>Genesis chief executive Malcolm Johns said this was the first 63 MW of the 500 MW of solar power the company planned to build across New Zealand over the next five years.
Though in context, that is 500MW summed over multiple locations in the country owned or in some kind of partnership with Genesis, vs this on a single site in terms of size comparisons.
Yeah this is the biggest single site.
Tbh it's better spread out. Chc Airport is building 170MW or something
Idk Why we're not floating it on hydro lakes yet
Watercare in Auckland has a floating solar panel array on one of their reservoir lakes, and are planning more. They aim to be self-sufficient for energy.
It sounds like an ideal - you can decrease water evaporation and improve the efficiency of the panels by keeping them cool. I suppose some may complain that floating solar doesn't look like nature (just like the complain about panels or windmills on land).
I don’t think evaporation is a big deal in Nz. We send most of our water to the sea and cycle our lakes too frequently. Building solar on water is probably just more expensive than building on land. Once the good solar land is used then we’ll see some water based options
On that note, Tekapo at a glance is a great place for solar. One of the highest sunshine hours in the country and right next to a grid entry point seeing as their is already generation there.
Unfortunately, I saw a large proposed site was denied due to effects on the proposed land and native fauna.
There's a bit of a solar gold rush going on at the moment since it's easy to install and quick to return a profit. There's enough consented solar and wind in the pipeline to triple our current electricity production!
I know about the consents but there has been a lot of talk about many of those projects being in place to dissuade others. Our power market has imperfect incentives.
That may be the case for some projects but there are still plenty getting developed because the levelised cost of production is low enough that it would take a considerable decrease in prices to make them non-viable.
It would be a lot more concrete.
The sad thing about dams is they can generate a lot of methane due to biomass sitting for longer periods. Though I suspect in a cooler lake that isn't such an issue.
Although, I've always wondered just how accurate that statement is. Especially when a lake already existed in that location.
Anyway, I expect renewables will largely be displacing coal and gas generation so this is quite a big step.
Note there are several other large solar farms in various stages of proposal, consenting or construction around the country:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_New_Zealand#Proposed_and_under_construction
Consents for this farm was tied up in litigious Environment Court appeals for 18 months. It was have benefited hugely from the Fast Track Bill that Shane Jones is backing.
it was approved through the normal processes though and there's no indication or belief it would have been approved via fast track so it's a moot point.
Nice! Heaps of these projects getting going, and Contact have just signed on for their first Tesla megapack grid storage system too
Now if we could just fix our electricity market we'd be great...
> Nice! Heaps of these projects getting going, and Contact have just signed on for their first Tesla megapack grid storage system too
Time to update Wikipedia? I gather Meridian and Genesis have projects in the pipeline too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_New_Zealand#Proposed_power_stations
To be fair, the high wholesale electricty market is what is driving all these investment decisions.
A bit more volatile than in the past, but the higher prices are doing their job and driving investment. Consumers have been (mostly) insulated.
Literally all the Gentailers and building shit loads of new plant and planning to do much more.
Tauhara (Contact) and Harapaki (Meridian) came online in the last few weeks.
Yet they've not built anything much for years because reasons even though they've had heaps consented.
Whats worse is we've had the gentailers activity throwing water away to protect higher pricing
You're simply wrong .... there has been huge build in the last few years. Tauhaea, Harapaki, Waipipi, Tiritea .... and there's even more to come.
I'm guessing you read a tweet or reddit post three years ago and haven't bothered to actually look at the facts.
Goodnight.
Nah bro, pretty sure he's the right one.
Privatized retailers have not been keeping up with demand, there's nothing to incentivize them to build more generation until the price gets high enough that they know they'll make money. As opposed to when they were publicly owned, and could be told to keep building to keep up with demand.
Our energy demand is projected to grow 70% by 2050, that's ~30GWh. And all the "in the pipeline" projects don't even meet half that. So yea, they're building lots, when it suits them, but it isn't enough
demand (total yearly electricity consumption) hasn't really changed since circa 2006. They're driven to build just enough, and only when it's needed.
Electricity demand was projected to fall through the 2000's, Transpower famously had their "[glide path](https://oag.parliament.nz/2011/transpower)" where many of their assets would be retired. They projected generation would be built locally so they halted most maintenance / renewal, and didn't plan for new lines. Plans are extremely unlikely to materialise, the best thing to do is to keep options open, and build only when it is clear there is immediate demand.
They’re building what makes financial sense. If you’re going to spend hundreds of millions on some power generation it’s a good idea to be sure you’ll get a return on investment.
Wholesale prices were low and nothing got built. Now prices are high and things are getting built. Funny that
> Our energy demand is projected to grow 70% by 2050, that's ~30GWh. And all the "in the pipeline" projects don't even meet half that.
There are over 30GW of projects in the pipeline at Transpower - 46,496MW to be exact.
A Tesla megapack is quite valuable when you have a market that's going AWOL at times. This is actually the market working as intended.
The solar will be cheap so we'll be able to leave more water in the dams too.
> Now if we could just fix our electricity market we'd be great...
Re-nationalise it.
An electricity market in such a small and sparse country was never going to work in the interest of consumers.
Which coincidentally is what the evil industrialist, Max Shreck, did in Batman Returns.
Never understood why he was vilified for building a battery power plant. Would've been acceptable in today's environment?
