Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > aus.electronics > #32999 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-16 15:12 +1100 |
| Last post | 2017-03-16 22:39 +1100 |
| Articles | 14 on this page of 74 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to aus.electronics
OT: Snowy Hydro Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-16 15:12 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-16 16:39 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Chris <c@b.a> - 2017-03-17 14:33 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-17 20:29 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-17 21:20 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 04:12 -0700
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-17 23:12 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-19 22:00 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-20 08:18 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-20 08:53 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-20 20:47 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2017-03-21 16:47 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 19:41 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2017-03-28 00:02 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 03:30 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-28 15:43 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 17:24 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-28 22:09 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-28 08:27 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 11:06 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-28 11:21 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 13:28 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-28 15:22 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 17:19 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Lucifer Morningstar <Barry@saymyname.com> - 2017-03-28 17:28 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-29 16:44 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 20:16 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2017-03-28 22:06 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 05:20 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-29 06:06 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 09:34 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-29 22:00 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-28 22:37 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 05:21 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-29 06:07 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 09:35 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-03-28 19:21 +0000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 09:37 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-03-29 04:43 +0000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 19:21 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-29 21:52 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 03:14 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 10:53 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-29 21:53 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-29 22:48 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 03:17 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-31 20:01 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 05:03 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-04-01 20:01 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 03:01 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-04-02 14:55 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 16:06 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2017-03-28 14:53 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 16:44 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2017-03-28 18:42 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 00:07 -0700
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 00:51 -0700
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-16 19:33 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-16 19:40 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-16 19:55 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Adrian Jansen <adrian@qq.vv.net> - 2017-03-17 07:38 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-16 22:12 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-03-16 10:04 +0000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 15:28 -0700
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-17 10:39 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 16:54 -0700
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-17 11:06 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 17:24 -0700
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-17 12:58 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-16 22:24 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-17 14:45 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-16 22:42 +1100
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-16 22:17 +1000
Re: OT: Snowy Hydro Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-16 22:39 +1100
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
| From | Adrian Jansen <adrian@qq.vv.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-17 07:38 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <58cb05e9$0$1586$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #33005 |
On 16/03/2017 6:55 PM, Sylvia Else wrote: > > Gas is cheaper as a fuel, but diesel generators themselves are cheaper. > Since they wouldn't be used much the cost of the generator is more > significant than the cost of the fuel. > > Sylvia. > Gas turbines will run on any fuel. We are not talking about tiddly piston driven engines here. -- Regards, Adrian Jansen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | keithr0 <user@account.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 22:12 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <eivdq3Fe9i1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33004 |
