Would like to shake your hand, thanks for saying what has to be said to the practical people.

@ronvandereerden4714

29 күн бұрын

You obviously work for, or are heavily invested in, fossil fuels.

@hyster16t

27 күн бұрын

​@@ronvandereerden4714even with evidence right in your face, you've still swallowed the green washing.

@shawnnoyes4620

26 күн бұрын

@@ronvandereerden4714 No, David has a grasp of supply chain, mineral resources and math. You do not :)

@boobtubereborn

2 күн бұрын

his numbers on nuclear are completely incorrect. its more like $300-500/MWh, with a 20 year build time minimum. which is why it wont get up. his numbers on RE are also incorrect. its more like $30-180/MWh, depending on time of day. anyone who has actually traded energy in the NEM in the last 10 years knows this. we also see negative prices ($0 or less) through the day due to excess RE, particularly in SA. this is a problem and needs soaking up with batteries. not expensive nuclear. he also doesnt tell you the $180/MWh price is pretty much the price that RE displaces natural gas turbines which is actually used to balance the market along with hydro tas and snowy. this is an benchtop presentation by someone with zero practical experience. sorry. im surprised he didnt start spruiking pumped hydro too. and we all know how well that is going! i was pretty dissapointed in this superficial and largely incorrect presentation.

I am a 50+year veteran of electricity transmission and distribution industry. My take from this video is to understand our current situation and how we get off fossil fuels. This video presents a very balanced view and realization solar/wind/batteries is not a complete solution. It's called realism and owning a calculator doesn't hurt.

@antonyjh1234

27 күн бұрын

80% of our energy is not from electricity but oil, I think separating the two when discussing the problem shows the public what net zero really means. Could we replace 20% of our energy with renewables? Yes, Should we? Yes, there will not be a cheaper time. Utmost we need to get the public off idea that 100% renewables for electricity is going to solve our problems.

@caolindennehy2553

26 күн бұрын

@@antonyjh1234 yes, I mean there will be a cheaper time(renewables are still getting cheaper each year) but the costs of not transitioning are staggering. Yes its part of the solution but we also need to decarbonise all systems, agriculture is one of the biggest contributors to this too.

@sparkytas

26 күн бұрын

Owning a calculator and not factoring in quite realistic S curve adoption dramatic price drops in grid batteries means the input data can be WAY OFF. Tony Seba was ridiculed for his predictions in the fall in the cost of solar and batteries 10 years ago but he was bang on the money. As solar and batteries continue to drop in price per kW, batteries now reaching something like greater than 20% every year for the last 5 years, all the economists keep doing their calculations on 2 year old data.

@shawnnoyes4620

26 күн бұрын

@@sparkytas Lithium Ion Batteries for grid backup is a fairy tale.

@antonyjh1234

26 күн бұрын

@@caolindennehy2553 China has used a lot of dirty coal to produce the prices we have now. It could be this is the cheapest it will ever get as we get closer to failing at the paris agreement. Agriculture if you are to look at usa, is 10% of the total, 5 % for crops and 5% for all farmed animals. Agriculture is a needed industry but this is the thing that really gets me, everybody seems to know who or what is the biggest contributor but no-one seems to know how much energy is in a tank of diesel, while people drive, for pleasure holidays. There is no replacement for the 636 kilowatts of energy per tank, but we continue to drive and then blame other parts of needed industry and talk of decarbonising that mean nothing overall in their personal lives, for that it seems business as usual and where's our next holiday. Worldwide agriculture in poorer countries might have a higher percentage than modern countries because they use animals instead of tractors, they collect the dung and dry it for heating and cooking. We would have to replace the animals they have in the fields with tractors and diesel, new forms of cooking/ heating etc. A tank of diesel is 3 months of my electrical energy with the air con going 24/7 during summer, we waste this energy because we think things are going to get better. With oil running out and rising in price and coal use being curtailed. now could be the cheapest it will ever be for a solar panel and in a hundred years people may be physically fighting over a single panel.

My brother-in-law was a controller before he retired and he often said that the addition of intermittent solar and wind made the task of keeping the grid stable was an absolute nightmare.

@Tom-dt4ic

Ай бұрын

Poor baby. Glad he has no responsibilty.

@buickanddeere

Ай бұрын

Who has no responsibility ?

@rodneyblackwell7477

Ай бұрын

​@@Tom-dt4ic tells us about your underwhelming responsibility

@granitfog

29 күн бұрын

I suspect a bigger nightmare would be supplying the greater electrical load from the increased use of water pumps to deal with flooding, increased use of AC to deal with increasing number and length of heat waves, just to mention two of the many ramifications of continued fossile fuel use.