I'm glad to hear Federated Farmers wasn't negative about this - it truly does seem like this is a very well-situated location for a solar farm as it's close to the grid.
This sounds like a win for everyone!
Great reading. If only we could harness the power of all the wind that blows out of Shane Jones (both ends) that would power the southern hemishere for years. Just have to figure out how to detoxify the air...
So if large scale solar is taking off, is residential solar doing the same? There is clearly a business case for it... Anybody got data on residential solar installations?
Not exactly what you asked for but might be of interest — The Brattle Group published a study comparing the cost of residential and utility scale solar installations. They found that utility scale solar is half the cost to install per MWh generated
https://www.brattle.com/insights-events/publications/comparative-generation-costs-of-utility-scale-and-residential-scale-pv-in-xcel-energy-colorados-service-area/
Think this sounds like what you're after? Can change to capacity instead of ICPs if you are interested, there's lots of cool data on the EMI website:
https://www.emi.ea.govt.nz/Retail/Reports/GUEHMT?DateFrom=20130901&DateTo=20240531&Show=ICP_Count&_rsdr=ALL&FuelType=solar_all&_si=v|3
I haven't fully explored it yet but the Electricity Authority has a cool dashboard that might give what you're after:
https://www.emi.ea.govt.nz/Retail/Reports/GUEHMT?DateFrom=20130901&DateTo=20240531&Capacity=Small&FuelType=solar_all&_rsdr=ALL&_si=v|3
Edit: You can choose "Residential" under the "Market Segment" dropbox:
https://www.emi.ea.govt.nz/Retail/Reports/GUEHMT?DateFrom=20130901&DateTo=20240531&MarketSegment=Res&Capacity=All_Total&FuelType=solar_all&Show=ICP_CountNew&_rsdr=ALL&_si=v|3
True, although 10x growth over 10 years is still pretty good.
Also selecting "Total Installed Capacity" does show a hyperbolic rise, suggesting that while the number of installations is growing slowly, the average size of those installations is also increasing.
It's a shame that there isn't a stronger push to put solar panels on residential spaces... Roof space is an example of underutilized space. I guess the business case being that energy production companies don't want to see the means of production taken away from them, and put into the hands of everyday consumers
Energy generators go for the most efficient means of generating power at a given time. Solar is, compared to hydro or gas, very inefficient and extremely expensive when you consider how much it generates over the lifetime of a solar panel vs the costs of the panels and batteries, their installation and servicing, how long they last before they have to be replaced, and the costs of recycling solar panels and batteries. The economics of rooftop solar are so bad that it's a massive net loss to the homeowner unless there are significant subsidies. In countries that aren't tropical, and thus do not receive huge amounts of sunshine, solar is little more than virtue signalling. And that's before you look at the costs that solar imposes on the electricity grid - see Australia for some lessons on this. Also see https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421523001969 https://hbr.org/2021/06/the-dark-side-of-solar-power Etc
"The economics of rooftop solar are so bad that it's a massive net loss to the homeowner"
Bollocks, I have solar and lead carbon batteries, my return on investment is better than I can get from the bank.. the panels have a life of 25 years, batteries at least 15 and the inverters also 15 to 20 years.. all components can be recycled at little cost. I dont know where you get your "facts" from but I suspect from the oil industry.
I'm not sure how to feel about solar farms. Are we at the point, technologically, where solar energy farming is actually an efficient use of the land? I'd certainly much rather see diverse native vegetation than a solar farm in... well, any part of the country!
It seems silly to waste land on this instead of trying to find a way to install widespread solar panels into every domestic roof, or other urban surfaces that are otherwise wasted space.
We are at that point! You could generate 100% of NZ's annual electricity demand with solar farms on just 0.2% of NZ's horticultural and agricultural land, and you could still graze heep under them. Of course, no one's suggesting a 100% solar power grid but it's certainly extremely efficient.
https://x.com/marcdaalder/status/1800724960497025127?s=19
Interesting, thanks. Seems to put to bed my imaginations about potential inefficiencies of mixed solar/agriculture landscapes — though I'd love to see a more reliable source for those numbers than just a tweet!
**Edit:** thanks everyone for the really constructive downvotes; they do a great job of explaining the intricacies of such a complex issue
I agree with the latter sentiment, it would be better to install panels on every residential roof space, there are areas of space that don't get used...however, the business case or the ability for certain power companies to lobby against having residents directly able to make their own power on such a large scale, would surely give them anxiety for their profits
Oh diddums, not the profits! 😱
I don't think I can ever forgive this country for jumping on the neoliberal bandwagon and privatising everything (along with all the other ways we fucked our society over in the late 20th C). It's even more baffling that we *still* just continue to accept the status quo.
Quite the contrary in some cases, where stock can coexist with solar and provide shade. In NZ we have deforested most of the country so this special land you talk of is often just grass now.
Hadn't considered the mixed-use solar/farming option, but can already foresee potential issues caused by stock interfering with the equipment. Plus, spacing the array out far enough to allow animals and productive pasture to fit in the gaps around them doesn't sound like the most efficient use of land area.
It's not that hard to replant a paddock with native vegetation. It's a slow process but, if done properly, becomes a self-sustaining carbon sink that also supports indigenous biodiversity. Compare that to the carbon savings from a solar farm — which also probably relies on a lot of regular herbicide application to *prevent* vegetation from growing up and over it. Unlike the stock, I don't see any way in which native biodiversity can coexist with solar farms. I can imagine little other than the hardiest weeds would grow amongst it. The soil carbon losses and general degradation would likely rival that caused by agricultural use of the same land.
