Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

No, renewables are not an alternative to fossil fuels. That’s why natural gas and coal fire plants are still being cranked out today.



Seems to work just fine? This will of course penetrate down to less ideal locations as costs continue to decline.

> South Australia is at the vanguard of the global energy transition, having transformed its energy system from 1% to over 60% renewable energy in just over 15 years.

> By 2025/2026, the Australian Energy Market Operator forecasts this could rise to approximately 85%.

> South Australia’s aspiration is to achieve 100% net renewables by 2030. In 2021, South Australia met 100% of its operational demand from renewable resources on 180 days (49%).

https://www.energymining.sa.gov.au/industry/modern-energy/le...


Your examples don’t support your point. 60% renewable isn’t enough and they aren’t even into the hardest part of replacing the base load at that level.

> South Australia’s aspiration is to achieve 100% net renewables by 2030

That link you sent is bleak. They just now are hitting the point where renewable generation causes excess energy during peak solar hours sometimes. They have no concrete plans to store at the scale required to actually get through the troughs. They are just now beginning to kick the tires on storage projects which is where much of the southwestern US was a decade ago.


1 to 60% was possible in 15 years. All the while we have had these cost curves for wind and solar. [1] So you're saying the last 40% is going to be completely impossible and wreck the grid?

Like, I just don't understand your negativity. Projecting to reach 85% renewable penetration in ~3 years and it is a bleak outlook? You're looking for a magic finger snap and it is 100% tomorrow?

[1]: https://www.lazard.com/media/451886/grphx_lcoe-09.png


>So you're saying the last 40% is going to be completely impossible and wreck the grid?

Without massive storage, yes. The 60% it picked up is the easy part of the demand that follows the renewable production. The last 40% is 95%+ of the difficult work.

The difference here is making a rocket that gets to space vs one that achieves orbit. They seem similar but they aren’t even in the same league.

>Like, I just don't understand your negativity.

It’s not negativity, it’s what has happened in every country that is a decade or more ahead of Australia here. Australia is not magic, it has nighttimes and slow winds like every other place on the planet. This problem has plagued everyone at the head of the technology curve here and there still isn’t a solution. What do you think Australia will do differently?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: