3 ms·

> Which "they" .. the Coalition in Opposition, the Labor Government, the various multi billion dollar private sector players (Santos, Fortescue, Rio Tinto, et a

> Which "they" .. the Coalition in Opposition, the Labor Government, the various multi billion dollar private sector players (Santos, Fortescue, Rio Tinto, et al)? AEMO. AEMO are the only ones who are tasked with keeping the grid running at the least cost. The private players are playing "how can I use this crisis to make money" game, the pollies are playing some game akin to "whats the best way to buy votes using the voters own money". AEMO handles the private players by attempting to create a market aligning the profit motive with their task. That's hard enough when the technology is stable. Right now it must be near impossible. I have no idea how they handle the pollies. It's probably a case of "keep your head down and hope they go away".

defrost 2y ago
AEMO, here at least, outside of it's core Eastern and Southern regions, is reactive rather than leading with plans .. it manages what exists and comes into existance and functions as a reference for questions on energy policies that are set elsewhere. The private players have many goals, a sizable part of those goals are driven by "how can we save money that we are already spending" - hence the interest in R&D from the likes of Rio Tinto and Fortescue in Infinity trains, solar farms, electric and other renewable renewables etc. in a sectors with some serious draw down on fossil fuels. Other players, eg. Santos, are motivated by green washing existing practices .. having the worlds largest carbon capture and sequestration project is small beans given a) it's piddling success so far and b) tiny impact compared to the magnitude of the larger operation that's releasing greater amounts of carbon than are being captured. AEMO is one part of what I generally referred to as "policies will flow from both industry and scientists in the public sector", it serves to coordinate a multitude of schemes pushing forwards, some of those schemes being hollow tin cutouts of no real substance.

defrost 2y ago

AEMO, here at least, outside of it's core Eastern and Southern regions, is reactive rather than leading with plans .. it manages what exists and comes into existance and functions as a reference for questions on energy policies that are set elsewhere. The private players have many goals, a sizable part of those goals are driven by "how can we save money that we are already spending" - hence the interest in R&D from the likes of Rio Tinto and Fortescue in Infinity trains, solar farms, electric and other renewable renewables etc. in a sectors with some serious draw down on fossil fuels. Other players, eg. Santos, are motivated by green washing existing practices .. having the worlds largest carbon capture and sequestration project is small beans given a) it's piddling success so far and b) tiny impact compared to the magnitude of the larger operation that's releasing greater amounts of carbon than are being captured. AEMO is one part of what I generally referred to as "policies will flow from both industry and scientists in the public sector", it serves to coordinate a multitude of schemes pushing forwards, some of those schemes being hollow tin cutouts of no real substance.