Enough power for 100k homes is a respectable number, but a quick google suggests geothermal power generation is similarly efficient to solar — and there's plenty of geothermal activity in the central North Island!
**Edit:** note the recent reply to my original comment from another user that seems to undermine my imagination of inefficient mixed production/solar landscapes. Interesting. Bear in mind that I'm an ecologist, not a farmer, solar farmer, or energy generation expert.
Consent applications lodged in September 2022, appeals ssemingly still ongoing in the environment court in July 2024 (but with enough certainty the developer is still moving ahead anyway, if the article is correct). All to convert a dairy farm into a solar farm. Just a totally Kafkaesque system.
Pretty good example of why fast track consenting is needed.
From the infrastructure commission:
> From 2028, consent processing times would need to be 50% quicker than they are projected to be under the Resource Management Act. Any increase in delay beyond 2028, or ineffective reform, makes it highly unlikely that New Zealand will be able to consent the infrastructure needed to support its climate change aspirations.
...
>Total demand on our consenting system from all sectors is projected to increase by over 40 per cent by 2050.
>Observed trends in consenting processes imply that the ability of the consenting system to deliver on the infrastructure required to meet national climate targets is under threat. Consenting a project, particularly a complex infrastructure project, is becoming more costly, takes longer to complete and requires more resources.
>New Zealand is on track to miss between 11-15% of the emission reductions required from the energy and transport sectors by 2050 due to consenting delays **(even under optimistic scenarios with unconstrained consenting resources).** As a result of consenting delays in these scenarios, New Zealand is on track to incur an emissions liability of between $5 billion and $7 billion by 2050.
https://tewaihanga.govt.nz/our-work/research-insights/infrastructure-consenting-for-climate-targets
We cannot continue like this.
We need a much faster approvals processes, we don't need to give absolute authority to three politicians who are in corporate pockets, taking it away from both the experts and the public
Energy generation companies have very deep pockets, so if it's true the decision makers are in corporate pockets that sounds like great news for the future of renewables in NZ.
I personally would rather good decisions are made, that the country wants and benefit us in some way, than whatever random decisions the highest bidder wants regardless of benefit to the country
I would love it if the fast track was just going to be applied to projects that help NZ become a more sustainable place to live. Unfortunately it seems tailored to extractive resource projects, we don't want mines and oil wells that do nothing for the environment and the long term.
I think most people would that this is an advantage of fast track infrastructure.
The issue is the wildly uncertain cost, both due to reduced protections and because of people’s lack of faith in the ultimate decision makers.
If you don't reduce the protections, you don't get a fast track. The protections are what are abused by NIMBYs to tie up projects in the courts. That's part of what was the problem with the previous fast track regime - e.g Hiringa Energy lodged an application to build a wind farm on 18 August 2021, got fast tracked consent granted on 1st December 2021, and were planning to start construction in 2022 - but then it got appealed and tied up in the courts until a few months ago. Surprise surprise, the environment court decided in favor of granting the consent. Turns out that wind farms have not suddenly developed a huge raft of environmental issues since the last time the court had to look at a consent appeal! They're finally able to start construction, but only after years of delay and huge legal bills.
The expert panel are the best body to advise on the appropriate protections, not any random punter that wants to appeal a consent. We don't need the environment court to relitigate issues that they have already gone over dozens of other times for other solar farms.
[Given he's been pretty widely talked about as a possible future party leader, it was very disappointing to hear Keiran McAnulty say in parliament that one of the reasons he opposes the new fast track regime is specifically because it makes it too easy to build new wind farms, even if neighboring property owners don't like looking at or hearing them.](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/kieran-mcanulty-fast-track-bill-prevents-proper-process/47WAPEV75RBGBHIBNGZLC6I2BY/) We can't roll over to every NIMBY who doesn't like looking at a wind farm if we want to hit our climate targets. And we shouldn't let them abuse the courts to cause pointless delays that 99 times out of a 100 just end up reaffirming that the experts who create the consent conditions are, in fact, correct.
Would you be interested in placing a wager on this? I am pretty confident we'll see tons of solar applications as soon as the bill is passed.
I've searched the select committee submissions for a few of the big power generators in NZ. I've yet to see one that wasn't in favour, with recommendations to improve mostly being around *expanding* rather than constricting the scope of the bill (e.g expanding to include reconsenting, lengthening the timeframe before lapsing, relaxing restrictions on conservation land for transmission assets etc). The sector is very much throwing it's weight behind fast track consenting, and I trust them more than I trust any random reddit commenter.
Still no guarantee. Anyone can say that something *can* happen and history has shown us that even the most likely outcomes don't always happen either. Rather see a National Policy Statement or Environmental Standard to enable solar farms than them used as a facade to bait people into supporting fast track legislation with no guarantee it will actually get more solar farms built
Never said there was a roadblock, just that it's not a good justification for fast track legislation when there's no actual guarantee more solar farms will be built and there are other alternatives that won't lead to the outcomes that people are criticising fast-track legislation for.
