By Phil Kreveld
The dichotomy in network and energy source development as we transition to our national 82% renewable target by 2030 was there to see for all but the casual or uninterested observer. To cut to the chase: what comes first; technology or markets? Here are some thought provokers to help decide the question. Super conductors, solid state electronic technology, and the internet well and truly preceded markets—they gave rise to them!
At the plenary sessions where energy luminaries including Daniel Westerman (AEMO), Anna Collyer (AEMC), Damien Nicks (AGL), Brett Redman (Transgrid) and others discussed the Australian transition journey the expectation that markets would give rise to appropriate technological developments was the credo.
Related article: How to design a ‘renewable’ grid
In parallel technical sessions there was a lot of discussion about conventional electrotechnology, in particular synchronous condensers, to jolly the integration of renewable energy sources along but somehow the existence of parallel universes seemed to escape the gravity of energy transition engineering requirements. Syncons, for all their usefulness are not the ultimate answer; at best they might ease the transition, the obvious point being that inverter engineering provides millisecond response speed, basically is inertia-less and therefore makes use of new control technology paradigms. Yet, there was no discussion in the technical sessions on this rather salient point.
The new technology being worked on in Australian academia could be instrumental in the transition path BUT it requires a commercial world’s desire to employ it ahead of some siren call beckoning its entry into the EPC world. Brett Redman’s ‘no transition without transmission’ reduces complexity to ridiculous simplicity. This is not to deny the obvious; remote energy zones appropriate for solar and wind require connection to consumption centres but it neatly sidesteps some important developments; the growing independence of distribution networks because of the rapid increase in rooftop solar and the consequent reduction of energy required to be transmitted from remote sources of energy.
In one of the technical sessions, Electranet from South Australia, made reference to the problems of difficult to control increases in transmission line voltage because of very light loading during daylight hours. Yet in a recent announcement, Transgrid proudly announced that it was purchasing controllable reactors for its westward transmission corridor—precisely to ameliorate the voltage rise due to transmission line charging in light load scenarios. This is the creation of a benefit and the defence of necessary investment where with better conceptual design none would have been required.
In a session chaired by Phil Blyth, the founder of energy disruptor, Greensync, the panel discussed the energy transition landscape and examination of energy efficiencies, vehicle to grid and upgrades called for in distribution networks. Panel member Ben Burge of Telstra appeared to talk past the large investment burden distribution networks would have to institute for vehicle to grid or for heavily increased vehicle charging burdens. As to the climate for funding, panel member Malcolm Thornton, Clean Energy Finance Corporation, admitted that regulatory and technical uncertainties ‘perhaps’ made the climate for investment difficult even though, as he said, there were many well-funded investors.
Missing in action were in depth examinations of the most exciting aspects of distribution networks because logic indicates that all electrical energy generated and transmitted ends up in distribution networks! With Daniel Westerman worrying that new generator connections were flagging one would think that therefore a focus on the role of distribution networks in meeting a substantial portion of their energy demand would be an urgent matter. His organisation was not represented in technical discussions and yet, it is charged with the maintenance of voltage and frequency stability as well as grid security.
Related article: Transgrid releases System Security Roadmap for transition
Blue sky projections of transition scenarios were there including a very impressive set of scenarios for the transition roadmap presented by Richard Bolt of NOUS painting a detailed picture of wind, solar, and the essence of retaining gas generation with carbon capture—a set of scenario studies similar in concept to AEMO’s integrated systems plan, and with input from Melbourne University, Princeton University and the University of Queensland. However, disappointingly an equivalent exposition in engineering terms addressing the concerns expressed in AEMO’s February Engineering Plan with some three-hundred unanswered questions that could lead to hold-ups in new generation connections didn’t make it to the conference!
We still face a dichotomy—that’s clear; integrated systems roadmaps require detailed integrated engineering plans and not glib, if amusing commentary. Anna Collyer in the opening plenary session made a playful reference to the renewable integration task ahead by comparing it to a jigsaw puzzle in solving the nation’s engineering challenge: start at the edges before you tackle the hard bits at the centre.
