A new study by researchers at the Australian National Univer-
sity has found that pumped hydroelectricity is the key to a cost-
effective power system providing 100% renewable energy for the
so-called national electricity market, which includes Queens-
land, NSW, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and the ACT.
Prof Andrew Blakers and his team were funded by the Australian
Renewable Energy Agency to model the system using only tech-
nologies that are in large-scale commercial operation. This
restricted the choice to solar photovoltaics (PV), wind and
pumped hydro, leaving aside such options as solar thermal,
battery storage and geothermal energy. The modelling showed
that 50–80 pumped hydro systems, adding up to 15–20 GW
of capacity, would provide enough storage to smooth out fluc-
tuations in available wind and solar energy.
Most significantly, the study found that the cost of power from
such a 100% renewable grid would be about $90/MWh based
on current prices for those technologies. For comparison, the
pooled price in the national electricity market now averages about
$60/MWh, while it is estimated that a new black coal power
station would produce electricity at a cost of about $80/MWh with
no carbon price. Therefore, Blakers said, “a 100% renewable PV
and wind system matches the price of a new fossil-fuel system”. That
is very encouraging news, with evidence growing of the need for
a rapid transition away from coal.
While the scale of construction of dams for pumped hydro
appears formidable, Blakers argues that they would mostly be
10–100 ha in area, in pairs at the top and bottom of steep hills.
“The amount of water required is trivial,” he said, calculating
it would be about 0.1% of current annual extractions from the
Murray–Darling Basin.
Two recent reports have raised similar issues about Australian
public policy. The long-awaited National Science Statement,
released in March, stated four objectives:
- engaging all Australians with science;
- building scientific skills;
- producing new research and technology; and
- improving Australians’ lives through research.
Most reactions were cautiously positive about the general
sentiments, but negatively cautious about the probability of
concerted action or serious funding. The Australian Academy
of Science called it an important document providing “much
needed long-term direction and purpose for government activ-
ities in regards to science”.
However, Prof Ken Baldwin of The Australian National
University noted that the Statement contained no significant
new strategies or funding. He called for incentives to encourage
industry to collaborate with researchers.
Several observers commented that the sentiments and broad
aims of the Statement are laudable, but the real test will be
whether they are translated into action. As Prof. Peter Andrews,
former Queensland Chief Scientist, put it most bluntly: “All we
need now is for the government and the opposition to agree
on this or any other policy for long enough to make a differ-
ence”.
Also in March, the fifth independent report on the state of
the environment came out. Like all the previous reports
stretching back to 1996, it found some good news to report. As
one example, the combination of the Murray–Darling Plan
and some welcome rainfall has gone some way toward restoring
the health of our largest river system, despite continuing wasteful
use of irrigation water in NSW and Victoria.
Also like the previous reports, the 2017 document said that
we have fundamental problems. Specifically, it noted that the
government does not have “an overarching national policy that
establishes a clear vision for the protection and sustainable
management of Australia’s environment to the year 2050”.
The report called for three priorities:- “specific action programs and policy to preserve and, where
necessary, restore natural capital and our unique environ-
ments, taking into account the need to adapt to climate
change; - “complementary policy and strengthened legislative frame-
works at the national, state and territory levels; and - “efficient, collaborative and complementary planning and
decision-making processes across all levels of government,
with clear lines of accountability”.
As with the National Science Statement, the real challenge
for governments is translating the general principles and worthy
aims into concrete actions that would make a difference. With
the Turnbull administration appearing to lurch from one
opinion poll to the next, it’s hard to be optimistic.
MAY/JUNE 2017 | | 47Ian Lowe is Emeritus Professor of science, technology and society at Griffith University.LOWE TECH ian Lowe
Keeping All the Lights On
A 100% renewable energy system using
pumped hydro can store enough power for
peak demand at a competitive price to fossil
fuels.
Zffoto/Adobe