Australia proposes a solution to chuck's solar problem

[AlbertaFarmer5]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-16/rooftop-solar-owners-could-be-charged-to-sell-energy-to-the-grid/12461748 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-16/rooftop-solar-owners-could-be-charged-to-sell-energy-to-the-grid/12461748
Fortunately, I'm not the type to say I Told You So.

[Robertbarlage]

Happening in the USA already to lol.

[chuckChuck]

Wow, there are a lot of "marxist environmentalists" with roof top solar in Australia! LOL

Mallee whats up with that?

How can up 75% per cent of Australia's electricity be provided by solar and wind? All the arm chair experts on Sillyville have told us that renewables don't work at all! LOL



https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-30/grid-operator-looks-to-manage-solar-power-output-in-sa/12202004 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-30/grid-operator-looks-to-manage-solar-power-output-in-sa/12202004

"At times, as much as 75 per cent of Australia's energy is forecast to be provided by wind and solar.

The report shows at certain points last year, 64 per cent of South Australia's power demand was met by rooftop solar alone.

AEMO's forecasts show that figure could grow as high 85 per cent by 2025, with rooftop solar also tipped to dominate supply at times in in Victoria (up to 66 per cent), Queensland (57 per cent) and New South Wales (48 per cent).

But the runaway success of solar power poses serious challenges for the security of the grid, because it operates "behind-the-meter", out of control of the authorities."

AEMO's managing director Audrey Ziebelman says the study makes clear that the current approaches used to manage the electricity market are becoming less effective as the grid continues its transformation to world-leading levels of renewable generation.

"Australia already has the technical capability to safely operate a power system where three quarters of our energy at times comes from wind and solar energy generation," Ms Ziebelman said.

"However, to do so requires changes in our markets and regulatory requirements, otherwise, AEMO will be required to limit the contribution of these wind and solar resources to 50 or 60 per cent of electricity supply at any point in time, even though they are the lowest cost way of providing electricity."

A5 its sounds like managing solar and wind in the Australian regulatory system along with figuring out how to compensate base load suppliers is what is needed. All these technical and regulatory hurdles can be met so the "sky is not falling" as you predicted.

Good on Australia for leading the way on how to integrate lots of renewables into the grid.



https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-08/authorities-look-to-control-house-rooftop-solar-power-in-wa/11773436 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-08/authorities-look-to-control-house-rooftop-solar-power-in-wa/11773436

Clean Energy Council supports move

Darren Gladman, the Clean Energy Council's distributed energy director, fully backed AEMO's push, saying the difficulties posed by solar panels were largely technical and smart inverters were needed to help overcome them.

He said if people wanted to see ever growing rates of renewable energy on the grid, they needed to accept the role the market operator would play in regulating the system.

"The really important thing that relates to smart inverters is that it's able to understand what's happening on the grid and provide support to the grid when it needs it," Mr Gladman said.
solar panel installation
Smart inverters are seen as key to managing any excess of power from solar panels.(Reuters: Mike Blake)

"As we move to a future where there's more solar and storage on the network … you have to have systems that are smart enough to support the network.

"It's just the price we have to pay if we want to get to a stage where a really large proportion of our power comes from solar and batteries."

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Thank you for the long and irrelevant cut and paste two days later.
Now, perhaps you could read the article I posted ,and comment on that instead.

[chuckChuck]

I have no problem paying for the use of the grid when solar isn't operating. I can see their point because coal plants are losing money because solar and wind are too cheap.

Solar and wind are disrupting the grid and causing change. Regulators and markets will adjust.

But as the regulator pointed out in my previous post, Australia can technically handle up 75% of their electricity coming from solar and wind.

Smart batteries, smart inverters will solve some of the technical issues. Its up to the regulators to figure out the market issues.

But your argument that solar and wind cant supply a lot of cheap electricity in sunny climates like Australia has fallen flat.

"Mr Roberts said SAPN's proposal would likely see $10-$30 added to the annual electricity bill of a solar customer, and would not change the overall amount of money that the company was allowed to charge customers."

$10-30 per year extra charges for solar exporters is not a significant cost to me.

The problem is solar has exceeded all expectations in Australia and 1 in 3 home owners in some areas have roof top solar systems. The regulatory system is playing catch up.

[chuckChuck]

Further, if the issue for you is subsidization of solar systems, then keep in mind that the cost of delivering electricity to you and I on widely spread farms is much higher than concentrated residential customers in towns and cities.

But farm rates are lower than residential rates in Saskatchewan, which means farmers are being subsidized by residential customers.

So if you want to have a debate about who is paying for what, are you prepared to pay for the actual cost of delivering electricity and maintaining a long distance grid to your farm?

In effect you are being subsidized at a lower rate because you are not paying for the actual cost of delivering electricity to a widely dispersed small number of farms. At least in Saskatchewan.

[furrowtickler]

Further, if the issue for you is subsidization of solar systems, then keep in mind that the cost of delivering electricity to you and I on widely spread farms is much higher than concentrated residential customers in towns and cities.

But farm rates are lower than residential rates in Saskatchewan, which means farmers are being subsidized by residential customers.