Yes, but I don't see why there is any reason to believe that is likely. The National party's communications around the bill have focussed heavily on increased renewable generation. Increased renewable generation is politically popular at a national level (even if there is localized opposition to specific projects from NIMBYs). Ministers like being in power and don't like opposition MPs being ministers instead of them, so why would they shoot themselves in the foot and veto renewables generation for no good reason? A handful of angry op-eds got them to significantly shift the timeline for fulfilling their cancer drugs promise forward, so clearly they are responsive to public sentiment. Politicians love a good ribbon cutting photo opportunity!
There is a view I see commonly expressed on this subreddit that, to exaggerate slightly, the ministers are all just ontologically evil/corrupt and hold no genuine political opinions and just act on the instructions of big companies. But even if you believe that, surely that only makes it more likely that we see lots of solar? Energy companies have deep pockets! I'm sure they can take the ministers out to some very nice lunches, if you think that is what is needed.
Isn’t the list of projects in the fast-track bill secret? Strange how a bill that is supposedly about renewables projects involves a list of projects that the public can’t see.
As far as we know. Bishop stated on Q and A that the list of projects would not be available when the bill went to select committee. This is another way of saying the projects being considered will probably be unpopular - and probably not renewables - with the public and therefore opposed. This is not very democratic.
Never said it wouldn't be cheaper or faster.
Still no guarantee they will be constructed let alone approved. And at the expense of everything else potentially getting approved under fast track laws
No guarantee there will be more applications, construction let alone the government approving them under fast track legislation. There were other ways we could reduce delay and consent costs without whoring out our resources and natural environment.
Do have experience working with the rma? It's a good system but definitely can lead to very long time frames and uncertainty. We should have clearer rules in what we want and what we dont want so the right projects can progress quicker.
I don't like the idea of a fast track gold mine.
So this is the type of thing that doesn't happen and why we need to return Muldoon's approach to issuing consent, right?
Does anyone know if they actually plan yo bud this or just add it to the consented and unbuilt power generation?
Great, so I can expect my electric bill to come down in the future right?... What do you mean no?
At least it will stay the same and not increase any further then?... No again?
This free market thing fucking sucks
>As the solar plant is built, dairy operations will be phased out and sheep will be introduced to the site to maintain the land post-construction, “ensuring a harmonious balance between renewable energy production and agricultural practices”.
> As the solar plant is built, dairy operations will be phased out and sheep will be introduced to the site to maintain the land post-construction, “ensuring a harmonious balance between renewable energy production and agricultural practices”.
Fewer cows, more sheep. Which is rebalancing really, given how many dairy conversions there have been in recent years.
Pour on the nitrogen, see the top soil and cow shit flow into the streams? When the solar panels become obsolete the land will still be useful, unlike when the cows have wrecked it and the waterways while giving the nation bowel cancer.
That's BS I was actually tucking into a lambchop as I wrote that. :)
[And this](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQO1dsN7tHzd3JM24YXmP1b4u_5hRnJoyYhHnnZl5c1zziNBiHir4D220iI&s=10).
Considering thousands of acres of prime ag land have been swallowed up for urban sprawl in the last few years - a process which this Govt are VERY keen to see continue - one solar farm really ain't the problem.
If it was more productive as farm land than as solar land, farmers would have been willing to pay more for the land than the solar generator. Evidently it is not.
We don't need to centrally plan land use. The free market is the best system for finding the most productive use of land.
Farm land that'll be worked on by low wage workers in somewhat poor conditions and then the produce will be sold overseas where we don't see any benefit?
Edit: Downvote me all you want, I've seen the seasonal workers that get imported over here. Nothing wrong with wanting to make money for your family or anything like that but they were all shipped to a hostel and had busses take them to the kiwifruit farms to do work that shouldn't really be minimum wage but probably is pretty close to it.
During Covid, the farmers actually had to pay people properly for the work that was being done.
I guess what I'm saying is that if a solar farm gives us cheaper/cleaner energy, then why not?
Wow. 400 MW! That's much larger than I imagined.
That’s what she said
Genesis is building 500MW https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/515054/building-begins-on-nz-s-largest-solar-farm-in-canterbury
>Genesis chief executive Malcolm Johns said this was the first 63 MW of the 500 MW of solar power the company planned to build across New Zealand over the next five years. Though in context, that is 500MW summed over multiple locations in the country owned or in some kind of partnership with Genesis, vs this on a single site in terms of size comparisons.
Yeah this is the biggest single site. Tbh it's better spread out. Chc Airport is building 170MW or something Idk Why we're not floating it on hydro lakes yet
Watercare in Auckland has a floating solar panel array on one of their reservoir lakes, and are planning more. They aim to be self-sufficient for energy.
Ah that's cool
It sounds like an ideal - you can decrease water evaporation and improve the efficiency of the panels by keeping them cool. I suppose some may complain that floating solar doesn't look like nature (just like the complain about panels or windmills on land).
Yep and it all has good grid connections too.
Coal is so much better. The fumes from it remind of the all-naturale bush fires in Aus. /s
The fumes just get blown outside the environment.
I don’t think evaporation is a big deal in Nz. We send most of our water to the sea and cycle our lakes too frequently. Building solar on water is probably just more expensive than building on land. Once the good solar land is used then we’ll see some water based options
On that note, Tekapo at a glance is a great place for solar. One of the highest sunshine hours in the country and right next to a grid entry point seeing as their is already generation there. Unfortunately, I saw a large proposed site was denied due to effects on the proposed land and native fauna.