On 3/16/2017 6:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: > On 16/03/2017 7:33 PM, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 16/03/2017 6:07 PM, Phil Allison wrote: >>> Stupider than anyone Else >>> >>>> >>>> "In one hour it could produce 20 times the 100 megawatts an hour >>>> expected from the battery proposed by the South Australian Government, >>>> but would deliver it constantly for almost a week," [Mr Turnbull] said. >>>> >>>> I thought he'd know better than to come out with such gibberish. Maybe >>>> he was misquoted. >>>> >>> ** It's not it not wrong - just a bit awkward. >>> >>> >>>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so >>>> much >>>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >>>> output, it can do so for less time. >>>> >>> >>> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. >>> >>> With water from the lower ones. >>> >>> It's a huge "water battery". >>> >>>> >>>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >>>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >>>> >>> >>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of >>> excess power in the grid at any time of day. >> >> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. >> During the day, the marginal excess capacity is gas generation. I >> doesn't make economic sense to use gas to pump water just so that that >> water can be used to displace gas generation on another day. >> >> At night, the marginal generation is sometimes coal based. While it does >> make sense to use coal during the night to pump water that can be used >> later to displace gas, it also substitutes a more polluting form of >> generation for a less polluting one. >> >> In any case, we're not short of generating capacity per se, we're short >> of peak generating capacity that's only required in extreme weather. All >> building additional hydro-generating capacity using pumped storage will >> achieve is to discourage investment in other capacity for use for a >> significant part of the day. It doesn't nothing to address the extreme >> peak capacity issue. >> > > **Yeah, it does. It sucks up surplus energy from coal fired power > stations and stores that energy by raising the level of water. Can it > deal with the most extreme days? Nope. The extra couple of GWh will help > though. Trouble is that you can bet Trumbull's idea is at least a decade > away. We need a solution quicker than that. > >> The cheapest solution to the problem we actually have is probably diesel. > > **Nope. Not even close. Gas is much cheaper. > > This seems a better idea https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/03/plans-for-a-24-hour-solar-thermal-plant-earn-environmental-approval-in-chile/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 10:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oadnvp$i4$1@gonzo.alcatraz> |
| In reply to | #33003 |
On 2017-03-16, Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote: > On 16/03/2017 6:07 PM, Phil Allison wrote: >> Stupider than anyone Else >> >>> >>> "In one hour it could produce 20 times the 100 megawatts an hour >>> expected from the battery proposed by the South Australian Government, >>> but would deliver it constantly for almost a week," [Mr Turnbull] said. >>> >>> I thought he'd know better than to come out with such gibberish. Maybe >>> he was misquoted. >>> >> ** It's not it not wrong - just a bit awkward. >> >> >>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so much >>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >>> output, it can do so for less time. >>> >> >> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. >> >> With water from the lower ones. >> >> It's a huge "water battery". >> >>> >>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >>> >> >> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of excess power in the grid at any time of day. > > There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. > During the day, the marginal excess capacity is gas generation. I > doesn't make economic sense to use gas to pump water just so that that > water can be used to displace gas generation on another day. Don't use gas, use solar... gotta build it first though. -- This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 15:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fa659db0-d884-4d49-90dd-363611b5089f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #33003 |
Phil Allison wrote: > > > >> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so much > >> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power > >> output, it can do so for less time. > >> > > > > ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. > > > > With water from the lower ones. > > > > It's a huge "water battery". > > > >> > >> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only > >> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. > >> > > > > ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of excess power in the grid at any time of day. > > There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. > ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. > > In any case, we're not short of generating capacity per se, we're short > of peak generating capacity that's only required in extreme weather. > ** More complete BOLLOCKS. The Snowy provides peak load power every day. Pumping goes on every night. Stop posting you mad, unsupported guesses as facts. ..... Phil
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-17 10:39 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ej0m0tFmg2bU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33012 |
On 17/03/2017 9:28 AM, Phil Allison wrote: > Phil Allison wrote: > >>> >>>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so much >>>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >>>> output, it can do so for less time. >>>> >>> >>> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. >>> >>> With water from the lower ones. >>> >>> It's a huge "water battery". >>> >>>> >>>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >>>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >>>> >>> >>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of excess power in the grid at any time of day. >> >> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. >> > > ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. > > Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. Power generation equals power consumption, second by second, always. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 16:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3e134164-3888-4520-ae14-03de78d589a1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #33013 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > > > >>> > >>>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so much > >>>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power > >>>> output, it can do so for less time. > >>>> > >>> > >>> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. > >>> > >>> With water from the lower ones. > >>> > >>> It's a huge "water battery". > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only > >>>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. > >>>> > >>> > >>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of excess power in the grid at any time of day. > >> > >> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. > >> > > > > ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. > > > > Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. > > Power generation equals power consumption, > ** You are playing fucking absurd word games again. Capacity might be "installed capacity" ie the MW rating of various power generators - OR it might mean the available power output from the grid system at a particular time. If the latter type of "capacity" is not all being used at some time, then there is excess power AVAILABLE. Whatever, what you have posted is a load of pig ignorant garbage. FOAD you ridiculous autistic. .... Phil
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-17 11:06 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ej0nkuFmpfsU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33014 |
