Sunday, October 27, 2019

Jamestown, South Australia Grid Battery - How Long Can it Supply South Australia?

The 129MWh storage capacity Tesla battery in Jamestown, South Australia brought tears of joy to the eyes of the politically-correct, greenie retards. Just look at how they celebrate this. And here's more.

Little do they know, it's only good for topping up the electricity supply during times of peak demand. A battery can discharge quickly without preparation when needed. This battery is totally useless for coping with sizeable blackouts.

Let me explain some things so you will quickly know more than the Minister of Energy about electricity.  For our purposes we are interested in a unit of used electricity.  Household electricity is paid per kWh - kilowatt hour.  A kWh represents an amount of work done.  A watt is the rate of work made possible by the input of a certain amount of energy - a watt of electricity. Say your kettle is marked as 1,000W - one Kw.  If you boil that kettle continuously for one hour you will have used 1kWh of electricity.  A kWh is a unit of electricity used to make a certain amount of work possible, say cool your room for x minutes, light up a certain area for y hours, etc.  When it comes to mass consumption a kWh is too small a unit and 1,000 of them are lumped together to make a MWh (megawatt hour) and 1,000MWh are lumped together to make a GWh (gigawatt hour).  1,000kWh = 1MWh.  1,000MWh = 1GWh.
 
What does 129MWh mean? It means they can supply 129MWatts for an hour. As the battery's maximum discharge capacity is 100MWatt/Hr it means the battery can actually go on for about 75 minutes discharging at 100MWatts/hour.

You will find much of what's in the paragraph above on the linked-to pages. But you won't find what it actually means as the media monkeys don't understand numbers. They don't answer the question of how long can it supply electricity to how many people. I wanted to see how long it can supply Adelaide with electricity but I could not find Adelaide's electricity usage. My guess for Adelaide was less than 10 minutes. I did find this AEMO pdf document online. It gives the electricity usage for the whole of South Australia.

On page 18 you will see that in 2017-18 South Australia used 12,203 GWh. Giga is 1000 Mega. So, with minimal rounding, it comes out that South Australia used 33,433MWh/day, 1,393MWh/hour and 23MWh/minute in 2017-18. 23MW/h means 23MW delivered for an hour.  But they need that delivered per minute.  So, they need a supply of 1,380MW/h for business as usual.  The supply rate of the battery is not remotely up to that - it's only 100MW/h.  Immediately, it's going to hit the fan big-time.  Now say the supply rate can be upped to the required 1,380MW/h, how long can SA keep running?  That's easy, the battery capacity is 129MWh.  Per-minute they need 23MWh.   So, the battery can supply South Australia with less than 6 minutes worth of electricity.  But, as already shown, even these six minutes won't happen. Only a few islands of light will be able to last the six minutes. And these must be decided in advance.  Who will get the electricity and who won't?  That'll be the night the lights went out in South Australia. Those backwoods, southern yokels will be crying into their beer for their battery to save them, but it won't.

Adelaide has about 515,000 homes.  This battery can run 8,000 houses for 24 hours. That's 0.0155% of Adelaide's homes.

I wonder how many of the numerically and reality-challenged politicians in the various governments know this.  I would not be surprised if the answer is none.

This is typical of this world – the world is mostly populated by retards led by their noses by the arts-and-humanities monkeys in governments using the arts-and-humanities monkeys in the media to disseminate their propaganda to the great unwashed. All three these groups have but a tenuous hold on reality and don't understand our technical world. That's the world we live in – the hoi-polloi crying out to be deceived and the politicians and their flunkies, the politically-correct media people, are all too ready to oblige.

7 comments:

  1. This is a rather pathetic article. Maybe you should focus less on calling people retards, and more on researching what you’re writing on. Might I suggest starting by googling what a peaker plant is, which is what these battery installations are intended to be. Also check out this article about the cost savings and utility that the Australian battery installation has provided: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-28/two-years-on-musk-s-big-battery-bet-is-paying-off-in-australia . But I’m sure those are still all the musings of “retards” as you put it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I clearly mentioned that this is a peaker plant.

      Very few know how little this battery can actually do when the chips are down.

      For masses of RELIABLE, clean (no hothouse gases) electricity nuclear power generation is a sine qua non.

      Is it true that libtards are making pilgrimages to this battery and worshiping it?

      Delete
    2. In addition, I've looked up the author of your Bloomberg article--James Thornhill. On LinkedIn he listed his academical credentials as: MPhil International Relations from Queens College, Cambridge. Hull University is also mentioned, but no qualifications listed. That's a complete absence of scientific qualifications. That means he regurgitates what he's told without understanding it. Read Bad Science by Ben Goldacre to learn the quality of scientific reporting by arts and humanities educated reporters.

      Truly, your Bloomberg article does not have much to it.

      Delete
    3. As hominems are not valid arguments, and neither are appeals to authority (or against lack of authority, as you’re doing by saying the Bloomberg author didn’t take the right degree). Why am I not surprised you can’t actually argue in good faith? Maybe it’s because you find it easier to call people you disagree with retards.

      Delete
    4. Ad hominems are valid if directed at total morons using flawed reasoning. If one doesn't tell them they're stupid, how will they know and try to do something about it?

      Delete
    5. After all is said and done, the author of your article is still an arts and humanities monkey. Again, read Bad Science.

      Delete