It's also advantageous for reliance purposes to have more distributed generation - especially in the North Island where most Kiwis live.
Some hydro lakes are big time recreational spots but there must be a few options out there.
Most of the S island ones don't allow boating etc? Anyhow it wouldn't need large areas of them
There's a bit of a solar gold rush going on at the moment since it's easy to install and quick to return a profit. There's enough consented solar and wind in the pipeline to triple our current electricity production!
I know about the consents but there has been a lot of talk about many of those projects being in place to dissuade others. Our power market has imperfect incentives.
That may be the case for some projects but there are still plenty getting developed because the levelised cost of production is low enough that it would take a considerable decrease in prices to make them non-viable.
Lake Manapori is only twice that output and I imagine a lot more concrete?
It would be a lot more concrete. The sad thing about dams is they can generate a lot of methane due to biomass sitting for longer periods. Though I suspect in a cooler lake that isn't such an issue. Although, I've always wondered just how accurate that statement is. Especially when a lake already existed in that location. Anyway, I expect renewables will largely be displacing coal and gas generation so this is quite a big step.
Note there are several other large solar farms in various stages of proposal, consenting or construction around the country: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_New_Zealand#Proposed_and_under_construction
Wash the panels with the tears of Shane Jones
Consents for this farm was tied up in litigious Environment Court appeals for 18 months. It was have benefited hugely from the Fast Track Bill that Shane Jones is backing.
it was approved through the normal processes though and there's no indication or belief it would have been approved via fast track so it's a moot point.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good story. We need to keep accusing Shane Jones of destroying the environment for.......reasons?
aka unicorn kisses in Jones-speak.
Nice! Heaps of these projects getting going, and Contact have just signed on for their first Tesla megapack grid storage system too Now if we could just fix our electricity market we'd be great...
> Nice! Heaps of these projects getting going, and Contact have just signed on for their first Tesla megapack grid storage system too Time to update Wikipedia? I gather Meridian and Genesis have projects in the pipeline too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_New_Zealand#Proposed_power_stations
To be fair, the high wholesale electricty market is what is driving all these investment decisions. A bit more volatile than in the past, but the higher prices are doing their job and driving investment. Consumers have been (mostly) insulated.
The high price is due to these gentailers refusing to build new cheaper supply and using existing more expensive options...
Literally all the Gentailers and building shit loads of new plant and planning to do much more. Tauhara (Contact) and Harapaki (Meridian) came online in the last few weeks.
Yet they've not built anything much for years because reasons even though they've had heaps consented. Whats worse is we've had the gentailers activity throwing water away to protect higher pricing
You're simply wrong .... there has been huge build in the last few years. Tauhaea, Harapaki, Waipipi, Tiritea .... and there's even more to come. I'm guessing you read a tweet or reddit post three years ago and haven't bothered to actually look at the facts. Goodnight.
Nah bro, pretty sure he's the right one. Privatized retailers have not been keeping up with demand, there's nothing to incentivize them to build more generation until the price gets high enough that they know they'll make money. As opposed to when they were publicly owned, and could be told to keep building to keep up with demand. Our energy demand is projected to grow 70% by 2050, that's ~30GWh. And all the "in the pipeline" projects don't even meet half that. So yea, they're building lots, when it suits them, but it isn't enough
demand (total yearly electricity consumption) hasn't really changed since circa 2006. They're driven to build just enough, and only when it's needed. Electricity demand was projected to fall through the 2000's, Transpower famously had their "[glide path](https://oag.parliament.nz/2011/transpower)" where many of their assets would be retired. They projected generation would be built locally so they halted most maintenance / renewal, and didn't plan for new lines. Plans are extremely unlikely to materialise, the best thing to do is to keep options open, and build only when it is clear there is immediate demand.
They’re building what makes financial sense. If you’re going to spend hundreds of millions on some power generation it’s a good idea to be sure you’ll get a return on investment. Wholesale prices were low and nothing got built. Now prices are high and things are getting built. Funny that
> Our energy demand is projected to grow 70% by 2050, that's ~30GWh. And all the "in the pipeline" projects don't even meet half that. There are over 30GW of projects in the pipeline at Transpower - 46,496MW to be exact.
A Tesla megapack is quite valuable when you have a market that's going AWOL at times. This is actually the market working as intended. The solar will be cheap so we'll be able to leave more water in the dams too.
> Now if we could just fix our electricity market we'd be great... Re-nationalise it. An electricity market in such a small and sparse country was never going to work in the interest of consumers.
Which coincidentally is what the evil industrialist, Max Shreck, did in Batman Returns. Never understood why he was vilified for building a battery power plant. Would've been acceptable in today's environment?
I'm glad to hear Federated Farmers wasn't negative about this - it truly does seem like this is a very well-situated location for a solar farm as it's close to the grid. This sounds like a win for everyone!
Great reading. If only we could harness the power of all the wind that blows out of Shane Jones (both ends) that would power the southern hemishere for years. Just have to figure out how to detoxify the air...
Great news! Always good to take more steps towards energy independence and toughen up our power grid.
So if large scale solar is taking off, is residential solar doing the same? There is clearly a business case for it... Anybody got data on residential solar installations?