@gregdrake5415

29 күн бұрын

​@@granitfoghahaha read some of the numbers for power requirements of fast charges for electric vehicles, home chargers for overnight charging before you even get to the numbers for all electric homes. Yep, here is the basket, full of eggs, one basket, all the eggs.

Thanks for a lucid explanation. It would be great to see you as a guest on Canada's Decouple Media, hosted by an emergency doctor who promotes nuclear power.

With Nuclear Energy we all have to TRUST the company building and running it, then trust that they will store the waste appropriately for the next thousand years. No. Just no. Let’s overbuild renewables.

@ThePtoleme

16 күн бұрын

No, it doesn't work like that. You have to TRUST the agency tasked with protecting public health and safety related to nuclear energy.

@jginfographics

4 күн бұрын

@@ThePtolemeWrong. Aircraft are engineered not to fall out of the sky, but I trust they will from time to time. Same with nuclear.

What worries me is that, whatever we do, we d... better do it right. Because everyone's livelihood depends on electricity. Ideology, wishful thinking and good intentions are no substitute for getting it right. Reality does not care about these concepts.

@antonyjh1234

27 күн бұрын

80% of our energy is not from electricity but oil, we only exist because of it. I think separating the two when discussing the problem shows the public what net zero really means. The reality of running out of oil in 47 years still exists.

@yl9154

27 күн бұрын

@@antonyjh1234 Correct. But the average business, commerce, at the first degree, relies on electricity. The transport of the goods that they sell and a lot of manufacturing relies on oil. Even some electricity generation relies on it. But when electrical brownout occurs, everything, the whole economy shuts down, including probably refineries. That in a context where we are converting transportation to electricity. But I am far from certain that the planning for the required increase in electricity supply has been considered and planned for. My fear is that governments have passed laws on the phasing out of internal combustion vehicles and just hoped that the electrical supply capacity would somehow catch-up. But it takes over a decade to get all the processes done for a new dam to be build. Leave alone a nuclear central. And there will be the "not in my back yard syndrome", so additional delays due to legal challenges. So we may end-up with a lot of EV car crashing out the grid.

@antonyjh1234

27 күн бұрын

@@yl9154 Have a look around yourself and see how many things are oil based, the computer you are using will not exist without plastic. Asphalt even comes from the same barrel that diesel and petrol do. If you take away oil, which is coming, by choice or force then business doesn't exist, so we need to start looking at total overhauls of our systems and decide do we want to do things for profit or need.

@antonyjh1234

27 күн бұрын

@@yl9154 Have a look around and see how many things are oil based, the computer will not exist without plastic. Asphalt comes from the same barrel that diesel and petrol do. If you take away oil, which is coming by choice or force then business doesn't exist

@yl9154

26 күн бұрын

@@antonyjh1234 I am not advocating banning oil and I am well aware that most consumer goods contain oil. All I am saying is that our governments better make sure we have the electrical capacity in place to sustain the EV transition that they put into laws. Because if the grid can't sustain the demand, the manufactures and business shut down during the brown-outs and the economy suffers, which makes people suffer. Ask the South Africans (or the Germans when they ran out of gas to run their power plants and manufactures could run only a few hours a day instead of 24 hours a day). Our economy run on both oil and electricity. If our governments plan to reduce the oil dependency/consumption, then they better get the electricity part right! EV car is useless if there is no electricity to charge it. Manufactures shut down when there is a power outage. That is my point.

Once synchronized, the generators tend to stay in sync. With inverters that natural feedback does not exist.

Not questioning the professor's credentials but this needs to looked at through the lense of his involvement with the Centre of Indendendant Studies which is a part of the Atlas network, a chain of global think tanks representing the views of the fossil fuel and like industries. He is also telling a one sided story based on an old system mindset, not the opportunity to move to a move distributed and participant focused system. The current guard are desperate to lock in the current central control of power generation and distribution.

@frankszanto

24 күн бұрын

Forget the conspiracy theories. Look at the graph at 19:22, which is the NEM step-change scenario. It shows the increase in generating capacity from 80 GW now to 120 GW in 2030 and 240 GW in 2050. This is capacity, not what is actually generated. It is a fact that, because they only work 25-35% of the time, we have to massively overbuild solar and wind to produce the same energy which coal plants do, or which nuclear plants would. Yes, solar is cheap, but when you need six times as much, it starts to add up. And you must have storage to cover the times when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing, and building storage is lagging way behind the installation of renewables.

