"Due to the government mandated coal phase-out, 11 coal-fired power plants with a total capacity of 4.7 GW were shut down on January 1, 2021. But the coal phase-out ended up lasting only 8 days, after which several power plants had to be reconnected to the grid due to a prolonged low-wind period.

The affected large Heyden power plant had to be restarted six times by the end of February in order to secure the power supply.

The Federal Network Agency has now confirmed that it has reclassified the Heyden, Datteln, Walsum 9 and Westfalen power plants, which had already been shut down, as system-relevant and that they now must remain on standby as reserve power plants. The owners will therefore be required to continue operation in the short term.

Never mind that this sporadic operation of these coal plants is horribly inefficient and costly, as you will find out below.

Coal plant shutdowns have increased grid frequency instability

The large power plants are to primarily provide their rotational energy, i.e. run at full speed but not feed any electricity into the grid. The rotational energy is urgently needed to bridge the time needed by the medium- and peak-load power plants to deliver the missing power to the grid by adjusting the load accordingly. Smaller plants simply have too little flywheel mass to be able to provide this compensation. We described how to stabilize a power grid in more detail in the article “How to stabilize the power grid“. The number of these critical frequency drops has already risen sharply this year.

Consumers have to bear the costs

The Federal Network Agency adds, “The costs for the provision in the grid reserve, as well as for the conversion to a rotating phase shifter, are borne by the power grid customers, as these measures serve the safe and reliable network operation.” It is thus clear that these costs must also be financed through the electricity price.

The planned operational readiness to be able to provide only the flywheel mass in critical situations as a rotating phase shifter is an economic disaster for the operators. Because these have the costs for the facility and the maintenance of the plants and practically no incomes, since for the bridging with net frequency dips only a current feed in the range of some seconds and/or few minutes takes place. So you then have to subsidize these plants. This is paradoxical, because these power plants have generated the cheapest electricity to date and have managed without subsidies.

Government rushed the phaseout

The German government has allowed itself to be politically driven by Fridays-for-Future protests and other NGOs and has rushed the coal phase-out. The coal commission that decided on the phase-out neither included power grid experts nor power producer representatives."

https://notrickszone.com/2021/04/13/2021-german-coal-plant-phaseout-lasted-only-8-days-put-back-online-to-stabilize-shaky-grid/

The world has gone mad.

One thing I'm happy about is that with future black outs during winter and summer people like Greta will also suffer and not be able to access the internet or aircon and heating when they want it and having to pay a high price for it.

Sheep are the to be shorn and that's exactly what the oligarchy are doing all over the world with a failed hypothesis/theory that is Anthropogenic Global Warming.

Ajax wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 11:42am:

The world has gone mad. One thing I'm happy about is that with future black outs during winter and summer people like Greta will also suffer and not be able to access the internet or aircon and heating when they want it and having to pay a high price for it. Sheep are the to be shorn and that's exactly what the oligarchy are doing all over the world with a failed hypothesis/theory that is Anthropogenic Global Warming.

i've seen the left in action and can almost guarantee  ' .......  people like Greta will NOT suffer and WILL be able to access the internet or aircon and heating when they want it ......  '

People like Greta say what people what to hear, then do whatever suits themselves the most.

Australia will be in the same boat shortly. Rather than transitioning rationally, we will eventually panic when we realise we left it too late. We will end up mothballing perfectly good power stations that should never have been built. We knew what had to be done 20 years ago, but are still only making token gestures. This is what business leaders mean when they criticise the government for pushing up power prices by creating uncertainty in the power supply industry. We all know it is coming, but we do not know when or what form it will take, which makes investors reluctant to make a move.

freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 1:06pm:

Australia will be in the same boat shortly. Rather than transitioning rationally, we will eventually panic when we realise we left it too late.

So tell us about the relative energy densities of Solar and wind. ;)

It's the price that matters Lee. You need to understand that to grasp the damage people like you are doing to the economy. You don't have to pay for the billions of cubic meters of wind that blows through a turbine.