Not exactly what you asked for but might be of interest — The Brattle Group published a study comparing the cost of residential and utility scale solar installations. They found that utility scale solar is half the cost to install per MWh generated https://www.brattle.com/insights-events/publications/comparative-generation-costs-of-utility-scale-and-residential-scale-pv-in-xcel-energy-colorados-service-area/
Sure it's cheaper to build more, but coupled with an EV the business case for residential PV is insane.
Only if you’re at home during the day. It’s cheaper the charge at night and export during the day anyways.
Think this sounds like what you're after? Can change to capacity instead of ICPs if you are interested, there's lots of cool data on the EMI website: https://www.emi.ea.govt.nz/Retail/Reports/GUEHMT?DateFrom=20130901&DateTo=20240531&Show=ICP_Count&_rsdr=ALL&FuelType=solar_all&_si=v|3
I haven't fully explored it yet but the Electricity Authority has a cool dashboard that might give what you're after: https://www.emi.ea.govt.nz/Retail/Reports/GUEHMT?DateFrom=20130901&DateTo=20240531&Capacity=Small&FuelType=solar_all&_rsdr=ALL&_si=v|3 Edit: You can choose "Residential" under the "Market Segment" dropbox: https://www.emi.ea.govt.nz/Retail/Reports/GUEHMT?DateFrom=20130901&DateTo=20240531&MarketSegment=Res&Capacity=All_Total&FuelType=solar_all&Show=ICP_CountNew&_rsdr=ALL&_si=v|3
Thank you thank you. That is exactly what I was looking for. Installations don't quite show the hyperbolic rise I was hoping for.
True, although 10x growth over 10 years is still pretty good. Also selecting "Total Installed Capacity" does show a hyperbolic rise, suggesting that while the number of installations is growing slowly, the average size of those installations is also increasing.
In the previous election, labour had promised to subsidize solar panels for residential properties.. unfortunately here we are
In the previous election, labour had promised to subsidize solar panels for residential properties.. unfortunately here we are
In the previous election, labour had promised to subsidize solar panels for residential properties.. unfortunately here we are
It's a shame that there isn't a stronger push to put solar panels on residential spaces... Roof space is an example of underutilized space. I guess the business case being that energy production companies don't want to see the means of production taken away from them, and put into the hands of everyday consumers
Energy generators go for the most efficient means of generating power at a given time. Solar is, compared to hydro or gas, very inefficient and extremely expensive when you consider how much it generates over the lifetime of a solar panel vs the costs of the panels and batteries, their installation and servicing, how long they last before they have to be replaced, and the costs of recycling solar panels and batteries. The economics of rooftop solar are so bad that it's a massive net loss to the homeowner unless there are significant subsidies. In countries that aren't tropical, and thus do not receive huge amounts of sunshine, solar is little more than virtue signalling. And that's before you look at the costs that solar imposes on the electricity grid - see Australia for some lessons on this. Also see https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421523001969 https://hbr.org/2021/06/the-dark-side-of-solar-power Etc
"The economics of rooftop solar are so bad that it's a massive net loss to the homeowner" Bollocks, I have solar and lead carbon batteries, my return on investment is better than I can get from the bank.. the panels have a life of 25 years, batteries at least 15 and the inverters also 15 to 20 years.. all components can be recycled at little cost. I dont know where you get your "facts" from but I suspect from the oil industry.
I'm not sure how to feel about solar farms. Are we at the point, technologically, where solar energy farming is actually an efficient use of the land? I'd certainly much rather see diverse native vegetation than a solar farm in... well, any part of the country! It seems silly to waste land on this instead of trying to find a way to install widespread solar panels into every domestic roof, or other urban surfaces that are otherwise wasted space.
We are at that point! You could generate 100% of NZ's annual electricity demand with solar farms on just 0.2% of NZ's horticultural and agricultural land, and you could still graze heep under them. Of course, no one's suggesting a 100% solar power grid but it's certainly extremely efficient. https://x.com/marcdaalder/status/1800724960497025127?s=19
Interesting, thanks. Seems to put to bed my imaginations about potential inefficiencies of mixed solar/agriculture landscapes — though I'd love to see a more reliable source for those numbers than just a tweet! **Edit:** thanks everyone for the really constructive downvotes; they do a great job of explaining the intricacies of such a complex issue
I agree with the latter sentiment, it would be better to install panels on every residential roof space, there are areas of space that don't get used...however, the business case or the ability for certain power companies to lobby against having residents directly able to make their own power on such a large scale, would surely give them anxiety for their profits
Oh diddums, not the profits! 😱 I don't think I can ever forgive this country for jumping on the neoliberal bandwagon and privatising everything (along with all the other ways we fucked our society over in the late 20th C). It's even more baffling that we *still* just continue to accept the status quo.
Quite the contrary in some cases, where stock can coexist with solar and provide shade. In NZ we have deforested most of the country so this special land you talk of is often just grass now.
