3 ms·

Great analysis. I’m not so familiar with the AU energy market, so I don’t know how much of an update this result is vs. a reasonable prior. The bigger simulati

Great analysis. I’m not so familiar with the AU energy market, so I don’t know how much of an update this result is vs. a reasonable prior. The bigger simulation mentioned in the OP is the ISP: https://aemo.com.au/energy-systems/major-publications/integrated-system-plan-isp/2020-integrated-system-plan-isp https://aemo.com.au/energy-systems/major-publications/integr.... Anyone know what that plan proposes in terms of energy mix? > It is interesting to note that the ISP is predicting that approximately 9GW of peaking gas or liquids will need to be retained in the NEM’s generation mix out to 2050. This is more than the 6.6GW required so far in this study. Though the OP notes that ISP is doing demand modeling too, instead of simulating a new supply mix for the present demand & supply conditions.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
This is completely in line with reasonable priors: https://www.wartsila.com/energy/towards-100-renewable-energy/atlas-of-100-percent-renewable-energy#/country/AU-E https://www.wartsila.com/energy/towards-100-renewable-energy... It's more of a science/engineering communication effort, because there's a lot of unreasonable priors out there. edit: also the 6.6GW of 'other' the current model uses, is the current actual gas plant size, not an amount that they predict as optimal or desirable. Similar with the Hydro, they used the current capacity, even though some are being built right now.
- caf 4y ago
  On my reading of it, "Other" is the gap between the other modelled sources and the actual demand.
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    I may be mixing up his comment about limiting the Hydro to the current max output rate. But, I believe they chose the levels on solar and wind to aim for, precisely because they knew 'other' would come in around this level, because it would be a poor demonstration of the viability of renewables otherwise. But they were at the mercy of the unpredictable weather and demand, so couldn't control it exactly, just much better than many people would assume.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

This is completely in line with reasonable priors: https://www.wartsila.com/energy/towards-100-renewable-energy/atlas-of-100-percent-renewable-energy#/country/AU-E https://www.wartsila.com/energy/towards-100-renewable-energy... It's more of a science/engineering communication effort, because there's a lot of unreasonable priors out there. edit: also the 6.6GW of 'other' the current model uses, is the current actual gas plant size, not an amount that they predict as optimal or desirable. Similar with the Hydro, they used the current capacity, even though some are being built right now.

caf 4y ago
On my reading of it, "Other" is the gap between the other modelled sources and the actual demand.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  I may be mixing up his comment about limiting the Hydro to the current max output rate. But, I believe they chose the levels on solar and wind to aim for, precisely because they knew 'other' would come in around this level, because it would be a poor demonstration of the viability of renewables otherwise. But they were at the mercy of the unpredictable weather and demand, so couldn't control it exactly, just much better than many people would assume.