BNC Discussion Forum
« CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
May 22, 2013, 2:18am

[Home] [New Topics] [Help] [Search] [Login] [Register]



BNC Discussion Forum :: BraveNewClimate.com :: BNC Blog Post Comments :: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
   [Search This Thread][Reply] [Share Topic] [Print]
AuthorTopic: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool (Read 511 times)
Barry Brook
Administrator
*****
Brave New Climate Owner
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage]

Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 118
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Karma: 103
CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Thread Started on Nov 8, 2012, 3:34pm »		[Quote]
A new post has been published on BraveNewClimate. Link here: http://bravenewclimate.com/csiro-energy-future-2050-tool

CSIRO eFuture have built a wonderful new tool for exploring scenarios of Australia’s electricity future. It gives great flexibility to ‘build your own future’ and is a wonderful point of reference for debates on clean energy pathways from today through to 2050. It’s based, among other things, on the data published in the recent AETA report

This BNC Discussion Forum thread is for the comments related to this BNC post.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
There's no 'silver bullet' for solving the climate and energy crises. The bullets are made of depleted uranium and thorium...
QuarkingMad
Beta Particle
****
member is offline

[avatar]



Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 65
Karma: 4
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #1 on Nov 8, 2012, 3:37pm »		[Quote]

Oops, I just posted this myself in Energy.

Fantastic tool nevertheless. This is what I posted there:

[...]

For a low demand, medium fuel cost, and low cost choices I get:

20Mt CO2 (2050), 26c/Kwh and 27c/KWh with nuclear, and
50Mt CO2 (2050), 26c/kWh and 30.5c/kWh with no nuclear.

I know what I want in my low carbon mix.

BREE ATEA report includes Nuclear, CSIRO includes Nuclear, and White Paper (not sure yet).

Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Barry Brook
Administrator
*****
Brave New Climate Owner
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage]

Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 118
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Karma: 103
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #2 on Nov 8, 2012, 3:39pm »		[Quote]
Thanks QM, I'll delete your post to keep the discussion on it centralised here.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
There's no 'silver bullet' for solving the climate and energy crises. The bullets are made of depleted uranium and thorium...
wilful
Gluon
*
member is offline

[avatar]



Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 12
Karma: 0
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #3 on Nov 8, 2012, 3:54pm »		[Quote]
If I'm reading that right, if nukes are allowed then brown coal disappears in 2032, and if not then brown coal continues until 2045. And nuclear power eats every other source of power's lunch from then on, rapidly becoming the only growth option.

Some might say that the tool is biased towards nukes. Others might say that's reality baby.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Barry Brook
Administrator
*****
Brave New Climate Owner
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage]

Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 118
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Karma: 103
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #4 on Nov 8, 2012, 4:23pm »		[Quote]
Certainly Giles Parkinson wasn't happy. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2012/csiro-mo....gy-future-39135

But there was extensive discussion of the nuclear costs at the ANU energy forum, and people there seemed to think they were reasonable (if anything, the SMR forward estimates were conservative). The key with that the Parkinsons of this world want FOAK costs to be applied to nuclear, and hypothetical NOAK to his preferred technologies (and to ignore storage costs).

The nuclear costs in BREE also tally with Nicholson et al 2010 meta-review, see TCASE 14: Assessment of electricity generation costs: http://bravenewclimate.com/tcase14
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
There's no 'silver bullet' for solving the climate and energy crises. The bullets are made of depleted uranium and thorium...
Nucular
Guest
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #5 on Nov 8, 2012, 8:57pm »		[Quote]
It's interesting to see that even with the high cost nuclear option selected in a high demand, low fuel price scenario, nuclear would account for almost 50% of the electricity produced.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
lukeuk
Quark
*
member is offline





Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 2
Karma: 0
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #6 on Nov 9, 2012, 3:15am »		[Quote]
Somewhat similar tools are available for the UK, and for China. The UK tool has been mentioned on here a few times, but I'd not seen the China one until Mark Lynas tweeted about it. The Chinese server is a bit erratic and not always available.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Anon
Fission Product
*******
member is offline

[avatar]



Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 492
Karma: 9
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #7 on Nov 9, 2012, 12:18pm »		[Quote]
Though the UK tool doesn't include economics and I can't see the China tool for myself (error 503).
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Barry Brook
Administrator
*****
Brave New Climate Owner
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage]

Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 118
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Karma: 103
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #8 on Nov 9, 2012, 12:30pm »		[Quote]
Inclusion of economics - even if basic (e.g. not properly accounting for fit-for-service issues like the need for large-scale energy storage for high-penetration variable renewables like solar PV and wind), is a bit step forward - it lessens the arbitrariness of the projected energy mixes vs the UK model
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
There's no 'silver bullet' for solving the climate and energy crises. The bullets are made of depleted uranium and thorium...
Giles Parkinson
Guest
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #9 on Nov 9, 2012, 2:26pm »		[Quote]
Barry, you can't build any sort of energy plant without financing it. Yes, the AETA estimates are in line with industry experience, and the French Senate committee, which found earlier this that nuclear operating costs at between $59-$75/MWh (compared to the $44/MWh cost passed on to consumers - shock, another subsidy!). But neither AETA nor the French report included the financing costs, and that is nuclear's Achilles Heal, as the UK and the Czechs are finding. All the best. One of the Parkinsons of the world.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
quokka
Beta Particle
****
member is offline





Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 56
Karma: 4
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #10 on Nov 9, 2012, 5:27pm »		[Quote]
My source tells me that the wholesale cost of electricity made available from EDF to other suppliers in France was set by the government at EUR 40/MWh in 2011 rising to EUR 42/MWh in 2012. At current exchange rates that's about USD 51-53.6/MWh.

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/C_EDF_....et_200411a.html

However you crunch the numbers, any purported subsidy is pretty small beer compared to the German retail renewables levy which is to rise to about EUR 53/MWh. That's not the price - that's just the subsidy. And to support about 20% of electricity generation not the 75% or so that nuclear provides in France.

But much more important than the last cent per kWh on electricity price is magnitude of emissions saved and emissions saved per dollar or Euro. France wins easily.

And while we are at it, do you think gossip sourced from the Times is a fair and reasonable way to represent the cost of new nuclear build in the UK? Numbers that were, in fact, categorically denied by EDF who are currently in confidential negotiations with the governments and not in a position to say anything more. Likewise for the government.

And also, why was my comment on this on ClimateSpectator deleted?
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
quokka
Beta Particle
****
member is offline





Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 56
Karma: 4
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #11 on Nov 9, 2012, 5:30pm »		[Quote]
err... That should of course be reneweconomy not ClimateSpectator.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Anon
Fission Product
*******
member is offline

[avatar]



Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 492
Karma: 9
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #12 on Nov 10, 2012, 1:27pm »		[Quote]
France is the world's largest exporter of electricity, wouldn't surprise me if they are making a lot of their operating costs not off their own citizens but of those they sell power to (at much higher rates).

Financing costs can be dealt with much more easily than inability to work when required so nuclear does have an advantage there.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Martin Nicholson
Neutrino
**
member is offline





Joined: Apr 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 17
Location: NSW Australia
Karma: 1
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #13 on Nov 10, 2012, 3:25pm »		[Quote]
Giles – pleased to see you commenting here.

The IEA frequently does studies of actual costs for electricity generators based on data supplied by its members. From these costs they analyse the LCOEs for each available technology. In 2010 the IEA had a range for nuclear between $59 (US) and $99/MWh based on different discount rates. In your article in Reneweconomy, you stated that BREE’s estimate was $55-$60/MWh in the low cost scenario. This seems to be inline with IEA’s estimate which most certainly takes financing cost into account. I think your statement of ‘fantasy land’ in your article was way off the mark.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
proteos
Beta Particle
****
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage]

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 74
Location: France
Karma: 4
Re: CSIRO Energy Future 2050 tool
« Reply #14 on Nov 15, 2012, 8:25pm »		[Quote]

Nov 9, 2012, 2:26pm, Giles Parkinson wrote:
Barry, you can't build any sort of energy plant without financing it. Yes, the AETA estimates are in line with industry experience, and the French Senate committee, which found earlier this that nuclear operating costs at between $59-$75/MWh (compared to the $44/MWh cost passed on to consumers - shock, another subsidy!). But neither AETA nor the French report included the financing costs, and that is nuclear's Achilles Heal, as the UK and the Czechs are finding. All the best. One of the Parkinsons of the world.


To add some info into this:

  • the french court of audits has published a very complete report on the costs of the french nuclear programme. It is based on an average price on the whole period, it gives a price of €¤50/MWh. It did include financing costs, yet one may argue that because EDF is state sponsored it does not matter.
  • There has been another report to determine the governement set price of nuclear power that EDF must sell to its competitors (let's not enter into the why's). It takes into account that amortization has not taken place linearly, and that most of the reactor fleet is now amortized. It gives a price of €¤33/MWh today. That was before renovation costs (to go to 60 year lifetime) & Fukushima related costs. Again, as the difference with the court of audits report is a question of amortization, the cost of financing is included.
  • The governement mandated price for the competitors is €¤42/MWh.
  • Various inquiries, lastly by a senate committee, says that in the regulated price of power, nuclear is priced around €¤35/MWh.
  • The senate committee has also a graph showing the path of the price of power in real terms through time (bottom of this page). It shows that there is no real subsidy: costs were frontloaded.
  • The price of the EPR under construction is said to be ¤€70 to €¤90/MWh. (see court of audits report)
« Last Edit: Nov 16, 2012, 5:32am by proteos »Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
   [Search This Thread][Reply] [Share Topic] [Print]

Click Here To Make This Board Ad-Free


This Board Hosted For FREE By ProBoards
Get Your Own Free Message Boards & Free Forums!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Notice | FTC Disclosure | Report Abuse | Mobile