Just for some background, I’ve been in the business of doing computer simulations of the operation and planning of electricity supply systems, large-scale systems, for over 30- 35 years now. Gosh, it’s scary, although that’s not the only thing I do so what I propose to do today is (now where do I point this thing?) (is it there? No? Here?) Okay So what I’ll do, briefly, is discuss the context, perhaps build a bit on Gavin Mudd’s introduction and then focus on two areas where those who are very enthusiastic about nuclear energy like to try to criticize renewable energy and that is the reliability and the economics. And I’m going to argue that we can provide 100 percent renewable electricity systems which are just as reliable as conventional polluting systems and they are now becoming cheaper than any kind system that is commercially available that would have a large input from nuclear energy For background, well, Gavin Mudd has already shown this slide. So just to remind you- the bars show the annual energy generation and you can see from nuclear energy it peaked in 2006 and since then it has been declining slowly and the percentage has declined from about seventeen a and a half percent in the mid-1990s actually, today, to just over 10 percent of electricity If you look at the reactor start-ups house which are in green and shutdowns in brown you can see that after about 2010 we reached the stage where there is almost balance between start-ups and shutdowns and if we look forward we’ve got a lot of old nuclear reactors. France is shrinking. It’s not going to rebuild a lot of its present, old nuclear reactors, so it’s quite likely that shutdowns will exceed start-ups. If we look at Global Investments in renewables versus nuclear, nuclear is the red line and because we can’t identify when a project starts each year of the nuclear investment, this graph from the World Nuclear Status Report puts the total nuclear investment cost into the year in which construction starts So the red line is nuclear and the bars are renewables. Solar is in the green, wind in the blue, and other renewables in the paler colour on top and by the way, the decline in solar in the last three years on that graph is not due to less solar being put in, or very slightly, it’s due to the fact that solar is getting cheaper and cheaper and so the investment costs per megawatt or gigawatt or whatever of solar are declining Now, clearly on a global scale, there is no renaissance in nuclear energy but there are a few countries which are building nuclear fairly rapidly and the main one is China and there’s to some extent, Russia, South Korea and India. Let’s look: this shows the installed generating capacity of nuclear in the red, wind in the blue and solar in the green. You can see what’s happening- this is in China. Now, okay, of course someone will say “well, yes but they have different capacity factors” and that’s certainly true but even if you allow for the difference in capacity factors, you can see that wind has overtaken nuclear in China and solar, well, it’s got some way to go never got in that regard, but the trend is fairly clear. So the background suggests that we’re not dealing with a thriving industry and even in China which is investing in everything- in big fossil fuel generators (while its closing down some the older and less efficient ones), in nuclear and in renewables, even in China you can see that renewables looks like it’s going to take over And by the way, nuclear in China currently contributes about 2.5% of Chinese electricity, so it’s not a major source

okay so now I’ll to try to talk about reliability and then economics and the first thing to say is that those who are enthusiastic about nuclear and hostile to renewable energy, usually misrepresent the whole reliability issue because the reliability of a generating system is measured by the reliability of the whole system, not by picking out a solar PV or wind and saying “oh yes, it’s less reliable than nuclear.” It’s the reliability of the whole generating system and this can be measured, is measured in different ways by power engineers and it’s quite obvious when you see the anti-renewable energy literature that is not written by power engineers, it is written by biologists and occupational therapists and people like that So, the three main measures of reliability of a generating system are the loss of load probability, more precisely, the expectation value of the probability that supply fails to meet demand and that’s used in many electricity grids. The frequency and duration of system forced outages so, forced outage is when supply fails to meet demand, and in the Australian National Electricity Market, the shortfall in energy which for the NEM has to be less than 0.002 % of annual electricity demand. So they are the standard measures and there are a few others too but they are whole system measures The wrong way to try and measure the reliability of a system is to look at the capacity factor of individual power stations which is a very full measure of reliability, even if individual stations Less so for large baseload stations like coal and nuclear but for any other station the capacity factor depends on the operating strategy which in turn depends on the nature of the national electricity market and so on So for example you wouldn’t say that a gas turbine, which is a peaking plant and might have a capacity factor of 5% is unreliable but many of the critics of renewable energy would try to do that to renewables by saying that wind in South Australia, where some wind farms have a capacity factor of 41%, they’d say “wind is unreliable” because some nuclear power stations after many years of operation in which they perform very poorly have now reached 90% So capacity factor of individual power stations is not a measure of reliability of the system Neither is a quantity called dispatchability and dispatchability is the ability of a power station to supply power on demand and as you’ll see, it is quite unnecessary to assume that every power station in a supply system is dispatchable Even if we look at individual power stations, sure, nuclear is usually dispatchable but if it has a breakdown, it has a forced outage, it is usually down for weeks or months or in some cases for years and this doesn’t happen for variable renewable sources like wind and solar PV They tend to fluctuate on a time scale hours or days and we’re currently doing an analysis of 30 years of weather data in Australia on wind and solar and we’ll be reporting those results soon, they’re very interesting. So you could argue that nuclear is unreliable but has a different statistical unreliability than wind or solar PV Okay so, well, before I actually get onto the computer simulations I want to sort of point out that that not many years ago I remember when I was doing research on wind power those who thought they knew better would say “well, the most wind power you could have in a grid would be about 5% 5% of annual energy. Beyond, then the fluctuations in wind would make the stability is system impossible to operate. Well, 5% was passed in several parts of the world then they said it was twenty percent. Now they’re saying What are they saying? 30 percent, 40 percent- but the reality is that Denmark is generating now 39 percent of its electricity from the wind

plus nearly 10 percent from agricultural residues from bioenergy It’s a flat country, so it doesn’t have any hydro A bit like South Australia, for different reasons and then if we look at states if we’re interested in South Australia maybe we should compare with states? two North German states, Schlezwig holstein again, Mecklenbourg forkommen (try and get the pronounciation right) are now running at a hundred percent renewable electricity, net. Now, the ‘net’ means that they trade with their neighbours. Of course they trade by transmission line but they’re running at a hundred percent, and in one of the states, over a hundred percent net renewable electricity Now the critics will say “oh, you can’t run a system like that.” “It will be unstable.” Well, they are doing very nicely thank you in those North German states. I have searched the literature, I read a little German. I have tried to find major problems in operating in the stability of these systems and the interesting thing is that those two north German states are mostly generating from wind. Now, I wouldn’t recommend 100 percent from wind and certainly South Australia has fantastic solar potential as well as wind and so we are looking not at comparing with wind alone or as one recent article tried to compare nuclear with wind alone or nuclear with concentrated solar thermal alone but we looking at comparing the whole mix of renewable energy sources. Now in the computer simulations that others and and we have done the UNSW we are running the National Electricity Market on a model with the mix of renewable energy sources We don’t claim to be the first to do this These are some of the latest studies and the references are in a report I’ve written for the Conservation Council of South Australia which will be released tonight so, the studies and mostly simulations Alba an out balancing real weather data on renewable energy supply against real demand a mostly studies now cool run thought eighties and although out published studies in 2012 2013 and 2014 will only run on 2010 the new studies that will be publishing soon run on eighty is and I can tell you it doesn’t really make significant difference to ourselves going from one UK we also said have a 30-year days said and we are analyzing that so we are modeling the yellow region the so-called grandiose Tikal National Electricity Market and done Solis states that joined together by transmission lines but the links some other lakes a not very strong the link between South Australia’s only joined directly to Victoria by two lines they don’t have it high-capacity and although there is a small an increase going on on we would recommend something more substantial Tasmania has a modestly and the link between the South Wales is Mark so that the only really strongly is between New South Wales and Victoria so what we’ve been doing and this is the work of the former PhD student been Elliston who designed a computer program assisted and supervised by in the killing myself and so we have balancing supply and demand every year alley for eight years and we find that we can produce a system that is just as reliable that meets the reliability criteria using real data we’re also doing the economics so we’ve used the cost projections by the Bureau resources and energy economics Bree and and the 2012 projections with very conservative for renewable energy and I can say this because they projections to 2030 full for example the economics the cost the solar PV word surpassed last year already and they’ve also made some rather write perceptions about the future price apostle feels so this %um that guess in 20-30 will have the same price as it did in 2012 which maybe but rather unlikely we do have a simplified transmission model but we’ve done very detail sensitivity analysis and we did although we think that

