While I totally agree that batteries and projects like South Australia’s Project EnergyConnect are revolutionary, they highlight rather than dismiss the massive grid integration challenge ahead.
South Australia’s new $2.3 billion transmission line proves that localised batteries alone cannot handle massive renewable gluts;....
The state physically required a massive "extension cord" to NSW to export excess power and maintain stability. Furthermore, relying on "batteries on wheels" (EVs) ignores human behaviour, as cars are rarely plugged into bidirectional chargers during peak midday solar curtailment..
And transitioning from 45% to 82% renewables isn't a linear progression of adding cheaper generation. It requires completely re-engineering the grid's underlying infrastructure and it's physics, replacing the mechanical inertia of retiring coal plants, and building extensive new transmission infrastructure to connect remote energy zones.
This generation tech is cheap, but the humongous system integration costs break the bank.
Fir example, the skyrocketing commodity and labour inflation have driven transmission asset costs up by onwards of 50% and it's climbing. Also the achieving of grid reliability requires overbuilding capacity threefold to combat winter lows, alongside billions in community compensation payouts to secure vital grid land.
And whike their intentions are of course good, the green lobby often treats the grid like a giant Lego set...
They assume that if you just snap cheap wind and solar pieces together, a clean grid magically appears for free. But they routinely ignore the staggering cost of the "glue" required to hold those pieces together.
There is a massive disconnect between "spreadsheet engineering" and real-world economics.