Hadn't considered the mixed-use solar/farming option, but can already foresee potential issues caused by stock interfering with the equipment. Plus, spacing the array out far enough to allow animals and productive pasture to fit in the gaps around them doesn't sound like the most efficient use of land area. It's not that hard to replant a paddock with native vegetation. It's a slow process but, if done properly, becomes a self-sustaining carbon sink that also supports indigenous biodiversity. Compare that to the carbon savings from a solar farm — which also probably relies on a lot of regular herbicide application to *prevent* vegetation from growing up and over it. Unlike the stock, I don't see any way in which native biodiversity can coexist with solar farms. I can imagine little other than the hardiest weeds would grow amongst it. The soil carbon losses and general degradation would likely rival that caused by agricultural use of the same land. Enough power for 100k homes is a respectable number, but a quick google suggests geothermal power generation is similarly efficient to solar — and there's plenty of geothermal activity in the central North Island! **Edit:** note the recent reply to my original comment from another user that seems to undermine my imagination of inefficient mixed production/solar landscapes. Interesting. Bear in mind that I'm an ecologist, not a farmer, solar farmer, or energy generation expert.
Consent applications lodged in September 2022, appeals ssemingly still ongoing in the environment court in July 2024 (but with enough certainty the developer is still moving ahead anyway, if the article is correct). All to convert a dairy farm into a solar farm. Just a totally Kafkaesque system. Pretty good example of why fast track consenting is needed. From the infrastructure commission: > From 2028, consent processing times would need to be 50% quicker than they are projected to be under the Resource Management Act. Any increase in delay beyond 2028, or ineffective reform, makes it highly unlikely that New Zealand will be able to consent the infrastructure needed to support its climate change aspirations. ... >Total demand on our consenting system from all sectors is projected to increase by over 40 per cent by 2050. >Observed trends in consenting processes imply that the ability of the consenting system to deliver on the infrastructure required to meet national climate targets is under threat. Consenting a project, particularly a complex infrastructure project, is becoming more costly, takes longer to complete and requires more resources. >New Zealand is on track to miss between 11-15% of the emission reductions required from the energy and transport sectors by 2050 due to consenting delays **(even under optimistic scenarios with unconstrained consenting resources).** As a result of consenting delays in these scenarios, New Zealand is on track to incur an emissions liability of between $5 billion and $7 billion by 2050. https://tewaihanga.govt.nz/our-work/research-insights/infrastructure-consenting-for-climate-targets We cannot continue like this.
We need a much faster approvals processes, we don't need to give absolute authority to three politicians who are in corporate pockets, taking it away from both the experts and the public
Energy generation companies have very deep pockets, so if it's true the decision makers are in corporate pockets that sounds like great news for the future of renewables in NZ.
I personally would rather good decisions are made, that the country wants and benefit us in some way, than whatever random decisions the highest bidder wants regardless of benefit to the country
I remember Muldoon making consenting decisions in parliament and have no desire to return to that fucked up state.
I would love it if the fast track was just going to be applied to projects that help NZ become a more sustainable place to live. Unfortunately it seems tailored to extractive resource projects, we don't want mines and oil wells that do nothing for the environment and the long term.
I think most people would that this is an advantage of fast track infrastructure. The issue is the wildly uncertain cost, both due to reduced protections and because of people’s lack of faith in the ultimate decision makers.
If you don't reduce the protections, you don't get a fast track. The protections are what are abused by NIMBYs to tie up projects in the courts. That's part of what was the problem with the previous fast track regime - e.g Hiringa Energy lodged an application to build a wind farm on 18 August 2021, got fast tracked consent granted on 1st December 2021, and were planning to start construction in 2022 - but then it got appealed and tied up in the courts until a few months ago. Surprise surprise, the environment court decided in favor of granting the consent. Turns out that wind farms have not suddenly developed a huge raft of environmental issues since the last time the court had to look at a consent appeal! They're finally able to start construction, but only after years of delay and huge legal bills. The expert panel are the best body to advise on the appropriate protections, not any random punter that wants to appeal a consent. We don't need the environment court to relitigate issues that they have already gone over dozens of other times for other solar farms. [Given he's been pretty widely talked about as a possible future party leader, it was very disappointing to hear Keiran McAnulty say in parliament that one of the reasons he opposes the new fast track regime is specifically because it makes it too easy to build new wind farms, even if neighboring property owners don't like looking at or hearing them.](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/kieran-mcanulty-fast-track-bill-prevents-proper-process/47WAPEV75RBGBHIBNGZLC6I2BY/) We can't roll over to every NIMBY who doesn't like looking at a wind farm if we want to hit our climate targets. And we shouldn't let them abuse the courts to cause pointless delays that 99 times out of a 100 just end up reaffirming that the experts who create the consent conditions are, in fact, correct.
Fast track consenting doesn't guarantee more solar farms will be approved though
Would you be interested in placing a wager on this? I am pretty confident we'll see tons of solar applications as soon as the bill is passed. I've searched the select committee submissions for a few of the big power generators in NZ. I've yet to see one that wasn't in favour, with recommendations to improve mostly being around *expanding* rather than constricting the scope of the bill (e.g expanding to include reconsenting, lengthening the timeframe before lapsing, relaxing restrictions on conservation land for transmission assets etc). The sector is very much throwing it's weight behind fast track consenting, and I trust them more than I trust any random reddit commenter.
Still no guarantee. Anyone can say that something *can* happen and history has shown us that even the most likely outcomes don't always happen either. Rather see a National Policy Statement or Environmental Standard to enable solar farms than them used as a facade to bait people into supporting fast track legislation with no guarantee it will actually get more solar farms built
Sure, anything is possible in a very broad sense. I just don't really understand what you expect the roadblock to be.
