Geoff Robertson and Michael Chamley (CCN 372) responded to my contribution in CCN 371 re the Super Battery proposed for Munmorah.
They point out the principal purpose of the battery is to provide stability to the power grid, not so much as a backup power source.
This in no way negates the need for a cost/benefit analysis to assist in the most beneficial use of scarce financial resources.
And yes I am very well-qualified to assess a cost/benefit analysis (as Mr Robertson wonders) if given the original value of the variables.
I am happy to produce my academic qualifications and industrial experience if necessary.
I have no vested interest in power, a job nor allegiance to any political party.
I speak for Australia as I see it from a long history in earth sciences, energy and metallurgy.
Many who see it like I do and are aware, are frightened of losing their jobs through idiot ideology.
Assessing the relative costs of new generating plants utilising different technologies is a complex matter and the results are sensitive to location.
Nuclear plants are expensive to build, as are renewables, and both are relatively cheap to run.
Nuclear has the advantages of security and reliability with very low greenhouse emissions.
Renewables lack reliability when the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow and the weather does not affect output from a nuclear plant.
Nuclear has the disadvantage of waste disposal.
Large scale storage is not so much of an issue with nuclear as it is with intermittent renewables.
The literature abounds with conflicting claims about the relative costs of nuclear, fossil and renewables.
The basic metric adopted for comparison is levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) which is the total cost to build and operate over plant lifetime divided by total electricity generated.
It is easy to get the ‘right’ figure for LCOE by choice of input variables.
LCOE calculations need to be made dispassionately, which is not usually the case.
Future generation will be a mix of types depending on location.
For example, Canada has high reliance on hydro because it has a lot of water, Australia does not.
We have an abundance of nuclear and fossil.
It would seem to make sense to further investigate nuclear, especially for base load power, and not to discard it out of hand, simply because it was made illegal in Australia years ago.
Why don’t we reappraise?
Email, Dec 17
Charles Hemmings, Woy Woy