{"id":734,"date":"2011-08-16T10:40:08","date_gmt":"2011-08-16T00:40:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/climatereview.net\/ChewTheFat\/?p=734"},"modified":"2020-10-21T11:57:18","modified_gmt":"2020-10-21T00:57:18","slug":"why-do-we-need-large-coal-power-based-energy-grids-cant-a-local-green-solution-of-solar-panels-and-biomass-replace-this-antiquated-system","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatereview.net\/ChewTheFat\/?p=734","title":{"rendered":"Why do we need large, coal-power based, energy grids? Can’t a local, Green solution of Solar Panels and Biomass replace this antiquated system?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

I work in Renewables and am proud to do so.   <\/strong><\/p>\n

In particular, I work in the costing of new, energy plant.  I have always had a hunch that biomass generation was a no go with respect to being a self-sufficient, profitable, investment opportunity.  I was happy with this perhaps, unfounded preconception until challenged recently…<\/strong><\/p>\n

A few weeks ago, a local politician friend of mine asked, \u201cwhy haven\u2019t we given up \u2018dirty\u2019 coal yet?\u201d  Why generate centralised, CO2<\/sub> intensive electricity and then waste resources on a very sizeable and expensive transmission grid that spans great distances.  \u201cTransmission\u201d and local \u201cdistribution\u201d usually accounts for about a third of the end-user, retail, electricity cost.  In addition, high voltage, transmission has an inherent loss factor and thus this is surely wasteful also?  Wouldn\u2019t it be much better to generate electricity locally, save on transmission costs, and preferably do it renewably?  Ideally, couldn\u2019t we replace large networks of principally, coal-fired generation with solar panels<\/a> on houses and use decentralised, biomass<\/a> generators to bridge any supply gaps?  A worthy suggestion on his part.  Well, I have some experience in power plant evaluations and said, \u201cErr, no, unfortunately this is a no go.\u201d  Of course, he asked me, \u201chow so?\u201d  Well, I confidently replied as follows.  Coal supplies the bulk of our electricity in Australia (and globally).  It costs us only $45\/MWh.  If we were to go down the Green route of local, Renewables generation we would need to install a lot of solar panels.  However, at a very pricey $450\/MWh, that would be a total non-starter.  Alternatively, couldn\u2019t we use winds farms?  Well, wind farms need to be cited in extremely windy areas to make them even slightly viable.  So, residential areas would mostly rule that one out.  However, assuming every town was constantly, super windy, they could only generate at $110\/MWh.  So, how about my friend\u2019s original suggestion, what about biomass?  Well, I replied, this technology is also relatively expensive at $140\/MWh, and thus sadly not suitable.<\/p>\n

Before we go any further, let\u2019s ask the question, \u201cWhere did I get these numbers from?\u201d:<\/p>\n

What\u2019s the relative cost of energy?<\/strong><\/h2>\n
(The Long Run Marginal Cost (LRMC<\/a>) of power generation technologies)<\/address>\n
 <\/address>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Detailed evidence here<\/a>.<\/address>\n
 <\/address>\n
Considering these comparative pricings, can biomass compete and, if so, in which market niche?  Sadly, it is not cheap enough to be a Baseload<\/a>, energy provider (i.e. run the plant 24\/7), like coal and OCGT.  Nor can it even compete against Peaking<\/a> plant (i.e. run the plant only in  high price periods) such as OCGT.  As it happens, biomass, and all the Renewables technologies, are uncompetitive without substantial tax-payer subsidies.<\/address>\n
 <\/address>\n
There are exceptions to the rule, every development is different, and synergies within particular, corporate structures could make biomass a lot more financially attractive.  However, these numbers are a reasonable rule of thumb.<\/address>\n

 <\/p>\n

However, needless to say, my friend wasn\u2019t convinced with just a few stats.  We all know that 95% of them are made up and are questionable, to say the least.   Agreed, this spiel of the relative costs of energy production was not a particularly satisfactory answer.  To him, biomass still seemed like the perfect solution.  Recycle organic and household waste, reduce its quantity and create Green electricity locally at the same, \u201cBrilliant<\/a>!\u201d  There\u2019s plenty of synergies in this concept; a few birds are killed with the same stone.<\/p>\n

Well, as I don\u2019t personally partake in biomass, plant evaluations (a poor excuse admittedly), I couldn\u2019t give him much more details at the time.  Why should it cost as much as x3 that of burning coal?  So, I decided to delve further.  I decided to flesh out the fruit and give some reasoning to my \u201cunreasonable\u201d response.  Where to go?  Well talk to the experts…<\/p>\n

So, I found myself a chief engineer of a \u201cbiomass plant\u201d.<\/p>\n

He, quite rightfully, was proud of his work there.  But, at the same time, he is now happy to be rid of it all, after many long years of service.  For him, it was like one, big, R&D, engineering project; on the one hand, full of technical problems, and thus frustrating, on the other hand, full of cutting edge solutions, and thus thrilling.  The technology required to make the wood and plastics combustion process work is necessarily very complex.   Thus, the business model became highly risky, and risky means costly.  Healthy cashflows were achieved, lamentably, solely on substantial subsidies from tax payers.  The project was, and still is, a success.  However, that\u2019s only from massive Green subsidies.  It\u2019s worth noting that there are a number of types of \u201cbiomass\u201d plant, landfill methane is another prominent example, however, my expert\u2019s plant burnt wood chips and plastics.  However, I would consider his case study as relatively indicative of the biomass industry as a whole.  His story is not the only one along the same lines.  His plant is not only new, but also well funded, managed and planned.  If it can succeed then, surely, others can as well?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

So, why should biomass cost so much?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

\u201cDirty<\/a>\u201d Coal is \u201cdirt\u201d cheap, so why can\u2019t biomass be the same? What are the “hidden costs”?<\/p>\n

Well, here are some of the real issues which make this type of cutting edge biomass project \u201cfrustrating\u201d, but also \u201cthrilling\u201d, because of the need for innovative, engineering solutions:<\/p>\n