Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Pumped storage: A game-changer for New Zealand’s electricity needs?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 тра 2022
- Could Lake Onslow’s pumped storage scheme be the game-changer New Zealand needs to meet its future electricity requirements?
Earl Bardsley is living proof that one man can make a difference - in this case to New Zealand’s electricity supply.
In 2002, Bardsley, Honorary Associate Professor at the University of Waikato, came up with the idea of using Lake Onslow in Central Otago as a reliable power storage facility to meet the country’s electricity needs during dry years.
The ‘dry year problem’ refers to the fact that, although blessed with an abundance of hydro-generating lakes and rivers, New Zealand runs into problems when lake levels are low. At these times, electricity has to be generated by expensive and polluting fossil fuels, which the Government is committed to phasing out by 2030.
“I was always looking for possibilities by which we might get alternative means of storage away from our scenic natural lakes. So that’s why I first started thinking about the Lake Onslow basin,” says Bardsley.
By year’s end, the Government will have decided whether or not to go ahead with the $4 billion project that may well turn Bardsley’s vision into reality. The decision to proceed will be based largely on the findings of a feasibility study known as the NZ Battery Project, the outcome of which will be announced in June 2022.
As Bardsley told Frank Film, at heart of the Lake Onslow scheme is the concept of pumped storage.
“What it amounts to is that we’re using Lake Onslow as a battery,” says Bardsley.
“When the prices are low, and there’s plenty of water around, we’ll pump water up into the lake. When there’s a dry year, we’ll have all this potential energy available which we can run back down to the Clutha River.
“By running it back down we can generate 1000 megawatts, and that means that we can do away with fossil fuel as a source of energy during dry years.”
The Minister of Energy and Resources, Hon Dr Megan Woods, is unequivocal about the significance of the project and what it could mean for the Government’s commitment to New Zealand’s energy being 100% renewable by 2030.
“Look, this will be a game changer. Not only will it enable us to decarbonise, and get to that 100% renewable electricity system, but, more broadly, across our energy system,” Minister Woods tells Frank Film.
As Bardsley further explains, “The example could be the dairy industry, and the production of milk powder, which uses a lot of energy.
If we use that energy from electricity as opposed to, for example, coal, then that’s better for the whole country.”
The magnitude of the project is illustrated in Bardsley's assertion that: “The culmination of the water storage volume, and the height about the Clutha River, means you could have the potential energy up there equal to all the hydro lakes of New Zealand put together.”
Both Bardsley and Minister Woods acknowledge that the wetlands adjacent to Lake Onslow would be a casualty of the project, with Minister Woods also noting that any cultural significance to the local rūnaka will need to be considered and addressed.
Local fisherman, Andrew Moore, indicates to the Frank Film crew the point on the hill where the new lake level would be. In spite of the fact that, should the project go ahead, the hut he’s been coming too for 30 years will need to be moved, he’s philosophical about it (while also not missing an opportunity to have a dig at city dwellers in the north):
“Well, we need it. We’ve got electric cars now! All those Auckanders and Wellingtonians [with] their electric cars plugged in at five o’clock.
“[You’ve] got to get the power from somewhere, don’t you,” says Moore.
No Elon Musk, Earl Bardsely may not fit the mould of today’s visionary hero. But, the sincerity, clarity and intellectual rigour of this old school academic is convincing.
Bardsley’s belief in the project is clear: “It would be good to see the whole thing go ahead. It will change the New Zealand energy scene for the next 50 years.”
Producer/Director: Gerard Smyth
Editor: Oliver Dawe
Story Producer: Rose O'Connor
Production Manager: Jo Ffitch
Sound Mix: Chris Sinclair
Production Asst: Romah Chorley
WATCH OTHER EPISODES HERE: frankfilm.co.nz/
5:35 Dude, I can promise you, the less than 1.5% of drivers in Auckland and Wellington who drive EVs are stuck in traffic at 5pm and even though ~1/3 of them will plug in when they get home (Most EV's don't need charging daily) they won't be drawing power until off-peak low demand power comes online later in the evening. In the long term though, as we transition to an all-electric fleet (Which is a good thing) we will need to find the additional 12.5 terawatts hours (NZs current gasoline-equivalent consumption per annum 41.6 TWh x 30% efficiency ) to power the electric fleet from somewhere.
Our current annual electricity generation is ~43 TWh....you do the math.
I hope this goes ahead
NZ is a role model for other countries to learn their sustainable development
Not from this Onslow pumped hydro boondoggle. New Zealand is fortunate to be blessed by a lot of hydroelectric potential which has been well exploited. However there is nothing in this video which explains how to develop pumped hydro potential in a rational way.