Light on the other hand is infinitely dense in energy if you consider it as a wave. All of which is completely irrelevant of course.

freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 2:00pm:

It's the price that matters Lee.

Only if you can manufacture and site sufficient solar farms and wind farms.


freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 2:00pm:

You don't have to pay for the billions of cubic meters of wind that blows through a turbine.

You do have to pay for the structure, the increased demand on materials. Cement, steel, copper, silica.


freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 2:00pm:

Light on the other hand is infinitely dense in energy if you consider it as a wave.

And the capture of that has costs associated.

I have posted this before. You seem to have forgotten -

"London Array wind farm to the south of England.This is the world’s largest offshore wind farm and according to its owners will generate “enough energy to power nearly half a million homes.” Its total capacity is 630 MW covering a total of 100 km2, and is expected to have a capacity factor of 39%. In other words the power density of the London Array will be 2.5 W/m2."

" As a result the highest power density achieved is around 20 W/m2 in desert solar PV farms, whereas solar farms in Germany generally achieve 5 W/m2."

"Power densities are comfortably above 100 W/m2 after accounting for mining etc. And conventional power plants often have power densites in excess of 1000 W/m2. A simple example of this higher power density is this small propane powered generator, providing in excess of 1000 W/m2. This is far in excess of the power density of any conceivable new method of generating renewable energy.  "

https://energycentral.com/c/ec/future-energy-why-power-density-matters

Perhaps you can refute?

It's out in the ocean Lee. It's not like a mine with people crawling all over it. Why does the surface area count? You always have a knack for completely missing the point. No wonder people like you are destroying the Australian economy. Completely clueless.

freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 5:05pm:

It's out in the ocean Lee. It's not like a mine with people crawling all over it. Why does the surface area count?

That is for offshore where generally they get the strongest breezes. Onshore wind is generally lower. But if it is offshore then that creates other hazards - shipping lanes etc.

In offshore windfarms there are also other factors. They tend to not last as long because of the rust etc. They cost more to maintain. They also cost more for their eventual removal.

How many square kilometres at 2.5W/m2 for a 1GW windfarm? Separation seems to be about 0.5Km between the turbines.


freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 5:05pm:

You always have a knack for completely missing the point.

You show you have no critical thinking ability at all.


freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 5:05pm:

No wonder people like you are destroying the Australian economy. Completely clueless.

Ok. Put in all the windfarms and solar farms you want. That will merely destroy the Australian ecology.

You didn't rebut the increased needs for materials. ;)

Bottom line is, energy density is both arbitrary and irrelevant, and your waffle reflects the cluelessness that is already costing our economy, and will continue to cost our economy, while we mismanage the transition.

Now go waffle about some other arbitrary and irrelevant BS, then whine about me not taking you seriously enough to address every piece of BS you serve up.

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/071/794/498/original/e4fc52aaf9e844ad.jpeg

freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 7:26pm:

Bottom line is, energy density is both arbitrary and irrelevant, and your waffle reflects the cluelessness that is already costing our economy, and will continue to cost our economy, while we mismanage the transition.

So you would build enough what... solar? It does offer better energy density.

The NEM provides 177TWh of consumption. That's 177,000,000MWh. in desert 20W/m2.

That makes it 50,000sq metres for 1MW. or 0.05 sq km per MW.  50,000sq km per TW.

or about 10M sq km for 177 TW. And that's without infrastructure.

And you think it irrelevant? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

https://www.arena.gov.au/assets/2017/02/CSIRO-Electricity-market-analysis-for-IGEG.pdf


Talk about ignorant. Maths is not your strong suit we can see that. I wonder which farm land will be lost?

Quote:

So you would build enough what... solar?

