Solar Batteries: Australians see energy storage as the future, poll finds, ABC By consumer affairs reporter Sarah Farnsworth and the National Reporting Team’s Rebecca Armitage, 22 Sept 17, As power prices continue to surge, Australians believe household solar storage batteries are the key to cheaper and more reliable energy, according to a new poll of 2,000 households.
Key points:
A survey found almost three-quarters of people believe solar batteries will become commonplace
68 per cent of households with solar panels are considering purchasing a battery
The price of storage batteries in the first half of 2017 only dropped by 5 per cent
The Climate Council found nearly three-quarters of those surveyed believe batteries, coupled with solar systems, would become commonplace within 10 years.
Of those who already had solar systems, 68 per cent were considering adding a household storage battery.
Most said the primary motivation for buying a solar battery was to reduce power bills.
Only 6 per cent believed consumers were driven by the need to protect their homes from blackouts.
More than half said they expected large-scale batteries like the one being built by Elon Musk in South Australia would also become common in the next 10 years.
“It shows that Australians do understand that renewables — particularly solar and increasingly battery storage — provide a solution to high power prices,” the Climate Council’s Andrew Stock said.
“I think it’s very encouraging that Australians really do get the importance of new technology. There is very little appetite for keeping aging coal fire stations running in the Australian populace, frankly,” he said……..
Energy economist and director of Carbon and Energy Markets, Bruce Mountain, agreed South Australians would benefit from installing batteries sooner rather than later.
“That is simply because battery and solar prices have come down, and in South Australia energy prices have gone up so much,” Mr Mountain said.
Mr Mountain said he wanted the Federal Government to invest more in the local industry to bring down solar battery costs, instead of seeking to subsidise coal fire power generators like Liddell.
“They can accelerate the installation of these batteries, they can grow a local equipment suppliers and often than incentive creates new industry and scale economies,” Mr Mountain said.
Australia’s southern winters are drying out. Here’s why, ABC 20 Sept 17 ,By Ben Deacon and Kate Doyle Winter rains are in decline across southern Australia, and while it is too early to say beyond doubt it is due to climate change, scientists say it is not just about climate variability.
Key points:
This winter was particularly dry given there was no El Nino event
Winters in Australia’s south are drying out, affecting farmers
Scientists say it is not just due to climate variability
“It’s actually quite unusual for us to get such a widespread dry through the winter without having an El Nino,” Bureau of Meteorology senior climatologist Blair Trewin said.
El Nino often brings dry conditions to Australia, but this year it is in neutral.
“It’s almost more about what hasn’t been happening,” Dr Trewin said.
Normally in winter, storms come up from the southern Indian Ocean and clip the bottom of Western Australia, delivering rain to the south of the country.
But until mid-July, the storms largely missed the continent………. Rainfall continues to decline in southern Australia. According to the Bureau of Meteorology, May to July rainfall has reduced by about 19 per cent since 1970 in the south-west of Australia.
There has been a decline of about 11 per cent since the mid-1990s in the April–October growing season rainfall in the continental south-east.
CSIRO Agriculture and Food senior principal research scientist Zvi Hochman said winter rain in Australia’s southern wheatbelt had declined by a whopping 28 per cent since 1990.
“I was surprised as anyone to find the extent to which that trend, across the 50 weather stations, is there,” Dr Hochman said.
Nuclear annihilation was the common childhood nightmare for those growing up in the late 20th century. When the Cold War ended, the issue dropped off the public radar, to be replaced by other existential concerns such as global warning.
In the meantime, states with nuclear weapons got on with modernising their arsenals away from the glare of community awareness, and other states forged ahead with their own nuclear programs because, as noted by Australia’s former UN Ambassador Richard Butler, “as long as any state holds nuclear weapons, others will seek to acquire them”.
Now, two man-children possessed of odd hairdos, nuclear arsenals and twitchy fingers have brought the issue back to where it should have been all along. Uppermost in our minds.
Nuclear weapons are uniquely destructive to human health and the environment, because of the nature and extent of the devastation they cause and the ongoing radioactive fallout. Some nuclear weapons today are more than 3000 times more powerful than the atomic bombs that wiped out Hiroshima and Nagasaki 72 years ago. A single nuclear warhead, if detonated on a large city, could kill millions of people, with the effects lasting for decades.
While other destructive weapons — land mines, cluster munitions, biological and chemical weapons — are already banned, the most powerful of all, nuclear weapons, remain the only weapons of mass destruction not yet explicitly prohibitedunder international law.
This year, more than 135 other countries came together at the United Nations to negotiate a nuclear weapons ban treaty. You’d think Australia’s participation in the negotiations would have been a no-brainer for the federal government, what with the Australian public being overwhelmingly supportive, with Australia’s proud record of advocacy of nuclear disarmament, and with the Labor Opposition expressing its strong support.
This so-called ‘nuclear deterrence’ policy requires rational behaviour by all those who control nuclear weapons. Do we really have confidence that North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un and U.S. President Donald Trump will always behave rationally in not launching an attack on other nuclear states or their allies?
The nuclear deterrence policy also assumes that nuclear weapons make the world safer, not more dangerous. Patently, the reverse is true. The production, testing and possession, let alone the use, of nuclear weapons pose inherent risks.
There have already been a number of close calls (think Cuban Missile Crisis) and accidents, including last June, when a test missile involving the British Trident nuclear deterrence program malfunctioned and veered towards the U.S. coast before self-destructing. Luckily the missile was not armed with a nuclear warhead on that occasion but the British and U.S. governments did not reveal the incident when it happened, which incidentally, was just before the UK Parliament voted on renewing the Trident nuclear program.
Channeling Kath and Kim’s ‘I’ve got one thing to say to you’, the former UN Secretary-General was heard to say: “There are no right hands for wrong weapons.”
John Carlson, former head of Australia’s nuclear safeguards office for more than two decades, has pointed out in articles for the Lowy Institute that, as a party to the non-proliferation treaty, Australia is legally required to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to nuclear disarmament.
It is difficult to see how Australia’s boycott of the nuclear ban treaty negotiations could be compatible with that obligation. Carlson also noted that:
“The world still has 15,000 nuclear weapons and the risk of nuclear war is increasing. A ban treaty is needed to re-energise disarmament efforts. The treaty will help to stigmatise nuclear weapons and change mindsets about retaining them”.
Notwithstanding Australia’s immoral (and likely illegal) boycott of the negotiations, the treaty text was finalised on July 7, and opened yesterday, September 20, for signature.
The treaty prohibits nations from developing, testing, producing, manufacturing, transferring, possessing, stockpiling, using or threatening to use nuclear weapons, or allowing nuclear weapons to be stationed on their territory. It also prohibits them from assisting, encouraging or inducing anyone to engage in any of these activities. Nations are obliged to provide assistance to all victims of the use and testing of nuclear weapons and to take measures for the remediation of contaminated environments. The preamble acknowledges the harm suffered as a result of nuclear weapons, including the disproportionate impact on women and girls, and on indigenous peoples around the world.
Many Australian indigenous and service personnel victims of British colonial nuclear testing at Maralinga, Emu Field and the Montebello islands in the 1950s and ’60s would no doubt attest to the importance of the treaty, which will come into force upon the ratification of 50 nations.
Just as it is time for Australia to have its own head of state, it is time for Australia to finally let go of our long-time strategic dependence on a great power, and to pursue fully independent foreign and defence policies.
Our ties with the U.S. will always be close — as Paul Keating said recently, “we couldn’t shake the Americans, even if we wanted to”. But surely, the time has come, particularly following the election of Donald Trump, to distance ourselves from counter-productive defence policies that are based on false assumptions, and take our place among the majority of nations as a constructive contributor to global peace.
I urge the Turnbull Coalition government to sign and ratify the UN nuclear ban treaty. If the present government fails to act, I urge the great Australian Labor Party of luminaries like Tom Uren, to convert its present support for nuclear ban treaty negotiations in Opposition into future support for the treaty in government, with a firm commitment at next year’s ALP national conference to ratify the nuclear ban treaty early in its first term.
Solar sedan and sports coupe in race across Australia – and to commercial market
A UNSW-built “solar sedan” is taking on a Brisbane-built solar sports coupe in a race across Australia – and to drive as registered vehicles on Australian roads.
Policy uncertainty is blocking investment in low carbon assets
Australian institutional investors have a strong appetite for low carbon assets, but policy uncertainty and a lack of scalable deals are major barriers.
Whyalla’s not a ghost town, it’s the centre of a green industrial revolution
Garnaut says renewables will cut energy costs to Whyalla steelworks by at least a third, and outlines plans for large scale solar, rooftop solar and pumped hydro and battery storage.
Solar boom underpins big surge in renewable energy jobs in August
Large-scale power project construction work has broken through 10,000 jobs and rooftop solar installs almost broke 100MW for the month. Given they’ll deliver something close to $180m in bill savings the large lift in solar shouldn’t come as much surprise to anyone but Tony Abbott.
Commonwealth Bank acknowledges climate risk, shareholders discontinue proceedings
Commonwealth Bank shareholders Guy and Kim Abrahams have discontinued their Federal Court proceedings against the bank for failing to disclose climate change risks in annual reports.
Infigen Energy announces announces who will be appointed to the Boards of Infigen Energy Limited, Infigen Energy (Bermuda) Limited and Infigen Energy RE Limited (the Infigen Boards).
Battery ban off the table after industry roundtable “consensus”
Standards Australia says industry roundtable has broadly agreed to “review” proposed rule banning li-ion batteries from being installed inside homes and garages. But rifts emerge in industry.
Tony Abbott has drawn new battle-lines with interviews and an article that is a horror-show of ignorance, bias, conservative ideology and political dogma. Turnbull’s efforts to appease the right wing has gotten him and the Australian economy nowhere.
BHP under pressure to dump pro-coal lobby groups over climate policy
A shareholder resolution highlighting the chasm between BHP’s stated climate policy and the pro-coal advocacy of its mining industry lobby has pushed the company to commit to reconsidering its membership of the hardline Minerals Council of Australia.
Off-grid solar + battery systems prove 15x more reliable than network
Western Power pilot shows stand-alone solar + battery + diesel systems 15 times more reliable than grid, and could save $300 million in avoided network upgrade costs – but only if rules are change changed to allow the systems to be rolled out.
Battery storage uptake by households surges as grid costs soar
New data shows home battery storage installations set to treble in 2017, even without a price fall. Once the technology gets cheaper, says SunWiz, batteries will be as ‘common as the backyard pool.’
The amazingly positive renewable story the Murdoch media won’t write
The Australian buries its admission that Tuesday’s front page lead was fabricated, and still seeks to portray a cost saving to consumers as an extravagant “payday” for rich Saudi man.
Tomorrow The World Is Going To Try And Ban Nuclear Weapons. Australia Wants To Keep Them. New Matilda, By Rewena Maheshon A global push to save the world from a nuclear armageddon has the backing of more than 120 nations. Australia isn’t one of them. Rewena Mahesh explains.
On July 7, a global treaty was adopted at the UN General Assembly to prohibit nuclear weapons. This treaty now sets precedence for a powerful norm that will change the course of history by helping promote disarmament and preventing further proliferation.
This treaty closes a large international law gap, by prohibiting states from developing, testing, producing, manufacturing, transferring, possessing, stockpiling, using, or threatening to use nuclear weapons once ratified by 50 states.
That will happen tomorrow, on the 20th of September.
Despite an overwhelming 122 countries endorsing the treaty, strongly and actively supported by hundreds of civic society organizations including the World Medical Association, Medical Association for Prevention of War, the World Federation of Public Health Associations, nine member countries that possess nuclear weapons and most NATO allies boycotted the agreement.
Shamefully, one of those countries absent from negotiations and which played a role in boycotting the treaty is Australia. We fall under the nuclear protection of the USA.
While Australia, possesses no nuclear weapons, it is a major producer and supplier of uranium used in the production of nuclear arsenals for the US and British military and most recently Russia, China and India.
Australia has had a long history with nuclear testing, hosting the British in the 1950s and 60s to conduct 12 major nuclear tests which dispersed radiation across much of the continent. In particular site workers and Aboriginal communities nearby have been suffering the consequences of radiation, seen in high rates of cancer with very little compensation, and a lack of capacity to use traditional land due to contamination.
As a result of Australia hosting the US military and intelligence facilities, such as Pine Gap near Alice Springs, we are offered protection in the face of a nuclear threat, under the extended nuclear deterrence, and thus consider nuclear weapons to be legitimate, useful and necessary despite their devastating and catastrophic effects……..
Given the current volatile environment with unpredictable leaders, the only guarantee we have against the spread and use of nuclear weapons is to eliminate them completely.
Indiscriminate weapons such as landmines, biological and chemical weapons, and cluster munitions which have all been permanently banned are increasingly accepted as illegitimate, and are losing their political status.
It is thus difficult to acquire resources for the production and modernisation of a prohibited weapon by companies or governments. It is then hoped that by eliminating nuclear weapons, this forms the new norm globally and they too will lose their legitimacy and political status in due course.
Nuclear weapons are also an ineffective means of combating almost all issues globally and nationally, such as cyber warfare, climate change, poverty, antimicrobial resistance etc.
The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) showed that 84 per cent of Australians surveyed wanted the government to support the efforts of a treaty to ban nuclear weapons. Australia still has the opportunity to be on the right side of history by signing the treaty tomorrow.
Australia needs to be at the forefront of global efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons and not be misled by the notion of extended nuclear deterrence under the protection of the US.
Australia needs to look across the Tasman to its neighbour New Zealand, which for decades has remained an ally of the US, but has had an independent foreign policy.
Noel WauchopeMichael Shellenberger is a nuclear salesman posing as a new generation environmentalist with unsubstantiated energy “solutions”, writes Noel Wauchope.
LAST WEEK, The Australianexcelled itself in uncritically regurgitating nuclear lobby propaganda in the article, ‘Nuclear the “only option” to replace coal and gas: Michael Shellenberger’.
To start with, they describe Shellenberger as ‘one of the world’s leading new-generation environmental thinkers‘. Well, that is sort of, a bit, right. Shellenberger is well known as the founder in 2003, with Ted Nordhaus, of The Breakthrough Institute — a nuclear front group dedicated to promoting “new generation” nuclear reactors. He is not a new generation environmentalist, as his focus is solely on the nuclear industry.
In the same opening paragraph, Shellenberger is described as ‘a former renewables advocate to Barack Obama‘. Well, Shellenberger’s advocacy consisted of lobbying Obama to promote not renewables but nuclear power. He is described as ‘now a global champion for nuclear energy’, as if he had only recently become a convert from renewables.
The Australian goes on to quote Shellenberger’s statements against renewable energy, uncritically, despite the fact that he provides no evidence for them:
“[Wind and solar] are doubling the cost of electricity and they have big environmental impacts. All existing renewable technologies do is make the electricity system chaotic and provide greenwash for fossil fuels.”
And:
“[Opposition to nuclear] is like a superstitious religious belief.”
Having thus established Shellenberger’s very shaky credentials as an environmentalist, The Australiangets to the gist of the story:
‘Michael Shellenberger will visit Australia in November to promote a rethink on nuclear at a minerals industry conference.’
We are told that Germany’s renewable energy transition is not successful and that Shellenberger believes better education about nuclear power is needed as well as ‘a leap forward in scientific literacy about radiation’.
“The reality is the death toll from Chernobyl in 1986, after 20 years, is less than 200 people.”
As we have come to expect from The Australian and from Michael Shellenberger, no references are given to back up these statements.
Also unsurprisingly, The Australian quotes Shellenberger’s conclusion without comment:
“Nuclear is the only technology that can lift everyone out of poverty and reverse human impact.”
As often happens, this article is followed by numerous positive comments, often glowing with praise, if somewhat lacking in information or insight. There were no negative comments. But then, only registered readers of The Australian are allowed to make comments. It is tiring but necessary to refute bald claims made by very manipulative nuclear spruikers.
Where to start?
Here are some links to thoughtful articles which address claims made in this article:
Robyn Wood, Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 19 Sept 17
Greg of FLAG has a letter to the editor in today’s Advertiser for those who can get around the paywall
On the charge
HEAD of Resources Division, Department of Industry, Innovation and Science (DIIS), Bruce Wilson’s statement that “the federal Government is not pushing for a … National Radioactive Waste Management Facility to be hosted in SA” is not supported by the facts (“Nuke healing”, The Advertiser, 6/9/17).
Since the call for potential sites across Australia in March 2015, the process narrowed to focus on three, all in SA, two near Kimba and one near Hawker.
For over a year, DIIS staff have visited Hawker and Quorn almost weekly promoting the facility and answering questions.
A consultative committee meets monthly, a community liaison officer has been appointed and an economic working group has been formed. Newsletters appear regularly.
A delegation from Champagne in France, where there is a similar facility, has been presented praising the benefits of the facility to their region. Individuals and groups, including school students, have been funded to tour Lucas Heights.
In 2016, the federal Government allocated a $2 million community benefit package to Hawker. Another $2 million is promised this financial year with a similar allocation for Kimba, which will also have its own consultative committee and community liaison officer.
Mr Wilson’s letter emphasises the disposal of waste from the production and use of radioactive medical isotopes. He does not mention that the problematic intermediate level component of this waste can only be stored there on a temporary basis with no plan for its disposal.
Current state legislation, the Nuclear Waste Storage Facility (Prohibition) Act 2000, prohibits the storage in SA of the type of material proposed for this site.
Noel Wauchope, 20 Sept 17, Now, many weeks after Australia signing up to the Framework Agreement For Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems, the public is informed of this. I found it at the bottom of page 23 of the print version of The Age today. Why haven’t we heard about this before?
How is it that Dr Adi Paterson of ANSTO signed up to this, in advance of Parliamentary approval, and that the whole thing can be done without any proper public consultation? Australian tax-payers are now to be supporting the development of these new dreams of nuclear power – advanced nuclear reactors that exist now only as blueprints, and will be expensive, require government funding, and will not be commercially operational for many decades, if ever.
Surely it is time for a thorough inquiry into ANSTO’s funding and finances. The New Generation nuclear reactors are controversial, to say the least. They are in fact, part of the global nuclear lobby’s push to save itself – its future being threatened by its dire economics, and by its connection to the nuclear weapons industry.
The Australian media is regularly used to promote ANSTO’s nuclear reactor as having as its purpose “medical research” and “medical isotopes saving lives” – despite the fact that non nuclear production of these isotopes can be, and is, being done. The reality is that ANSTO is part of the global nuclear industry lobby, and its reactor produces long-lasting radioactive wastes and it should be shut down.
I couldn’t find it on The Age online. The print version, 19 Sept 17 – small article at the bottom of page 23:
Australia joins nuclear research club,by Cole Latimer
Australia has officially joined an international group focused on developing future nuclear energy systems, The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation has been welcomed into the Generation IV International Forum Framework, which aims to develop next generation nuclear power systems, and which ANSTO calls “a potential game-changer in global energy creation”.
Although Australia joined the GIF charter last year, the event marked the country’s official accession to the nuclear framework agreement, which is focused on six different nuclear reactor designs that provide poeer and “stringent standards in relation to safety and non proliferation”.
However, ANSTO stated that this was not about advancing the cause of nuclear energy in Australia’s current energy mix: instead it was about utilisingAustralian skills in research and development.
“Australia has no nuclear power program, but we do have significant local expertise in next generation research, which is what this partnership is about” ANSTO chief executive officer Adi Paterson said.
ANSTO will leverage our world class capabilities, particularly in relation to the development of advanced materials and with applications in extreme industrial environments, and of nuclear safety cases.
“This agreement will enable Australia to contribute to an international group focused on peaceful use of nuclear technology, and the international energy systems of the future”
An ANSTO spokesman said Australia was a world leader in terms of nculear safety, “due to the high levels of oversight and paperwork required” to operate.
GIF is a co-operative of 14 nations led by France, a country where nuclear power accounts for nearly 75% of energy generation. This reliance on nuclear energy has helped the nation slash its carbon emissions.
But don’t let’s forget that BHP is a big member of the nuclear industry – which claims (incorrectly), that nuclear power is ‘clean’ energy, and the solution to climate change
BHP considering Minerals Council exit over lobby group’s climate policies
By business host Elysse Morgan Australia’s biggest miner BHP has confirmed it is reconsidering its membership of the country’s peak mining lobby, the Minerals Council.
Key points:
BHP under pressure to quit lobby groups that don’t support clean energy target
Activist group backed by big investors including ANZ, AMP, Australian Super, Blackrock
Board considering move before next month’s AGM
BHP announced it would review its membership of all industry associations, and publish the findings, by the end of this year.
The review comes hot on the tail of a demand by activist shareholders that the miner sever ties with the council, which successfully advocated for the abolition of the carbon price and is currently lobbying the Federal Government to reject a clean energy target.
“We are aware that some civil society and other organisations believe that, where an industry body advocates for a position which does not align with our own, we should cease to be a member of that industry body,” BHP said in a statement issued overnight.
The activist’s resolution to be tabled at the company’s AGM next month is also calling for BHP to terminate its membership of the World Coal Association which, along with the Minerals Council, is also calling for a rejection of a clean energy target.
Updated Tue Police say they have arrested 10 protesters who were blockading the road to the Abbot Point coal terminal near Bowen in central Queensland.
About 50 people, including members of anti-Adani group Front Line Action on Coal, held banners and voiced their concerns at plans to develop the Carmichael coal mine facility in the north of the Galilee Basin in central Queensland.
Police said they charged 10 people with trespassing on business land, and those arrested had been taken to the Bowen watch house.
Whitsundays Police inspector Steve O’Connell said it was unfortunate arrests had to be made, but he was happy with the overall peaceful nature of the protest.
“At this time with climate change and the knowledge we have on that, that it is not a good time to be opening a large coal mine,” Ms Smith said.
“With the extreme weather events that have been happening, coal is the thing that is fuelling this.
“I am here for future generations to protect this great place that we have.”
Local councillor Mike Brunker said the protesters did not represent the views of local residents who opposed the protest.
“Finally now we see a bit of light at the end of the tunnel, and now we come and see this sort of rubbish. People are sick of it,” Cr Brunker said.
Security ramped up at water reservoir
Whitsundays Mayor Andrew Wilcox said the council was taking extra measures to protect the Bowen water supply after activists hung a banner on the town’s reservoir.
Cr Wilcox said the council was not taking any risks.
“We’re taking extra precautions now. We are just making sure we’re doing more patrols,” Cr Wilcox said.
“At the end of the day it’s already all secured, but we’re just doing that and we’re also putting some cameras around the place.
“And then if we do catch some of these people, we hope that they face the long arm of the law.
Anti-Adani protest censored by operators of Melbourne’s Federation Square
Exclusive: Operators demand images of newspaper headlines and politicians, and ‘explicitly negative’ environmental messages be removed, Guardian, Michael Slezak, 20 Sept 17 The operators of Melbourne’s Federation Square have censored the content of an anti-Adani slideshow presented there, demanding that all images of newspaper headlines and politicians, as well as “explicitly negative” environmental messages be removed.
On Saturday, a coalition of environmental groups held a screening of the documentary Guarding the Galilee at Federation Square, attended by about 300 people. The film is about the fight to stop Adani’s Carmichael coalmine, which would be the biggest coalmine ever built in Australia and one of the biggest in the world.
In the week before the event, Federation Square demanded to see the slideshow that would be presented before the screening and then demanded much of it be removed.
In email correspondence a Federation Square representative told the event organisers they “cannot permit any slides with protest messaging, slogans or memes together with slides that show pictures of politicians, newspaper headlines or any explicitly political messaging”.
The operators objected to any content that was “negative and inflammatory” and demanded the majority of the slides be removed or significantly altered.
That included removing all pictures of newspaper headlines, politicians, political memes, protests or pictures of the Great Barrier Reef with “inflammatory messaging”.
Federation square also demanded that the “stop Adani” logo be changed to black and white, and that it not take up a whole slide……….
We know Australia is leading the world in per capita uptake of rooftop solar, with total installed capacity on homes and businesses this year soaring past the 6GW mark.
But which parts of Australia are leading the country? New data from the Clean Energy Regulator has revealed the latest ranking of Australia’s top 10 postcodes for small-scale solar installation (up to 100kW), with some interesting new additions.
As you can see below, the list this year features a few new entries, and a more diverse spread across the states, instead of being dominated by Queensland and Western Australia locales.
Both the new entries and the old stagers on the list span the suburban, regional and rural areas of Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia, with no entries this year from South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT or the Northern Territory.
In order from the top, the Queensland town of Bundaberg has again secured the number one spot, followed by new entries on the list, the Victorian suburbs of Werribee and Hoppers Crossing. Last year, no Victorian postcodes made the top 10.
According to the CER data, these three postcodes have accumulated the highest number of small-scale renewable energy installations since the small-scale renewable energy scheme began in 2001, each reaching around 17 000 installations as at 1 September 2017.
In fourth place, down from second place last year, is the WA suburb of Mandurah, where the local council is also pushing hard to install PV on government buildings – and just last week agreed to install a 200kW (not a part of the SRES) system at the local pool and sports centre.
The Queensland suburb of Hervey Bay follows, moving to fifth place from third last year. And another Victorian new entry, the semi-rural south-eastern suburb of Cranbourne, is in sixth place.
Bringing up the rear are regular place holders Caloundra and Toowoomba in Queensland, and new entries Wangara (WA) and Lismore (NSW), the latter of which makes the list probably due to the May switching-on of a 99kW rooftop PV system at the Goonellabah Sports & Aquatic Centre, as part of a major community-based and funded renewables campaign.
Despite some bigger commercial installations coming into play, the CER says the average size of the solar postcode installations is 5kW – which is also the average size, now, of a household rooftop solar system. This indicates the dominance, still, of residential uptake in these numbers, considering the SRES encourages commercial systems, too – up to 100kW in size.
“Over the last 10 years, 23 per cent more Australians have embraced rooftop solar,” the CER said in a release on Monday. “That’s one in five homes and businesses now generating their own renewable energy and reducing carbon emissions through rooftop solar.
Interestingly, while no South Australian suburbs on their own make the list, the entire state is setting all sorts of solar records, including a new record low for minimum demand – barely a week after the previous benchmark was set – with a fall to just 587MW on Sunday afternoon.
As Giles Parkinson notes, the record eclipsed the previous mark by nearly 200MW – with AEMO data showing minimum demand at 1.30pm of exactly 587.8MW, compared with the previous low mark of 786.42MW posted last Sunday – thanks to moderate spring temperatures, combined with the state’s more than 700MW of rooftop solar producing 538.54MW at the time of minimum demand.
“That is a phenomenal share of 47.8 per cent of the state’s electricity demand being met by rooftop solar (compares with 36 per cent in the previous record last week) and is clearly a record for South Australia, and for that matter in any large grid anywhere in the world,” Parkinson says.
Below [on original] is the list of last year’s Top 10 solar postcodes:
Better data would improve transparency in electricity market
Better data would reassure consumers that price changes are the result of real problems, such as weather or machinery failure, rather than market manipulation.
REneweconomy
Antinuclear 