There don't appear to be any engineers involved in those predictions.
Their predictions require many other changes: "The baseload issue can be solved by reducing baseload demand,having some renewable energy sources that can supply baseload power and increasing the proportion of flexible peakload plant in the generating mix." Who should pay for this? Price pollution properly, and you will see the push away from natural gas and coal to nuclear, not "renewables" at far higher prices ($7-10 billion AUD/year for Australia, according to this article).
In summary, if you change the goalposts (reduce baseload) and pay lots more, "renewables" are totally doable according to somebody with no engineering experience.
Who is putting their hand up for their street lights to be switched off? For their hospital to run expensive co-generation when there isn't enough supply or it becomes to expensive? A lot of these statements are made by groups which just pretend that you can cut down a lot of energy and that's how they make their sums work. The BZE group do this with their calculations and it's pretty unrealistic.
The problem I have with all of these plans is that they drastically inflate the cost of energy for no real reason apart from dislike of certain generation types.
coryrc|11 years ago
Their predictions require many other changes: "The baseload issue can be solved by reducing baseload demand,having some renewable energy sources that can supply baseload power and increasing the proportion of flexible peakload plant in the generating mix." Who should pay for this? Price pollution properly, and you will see the push away from natural gas and coal to nuclear, not "renewables" at far higher prices ($7-10 billion AUD/year for Australia, according to this article).
In summary, if you change the goalposts (reduce baseload) and pay lots more, "renewables" are totally doable according to somebody with no engineering experience.
brc|11 years ago
Who is putting their hand up for their street lights to be switched off? For their hospital to run expensive co-generation when there isn't enough supply or it becomes to expensive? A lot of these statements are made by groups which just pretend that you can cut down a lot of energy and that's how they make their sums work. The BZE group do this with their calculations and it's pretty unrealistic.
The problem I have with all of these plans is that they drastically inflate the cost of energy for no real reason apart from dislike of certain generation types.