy, it would power only about 0.1 percent of the world’s homes. – Tess Light, Space and Remote Sensing group, Los Alamos National Laboratory
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Are our power markets broken? ...not yet, but soon they will be if we don't do something. Spot markets generally work on a pay-as-clear basis. The marginal unit sets the price for everyone. This way the system welfare is maximised. 🛢🔥When power markets emerged 30 years ago, most electricity generation was from thermal power plants (aka coal, oil, gas). This type of plants pay a variable cost to generate power, fuel costs primarily. In a liquid and competitive market, thermal plants offer their energy at a price close to their variable cost of production and power prices oscillate following fuel prices. So far, so good. ☀🌬Today, the share of power supply covered by thermal generation has substantially shrunk in many European markets compared to 1990 levels. Renewables have increasingly substituted thermal resources. Unlike thermal plants, variable costs of production are virtually nonexistent for renewables. This brings down the cost of wholesale electricity at a system level, occasionally reaching zero or even negative prices. ☀☀🌬🌬🔋🔋Renewables are set to grow massively in the next 20 years, which means we'll see renewables setting the price (0 €/MWh) more and more often. The long-term configuration towards which power systems are converging consists of 70%-90% RES. The rest will be made up by a mix of dedicated storage + flexible demand + maybe some natural gas (if CCS will ever fly) to accommodate swings in RES generation. So… What happens in a marginal price market when renewables and storage, characterised by zero variable cost, are price setters 99% of the time? I can hear some of you cheering: "Free electricity 24/7!" As much as you and I would love free lighting and heating, sadly that's not how economics works. In fact, the question is ill-posed because we will never reach that state. The market would break earlier in a number of possible ways (see comments for details). It's clear how sooner or later we'll have to face the distortion that zero-cost energy create and rethink the very structure of our power markets. Damn! What is the solution then? There are multiple alternatives, but I particularly like the one proposed by International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in "RE-organising Power Systems for the Transition". 💡A separation of power markets tailored on the products that are effectively being traded: - Bulk intermittent RES generation --> procured through long-term LCOE-driven auctions (similarly to how current CfD contracts work) - Flexibility --> procured through short-term marginal price auctions (as current spot markets) The bulk of the energy is sold through long-term auctions accessible to ONLY intermittent renewable resources and spot markets, participated ONLY by flexible resources, pick up the slack between forecasted vs actual RES production. I think it's brilliant. And you? #powermarkets #marginalprice #renewables #storage
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Global energy consumption breaks records. Global energy consumption increased by 2% from 2022, exceeding pre-COVID levels by over 5%, according to the Statistical Review of World Energy. Energy Institute #energysupply #energydemand #energyconsumption #energysupplier #energysecurity #energycosts #energyprices #energybills
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Great post and illustration of the day to day, month to month and season to season challenges that face system operations teams. Balancing energy adequacy, energy capacity and fluctuations in demand is a dynamic equation which is constantly evolving. The common deominator is that customers want electricity (these days it’s more like society needs it to remain functional) whenever they choose. We have to design, plan and operate the grid with resources and incentives that can deliver capacity, energy and demand side management while maintaining reliability and availability - and have opportunities to maintain those resources and programs for the long term.
Springtime is always interesting for posts on energy transitions as it is a low demand period with really good renewable energy output (on some days). April 16, 2024 in CAISO is a great example. Pulled some data from https://lnkd.in/ejxxvVcF (link is to August 17, 2023, but just change the date to get April 16, 2024 data). The link is to a summer day to show the comparison data below. The top graph is just a summation of the electrical energy for the day consumed by CAISO. About 150,000 MWh of solar was the largest contributor on the spring day (April 16, 2024). On August 17th, 2023 we got about the same MWh from solar PV production, but that was not our largest contributor. On this summer day almost 50% of the electricity was served by gas (>400,000 MWh). The middle graph is the load and net load trends for the spring and summer day. April 16th is notable by some because the net load (load or demand less that served by solar and wind was negative). These types of days generate headlines like California powered completely by wind and solar (usually caveated in the article that it was just for a few minutes or some hours, and if the article is really good caveated again that well a lot of other generation was actually running and the notion that the system was all wind and solar is just math). For the summer day even with math the entirely run on wind or solar is far from being obtained. The bottom graph shows the actual output by resource - with the negative portions being periods of export and battery charging. For the spring day on April 16 it was noted by some that batteries were the largest output for some hours. Probably worthwhile to look back at the top graph to understand the role of batteries - they move energy through time and actually don't provide energy themselves (they consume it). Sometimes with the headlines people wonder why do we still have all these non-wind and non-solar plants still ... the two sides of this graphic show why. Didn't plot the solar curtailment but on that spring day the peak curtailment was >5GW (>5,000MW) at 2pm. On the summer day it was almost nothing curtailed. A power plant is like a factory - costs a lot to build, once it is built it is cheapest if it can run all the time - with the seasonality of demand and seasonality of variable energy sources - we have periods of over abundance in the year. Once we hit levels of installed capacity where variable energy sources are running into curtailment for part of the year the value to build more diminishes.
