This map from The Dec 2013 AECOM report Pathways to Wind Power Development in the Australian Capital Region, prepared for – ACT Government – Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate – illustrates the most amazing NIMBY hypocrisy as the ACT Govt plans to locate all its wind farms well away from the ACT in New South Wales. Note also their reference to “Capital Region” which now has overtones of annexation of NSW resources to suit the ACT GreenLabor Soviet’s ultra-green plans. The ACT is replete with high windy ridges suitable to locate wind farms but Canberra residents are not to see a single turbine from their cocooned society.
We do not know if the ACT’s 90% renewables target by 2020 is even technically possible or what new gas fired capacity would be essential near the ACT to help the NSW grid cope with the huge random fluctuations inherent with greatly increased wind power near the ACT.
The Dec 2013 AECOM report – tells us in Table 4 on page 27
If you are facing sexual difficulties like low sex desire, inability to attain and wholesale viagra from canada maintain an erection, early ejaculation and unsatisfactory orgasm. That is the reason; they have to pay a lot of attention, and viagra 100mg tablets tonysplate.com that they learn a lot of slumber. All this helps to develop the child’s abilities with a view to foster his independent / near independent functioning at a later stage. It has been stable food for summer generika viagra www.tonysplate.com/blog/index.php?blogid=1&archive=2010-08 picnics to combat heat and also provide a low-maintenance desert especially for kids during the holidays. 
There have been few wind turbines installed near Canberra since 2011 – and Australia-wide installations peaked in 2009. Boco Rock to the SW of Nimmitabel is currently under construction and has apparently been sold to the Thai electricity company Electricity Generating Public Company Limited (EGCO).
What we do know is that the new Commonwealth Government is deciding what new policy to adopt with respect to the RET scheme and that this new policy is likely to be less permissive towards taxpayer funded renewable energy subsidies.
It looks likely that ACT Government plans to source 90% of electricity from renewables by 2020 is dead in the water – which is great news for ACT and NSW taxpayers and electricity consumers.
Bloody typical really!
Everybody outside Canberra has to generate what Canberra says it needs so they can be smug about having it.
I can just see Milne on her fet saying “if Canberra can do it why cant the rest of Australia?”.
Brains in pineapples or physics to Greens………..
Is there any body out there in Canberra prepared to publically back this ( with their own money)?
From the Canberra Greens point of view, this is wonderful.
All the noise, visual degradation and ecological damage is out-of-sight (they’re already out-of-mind).
All the disruption due to variable supply, and the costs, is handed to the NSW authorities.
NSW has to increase their CO2 generating capacity for backup, costing them and giving the Canberra Greens a smugness about how others are “not doing anything about emissions”.
And NSW consumers will pay higher accounts so producers can pay the RET certificates for Canberra.
A 90% renewables supply for Australia is impossible, even the beyond Zero Carbon people admit that, so the only way is for the small off take for Canberra to be added to NSW.
If the Canberra Times can be relied on ( www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/wind-energy-to-power-80000-canberra-homes-20140311-34kox.html ) 200MW will supply 25% of Canberra’s needs, so they are looking at 720MW continuous or 2400MW. If they’re buying cheaply, that is 1,000 turbines minimum. So NSW will have to install at least 720MW of OCGT to cover windless days, and somehow find room for 2500MW if the wind blows strongly.
I don’t think that Canberra can count on enthusiastic support from NSW. If the RET scheme is shut down, or more probably restricted to existing wind farms, then Canberra had better buy a lot of bicycles and hook them up to generators.
Whatever causes “warmest” or “coldest” or “highest level of ice cover in Antarctica since records began” it is not carbon dioxide and RET’s will have no effect.
If a molecule has an upward component in its free path movement between collisions then some of the translational kinetic energy in that molecule (M.Cp.dT) supplies the additional gravitational potential energy (M.g.dH) that it acquires by virtue of its additional altitude. Vice versa for downward motion. Equate the two and you have the temperature gradient dT/dH = g/Cp which should not be hard to understand.
Because the laws of physics can be used to explain this gravitationally induced temperature gradient, the fact that the surface temperature of a planet is higher than the radiating temperature of the planet is fully explained (and confirmed empirically) by this autonomous temperature gradient.
There is thus no need for any other explanation as is supposedly presented in the false radiative greenhouse conjecture.
Every day ACT becomes more like a repeat of the failed California experiment?
Unfortunately the ACT would still be able to achieve its target. New ways to account for the 90% would have to be developed and because the National Electricity Market electricity supply will be less renewable, more ACT commissioned renewable supply would be needed.
The ACT always intended that the renewable generators it gave power price agreements to would be additional to the RET scheme. All certificates generated were to be handed back to government and cancelled in the same way certificates purchased by GreenPower providers are.
If the absence of a RET retards the uptake of roof-top solar, the Labor/Greens government is committed to the cause enough to reintroduce another gross feed-in tariff scheme.The target, local green jobs, etc. being the excuse.
I doubt that new gas-fired generators will need to be built until a large amount of coal-fired plant is closed down
I have argued in the local media that the achieving the target did not mean that it was possible for other places to emulate. Some quotes:
“The target only advances renewables penetration in Australia by a faction of a percent. Any boast about the target should, and probably will bring a fleet of Skywhales of derision”.
“Environment Minister Simon Corbell talks about decarbonising the ACT’s electricity supply. The ACT will sometimes have a 90% renewable electricity system. On still nights, frosty winter mornings and most rainy periods the ACT will have a 90% fossil-fuelled electricity system.”
Time might prove you right John – I appreciate what you know of the ACT – but we are half way through the four year election cycle now – so as late 2016 approaches expensive green policies might come under greater scrutiny and of course a Federal election could well be held in late 2016 too.
The ACT Govt has their expensive green light rail proposal to go into bat for as well – so they could have their hands busy.
Earlier this year NSW politicians were roused to express opposition to the ACT Govt plans to source “green power” from NSW.
NSW should not be treated as the ACT’s junk yard over its Government’s irresponsible and self-indulgent renewable energy policy, the Member for Monaro John Barilaro said 14 March 2014.
Mr Barilaro and his State colleagues Katrina Hodgkinson Member for Burrinjuck and Prue Goward Member for Goulburn have joined forces with Federal MP’s Angus Taylor Member for Hume and Dr Peter Hendy Member for Eden-Monaro to voice their concerns over wind farm developments.
I have just posted on the Bango Wind Farm which has been battling red and green tape for five years now.
Weighing it all up – I would not bet on ACT Minister Corbell succeeding with his green plans for 2020.
On the issue of a gas fired power station – recall several years back a consortium including ActewAGL was planning to build a data centre and gas-fired power station near the Mugga Lane tip. That proposal died in NIMBY opposition. Then AGL stroked up a much larger $1Bn proposal at Dalton which was shelved two years ago amidst NIMBY complaints. IMHO the proximity to variable wind power was always one of the reasons for these two gas generation proposals – gas of course can be quickly ramped up or wound back to compensate for wind or lack of. I think two factors contributed to AGL shelving Dalton two years ago – the glut of electricity and the slower pace of wind developments.
Just warning commenters – there is a spam blizzard on now – ~5,000 per day which I have no time to sift through. If a comment does not appear – best to email it to me.