Why would I be building anything?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 7:39pm:

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/071/794/498/original/e4fc52aaf9e844ad.jpeg

Wacist!!!!!!!

freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 8:07pm:

Why would I be building anything?

That was a rhetorical question petal. It wasn't meant for you to build personally.

So what is your preferred renewable energy?

Hydro has limitations it requires appropriate terrain.

But perhaps you think unicorn farts may work.

Quote:

So what is your preferred renewable energy?

I don't have one. Why do you keep asking these silly questions?

Frank wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 8:45pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 7:39pm: https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/071/794/498/original/e4fc52aaf9e844ad.jpeg Wacist!!!!!!!

But it's right though isn't it?

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/071/794/498/original/e4fc52aaf9e844ad.jpeg

freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 8:58pm:

Quote: So what is your preferred renewable energy? I don't have one. Why do you keep asking these silly questions?

just to show you are a know nothing. But renewable energy is good. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 9:56pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 8:58pm: Quote: So what is your preferred renewable energy? I don't have one. Why do you keep asking these silly questions? just to show you are a know nothing. But renewable energy is good. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I did not say that renewable energy is good either. Why are you so obsessed?

lee wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 3:02pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 2:00pm: It's the price that matters Lee. Only if you can manufacture and site sufficient solar farms and wind farms. freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 2:00pm: You don't have to pay for the billions of cubic meters of wind that blows through a turbine. You do have to pay for the structure, the increased demand on materials. Cement, steel, copper, silica. freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 2:00pm: Light on the other hand is infinitely dense in energy if you consider it as a wave. And the capture of that has costs associated. I have posted this before. You seem to have forgotten - "London Array wind farm to the south of England.This is the world’s largest offshore wind farm and according to its owners will generate “enough energy to power nearly half a million homes.” Its total capacity is 630 MW covering a total of 100 km2, and is expected to have a capacity factor of 39%. In other words the power density of the London Array will be 2.5 W/m2." " As a result the highest power density achieved is around 20 W/m2 in desert solar PV farms, whereas solar farms in Germany generally achieve 5 W/m2." "Power densities are comfortably above 100 W/m2 after accounting for mining etc. And conventional power plants often have power densites in excess of 1000 W/m2. A simple example of this higher power density is this small propane powered generator, providing in excess of 1000 W/m2. This is far in excess of the power density of any conceivable new method of generating renewable energy.  " https://energycentral.com/c/ec/future-energy-why-power-density-matters Perhaps you can refute?

Does that mean dimmer lights at night not to exhaust the clean energy battery supply....?!

freediver wrote on Apr 17^th, 2021 at 9:59pm:

lee wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 9:56pm: freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 8:58pm: Quote: So what is your preferred renewable energy? I don't have one. Why do you keep asking these silly questions? just to show you are a know nothing. But renewable energy is good. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D I did not say that renewable energy is good either. Why are you so obsessed?

So then what are you arguing for....LOL.... :o ;D :D

Ajax wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 11:52am:

freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 9:59pm: lee wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 9:56pm: freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 8:58pm: Quote: So what is your preferred renewable energy? I don't have one. Why do you keep asking these silly questions? just to show you are a know nothing. But renewable energy is good. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D I did not say that renewable energy is good either. Why are you so obsessed? So then what are you arguing for....LOL.... :o ;D :D

A reduction in GHG emissions.

freediver wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 11:54am:

Ajax wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 11:52am: freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 9:59pm: lee wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 9:56pm: freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2021 at 8:58pm: Quote: So what is your preferred renewable energy? I don't have one. Why do you keep asking these silly questions? just to show you are a know nothing. But renewable energy is good. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D I did not say that renewable energy is good either. Why are you so obsessed? So then what are you arguing for....LOL.... :o ;D :D A reduction in GHG emissions.

WHY today we have one of the lowest amounts of atmospheric CO2 (410 ppm) in the last 600 million years, only one other time has it been as low as today in 600 million years.