@markdev4796

24 күн бұрын

@@frankszanto Yes it is well known, if you look at Tony Seba's numbers on over building on both is still cheaper and they calculate on actual power delivered not rated max output. Then if we reference the latest advice from the Gaurdian interviewing 380 top climate scientist (not economist)80% gave a forecast in excess of 2.5 degrees of warming buy the end of the centry, so it pretty much stops us all in our tracks. The Atlas links are no conspiracy theory, although Atlas thinktanks love to claim this- there is some great information out there on this from leading Australian academics as well as publicly available information - much of it from Atlas themselves.

@frankszanto

23 күн бұрын

@@markdev4796 The graph at 19:22 is of GW, which is power, not GWh which is energy. It shows we now have about 80GW installed, but the maximum demand on the NEM on a hot summer's day is around 36GW. Fossil fuels still contribute over 61% of our energy. This overbuild is not free. It uses huge amounts of materials. In the end, it will be the environmentalists who stop the transition to 100% renewables when they can physically see the cost.

@markdev4796

23 күн бұрын

@@frankszanto I think we all understand GW vs GWh, combined with battery and storage the overbuild is not as significant as suggested, you are trying to measure the new system through the lens of the now very outdated way of delivering power and through the narrative of the incumbent. Australia has an amazing opportunity through this transition, if it lets the coal and gas industries keep its control of the narrative it will miss the opportunity. It is more often than not the expense of fossile fuel power on the wholesale market that is pumping the power price up.

@cameronfuture7467

22 күн бұрын

@@frankszanto Nothing is free we have some submarines coming apparently according to the drums of war are to stop the Chinese thinking about taking over Australia, those are not free either. The problem with this is like Mark mentions, its all based on the old centralised one way distribution/transmission system. Its the same basic system that Tesla/Westinghouse proposed in 1886 and ultimately running at Niagara Falls. Things have changed a hell of a lot since back then, we are more efficient, technologically more advanced and science is forever discovering better ways of doing things. Just because the infrastucture for centralised distribution has been in place and sticky taped together doesnt mean it should stay. I like the idea of lots of redundancies and to me thats self islanding microgrids where they still can be interconnected but you can issolate very small blocks and avoid the clamity of a problem in a centalised generation station wiping out massive areas. Take a look at Octopus Energy in the UK thats the future direction of energy providing. I am seeing positive thing here in Australia with new suburbs having local batteries and homeowners with solar storing excess into those so they can use it at night and the battery provider charging them up during the day when energy providers have cheap solar excess. Its dropping their bills by 1/3 which for many isn't chicken feed. But we need to stop looking at the grid as we did in the 50's and 60's and look at it from a whole different angle. the "alway on" one speed coal stations really just have to go they just are wasteful and a relic from the past. IMO the AEM would be far better to disband and everything become localised microgrids, to me the AEM has become an utter mess and the costs to keep putting on endless bandaids on old infrastructure make little sense in 2024.

Tesla PowerPack grid storage batteries: "Hello... We're over here 👋"

@malcolmwhite6588

27 күн бұрын

I’m assuming you’re kidding if you’re serious, grab your calculator and work out in dollar terms, size and capacity how big a grid storage you would need to provide any sort of additional stability and meaningful load, balancing to the grid

@virtual-viking

27 күн бұрын

@@malcolmwhite6588 I figure production will increase by a factor of 1000 while cost will be reduced by a factor of 10 using Sodium ion batteries instead of Lithium. It will also be more profitable for Tesla than selling cars in less than a decade. It doesn't even take all that much imagination, since there are already a couple of islands that have done it.

@mikegofton1

27 күн бұрын

@@malcolmwhite6588 yes, done that. Tesla megapacks : 970 kWh LCOS = AUD $0.17kWh , 200 MWh, 8 hr duration LCOS = AUD $0.112 kWh. Size of energy storage capacity required by 2050 as per AEMO 2024 ISP (optimal deployment path) = 398 GWh pumped hydro , 86 GWh grid scale battery, 160 GWh consumer energy resources (home batteries and EV with V2G/H) What figures do you have ?

@SocialDownclimber

18 күн бұрын

@@malcolmwhite6588 Why use a calculator when you could check the cost of existing grid scale batteries that already provide that service all over Australia? The FCAS market has already been swallowed whole by batteries. They provide those services far cheaper than running a turbine on standby, burning fuel constantly without putting that power into the grid.

@ThePtoleme

16 күн бұрын

@@SocialDownclimber How delusional can you get? The Germans, who are 20 years ahead in renewables, have just announced that they are building 21GW of new gas-fired power plants, not 21GW of batteries.

Trends need to be considered. Australia has been spiralling in ever decreasing circles, since Menzies was elected by promising to end petrol rationing. ENIGINEERS ARE NOT SCIENTISTS.