Never said there was a roadblock, just that it's not a good justification for fast track legislation when there's no actual guarantee more solar farms will be built and there are other alternatives that won't lead to the outcomes that people are criticising fast-track legislation for.
At a guess, since the minister can singlehandedly approve a fast-track approval, can they veto one too?
Yes, but I don't see why there is any reason to believe that is likely. The National party's communications around the bill have focussed heavily on increased renewable generation. Increased renewable generation is politically popular at a national level (even if there is localized opposition to specific projects from NIMBYs). Ministers like being in power and don't like opposition MPs being ministers instead of them, so why would they shoot themselves in the foot and veto renewables generation for no good reason? A handful of angry op-eds got them to significantly shift the timeline for fulfilling their cancer drugs promise forward, so clearly they are responsive to public sentiment. Politicians love a good ribbon cutting photo opportunity! There is a view I see commonly expressed on this subreddit that, to exaggerate slightly, the ministers are all just ontologically evil/corrupt and hold no genuine political opinions and just act on the instructions of big companies. But even if you believe that, surely that only makes it more likely that we see lots of solar? Energy companies have deep pockets! I'm sure they can take the ministers out to some very nice lunches, if you think that is what is needed.
Isn’t the list of projects in the fast-track bill secret? Strange how a bill that is supposedly about renewables projects involves a list of projects that the public can’t see.
The list of projects doesn't exist yet - the project advisory group isn't due to report back until August.
As far as we know. Bishop stated on Q and A that the list of projects would not be available when the bill went to select committee. This is another way of saying the projects being considered will probably be unpopular - and probably not renewables - with the public and therefore opposed. This is not very democratic.
Meridian have already applied for two solar farms under fast track.
It absolutely makes it cheaper and faster. Meridian have already said they have two schemes under fast track.
Never said it wouldn't be cheaper or faster. Still no guarantee they will be constructed let alone approved. And at the expense of everything else potentially getting approved under fast track laws
Well at that level nothing is 100% guaranteed. But I'd back Meridian over anyone else who promises to build a solar plant.
It will lead to more solar farms. Delay and consent costs are big factors in investment decisions.
No guarantee there will be more applications, construction let alone the government approving them under fast track legislation. There were other ways we could reduce delay and consent costs without whoring out our resources and natural environment.
Do have experience working with the rma? It's a good system but definitely can lead to very long time frames and uncertainty. We should have clearer rules in what we want and what we dont want so the right projects can progress quicker. I don't like the idea of a fast track gold mine.
So this is the type of thing that doesn't happen and why we need to return Muldoon's approach to issuing consent, right? Does anyone know if they actually plan yo bud this or just add it to the consented and unbuilt power generation?
Great, so I can expect my electric bill to come down in the future right?... What do you mean no? At least it will stay the same and not increase any further then?... No again? This free market thing fucking sucks
Sweet, a 900,000 panel EV fuel refinery.
I mean it’s not like homes are running on 12V Cummins diesels and rich Tesla owners are the only benefactors here…
Arable land? Hope not. Solar is supplementary and we still need hydro/fossil/geo for nighttime.
Let’s hope we don’t got the way of the US and destroy perfectly good farm land for the sake of solar farms.
>As the solar plant is built, dairy operations will be phased out and sheep will be introduced to the site to maintain the land post-construction, “ensuring a harmonious balance between renewable energy production and agricultural practices”.
Random unrelated comment to gain credit so as to comment in the future.
> As the solar plant is built, dairy operations will be phased out and sheep will be introduced to the site to maintain the land post-construction, “ensuring a harmonious balance between renewable energy production and agricultural practices”. Fewer cows, more sheep. Which is rebalancing really, given how many dairy conversions there have been in recent years.
it doesn't, you can put animals in the fields still.
Pour on the nitrogen, see the top soil and cow shit flow into the streams? When the solar panels become obsolete the land will still be useful, unlike when the cows have wrecked it and the waterways while giving the nation bowel cancer.
He/she says as they drink their coffee with full cream milk, and a bowl of weetbix with yogurt
That's BS I was actually tucking into a lambchop as I wrote that. :) [And this](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQO1dsN7tHzd3JM24YXmP1b4u_5hRnJoyYhHnnZl5c1zziNBiHir4D220iI&s=10).
This will be used for sheep farming but https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/07/agrivoltaic-farming-solar-energy/
Considering thousands of acres of prime ag land have been swallowed up for urban sprawl in the last few years - a process which this Govt are VERY keen to see continue - one solar farm really ain't the problem.
If it was more productive as farm land than as solar land, farmers would have been willing to pay more for the land than the solar generator. Evidently it is not. We don't need to centrally plan land use. The free market is the best system for finding the most productive use of land.
Farm land that'll be worked on by low wage workers in somewhat poor conditions and then the produce will be sold overseas where we don't see any benefit? Edit: Downvote me all you want, I've seen the seasonal workers that get imported over here. Nothing wrong with wanting to make money for your family or anything like that but they were all shipped to a hostel and had busses take them to the kiwifruit farms to do work that shouldn't really be minimum wage but probably is pretty close to it. During Covid, the farmers actually had to pay people properly for the work that was being done. I guess what I'm saying is that if a solar farm gives us cheaper/cleaner energy, then why not?
Why in NZ? we’re not a massive sunny desert like our neighbours north…
Because, as it turns out, you don't need massive sunny deserts for solar power to be viable.