Sustainable? What is Sustainable about wrecking landscape and destroying vegetation, fish and other animals living there.
It surprises me how naive people can be and eat the state propaganda for breakfast.
Nothing wrong about using hydro energy and destroying some land to get natural energy from water. But pumping excess solar and wind energy up because 90% of the time when it produces energy we do not need is and then pumping it up is absolute ridiculous.
I love trees and other vegetation and therfore I am for coal. Also less people die from heat then from cold so another reason to love coal if you truly beleive the climate is warming because of CO2
Pissing away tax money is what it is.
@@bartdeking So many bizarre statements in your little rant.
@@kingy002 Thank you for your valuable feedback. I will take your input into consideration.
Being right on Aucklands door step would be better location.
One of the cones could have a tram that runs on a track which spirals down the cone.
The dynamo is on the tram the track is tilted into the cone side.
The dynamo is driven by gears driven by the wheels.
A brush connects the dynamo to the power system.
The trolly is loaded with weight.
I cant do the maths but this is cheap and quick, locail and easy .
The problem with pumped storage is it consumes more power than it generates.
All forms of storage have that problem. The problem is you cannot store electricity without converting it to another form of potential energy (mechanical, chemical).
In a dry year, the Onslow basin will be the biggest dust bowl imaginable. But the environmental issues/impacts will not be concerned about north of the Waikato. DR
... what about combining with cloud/fog catchers? It's a year round thing, plus they rejuvenate the environment, which that Onslow area could do with.
Would be awesome. What a great idea
No Onslow pumped hydro would not be awesome or a great idea. If you want to learn why then read my other comments here.
Dumb and unnecessary distruction of nature you mean?
You don’t think there’s better solutions for $16billion?
There is something very similar in El Hierro Canary Island in Spain. They pump water up the hill with wind turbines. It seems that pumped hydro works fine.
New power capacity will come from windfarms, rooftop PV, PV panel farms, mini and micro hydro power, some biomass and some wave/tidal power and all of this will need pumped storage and large battery banks to provide the backup capacity and to ensure system stability. Phase out of fossil gas usage will also add considerably to the needed capacity from the national electricity system. Thanks for the energy figures which helps get a feel for the size of the task.
@@andreasbimba6519 Thanks for your comment. Changing a bit of topic... do you think that NZ grid can afford to phase out combustion engine cars and change for battery electric cars? Do you think that might be a space for hydrogen/ethanol/ammonia fuel cell cars? thanks
@@andreasbimba6519 Wind especially in New Zealand and solar to a limited extent can also save conventional hydroelectricity generation which is yet to be done to any great extent in New Zealand before they need to turn to pumped hydro.
+2GW of wind power is proper solution to the dry year problem, unlike this Onslow pumped storage boondoggle.
Wave power doesn't work very well. Wind is better in every case.
@@flaviopalmiro The NZ grid has further development to go before it can power zero emission cars for everyone from 100% renewable energy, but we can plan ahead for that day of course. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles go further on one refuelling so yes of course.
Nice man, destroying the scenery with religious status uhhh I mean wind mills and then destroying massive amounds of land and animals to store the energy because most of the time when we need the energy there is no wind. That indeed works fine man!
Gravity can be exploited to store energy, without having to flood river valleys. You just need to lift up weights when you have excess renewable energy and then let the weights drive turnbines when alternatives are not abundant. This is environmentally much cleaner than using chemical batteries or flooding endless river valleys for pumped hydro storage. Tasmania's Lake Pedder was flooded causing a great amount of species loss, motivating a green movement to oppose flooding the Franklin River. Creating huge dams by using much concrete also produces huges emissions.
Very fortunately the existing Lake Onslow is a man made reservoir in a sparse landscape of grasses and sedges so the undeniable but small environmental cost of flooding the much larger area is not in total nearly as damaging as nearly all other existing hydro schemes are individually and that were built decades ago. Lake Onslow is definitely not a unique jewel like Lake Pedder was and still is - which by the way MUST be restored to its original natural condition and before any new pumped hydro schemes are allowed to be designed or built in Tasmania. The Australian and Tasmanian Greens must make the restoration of Lake Pedder to its original natural state an essential precondition to the proposed building of any new pumped storage systems in Tasmania and any proposed new systems must meet the strictest environmental approval standards. Then we can all proceed as one and good outcomes that suit all parties involved including the natural environment can be attained - or if not its a shit fight to the end that no one will gain from - which may be the preferred approach of some remnant dinosaurs in the applicable hydro power authorities and privatised power speculation businesses.