@cameronfuture7467

22 күн бұрын

Coming up to seven decades and I for one have lived in that spiral

The speaker mentioned Tesla, Westinghouse and Edison, a name that can not be left out is Charles (Proteus) Steinmetz. His contribution to electrical science is equal or greater than the before mentioned. The comments section has revealed some ignorance of science and engineering by laypeople on this subject.

Where did you get the $90/MWh cost for nuclear? New build nuclear is no way near this price, it's closer to $160/MWh. Why did you not provide a source for this claim?

@Nathan-bu5ci

21 күн бұрын

Yeah not much detail on this slide, imagining no extra grid capacity needed for Nuclear without any idea where its being deployed, probably nothing on the cost of water needed which will go up when these things are turned on and Uranium will go up in price. Factored in all the costs of extra grid for Wind and Solar, did they factor in the cost of building the plants?

@jackmasi9753

9 күн бұрын

It’ll be in the paper. You can locate a nuclear plant at the exact same location as existing coal plants - they are all located near lakes for cooling. Where did you get 160/MWh from?

@rossstevenson4103

4 күн бұрын

Look up hinkley point B and C , an absolute blot on the land scape and 41 billion.

Any chance you could approach the guys from the Energy Insiders podcast for a discussion. I would love to see where the debate goes. I just want to know the truth and facts. I don’t know who advises the government on planning but I am 100% sure politicians aren’t engineers, and they should be finding the most reasonable balance between what is cost effective and achievable whilst still maintaining a reliable system to provide cheap power and the least environmental damage over the lifecycle. Wind and solar farms are environmental vandalism in my opinion.

@jasonsvarc4424

22 күн бұрын

The integration system plan (ISP), which is being implemented, is developed by experienced power systems engineers (not politicians). There is a lot of cherry-picking and misinformation in this video, and many advancements, strangely, were not mentioned. For example, Grid-forming inverters and the role of batteries in frequency response are far quicker than any "spinning machines" or fast-start gas turbines. This is very odd, considering he is involved in the industry and would be well aware of these advancements, which have helped stabilise the grid numerous times over the last few years (most notably and ironically after thermal coal generator tripping events).

Its about time an Electrical Engineer is speaking up, there should be more doing the same, unfortunely, many are profiting from renewable Projects and don't give a rats about the impossability of powering a nation with wind and Solar

@Nathan-bu5ci

21 күн бұрын

It's almost equally as impossible to do it with Nuclear in a drought prone country. Soon they will say we need to add desal plants and then more nuclear to power those. Running nuclear takes obscene amounts of water.

@robzee-4895

21 күн бұрын

We have desal plants that are wasting away due to lack of use so where is the problem

Hear! Hear! Been saying it for many years.

"you need to understand" is not a coherent argument.

this is a great video. this is what the mainstream doesn't see. it's so sad. its a religion

Interesting Data Thanks

Thank you Professor Wilson. Hopefully the Greens and their followers will listen.

@Nathan-bu5ci

21 күн бұрын

I mean he could talk to the Greens and maybe he gets asked where all the water will come from to run these plants.

So Edison was right but he didn't have the DC voltage boosting and bucking capability we have now.

@Nathan-bu5ci

21 күн бұрын

I mean he did electrocute a while heap of animals to try and sway the argument, so he loses points for that.

Great simple explanation - but something most would have guessed is fairytale

The people at Net Zero Australia must be nuts!

@Gumbatron01

23 күн бұрын

They are. Probably the most accurate way you could describe them is cultists. The "Climate Emergency" is a cult,. and the Net Zero zealots are some of the most devoted to that cult.

I got 5 minutes in and smelt an agenda, I'm not suggesting that we can 'do it all' with renewables, but the way this was formatted, seems like outsiders have written most of the dialogue. did the professor receive remuneration? We will never know.

I am a little confused about a couple of his remarks. First at the 6:30 min marks he mentioned that DC cannot be converted to AC. This is what a inverter does on every rooftop solar system installed on the grid. Secondly he mentioned that you cannot maintain grid stability without the spinning turbines of power stations or at least I think that is what he meant. You can stabalise the grid through Synchronous Condensers which are being used in SA to stabalise the grid and maintain 50Hz. Also more recent software management has allowed batteries to do this Virtuallt. This is occuring at the Big Battery at Hornsdale in SA. The British Government has signed an agreement with the owners of Hinckley C Nuclear P{ower Station to provide power at $A180 per Mwh for the next 30 years adjusted annually for inflation.