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Oil demand is expected to peak by 2025, while demand for gas, solar, wind, and coal will continue to rise. Electrification is on rise with coal as leading fuel for electricity generation in 2023. #energy #energytransition #wind #solar #gas #oil #energyoutlook Stay informed on the latest trends and statistics at: https://lnkd.in/dXfYwFSt
Home
energyinst.org
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
The case for gas decarbonization and it seasonal storage for the state of califonia-it couldnt be any clearer than this. Demand practically doubles from April to Aug and currently all of that increase is being met by gas based generation. Alternative would be to overbuild renewables and curtail in April. No amount of batteries buildout/ pumped hydrogen addition/thermal storage will cut it either
Springtime is always interesting for posts on energy transitions as it is a low demand period with really good renewable energy output (on some days). April 16, 2024 in CAISO is a great example. Pulled some data from https://lnkd.in/ejxxvVcF (link is to August 17, 2023, but just change the date to get April 16, 2024 data). The link is to a summer day to show the comparison data below. The top graph is just a summation of the electrical energy for the day consumed by CAISO. About 150,000 MWh of solar was the largest contributor on the spring day (April 16, 2024). On August 17th, 2023 we got about the same MWh from solar PV production, but that was not our largest contributor. On this summer day almost 50% of the electricity was served by gas (>400,000 MWh). The middle graph is the load and net load trends for the spring and summer day. April 16th is notable by some because the net load (load or demand less that served by solar and wind was negative). These types of days generate headlines like California powered completely by wind and solar (usually caveated in the article that it was just for a few minutes or some hours, and if the article is really good caveated again that well a lot of other generation was actually running and the notion that the system was all wind and solar is just math). For the summer day even with math the entirely run on wind or solar is far from being obtained. The bottom graph shows the actual output by resource - with the negative portions being periods of export and battery charging. For the spring day on April 16 it was noted by some that batteries were the largest output for some hours. Probably worthwhile to look back at the top graph to understand the role of batteries - they move energy through time and actually don't provide energy themselves (they consume it). Sometimes with the headlines people wonder why do we still have all these non-wind and non-solar plants still ... the two sides of this graphic show why. Didn't plot the solar curtailment but on that spring day the peak curtailment was >5GW (>5,000MW) at 2pm. On the summer day it was almost nothing curtailed. A power plant is like a factory - costs a lot to build, once it is built it is cheapest if it can run all the time - with the seasonality of demand and seasonality of variable energy sources - we have periods of over abundance in the year. Once we hit levels of installed capacity where variable energy sources are running into curtailment for part of the year the value to build more diminishes.