The important wetland area that developed over time as a result of the manmade Lake Onslow can be retained and expanded by modifying it to float on the surface as a type of floating reed mat so that the fluctuating water level associated with the new much larger Lake Onslow no longer presents a problem. Professor Earl Bardsley suggested the floating wetland idea from the very beginning in his first report in 2004/2005. The good professor also explained how some of the environmentally damaging aspects of the existing hydro power systems could be significantly reduced by taking advantage of the capacity of the proposed Lake Onslow pumped storage system. I think he even recommended as I recall the return of one particularly damaging existing hydro power system river valley to its original natural state.
The current Aotearoa/New Zealand Labour government does appear to be taking a careful considered approach that is taking into account environmental and social consequences and is trying to minimise these costs and to undertake compensatory measures. The Aotearoa/NZ Greens are also not going to provide a blank cheque endorsement and are in a position to ensure proper procedures are followed. Environmental experts and experts in all other relevant areas will need to be given a fair chance to undertake studies and to report to the responsible authorities.
The maximum possible storage capacity of the proposed Lake Onslow pumped storage project is 12 terawatt-hours (TWh), achieved with a lake level maximum of 800m and permitted dry year water level decline to 720m. That is 12,000 MWh which is far larger than any alternative storage technology by many orders of magnitude. This scheme can therefore supply sufficient electrical energy to meet the expected shortfall for all of New Zealand during any long multi year dry periods without resorting to fossil fuel powered electricity as is the current situation.
I suspect the dams required by the Lake Onslow pumped storage scheme would be clay core rockfill or concrete lined only. You are right to point out that cement production is currently a high CO2 emission product and the transition to 'greener' cements that for example use fly ash (ash from coal fired power stations) as well as some other technologies is needed and this project could be a driver for bringing that transition about IF governments act accordingly.
This article provides good background information as the video is actually just a very brief snap shot. This project is also not responsible for all of the world's current short comings.
www.nsenergybusiness.com/features/new-zealand-pumped-storage/
@@andreasbimba6519 What the Onslow fans never explain is where is the power to pump the water up to Lake Onslow coming from?
If Onslow buys power for pumping then more supply is needed to serve other customers which comes from where .. fossil fuels?
If NZ installs new wind power capacity then just use it to save water in the existing hydroelectric reservoirs and you don't need Onslow at all.
There's no surplus of coventional hydro power - most ever in Sep'04 met 68% of demand.
@@scottishscientist9376 Exactly my point at the top of the responses
CO2 emissions works fine too. It is a perfect clean natural gas. Without it we would die. I love trees and vegetation and therfore love more CO2. If you beleive in the CO2 causing heat and sea level rise propaganda then still less people die from heat than from cold and also if you can not cope with 20cm sealevel rise then you should not have but that beachfront house anyway and you can also not cope with a 1 in a 100 year storm.
so what is the result from June
Could something like a ram on a big scale, using the water's own power, be used to pump it up there?
PHES: requires pumping water up during low energy demand, but what is the means of the power generation used? If it's hydro then that is moving energy from one battery to another minus losses, which does not appear to make sense, when increasing the existing storage lakes capacity would save the losses of moving the storage to another lake.
If the energy is from solar less likely to be available as solar is only likely to be generating during hours when NZ energy usage is highest.
If wind then also variable as most efficient in generation during daytime when thermal air movement greatest
So where does the pumping energy come from that is 'excess to demand and available' ?
My suggestion (which I haven't seen mentioned anywhere) would be building a small 'dedicated' solar system close to the pumping station and 'trickle charge' the high level storage battery (lake) from another source that would otherwise not go into storage - natural lake discharge river, not the storage lake itself or river feeding that lake
The off peak low energy/unit cost systems I've seen in other PHES schemes is only relevant for local applications and is not a National solution as it is all about cost of electricity purchase and do not look at 'how' the cheaper energy is generated ie doesn't care if the battery is charged from another battery and the losses as a result in doing so
I'd appreciate being directed to a feasibility study for NZ situation if one has been carried out
The workings and economies of pumped hydro are well explained in this presentation: ua-cam.com/video/McByJeX2evM/v-deo.html
Thank you Ken. You've identified the flaw with the Onslow pumped storage proposal - where does the pumping energy come from? The NZ grid has no routine surpluses. The most hydro generated in any quarter was in September 2004 and that only supplied 68% of New Zealand's demand. In that quarter the hydro capacity factor was a high 65% but nowhere near the 100% of a maxed out hydroelectricity system. So there just was no more hydro to power Onslow even in that best-ever hydro quarter. There's just no point in powering the pumps with more fossil fuel generation. There's certainly no surplus of wind power, not yet anyway. Solar is barely registering.