@kevinloughrey5135

Ай бұрын

Firstly, 18 cents a kWh is very expensive for electricity produced by nuclear power. It is likely there are influences that have elevated this price such as excessive regulation, power unions, a lack of low cost means to cater for peak loads and the injection of intermittent power into the system from other sources which then prevents the system from running at 100% of its capacity 100% of the time. Next, he is right in what he said regarding AC and DC voltage transformation. To change the voltage of DC you must chop it up such that it is a square wave AC, smooth it with capacitors, transform it to the new voltage, rectify it back to DC and then smooth out the transients with large capacitors. Very messy and you lose a lot of energy in the process. Very high voltage DC has much lower loss than AC when transmitted over long distances and this low loss in transmission compensates for the energy lost converting AC to DC and then returning the DC to AC for consumption. That is why long distance transmission might use 500kV DC for this purpose.

@buickanddeere

Ай бұрын

The conversation was regarding Tesla and Edison over 100 years ago . Why are you trying to drag 100 year old tech into today’s conversation . To push your renewable religion . Synchronous Condensers do control noise and spikes in real time . While also providing leading power to counter the lagging power factor from electric motors . There is nothing driving the Synchronous Condensers to pickup the power grid load . When wind and solar falter. There is also no spinning reserve to pickup the load in case of transmission line or generator failure .

@markrowley8177

Ай бұрын

You need the mechanical inertia to maintain grid stability. Nothing else does it as well.

@markrowley8177

Ай бұрын

Regards to converting!!! He said Transform. You cannot Transform DC is a true statement. Transformers work due to the collapsing fields that are only possible with Alternating Current!!!

@buickanddeere

Ай бұрын

Actually the solid state conversion of DC to AC is efficient . The example given back in the Edison and Tesla era was lossy and expensive . Note how quick a greenie was to jump on that and attempt to twist the presentation out of context . Greenies are more about faith and feelings instead of facts .

What a load of tripe.

@smclaren67

14 күн бұрын

Why ... what part of the science do you disagree with ?

Remember that supplying baseload energy requires batteries or other stotage mediums PLUS the installation of renewables like solar or wind to charge the batteries when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. You cannot count that capacity as available to serve peak loads, too. This truth is what makes net zero electric systems very expensive for the middle class to afford. Can it be done? Yes. Do we want our citizens to pay for it when we are trying to compete with China? Maybe not! Maybe we should make crypto mining an interruptible load or only allow it when surplus renewable energy is available.

His graph at 16:33 purporting to show that renewables are too expensive uses studies from 2008 to 2018 (and in turn data from perhaps before that)? Does he not know how much the costs of renewables, storage, and much else have plummeted in that time? Or worse, perhaps he does, which is why he presented this old data?

@jasonsvarc4424

22 күн бұрын

Yes, a lot of information and data presented was outdated and cherry-picked to make renewables sound unviable.

@Nathan-bu5ci

21 күн бұрын

Yeah said he talked to bankers in 2017 as well....hmm you think anything on the economic landscape has changed in 7 years?

If one is going to criticise any proposed solution to any problem, then one should 1) state whether the problem is real or not, 2) define the risks for not acting on the proposed solution of the problem or give evidence for the problem not existing or not worth a solution, 3) define or propose alternatives to the proposed solution. This speaker did not do any of these.

@ronvandereerden4714

29 күн бұрын

He got so much wrong it was clear he was preaching to the choir.

Claiming that solar/wind/renewable electricity is too intermittent and has to be consumed as it is generated is the same argument as claiming that harvested vegetables must be eaten immediately. But look how that argument fails on so many levels, including in all kinds of living organisms. Energy storage is common and complex, the fat stored in the bodies to plants and seeds being squirrelled away. Just because some people are still stuck on promoting fossil fuels, doesn’t mean that everyone has to stay stuck on using carbon to create electricity.

@malcolmwhite6588

27 күн бұрын

I’m not sure what the point of your commentary is? if you’re debunking this piece, I suggest you do some research on electricity generation and also as some background some electromagnetic theory - you can find that in any university physics, 101 paper

@LateForDinner-mn1hn

27 күн бұрын

@@malcolmwhite6588 Marc Jacobson published some very good data about how to get to 100% renewable energy with the current available technology for the whole of USA. Perhaps a debate between Wilson and Jacobson would be illuminating.

@hyster16t

27 күн бұрын

You're clueless of the reality of power generation, transmission and cost.

@LateForDinner-mn1hn

27 күн бұрын

@@hyster16t But Marc Jacobson isn’t. Go read his published data.

@prizecowproductions

26 күн бұрын

Did you not pick up on the fact that renewables require because of their nature of supply of AC power has to be built 6 times bigger to cope with its inefficient supply. Time to smell the roses and wake up from this dream.

After watching this I figured there’d have to be at least one anti-trump comment. Was right.