And remember if we go below 180 ppm vegetation will stop growing which will collapse the food chain.

You know why.

freediver wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

You know why.

There can only be 2 reasons,

1. Runaway greenhouse effect.........???
The hot spot
Doesn't exist in the real world only on the computer models.

2.The oligarchy establishes their trillion dollar carbon derivatives market and make us pay for the air we breathe.

Don't play stupid Ajax. You are a little too convincing.

freediver wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 12:22pm:

Don't play stupid Ajax. You are a little too convincing.

Dont believe me, how about a former PM,


Quote:

“International carbon markets will cover billions of consumers this decade. Ask the bankers at your table whether they want Australia to clip that ticket. We’re going to help them get their share." Julia Gillard http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/speech-business-council-australia-dinner

You probably didn't notice, but that quote does not refer to renewables. It does however refer to the cheapest mechanism for reducing GHG emissions.

freediver wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 2:10pm:

You probably didn't notice, but that quote does not refer to renewables. It does however refer to the cheapest mechanism for reducing GHG emissions.

Is that the message you got from that quote...???

Seems to me you missed the point....!!!

Good old Julia was going to help the oligarchy establish their trillion dollar market.

That's how I read it.

I should add by giving Australia one of the biggest carbon taxes in the whole world.

Yet we only emit one percent of all man made emissions.

Was she working for the Australian people or was she working for the banks....???

freediver wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 2:10pm:

It does however refer to the cheapest mechanism for reducing GHG emissions.

So a carbon market will reduce emissions?  ::)

lee wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 3:54pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 2:10pm: It does however refer to the cheapest mechanism for reducing GHG emissions. So a carbon market will reduce emissions?  ::)

If the price is high enough.

freediver wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 4:25pm:

If the price is high enough.

If the price is high enough it will close any factories remaining. ;)

lee wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 4:29pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 4:25pm: If the price is high enough. If the price is high enough it will close any factories remaining. ;)

No it won't.

A carbon market is not going to get any traction whilst China and India have vowed to increase fossil fuel use.

lee wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 4:45pm:

A carbon market is not going to get any traction whilst China and India have vowed to increase fossil fuel use.

Yes it will. It's the mechanism that will allow them to do so without the whiners like you using it as an excuse for a continued free-for-all.

freediver wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 4:53pm:

lee wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 4:45pm: A carbon market is not going to get any traction whilst China and India have vowed to increase fossil fuel use. Yes it will. It's the mechanism that will allow them to do so without the whiners like you using it as an excuse for a continued free-for-all.

Come on FD -
as far I know China and India were building a new coal fire power station every week
after the Paris agreements.
It was just feel good lip service that did nothing -
in fact it's now a lot worse.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 5:00pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 4:53pm: lee wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 4:45pm: A carbon market is not going to get any traction whilst China and India have vowed to increase fossil fuel use. Yes it will. It's the mechanism that will allow them to do so without the whiners like you using it as an excuse for a continued free-for-all. Come on FD - as far I know China and India were building a new coal fire power station every week after the Paris agreements. It was just feel good lip service that did nothing - in fact it's now a lot worse.

Luckily no-one bases their judgements on the limits of what you know Bobby. I'm not sure why you even think that is relevant.

freediver wrote on Apr 18^th, 2021 at 5:31pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 5:00pm: freediver wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 4:53pm: lee wrote on Apr 18th, 2021 at 4:45pm: A carbon market is not going to get any traction whilst China and India have vowed to increase fossil fuel use. Yes it will. It's the mechanism that will allow them to do so without the whiners like you using it as an excuse for a continued free-for-all. Come on FD - as far I know China and India were building a new coal fire power station every week after the Paris agreements. It was just feel good lip service that did nothing - in fact it's now a lot worse. Luckily no-one bases their judgements on the limits of what you know Bobby. I'm not sure why you even think that is relevant.

What a pity-
I was hoping you would consider me an oracle of all knowledge.