25 October 2017, ENOVA One Step Off the Grid: Enova launches community “Solar Garden” for those who can’t install. NSW community energy retailer Enova has launched a first-of-its kind project that will enable renters and others who can’t intall rooftop solar to invest in a “solar garden” and benefit from reduced bills. The idea is to build a 99kW rooftop solar system – most likely on a business – and “sell” the panels in 1kW chucks to consumers that can’t put solar on their own roofs, either because they are renting, they live in apartments, in houses that are shaded, or can’t afford to invest in a whole system. Enova held a public meeting in the northern Rivers town of Brunswick Heads on Tuesday to sell the idea, which it says could be the first of many such “solar gardens”, particularly as it moves into the major metropolitan markets of Newcastle and Sydney early next year. “We’ve been thinking about this for a while,” Enova chair Alison Crook said. “People have been saying they want to install solar but they can’t do it …. this makes rooftop solar more affordable and accessible for everyone. We didn’t think that we’d be able to offer this so quickly – but it is here.” The savings from a solar garden are not as great as having your own rooftop solar, but according to Enova’s numbers they are substantial, and can offer a rapid payback time. Customers will be able to buy capacity in increments of 1kW. The upfront price is expected to be $1,000 for each 1kW, and the returns could up to to 23 per cent a year (in the form of a $230 reduction in annual energy bills for each kW). That represents a payback of less than 5 years. The deal lasts for 20 years. Read More here
Monthly Archives: October 2017
25 October 2017, ABC News, Once were sceptics: What convinced these scientists that climate change is real? Up until a few years ago, Richard Muller was often quoted by sceptics as a credible, high-profile scientist who doubted the consensus on climate change. Today, he starts his lectures by stating a few things he believes to be facts. “Al Gore has grossly exaggerated global warming. And if you watch his movie you have more misinformation than information. In 2010, Professor Muller from Berkeley University was funded to carry out a comprehensive study by a group of individuals who doubted the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) data. They believed that urban heat islands, data-selection bias, and inaccurate climate models were being glossed over by scientists. ‘Don’t trust us’ approach key to convincing sceptics Professor Muller and his team — all of whom doubted climate change was happening or that carbon dioxide was its cause — were shocked to find a correlation between carbon dioxide emissions and warming. “That was the biggest surprise of all,” he said Read More here
19 October 2017, HiffPost, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Climate Change Remarks Sure Seem To Be Aimed At Trump. As U.S. President Donald Trump continues to unravel legislation designed to fight climate change, Chinese President Xi Jinping is promoting his own country as a climate change leader. At the opening of the Communist Party congress in Beijing on Wednesday, Xi said China has taken a “driving seat in international cooperation to respond to climate change.” “No country alone can address the many challenges facing mankind. No country can afford to retreat into self-isolation,” Xi said. “Only by observing the laws of nature can mankind avoid costly blunders in its exploitation. Any harm we inflict on nature will eventually return to haunt us. This is a reality we have to face.” While he didn’t mention Trump by name in the address, some observers are interpreting Xi’s words as part of a campaign to present himself as a strong and responsible world leader while Trump takes aim at environmental protections and alienates U.S. allies. The Trump administration announced its withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement in June, and proposed repealing the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan earlier this month. Trump also has a personal history of denying climate change, describing global warming as “mythical” and a “hoax” in past tweets. Read More here
18 October 2017, The Conversation, The government’s energy policy hinges on some tricky wordplay about coal’s role. The most important thing to understand about the federal government’s new National Energy Guarantee is that it is designed not to produce a sustainable and reliable electricity supply system for the future, but to meet purely political objectives for the current term of parliament. Those political objectives are: to provide a point of policy difference with the Labor Party; to meet the demands of the government’s backbench to provide support for coal-fired electricity; and to be seen to be acting to hold power prices down. Meeting these objectives solves Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s immediate political problems. But it comes at the cost of producing a policy that can only produce further confusion and delay. The government’s central problem is that, as well as being polluting, coal-fired power is not well suited to the problem of increasingly high peaks in power demand, combined with slow growth in total demand. Coal-fired power plants are expensive to start up and shut down, and are therefore best suited to meeting “baseload demand” – that is, the base level of electricity demand that never goes away. Until recently, this characteristic of coal was pushed by the government as the main reason we needed to maintain coal-fired power. The opposite of baseload power is “dispatchable” power, which can be turned on and off as needed. Classic sources of dispatchable power include hydroelectricity and gas, while recent technological advances mean that large-scale battery storageis now also a feasible option. Coal-fired plants can be adapted to be “load-following” which gives them some flexibility in their output. But this requires expensive investment and reduces the plants’ operating life. The process is particularly ill-suited to the so-called High Efficiency, Low Emissions (HELE) plants being pushed as a solution to the other half of the policy problem, reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Read More here