Showing posts with label Energy cost. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Energy cost. Show all posts

Thursday, August 9, 2012


Australia saddled with a Taj Mahal power network


The Prime Minister delivered a landmark speech yesterday on the need for changes to Australia’s
energy markets, particularly the way that electricity networks (poles and wires) are managed. This
speech will significantly raise the profile of this debate, but to energy insiders this speech isn’t a
surprise, it’s long overdue.

No doubt there will be a political fight in shifting anger about rising energy prices from the carbon
tax (the Australian Government) to the energy market (the states). However, the Prime Minister has
raised issues that are very real and she’s not the first person to raise them. On June 13, Greg Hunt,
the federal Shadow Minister on Climate Action, Environment and Heritage, set out a three point
plan for reducing energy prices that included a specific change to the energy markets.

There is something very wrong with the National Electricity Market. The price of wholesale
electricity is going down, but people’s bills are going up, increasing by over 50 per cent over four
years. The carbon price only accounts for 6 per cent of the average electricity bill, and other ‘green’
schemes are less than 7 per cent of bills and actually lower wholesale prices. In contrast, network
costs (‘poles and wires’) account for 43 per cent of the average bill and are rising rapidly – in 2010
Ross Garnaut estimated that 68 per cent of price rises by then were due to network costs.

Why are network costs going up so fast? Put simply, the network companies are spending $45 billion
to ‘augment’ the network over 5 years, and those costs are passed on to electricity consumers. There
is no doubt that some of this expenditure is essential. New suburbs need to be connected and some
old infrastructure needs to be replaced. However, while its convenient for network companies to
blame aging infrastructure, it’s a scapegoat for a much broader range of spending, and probably only
accounts for 20 per cent of expenditure.

Wednesday, July 11, 2012


The Direct Costs of Energy - Hydro&Nuclear Best, Solar Still Lagging

Wrapping up our discussion on the actual costs to produce electricity, we can determine a total actual life-cycle cost for coal, nuclear, solar and hydro needed to build and operate the number of each plants or arrays required to produce a trillion kWhrs over their life-span. Key assumptions and references are given in the three previous posts.

In 2011, a 750 MW coal fired power plant cost $2.5 billion, expected to operate at a capacity factor of 71% for the 8,766 hours each year over its 40-year life, producing 187 billion kWhrs, more or less.
750 MW x 1000 kW/MW x 0.71 x 8,766 hrs/yr x 40 yrs = 187 billion kWhrs

To produce one trillion kWhrs over their life span will require building about 5 (5.3) of them at a cost of about $13.4 billion.
 Fuel costs are about 2¢/kWhr @$40/ton of coal, O&M costs are about 0.6¢/kWhr and decommissioning costs are 0.21¢/kWhr. So to produce a trillion kWhrs from coal will cost: $13.3 billion + $20 billion + $6 billion + $2.1 billion = $41.4 billion or 4.1¢/kWhr.
Fuel costs are largest for natural gas and coal, small for nuclear and zero for the renewables. Long-term generating costs are highly dependent upon fuel costs, especially for natural gas.