Comments on: $75m power station the wrong decision: WA experts

By: Richard Bentley

Richard Bentley — Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:42:56 +0000

Fortunately we live in the age of distributed information as well as distributed power.
Well done Erwin in seeking those reports from Curtin University. They were free to voice opinions which others felt constrained to do.
Undoubtedy CAT has substantial expertise in solar power and they will both benefit and contribute substantially to the inevitable transition to renewable power in Alice Springs.
However for a seminar designed to explain the benefits of solar and to discuss the process of change a person who fails to understand why “I Love Solar” is part of the solar story was an innapropriate choice as a speaker.
“I love solar” means we have found a source of energy that may save us from ourselves. Electricity delivers us so many benefits but if we burn carbon to produce it we destroy our habitat. Why would I not love solar when it gets me out of gaol.
Can we invite Professor Newman to our next Solar seminar?

By: Alex Nelson

Alex Nelson — Thu, 28 Jul 2016 04:20:25 +0000

From July 1997 to March 1998 I lived at a house that operated solely on solar energy stored in a battery system with no connection to the power grid or diesel generator backup.
The solar power system was part of an overall package of alternative technologies incorporated within the house design ostensibly intended to demonstrate options for housing on remote communities.
Located 30km west of Alice Springs on the Iwupataka Aboriginal Land Trust, the “Gloria Lee Environmental Learning Centre” received considerable local media publicity in 1997 as a prime example of showing the way ahead for potentially reducing the construction and operating costs of housing on Aboriginal communities.
The technical description of the entire project was detailed in a submission to the national Ecologically Sustainable Building and Architecture Awards of 1997 (which it won), and it’s from this document I quote the section describing the “Active Energy Systems”.
Under the heading “Solar Power System” the document outlines: “A minimal system that promotes responsible use of energy; made up of:
• 6 x 120 watt Neste monocrystalline modules [solar panels]
• Trace C40 pwm solar regulator
• 4 x 535/c Solar sun flooded cell batteries
• CSA 2.2kw sinewave inverter.
“The system provides reliable power for: 11 watt PLEC lighting, 4x ceiling fans on timers, iron, chest freezer, radio/tv/video, computer, washing machine, automatic water transfer pump”.
The performance of the system was described: “The array output is between 2.8 and 3.8 kwh per day. Battery storage is approximately 5 kwh of storage at 40% DOD C100.
“No generator back up is required but provision for emergency connection through a changeover outlet is provided.”
In addition there was a hot water system with a “wood-fired boost” described as follows: “The system comprises a Solahart 180J solar hot water system connected to the Nectre combustion stove in the eating area through a water jacket in the firebox.
“The solar panels operate on a closed circuit with heat transfer fluid. The over flow from temperature relief is directed through a shepherds crook back into the main header tank to eliminate waste. No electrical connection exists”.
From my eight months residency at this house I adjudged the solar power system as by far the most successful feature of the entire project, its only drawback being that it was too limited to provide adequate power for regular household use; however, it convincingly demonstrated the enormous potential such independent power systems have for future household use.
Unfortunately there was little else that was successful about this alternative technology demonstration centre.
The costs of the project were listed: “Basic building and systems cost = $120,000. This equates to approximately $475/m2 average under total roof canopy” divided into “enclosed spaces = $675/m2” and “covered spaces $250/m2”.
“This figure excludes the administration and architecture consultancy and the costs associated with the special training programs under which it was built. When considering the cost of the training programs the long term advantages of the social costs and the reduction of unemployment far outweigh the short term outlays.
“For this reason it would be a false assessment to input the overall training costs, much in the same way as training subsidies are generally not included in the real costs of most building project assessments elsewhere.”
This additional funding – never accounted for – was provided by the Federal Department of Employment, Education and Training and the NT Education and Training Authority, with trainees from the Arrernte and Tangentyere councils “funded through a mixture of programs which comprised TAP (Training Aboriginal People), ABSTUDY and CDEP”.
From my personal enquiries in 1998 I learned the overall cost to the taxpayer ranged from $250,000 to $400,000, depending on who was my informant.
This tax-payer funded house, a failure overall as an alternative technology demonstration centre, sits in the middle of a slab of 108 hectares from the Iwupataka Aboriginal Land Trust.
In October 2009 the Aboriginal corporation that owned and oversaw this project was deregistered by the Office of Registration of Indigenous Corporations, which answered the question “Does the corporation own land?” as “Unknown”.

By: Neil Rilatt

Neil Rilatt — Wed, 27 Jul 2016 06:55:29 +0000

Jim, Steve and Janet Brown, and anyone else who insists on repeated the same tired, old boring logical fallacy: YES, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT WE NEED TO GENERATE POWER WHEN THE SUN IS NOT SHINING. FFS.
We know that sometimes it is night! We know that sometimes it is cloudy!
That is why NOBODY is suggesting we turn off all the gas generators and switch to 100% solar.
Jesus Christ, let’s have a bit of intellectual honesty in this discussion, please.
Nobody wants a return to the dark ages! But some are certainly keen to see us stuck in last century.
The age of fossil fuels is coming to an end and a lot of us want to invest in newer, cleaner, more innovative technologies that are available NOW.
And no, Steve Brown, a 100% gas powered station is, by definition, NOT A HYBRID STATION.

By: Fred the Philistine

Fred the Philistine — Fri, 22 Jul 2016 09:54:25 +0000

The bottom line is, whats in this for Steve Brown.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 22 Jul 2016 08:44:19 +0000

And doesn’t South Australia have trouble with huge increases in cost? And when the wind doesn’t blow they get their power from Victoria power stations.
We don’t even know how long solar pannels will even last in our climate.
We still need a modern up to date power station that we can rely on for the majority of the population who didn’t get tax payers grants for solar panels. Oh and when the sun goes down or it is cloudy.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 22 Jul 2016 03:17:12 +0000

We said Janet, I’m over Greens telling us how to live. You are the minority. The future will bring great ideas and innovations that will change our power production.
There seems to be no understanding from a few that we need baseline power for at night or when the sun is not shining. The investment in the power station has to happen. South Australia had a week of no wind.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 22 Jul 2016 02:23:43 +0000

@ Steve Brown: No-one stupid as the old man who comments on an article he didn’t read.

By: Charlie Carter

Charlie Carter — Thu, 21 Jul 2016 03:06:43 +0000

Steve Brown: Try reading the article.

By: Janet Brown

Janet Brown — Thu, 21 Jul 2016 02:04:24 +0000

If people are so convinced of solar. Put in stand alone systems. Disconnect from the grid in your own property. I want assurity. 100%. That is why I support both.
It is fine to protest for what you believe. A reminder to all. Tax payer’s money is not under the rule of a minority.
When solar is 100% perfect we will put in place our own stand alone system.
Until then we rely on the gas powered power. Just logical I think.

By: Marli Banks

Marli Banks — Wed, 20 Jul 2016 19:32:18 +0000

With “the transfer to solar is likely to proceed apace with or without the collaboration of the government-owned and other centralised utilities,” my question to Chief Minister Adam Giles is: Why are you pushing this deluded agenda so strongly?