On 17/03/2017 10:54 AM, Phil Allison wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> >>> >>>>> >>>>>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so much >>>>>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >>>>>> output, it can do so for less time. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. >>>>> >>>>> With water from the lower ones. >>>>> >>>>> It's a huge "water battery". >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >>>>>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of excess power in the grid at any time of day. >>>> >>>> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. >>>> >>> >>> ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. >>> >>> Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. >> >> Power generation equals power consumption, >> > > ** You are playing fucking absurd word games again. No I'm not. These distinctions are important. People cause and have all sorts of confusion when they conflate power with capacity. You said "Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops." No mention of capacity there. If you meant that there is excess capacity when the load drops, you should have said that, and you'd have been closer to the mark, but in reality there is always excess capacity in the system, since otherwise you end up with a collapse of the grid. The market operator directs that loads be shed before the point is reached where there's no excess capacity. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 17:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0283222b-9c04-4781-be47-77683ba8d1c0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #33015 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of excess power in the grid at any time of day. > >>>> > >>>> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. > >>>> > >>> > >>> ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. > >>> > >>> Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. > >> > >> Power generation equals power consumption, > >> > > > > ** You are playing fucking absurd word games again. > > No I'm not. ** Yes YOU ARE - you absurd, autistic mental case. > These distinctions are important. People cause and have all > sorts of confusion when they conflate power with capacity. > ** Available power = the same fucking thing !!! No need exists to post the word " available" all the time as it is blindingly obvious from the context. > You said > "Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops." > ** You have quoted me out of context. I know fuckwit autistics cannot fathom the very idea of *context* but you need to stop punishing others for YOUR glaring metal disability. > If you meant that there is excess capacity > when the load drops, you should have said that, > ** No need to - it was blindingly obvious from the previous context. Only an crazed, pedantic, autistic retard would miss it. ALSO - you are being a fucking smartarse by insisting on using power industry jargon when doing so is inappropriate on this NG. You know you annoy everyone with this crap but continue anyhow cos it gives you some sick pleasure. You really are one stupid, vile cretin. .... Phil
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-17 12:58 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ej0u6dFns5eU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33016 |
On 17/03/2017 11:24 AM, Phil Allison wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: > > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of excess power in the grid at any time of day. >>>>>> >>>>>> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. >>>>> >>>>> Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. >>>> >>>> Power generation equals power consumption, >>>> >>> >>> ** You are playing fucking absurd word games again. >> >> No I'm not. > > > ** Yes YOU ARE - you absurd, autistic mental case. > > >> These distinctions are important. People cause and have all >> sorts of confusion when they conflate power with capacity. >> > ** Available power = the same fucking thing !!! > > No need exists to post the word " available" all the time as it is blindingly obvious from the context. > > > >> You said >> "Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops." >> > > ** You have quoted me out of context. > > I know fuckwit autistics cannot fathom the very idea of *context* but you need to stop punishing others for YOUR glaring metal disability. > > >> If you meant that there is excess capacity >> when the load drops, you should have said that, >> > > ** No need to - it was blindingly obvious from the previous context. > > Only an crazed, pedantic, autistic retard would miss it. > > ALSO - you are being a fucking smartarse by insisting on using power industry jargon when doing so is inappropriate on this NG. > > You know you annoy everyone with this crap but continue anyhow cos it gives you some sick pleasure. > > You really are one stupid, vile cretin. > > > > .... Phil > And so Phil loses it again, in just four posts. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 22:24 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <58cb5956$0$1389$c3e8da3$1cbc7475@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #33013 |
On 17/03/17 10:39, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 17/03/2017 9:28 AM, Phil Allison wrote: >> Phil Allison wrote: >> >>>> >>>>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so >>>>> much >>>>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >>>>> output, it can do so for less time. >>>>> >>>> >>>> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. >>>> >>>> With water from the lower ones. >>>> >>>> It's a huge "water battery". >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >>>>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >>>>> >>>> >>>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of >>>> excess power in the grid at any time of day. >>> >>> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. >>> >> >> ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. >> >> Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. > > Power generation equals power consumption, second by second, always. No. Not if you measure power as heat generated in the coal-fired boilers and consumption as power extracted from the generators. The heat production has a huge time-constant - like 24 hours - so you cannot simply increase heat for each daily power peak. You have to run with enough for the peak, and waste or store the extra in-between. Clifford Heath.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-17 14:45 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ej14f6FothjU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33019 |