What is a renewables superpower?

We do not need nuclear, we have perfectly good coal fired power stations already built. In any case we need more CO2, not less.

@buickanddeere

2 ай бұрын

Why the fear and terror regarding nuclear ? Your experience is limited to anti nuclear echo chambers , anti nuclear warhead types and watchers of the Simpsons . How many years have you worked in nuclear ?

@andrewjoy7044

Ай бұрын

What was the matter with kerosene lanterns and wood stoves?

@buickanddeere

Ай бұрын

Still need nuclear base load . Why are you terrified of nuclear ? Myself and two of my children were working in a nuclear power plant today .

@andrewjoy7044

Ай бұрын

I am not "terrified" of nuclear. It would be a good option if it could be built for roughly the same cost and in the same time frame as wind and solar. It cannot! All the nuclear power stations built and commissioned over the last few years have been way over budget and taken a pond time to build. Hinkley C is a very good example. This 3.2 GW station was initially expected to cost about$A24 billion when first proposed in 2009. 15 years later that estimate is now $A92 billion and full completion by 2031.​ @@buickanddeere

@buickanddeere

Ай бұрын

Andrew, congratulations . You are today’s winner of the unequal comparison argument .

Exactly! Nuclear!!! By far the cleanest and most practical form of energy we can use in this period of human history. Until they allow us to use the suppressed tech they no dubitably have, we have to be using nuclear and fossil to the most part.

Ramblings. You're a smart guy. How about you come up with a solution that doesn't take 20 years to build

The problem is people no longer know how to think critically and if some AI system generates an output your not able to question it because AI is clever and your not.

renewables are working very well here in California . Are you taking money from the fossil fuel industry?

@benmorris1968

27 күн бұрын

Anyone who questions solar , wind, renewables must be corrupt? If that is how you roll maybe you need to have a look at yourself.

@scottprather5645

27 күн бұрын

@@benmorris1968 solar and wind with battery backup is working remarkably well and transforming the power grid here in United States and this is mostly funded by private investment money they wouldn't do it if it didn't make economic sense so the picture I see is that it's working spectacularly well. there's a lot of fossil fuel company propaganda trying to confuse people on this issue. When someone tells me it's not working that's an immediate red flag.

@benmorris1968

27 күн бұрын

@@scottprather5645 Please watch to the end. This professor is pointing out the issues facing us and he is advocating for Renewables with Nuclear as the percentage of Renewables grows. He's not advocating for fossil. California's grid source is 50% Gas as their turn-on source when renewables switch-off. Go Off Grid. This is an option for many homes in wealthy countries but not for 90% of the world's population. Solar and batteries might seem cheap to Californians. But try telling 800 million Indians who earn less than $2000 USD per YEAR they have to buy an off grid system. Indeed, with all the efforts Californians have put in they are still only Solar 17% and Wind 8%, which is below the renewables adoption threshold where the issues this professor is trying to address start. I believe thinking and talking about the technical and economic issues that will arise when Solar and Wind approach 40% or more should be viewed as a good thing. A problem to solve. Not accused of being a fossil fuel stooge. A corrupt person. Do better. Please. I believe Nuclear forms a big part of the way forward to save the planet and prevent the millions of human deaths that will occur if we try to force most of the world to go net zero too quickly. But we need to look at all the options. www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electric-generation

@SocialDownclimber

18 күн бұрын

@@benmorris1968 The speaker is taking money from the fossil fuel industry though. You should actually check before assuming innocence.

@jamesgreig5168

15 күн бұрын

​@@scottprather5645what a load of absolute garbage. California is the basket case of the US on such issues. Is there some link that remotely supports your comment. I've yet to see it.

Renewables won’t work compared to what? Business as usual won’t work, that’s why we are here. We can produce renewable energy, but whether that ‘works’ depends on your vision of what is required. The only model we have control over, is the only one not considered: economic model. So, we may not be able to power a civilization optimized for carbon molecules, but we can power a civilization. Which is the goal, to sustain civilization, but it would be naive to think that doing so would not require it to change as well.

@philipwilkie3239

28 күн бұрын

Without a realisable physical system, the economic model you propose is not anchored in anything real.

"Do the Math" and we are compelled to recognise Logarithmic Time, a relative-timing number at e-Pi-i 1-0-infinity functional infinitesimal coordination-identification positioning system. If we listen to authorities who wish to maintain a system of ethical standards in every aspect-version of Singularity-point Lensing Actuality, it's (too) clear and simple that the only fundamental absolute needed for a solution to the Measurement Problem situation, is Absolute Zero Kelvin, ie Eternity-now Interval is the only "discrete" definition of reality and that is the old implication of placement by epicycles in quantization jumps of No-thing definable, the natural WYSIWYG illusion of separation being a delusion of intentional displacement. The cleansing of the Atherton Tablelands is a top down absolute disgrace, the absence of the legal system processes created of, by, for people.