if we put in more transmission links there will be some increases in costs the results on recent anyway so in the papers that we’ve published so to which apts that site any such the 2012 at on that this is 2013 paper putting any debris costs what we can do because the computer program runs in tibet half a second for a whole year and its Sun its by the way available now its cool name and you can actually download it and use it sits at public thing open access this is the optimal mix if we do several hundred to several thousand simulations we can vary and mixes renewable energy we can very the operating strategies for storage in the system and up for the whole system and a separate sample we find that the optimal behavior concentrated solar thermal is not as base layers some it isn’t the easiest say at will come to that but what you can see here is that wind is nearly 50 percent all the simulations are constrained the heck to me the neem reliability criteria they rely on PVC 20 percent said 230 annual electricity generation are coming from burial renewable energy sources house is possible because the variable sources a balanced by flexible dispensable sources gas turbines and they can burn renewable gases and liquids or they can burn natural gas another fossil fuels hi Joe existing hydro at which don’t yet have in South Australia but you could perhaps happen we’ll come to that and concentrated solar thermal with them storage wind is such a large proportion because it’s the cheapest all the new renewable energy sources and PVC second cheapest CST is the most expensive is no doubt about it but its process behind within 10 years the way as the market grows just said like what happened with solar PV except not as fast so this reliability his because there’s this balance between variable renewables and the flexible dispatch double review basically we busted the traditional me thought news which planes at which is in the Top grant showing on a days demand in some a and the traditional view is that the base node which is the blue at the bottom base like the man has to be supplied with the base load power station that base that past asians at varying inflexible in operation so you have different power station sitting on top making the peaks which I’m more flexible like gas turbines and hi Gerry dance and the assumption is that you’ve got to have a state power stations supplying base load demand and all power stations must be dispatch the new model and it’s not just sounds its the studies the huge study done by 100 engineers and scientists at the National Renewable Energy Lab in the US studies done by Heidi and Brianna and Rasmussen and and others in your we’ll come to the same conclusions the new concept is that you had very little ones has been stuffy said at the beginning substituting for baseload energy and busy say is filled in by flexible the special sources which up traditional peak like plants plus concentrated sell them with them store okay and talk about economics at the heart so economics depends as you can see on full they reduce the cost of construction of the capital cost the capacity factor because the finance which is very important for nuclear and renewables and the magnitude to the subsidies and nuclear problem is that the cost data a less available in they often now for renewable energy credible cost a hat comes mainly from West from Western European and US power stations under construction that’s the current generation cool generation 3 or grandiose say something called generation three-plus and we really have very limited operating operating experience with this current generation that supposed to be a little bit safer than a generation two reactors and they really two main ones under construction the eighty-one thousand in the US and the European pressurized water reactor the yeah but really none of these is actually operate that this summer and under construction in china too both types it’s hard to get day now the new truth is yes

as saying oh we go to generation 4 and fast breeder reactors integral fast reactors they’re unlikely to be commercially available today case I mean that’s the reality okay so let’s look so there’s a wide variety of cost estimates at the best one that’s used the one to promote you clear is the US here he I A estimates and the the averages for the US in dollars per megawatt-hour so nuclear 96.1 onshore wind eighty and utility-scale PV 130 but the second one comes from Lhasa and less at as you probably know is one of the biggest multinational financial services corporation in the world they finance energy systems they don’t care with a nuclear of fossil or renewable and their estimates the nuclear 124 232 and it right to remove the subsidies but with nuclear the only obvious subsidies economy move the direct federal government weapons and all the others which I’ll mention very hard to do win onshore 37 281 and thats after we should after removing the subsidies which is Sun 23 cents a kilowatt-hour US for the PTC in the US and utility-scale at PV is now the new ones and now less than the nuclear estimate according to lester but what about practical experience with construction now in the US this done AP 1000 wrecked is under construction up to react is now differently churches says different numbers if he is behind schedule so it goes from that one and a half years three years and that budget guys from that 700 million to 1.4 billion over budget these are all being built with huge loan guarantees the UK experience out the European experience in Finland with the EPA to up to you to three is a decay behind shit you and is 2.7 times the original budget process in France aplomb feel three is five years behind schedule and 2.7 times the budget price in the UK the proposed new PC at has been of it the the bill this is the this past Asian if they they build it a guaranteed price at ninety 2.5 pounds per megawatt-hour that 140 US dollars the big one at double the wholesale price of electricity in UK increasing with inflation for 35 years so that’s higher than that in highest lestat estimate it also receive a loan guarantee about ten billion dollars okay Rep subsidies is a huge range subsidies package through now can’t you be in renewable energy be hotness in low-carbon electricity systems will in grief nuclear power stations lacked sufficient flexibility in operation to handle the fluctuations in there it’ll renewable energy they are very poor power the best partners a peking stations which are highly flexible and concentrate to sell them also nuclease gonna have a problem if anyone ever seriously choice to introduce it into the National Electricity Market that its operating costs are higher than those a win also light bombs and so it’ll be displaced in operation so it won’t be able to operate his base light he’ll be displaced by wind and sell unless they change the the rules but doing so finally on will first renewable energy we could run the whole nation electricity market on renewable energy if we have the political will using commercially available technology and equally reliable nuclear appears to be roughly twice as costly as onshore wind and will soon be overtaken a is being overtaken by large-scale solar PV nucleus too inflexible in operation and you could add to that the concerns it is increasing the risk of nuclear will by making it easier to proliferate undercover it’s a very slow technology to build and and the question at life cycle co2 emissions means that it is hiring emissions as you go to low-grade uranium all then a renewable energy meese thanks very much

You Want To Have Your Favorite Car?

We have a big list of modern & classic cars in both used and new categories.