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
EXCERPTS: Decarbonising the world’s electricity supply will take more than solar panels and wind turbines, which rely on sunshine and a steady breeze to generate power. Grid-scale storage offers a solution to this intermittency problem, but there is too little of it about. The International Energy Agency (IEA), an official forecaster, reckons that the global installed capacity of battery storage will need to rise from less than 200 gigawatts (GW) last year to more than a terawatt (TW) by the end of the decade, and nearly 5TW by 2050, if the world is to stay on course for net-zero emissions (see chart 1). Grid-scale storage traditionally relied on hydroelectric systems that moved water between reservoirs at the top and bottom of a slope. These days giant batteries stacked in rows of sheds are increasingly the method of choice. According to the IEA, 90GW of battery storage was installed globally last year, double the amount in 2022, of which roughly two-thirds was for the grid and the remainder for other applications such as residential solar. Prices are falling and new chemistries are being developed. Bain, a consultancy, estimates that the market for grid-scale storage could expand from around $15bn in 2023 to between $200bn and $700bn by 2030, and $1trn-3trn by 2040. In 2019 stationary lithium batteries were almost 50% more expensive than those used in EVs; that difference has fallen to less than 20% as producers have piled in (see chart 2). The centre of global battery production is China. It is home to six of the world’s ten biggest manufacturers, including CATL and BYD (see chart 3). The share of China’s battery production destined for power grids has risen from almost nothing in 2020 to around a fifth last year, overtaking the share used in consumer electronics. Growth has been helped by policies at home mandating that big solar and wind projects also install storage.
Clean energy’s next trillion-dollar business
economist.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
🔋 Battery Storage: Key to clean energy transition 🔋 As the world moves towards a net-zero emissions future, the path to decarbonizing electricity goes beyond just solar panels and wind turbines. While these renewable sources are crucial, they are dependent on the sun shining or the wind blowing. Grid-scale battery storage can be just the answer. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), global battery storage capacity must grow exponentially from under 200 GW last year to over 1 TW by 2030, and nearly 5TW by 2050. Energy storage sector is witnessing unprecedented growth. Key Drivers: 🔺 Falling Battery Prices: Lithium battery costs have dropped by 40% between 2019 and 2023, driving greater adoption for grid storage. 🔺 China’s Production Powerhouse: Six of the world’s ten biggest battery manufacturers are based in China. Growth has been helped by policies at home mandating that big solar and wind projects also install storage. 🔺 Emerging Technologies: Beyond lithium, new technologies like sodium-ion and nickel-hydrogen batteries are on the rise. Given the increasing appetite of data centers, which are rapidly expanding and demanding more reliable and renewable energy. The outlook for grid-scale battery storage is promising, with innovation and investment driving the sector forward. #RenewableEnergy #Sustainability #EnergyTransition #BatteryStorage #Innovation #NetZero #GreenEnergy #ClimateAction #Decarbonization #GridScaleStorage #EnergyIndustry #FutureOfEnergy
Clean energy’s next trillion-dollar business
economist.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Springtime is always interesting for posts on energy transitions as it is a low demand period with really good renewable energy output (on some days). April 16, 2024 in CAISO is a great example. Pulled some data from https://lnkd.in/ejxxvVcF (link is to August 17, 2023, but just change the date to get April 16, 2024 data). The link is to a summer day to show the comparison data below. The top graph is just a summation of the electrical energy for the day consumed by CAISO. About 150,000 MWh of solar was the largest contributor on the spring day (April 16, 2024). On August 17th, 2023 we got about the same MWh from solar PV production, but that was not our largest contributor. On this summer day almost 50% of the electricity was served by gas (>400,000 MWh). The middle graph is the load and net load trends for the spring and summer day. April 16th is notable by some because the net load (load or demand less that served by solar and wind was negative). These types of days generate headlines like California powered completely by wind and solar (usually caveated in the article that it was just for a few minutes or some hours, and if the article is really good caveated again that well a lot of other generation was actually running and the notion that the system was all wind and solar is just math). For the summer day even with math the entirely run on wind or solar is far from being obtained. The bottom graph shows the actual output by resource - with the negative portions being periods of export and battery charging. For the spring day on April 16 it was noted by some that batteries were the largest output for some hours. Probably worthwhile to look back at the top graph to understand the role of batteries - they move energy through time and actually don't provide energy themselves (they consume it). Sometimes with the headlines people wonder why do we still have all these non-wind and non-solar plants still ... the two sides of this graphic show why. Didn't plot the solar curtailment but on that spring day the peak curtailment was >5GW (>5,000MW) at 2pm. On the summer day it was almost nothing curtailed. A power plant is like a factory - costs a lot to build, once it is built it is cheapest if it can run all the time - with the seasonality of demand and seasonality of variable energy sources - we have periods of over abundance in the year. Once we hit levels of installed capacity where variable energy sources are running into curtailment for part of the year the value to build more diminishes.
To view or add a comment, sign in