We have other promising renewable energy options to replace coal. According to ABARE, hot rocks geothermal could be half the price of solar thermal by 2030 - if we ever get it working. This is anything but mature technology, so delivery and cost are somewhat uncertain but it’s certainly worth keeping in the kitbag.
Other renewable technologies like wind and solar PV are mature but will probably be restricted to a relatively minor role because of the need for expensive storage. Energy efficiency and conservation can also help reduce demand for energy which will assist in the fossil fuel replacement process.
Managing reliability in an electricity network relying on variable renewable technologies will require a much smarter grid and extensive storage. Careful analysis will be needed to ensure sufficient storage is available to handle extreme adverse weather events such as widespread, persistent cloud over solar thermal plants. These will all add to the cost.
Advertisement
So where does that leave us?
We can possibly replace fossil fuels with renewable energy but we will pay a big price to make it work reliably. We could see electricity costs at least quadruple in real terms by 2030 and probably more. If geothermal comes good we might get away with less storage but the cost will at least double by 2030. Do we need to pay this price?
Well no. We have another mature technology which passes the emission test as well as any renewable energy option. Based on a recent analysis of 15 separate studies performed over the last 10 years, this mature technology will do the same job as new coal plants for about the same electricity cost with no future cost increase from a carbon price.
So why aren’t we planning to use this technology? Most of the world already does and has plans to build a lot more plants to replace coal. The technology, of course, is nuclear power. No emissions in operation. Very low fuel cost. High reliability and no significant increase in energy costs. It really does not make any sense for this technology to be ignored in Australia.
Pursuing a 100 per cent renewable energy option (with its inherent risks of failure) to replace fossil fuels could burden our grandchildren with significantly higher energy costs and a flow-on effect to their standard of living. Australia is a low-cost energy country. Why would we want to give up this commercial advantage unnecessarily? I don’t think our grandchildren will thank us for it.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
19 posts so far.