Even if they installed more wind power, as I recommend, that should be used to save hydroelectricity generation in the existing hydro schemes, saving the cost of building Onslow.
In summary, the Onslow scheme is not feasible economically, even if technically it could be built, because there is no need for that scale of energy storage and not likely to be in the years ahead.
I believe the government is funding a feasibility study and I can only trust that the recommendation will be to cancel further consideration of Onslow to focus on more useful projects - +2GW of wind power for the South Island should solve the dry year problem, for example.
Could something like a ram on a big scale, using the water's own power, be used to pump it up there?
No need for any other energy input then.
@@evapick1566 Unfortunately you don't get something for nothing - the "water's own power you mention" could only come from either a hydro lake (head generated from water falling) either the Clyde dam or Onslow itself - either would only waste energy
I think you need to read up what a Ram is, do understand what I was asking there:
A ram is an old concept and it works really well (At one point we had all our water pumpded a considrable hill by one)
. A ram is a hydraulic ram pump, (ram pump, or hydram) is a cyclic water pump powered by hydropower. It takes in water at one "hydraulic head" (pressure) and flow rate, and outputs water at a higher hydraulic head and lower flow rate.
Bravo New Zealand Battery project!
Boo! Onslow pumped hydro is misconceived and won't help New Zealand transition to 100% renewable energy. Read my other comments here to learn why.
Good
嗯，这个方案挺有意思的
感谢您的关注。 是的，如果从任何项目的一开始就将环境和社会成本降到最低，这是一个适用于全世界的重要理念。
Does it hurt the fish?
'
No they like water.
You can not ask rational questions to highly religious beleivers in a cult.
Ofcourse it distroys vegetation animals insects. All because they know the wind and solar energy is generated on moments when we do not need it.
Coal only exhaust CO2 which is a perfect clean natural gas that grows trees and vegetation. Without it we die yet it is seen a some poluting gas.
damn the dams, i feel for the land owners. farmers cop the short end of the stick in NZ.
That is one of the most bizarre comments on here. Drive around NZ on any given day and look at the wealth tired up in new vehicle, houses, infrastructure that is across the country. A lot of private schools are full of farming kids. Farmers are some of the wealthiest people in NZ. Some are doing it hard, yes, and it is hard to get into the market, due to land prices, but they are far wealthier than the mass of New Zealanders in cities. I know because I teach lots of them at a major polytechnic and I know where they come from.
Megan Wood was a terrible Minister of Energy. Announced at $4Billion, scrapped at $16Billion….
The power station may need to be bigger than 1000MW if the Clutha River can handle the larger flow without environmental problems?
As New Zealand electrifies nearly all of the economy, even with the needed economy wide energy efficiency improvements, and as more windfarms, roof top solar panels and large scale solar panel farms come on line, the need for electricity generation levelling and to provide the extra generation capacity to meet peak demand periods plus the need to provide enough electrical energy during multi year dry periods - will likely mean a maximum output capacity for the Onslow pumped storage scheme closer to Snowy Hydro's Snowy 2.0 scheme of 2000MW peak output may be more appropriate.
If the Clutha River cannot cope with the increased water flowrate associated with a 2000MW output power station without environmental costs then a downstream storage reservoir that could moderate the peak flows into the Clutha River may be needed. If such a downstream storage reservoir was required then can this be done in a minimally environmentally damaging way? Should the downstream reservoir be an 'off-stream' reservoir on already cleared land?
There would be some head loss for the Lake Onslow system associated with incorporating a downstream reservoir but this would still be small compared to the very large head difference that the scheme offers. Pumping capacity I would expect would only need to be a fraction of the power station mode capacity due to the longer timespans available for pumping compared to generating. If a pumping capacity of say 1000MW was optimal then only half of the turbines would also need to operate as pumps in the reverse mode.
This project no doubt needs a lot of modelling of the many options to ensure New Zealand gains the most out of this wonderful opportunity and that the downsides are minimised through careful design right from the beginning. May I suggest people like Andrew Blakers of the ANU and Snowy Hydro's experts also get involved but I suspect they already are involved.
Even with "more windfarms" etc the modest amount of extra energy needed in a somewhat misnamed "dry year" - about 500GWh per dry month - can be used to save conventional hydroelectric generation, without the great expense of building an redundant pumped storage scheme.
Onslow is too big, too expensive and too stupid.
IF you are serious put solar panels in the Australian deserts, and two or three DC cables to NZL = game over forever. You only need a few square kilometers of panels. :)
Inefficient and a major environmental hazard ability.
Can you produce the evidence, please, to substantiate your remarks. Can you also list your qualifications so I can see whether you know what you are talking about. I'm not saying you are wrong, I just need your evidence to make an informed decision.