Everything comes back to OVERPOPULATION. Geothermal energy requires a smaller footprint 👣 and is worth the investment necessary.

@AquaMarine1000

28 күн бұрын

If the world's current population were to stand side by side each on one square meter. Their foot prints would be contained in a ninety kilometres square, barely a dot on a world map.

Wow, just outdated information.

"There would be considerable environmental impact I would have thought". I do not give a damn about your guesses. This is all just guesses and biased nonsense.

Put in place 60% BWRX 300 and 40% Natrium SFR with Molten Salt Storage. Offer to take in Spent Nuclear Fuel from around the world and run your reactors off the recycling of the Spent Nuclear Fuel. Give back the Spent fuel via the ANSTO technology so host country can deposit with deep bore technology. ANSTO Synroc is a technology that treats challenging nuclear waste, including molten salts from spent fuels.

He absolutely insists you can't model the whole system, and then he supports his argument on his PHD student who modelled the whole system. He says to question when somebody says, "we need", and then says, "we need". I question him. I question his motives. I question whether he's ever heard of batteries and algorithms. I question if his oldest ancestors kept his more contemporary ancestors in the caves like he is trying to do to you now. This guy is a nutcase!

@Nathan-bu5ci

21 күн бұрын

Says ecologist and never mentions where all the water will come from to run these plants, not from his drinking water. He will probably try and tell farmers that they dont need big turbines and transmission wires through their country and that Nuclear is the answer and then take all their water allotments away to feed these plants.

Yes - still some big decisions to come and maybe nuclear cannot be excluded yet for Australia. The climate emergencies coming at us fast now may yet demand a sharper turn away from fossil fuels but a stable electricity grid at the same time in order to power new buildings, flood mitigation, food security, rapid research, maybe defence demands etc. Rapid responses are better handled with stable power systems.

@Nathan-bu5ci

21 күн бұрын

Build Nuclear and add water security to that list, as he says 'Do the Math' on water usage and come back to me.

@jamesgreig5168

15 күн бұрын

Seriously mate, how delusional are you.? Firstly the assumption to climate change is due to how we generate energy and secondly, disasters are coming at such a rate because of global warming. No data backs either of your points and it's sheer stupidity on your behalf to write such irresponsible drivel.

The sooner these pretender engineers are moved on the better. Just bc they think they can solve a given problem, makes them think they have the creativity to think up novel solutions when typically they do not. This is why Elon Musk created SpaceX while the engineers merely solve the problems he frames for them. This is why Steve Jobs hired Johnny Ives - an industrial designer - to imagine the future, and then sent their imaginings to the engineering dept. These mediocre engineers are handbrakes on progress due to their stubborn ego, while the real entrepreneurs who are solving the renewables storage challenge have already past these yesteryear pedants with solutions that will make this arrogant fool look idiotic within a decade. Reminds me of the electrical engineer who spent an hour in the 1990’s telling me the internet will never have the bandwidth for video streaming. I told him he was wrong & he foolishly was. He just couldn’t factor in that people better and smarter than him would solve the problems he couldn’t even conceive of.

Will you just as publicly eat your words and apologize when you are shown to be wrong?

@normanstewart7130

Ай бұрын

Will the renewables fanatics eat their words and apologise when they're shown to be wrong?

@normanstewart7130

Ай бұрын

Correction, did the renewables fanatics eat their words and apologise when they were shown to be wrong?

@ronvandereerden4714

29 күн бұрын

@@normanstewart7130 Renewables are growing incredibly fast, now make up all growth in energy demand, are poised to exceed energy growth and are getting cheaper by the day. Batteries and computer algorithms are negating the need for the old, and inflexible, flywheel stability. Computers didn't even exist when the grid began developing. Leaving the caves would have been fanatical to your ancestors.

@normanstewart7130

29 күн бұрын

@@ronvandereerden4714 If you watch the video, you'll see that the growth of renewables is precisely the problem. Prof. Wilson, and the electricity industry, are pointing out that renewables make the grid unstable and extremely expensive.