On 16/03/2017 10:24 PM, Clifford Heath wrote: > On 17/03/17 10:39, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 17/03/2017 9:28 AM, Phil Allison wrote: >>> Phil Allison wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so >>>>>> much >>>>>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >>>>>> output, it can do so for less time. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. >>>>> >>>>> With water from the lower ones. >>>>> >>>>> It's a huge "water battery". >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >>>>>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of >>>>> excess power in the grid at any time of day. >>>> >>>> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. >>>> >>> >>> ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. >>> >>> Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. >> >> Power generation equals power consumption, second by second, always. > > No. Not if you measure power as heat generated in the coal-fired boilers > and consumption as power extracted from the generators. That doesn't seem a very sensible measure of generation, since some of the heat is unavoidably lost due to the laws of thermodynamics. > > The heat production has a huge time-constant - like 24 hours - so you > cannot simply increase heat for each daily power peak. You have to run > with enough for the peak, and waste or store the extra in-between. Coal fired generators are run with very slow changes in power output for that reason. Variations in overall load are handled by other generation with quicker response times. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 22:42 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <58cb5d78$0$32604$b1db1813$19ace300@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #33020 |
On 17/03/17 14:45, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 16/03/2017 10:24 PM, Clifford Heath wrote: >> On 17/03/17 10:39, Sylvia Else wrote: >>> On 17/03/2017 9:28 AM, Phil Allison wrote: >>>> Phil Allison wrote: >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so >>>>>>> much >>>>>>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >>>>>>> output, it can do so for less time. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. >>>>>> >>>>>> With water from the lower ones. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's a huge "water battery". >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >>>>>>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of >>>>>> excess power in the grid at any time of day. >>>>> >>>>> There isn't an excess of power, there's only an excess of capacity. >>>>> >>>> >>>> ** That is complete BOLLOCKS. >>>> >>>> Excess power generation occurs all the time, whenever the load drops. >>> >>> Power generation equals power consumption, second by second, always. >> >> No. Not if you measure power as heat generated in the coal-fired boilers >> and consumption as power extracted from the generators. > > That doesn't seem a very sensible measure of generation, since some of > the heat is unavoidably lost due to the laws of thermodynamics. > >> >> The heat production has a huge time-constant - like 24 hours - so you >> cannot simply increase heat for each daily power peak. You have to run >> with enough for the peak, and waste or store the extra in-between. > > Coal fired generators are run with very slow changes in power output for > that reason. Variations in overall load are handled by other generation > with quicker response times. No. The heat is released into the atmosphere instead of wasting water. It's a simple matter of diverting the combusted gases away from the boiler.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | keithr0 <user@account.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 22:17 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <eive2oFebr5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33001 |
On 3/16/2017 5:07 PM, Phil Allison wrote: > Stupider than anyone Else > >> >> "In one hour it could produce 20 times the 100 megawatts an hour >> expected from the battery proposed by the South Australian Government, >> but would deliver it constantly for almost a week," [Mr Turnbull] said. >> >> I thought he'd know better than to come out with such gibberish. Maybe >> he was misquoted. >> > ** It's not it not wrong - just a bit awkward. > > >> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so much >> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >> output, it can do so for less time. >> > > ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. > > With water from the lower ones. > > It's a huge "water battery". Its called pumped storage, it has been going on in the Snowies for more than 50 years. >> >> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >> > > ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of excess power in the grid at any time of day. > > >> That wouldn't use much >> of the water in the scheme of things, but I seriously question whether >> the proposal is the cheapest solution. >> > > ** Probably is, when you take into account the limited life of the thousand batteries and the electronic converters needed to turn DC into AC. Pumped storage wouldn't work in South Australia coz its flat, and any new pumped storage in the Snowies will probably take the best part of 10 years to come online.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 22:39 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <58cb5ce1$0$32604$b1db1813$19ace300@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #33009 |
On 16/03/17 23:17, keithr0 wrote: > On 3/16/2017 5:07 PM, Phil Allison wrote: >> Stupider than anyone Else >> >>> >>> "In one hour it could produce 20 times the 100 megawatts an hour >>> expected from the battery proposed by the South Australian Government, >>> but would deliver it constantly for almost a week," [Mr Turnbull] said. >>> >>> I thought he'd know better than to come out with such gibberish. Maybe >>> he was misquoted. >>> >> ** It's not it not wrong - just a bit awkward. >>> That aside, Snowy Hydro is energy limited, because there is only so much >>> water (less in extended dry spells). If it produces a higher power >>> output, it can do so for less time. >> ** The high lakes in the Snowy scheme get filled up at night. >> With water from the lower ones. >> It's a huge "water battery". > Its called pumped storage, it has been going on in the Snowies for more > than 50 years. >>> Maybe the government intends to use the extra power generation only >>> during extreme demand to avert rolling blackouts. >> ** It can do that, but more importantly it allows the storage of >> excess power in the grid at any time of day. >>> That wouldn't use much >>> of the water in the scheme of things, but I seriously question whether >>> the proposal is the cheapest solution. >> ** Probably is, when you take into account the limited life of the >> thousand batteries and the electronic converters needed to turn DC >> into AC. > Pumped storage wouldn't work in South Australia coz its flat Not necessarily, though it would take longer than 100 days. See <https://theconversation.com/snowy-hydro-gets-a-boost-but-seawater-hydro-could-help-south-australia-74442> Clifford Heath
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
Back to top | Article view | aus.electronics
csiph-web