So if you want to have a debate about who is paying for what, are you prepared to pay for the actual cost of delivering electricity and maintaining a long distance grid to your farm?

In effect you are being subsidized at a lower rate because you are not paying for the actual cost of delivering electricity to a widely dispersed small number of farms. At least in Saskatchewan.

Saskatchewan is not Australia..... slight difference in solar output year around

[TSIPP]

Chuck is the silly in agriville, where are you getting your numbers from? On the saskpower website it clearly shows rural pays more than urban on both the amount of electricity used and the basic monthly charge.

We also pay more per kilowatt than most of the rest of Canada, we as rural people are paying our fair share, most farms probably use well over 10 times more electricity than a city person does, buying in bulk usually gets a better deal.

[malleefarmer]

Think the 75% figure is new electricity, but not sure.

[chuckChuck]

Chuck is the silly in agriville, where are you getting your numbers from? On the saskpower website it clearly shows rural pays more than urban on both the amount of electricity used and the basic monthly charge.

We also pay more per kilowatt than most of the rest of Canada, we as rural people are paying our fair share, most farms probably use well over 10 times more electricity than a city person does, buying in bulk usually gets a better deal.

https://www.saskpower.com/Accounts-and-Services/Billing/Power-Rates/Power-Supply-Rates https://www.saskpower.com/Accounts-and-Services/Billing/Power-Rates/Power-Supply-Rates

The rate farmers pay is below residential users. Residential rate is 0.1422 per kWh, Farm rate .12658 per kWh up to 16,000 kwh per month. Basic Monthly charge for farms is $34.97 vs residential basic charge is $22.79 for cities and towns.

Do you really think that $12/month extra for basic charge on farms covers all the extra distribution and maintenance costs to all the farms in Saskatchewan? I don't think so.

What is the cost of delivering electricity to all farms versus residential and industrial users? I think you will find that the rural grid system is much more expensive to install and maintain because of the many thousands of miles of lines for a few customers versus the relatively few miles needed to supply the many more customers in cities and towns.

[furrowtickler]

https://www.saskpower.com/Accounts-and-Services/Billing/Power-Rates/Power-Supply-Rates https://www.saskpower.com/Accounts-and-Services/Billing/Power-Rates/Power-Supply-Rates

The rate farmers pay is below residential users. Residential rate is 0.1422 per kWh, Farm rate .12658 per kWh up to 16,000 kwh per month. Basic Monthly charge for farms is $34.97 vs residential basic charge is $22.79 for cities and towns.

Do you really think that $12/month extra for basic charge on farms covers all the extra distribution and maintenance costs to all the farms in Saskatchewan? I don't think so.

What is the cost of delivering electricity to all farms versus residential and industrial users? I think you will find that the rural grid system is much more expensive to install and maintain because of the many thousands of miles of lines versus the relatively few miles needed to supply the many more customers in cities and towns.

Do you honestly think that all rural distributions are solely for farms ?? Really ?
Once set up cost is very minimal
The expense comes from the big transmission lines .... they are not going to farms
You should show us mr farmer hater just how much our share is
We will wait .
Your post already proved you half wrong , we do pay more .

[chuckChuck]

I don't have the breakdown of cost of supplying rural vs city and towns in Saskatchewan.

Only Saskpower has those numbers. Lots of large industrial users get rates well below farmers as well.

So roughly 50,000 farmers pay an extra $12 per month. That adds up to a $600,000 per month or $7.2 Million per year. Does that cover all the additional capital and maintenance costs of all the rural farm grid? I doubt it.

I am not saying the lower rate per kwh for farmers is bad policy. I am just saying that farmers are not paying the full cost of delivering electricity to their widely dispersed farms and are likely subsidized by the more numerous residential and industrial users who are more concentrated in cities and towns.

I am farmer too, so I get the benefits of lower rates.

[furrowtickler]

I don't have the breakdown of cost of supplying rural vs city and towns in Saskatchewan.

Only Saskpower has those numbers. Lots of large industrial users get rates well below farmers as well.

So roughly 50,000 farmers pay an extra $12 per month. That adds up to a $600,000 per month or $7.2 Million per year. Does that cover all the additional capital and maintenance costs of all the rural farm grid? I doubt it.

I am not saying the lower rate per kwh for farmers is bad policy. I am just saying that farmers are not paying the full cost of delivering electricity to their widely dispersed farms and are likely subsidized by the more numerous residential and industrial users who are more concentrated in cities and towns.

I am farmer too, so I get the benefits of lower rates.

Well there not lower

[chuckChuck]

The rate farmers pay is below residential users. Residential rate is 0.1422 per kWh, Farm rate .12658 per kWh up to 16,000 kwh per month.

Most farmers use several thousand kwh per year and the basic service charge is a very small amount of the cost of most farmer's bills.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I am farmer too, so I get the benefits of lower rates.

You forgot the LOL at the end of that sentence. You use it after almost every not humorous statement, then you make a whopper of a joke like this, and don't finish off with LMAO, or HAHAHA etc.
I don't get it.