@ronvandereerden4714

29 күн бұрын

@@normanstewart7130 Leaving the caves meant everybody would lack shelter. So why aren't we still there? Wilson and his fossil cohorts can make all the claims they want about not being fundamentally opposed to renewables, but they are fundamentally opposed to renewables. That is their motivation. Grid instability is an excuse, not a limitation. Computers and grid scale batteries didn't exist when the grid was first established so they made do with other innovations. Now computers and batteries can stabilize the grid in ways that the original designers could never have dreamed of. His claims are poppycock that sells well to old-timers and those who want to see renewables fail because they are so invested in fossil fuels. The excess capacity that an intermittent system requires does not go to waste as he coyly avoids mentioning. In a free market, businesses will make use of that excess energy during maximum output and store it in myriad ways or create a demand for products and systems that benefit from short but somewhat predictable periods of free or cheap energy. As he admitted, the entire system is in its infancy. He tried to make that sound like a bad thing. Note that he *insisted* the entire system cannot be modelled. And then he argues his case on the claim that his student modelled the entire system. He also said to question those who says, "we need". And a few sentences later says, "we need", to argue his point. So, yeah, I question him. He is a charlatan of the worst sort.

Absolute rubbish

Those massive solar farms in the north are primarily for export. Australian net revenue. I think you are the most disingenuous presenter I've seen since Trump.

@philipwilkie3239

28 күн бұрын

So where does all the domestic solar come from then?

@ronvandereerden4714

28 күн бұрын

@@philipwilkie3239 Closer to where demand is. You don't need that much solar as the size of those farms. Half of you have it on your roof. Those huge farms are to send power to SE Asia.

@ivanf6938

27 күн бұрын

@@ronvandereerden4714 When? There is no current means for it to get there.

@Nathan-bu5ci

21 күн бұрын

@@philipwilkie3239 the sun you dolt.

Some total garbage takes here, really brings down the level of so-called academic. Idiotic strawman arguments to start with

@normanstewart7130

29 күн бұрын

Could you be more specific?

@philipwilkie3239

28 күн бұрын

The core argument is this : intermittent renewables = complexity = risk = higher costs

@peter1448

27 күн бұрын

@@philipwilkie3239 There's just some really inane strawman statements to begin with and total crap unsourced data with no assumptions given or transparency. Just total garbage for an academic. The idea that solid state tech like PV and batteries is more complex than thermal generation plants with boilers, steam turbines etc is garbage. That is tech from centuries ago. Like an EV has far less moving parts and mechanical complexity than an ICE vehicle, EV will be far more efficient and long lasting. It's just stupidity of not seeing how inefficient old crap tech is compared to new tech. Direct generation by PV and wind are for more straight forward and efficient, batteries developing rapidly

@jasonsvarc4424

22 күн бұрын

@@philipwilkie3239, except that both of the recent large-scale blackouts over the last few years (in Vic and QLD) were due to thermal coal generators tripping. An old centralised energy system is not compatible with a modern decentralised system, which is what is happening. Additionally, the energy crisis in 2022 and massive spikes in wholesale electricity prices were due to coal and gas shortages, not renewables.

@philipwilkie3239

22 күн бұрын

​@@jasonsvarc4424 So your argument is that if the relatively simple and robust system that has a pre-ponderance of high inertia rotating generators can indeed fail from time to time - then adding more intermittent, complex, zero inertia generators will somehow magically make matters better? In my working life I have seen this mistake made many times - adding complexity almost always decreases reliability. And adding poorly defined buzzwords like 'modern' and 'decentralised' does not help either.

I'm amazed that you showed so many graphs but you managed to avoid providing so little evidence for your claims. Almost every single slide was you describing a 'problem' from the slide and then talking about causation without actually showing evidence for what you were saying. Here's some very important points you missed: 1. Batteries have already dominated the FCAS market. They do it better and cheaper than traditional 'spinning machines' on all time horizons shorter than an hour. 2. Models are a thing you urged people to distrust, and then entire second half of your talk was about how certain models predict the future of the grid. You even talked for 10% of your own talk about how modelling the whole grid is impossible for anyone, then used around 4 models to predict the future of the whole grid. That's just contradicting yourself. Nonsense. 3. The 100% RVE graph you showed was almost entirely data from the EU and a bit from the USA. None of that is relevant to Australia. Might as well show a graph comparing kangaroo meat consumption and being shocked about how different the estimates are for Aus and the Eu. 4. You said at the start that you were addressing the claim that renewable energy can save us from climate change ... and proceeded to forget all about it. You didn't even have a single chart that talked about emissions of each power source, construction times, permitting and cost of each generation technology. You only showed graphs derived from predictive models, which you had already rubbished. Why did you spend 2 minutes talking about Tesla and Edison and fail to mention emissions and climate? This presentation needs some serious work to move it from 'misleading' to 'helpful'. Provide evidence for your claims, include some obvious omissions and talk about each model you use and its purpose, rather than presenting their conclusions as fact.