NZ's biggest solar farm to be built

[Wainuiguy]

Solar is something that needs to be looked at but solar on this scale is not great.  For one rather amount of usable land this will take is massive and I didn't see any mention of storage in there?  While wind power is not pleasing to the eye at least the land below can still be used for farming or industrial.  The noise is an issue though not greatly so.  I sat having my lunch one day directly under a wind turbine opposite the famous sculpure "Donde se cruza el camino del viento con el de las estrellas"- while there was some noise it wasn't terrible.

We just looked at solar for our house - $20k outlay for a$10k savings over 20 years.  Just wasn't worth it.

Wind we have plenty of.  We need to build more dams(we wont), more geothermal, ,look at tidal power.  Solar in N Z isn't good enough.  Too much of the year we have reduced capacity.

A few points you've made are invalid and need correction.

Large scale solar installations can be done in conjunction with crops so that land is far from unusable. More information on Agrivoltaics here:



Another option is to site PV over non-productive land or other areas such as over water such as canals or wastewater ponds. The shading resulting from doing so provides benefits in reducing evaporation from potable water sources.

In regards to battery storage here in New Zealand we already have enormous storage potential by way of our hydro lakes. Daytime PV generation offsets hydro generation during that time which is in effect a storage method. And of course the pumped hydro scheme being proposed for Lake Onslow is a more ambitious approach for offsetting generation scheduling. Lower winter sunshine levels are thereby also offset by rainfall capture during that period. The real issue in New Zealand however is the split generation/transmission model instigated by the Bradford reforms which works against smaller competing generators penetrating the existing market due to advantages enjoyed by the encumants. That's why we're seeing the likes of Todd and NZ Refining being those with the economic clout to take on the big power co's.

While wind turbines' noise output is relatively low in volume the low frequencies are problematic in terms of psychological effects on nearby properties so isolated locations are required. Smaller horizontal axis (propeller style) such as those for individual properties can generate significant volumes (think Cessna on take off) so council consents are an issue. Also wind turbines, big or small, like wave or tidal generating systems have plenty of moving parts and operate in challenging environments so maintenance of them is a major consideration. Fixed PV panels are very low maintenance in comparison.

Domestic sized PV installations require good design to be economically viable as their economic viability is far more precarious than for utility scale installations. We have recently completed a 5kW PV installation on our property that cost us $14K with a ~10 year payback period. That installation uses our hot water cylinder as storage via a Paladin 'power diverter' for excess generation, rather than exporting to the grid, and provides most charging for our Nissan Leaf EV, and a planned second EV which will further improve the PV's investment value and ROI. Also owning an EV or two made the economies of including battery storage non-viable as our vehicles are essentially batteries on wheels.

We had a similar sized PV installation at our previous property so had plenty of prior experience going into this one and were disappointed with much of the poor advice we received from potential installers so I'm well aware that there will be plenty of poor PV choices being made and it would be advisable to shop wisely if you're considering investing in home solar. Keep an eye out for a coming blog on our website detailing our solar venture for more information in that regard.

Well that looks great - is that what they plan for here?

[king1]

i've always liked the idea of tidal, tucked away offshore (i'm assuming), but the impact on the seabed is probably an issue for Maori culture that will need working through

[harm_less]

i've always liked the idea of tidal, tucked away offshore (i'm assuming), but the impact on the seabed is probably an issue for Maori culture that will need working through

We lived just down the road from the Annapolis tidal generating station back in 2003. It was an interesting concept though even while we were there a problem occurred when a whale calf found its way upstream of the station separated from its mother which eventually resolved but caused a lot of publicity at the time. Also worth noting that the closure of the station in 2019 came as a result of high maintenance costs and issues with high fish mortality. It did puzzle me though that the Annapolis station only generated during the outgoing tide which I thought was a missed opportunity as the turbine saw tidal movement in both directions.

A similar technology with turbines moored on the sea floor in the mouth of the Kaipara harbour failed to progress a few years back with fish mortality being one of the main criticisms then. Also from my previous work on offshore oil production facilities I am all too aware of the aggressive conditions that the sea presents for any structure sited in it. Interesting to read the factors in play and predicted back in 2013 when the Kaipara proposal was active, and how things have changed in the interim.

[The BDI]

apparently a bit of noxious by-product in much of the componentry, especially from the batteries
lithium etc is mined, mines bad.
might also be the odd third world underaged underpaid pseudo slaves employed in the process as well.

bit like chocolate and coffee
we just want a nice hot bevvie, a caffeine buzz, or a little smackerel of something sweet by way of mr whittaker
a little harmless self frottage in an otherwise pedestrian existence., without depriving half the third worlds children
their education and childhood.

its ironic. the angst of those proponents of solar energy, that the toxicity of the by-product is as vile as petrochem products they loathe.

Those seeking "solutions" so often cling to something that sounds good when they don't know enough to see that the underlying technology isn't really going to achieve what's required. Solar is great on the roof of our camper, until one panel failed and started drawing instead of charging (which is what has happened recently, and will be fixed by replacing it). People using solar for individual houses/businesses seem to have mixed success. I really can't see that using up a huge space of productive land to only provide the equivalent power as needed for 100,000 homes is really efficient. And what about when climate change means we have more cloud and the solar power we can utilise now is reduced (something else we have experienced with our camper)? Examples of small scale experiences probably extrapolate to large scale problems in the wider world. Is the proposed solar farm just pandering to fashion and setting up a white elephant that will make money for Todd when it is sold, for someone else to have to deal with the long term problems?

We have a lot of sea around us, with rise and fall twice daily. Other countries are well on the way with exploring how to best utilise it, although, as with everything, environmental impacts are a serious concern. Maybe NZ could join the real world by looking in that direction.

Yes, I've seen large acreages covered in them in Eastern Europe.. viable flat farmland as far as I could tell.  Should not be put on viable flat farmland unless at a suitable height that allows grazing.

---

A few points you've made are invalid and need correction.

Large scale solar installations can be done in conjunction with crops so that land is far from unusable. More information on Agrivoltaics here:



Another option is to site PV over non-productive land or other areas such as over water such as canals or wastewater ponds. The shading resulting from doing so provides benefits in reducing evaporation from potable water sources.

In regards to battery storage here in New Zealand we already have enormous storage potential by way of our hydro lakes. Daytime PV generation offsets hydro generation during that time which is in effect a storage method. And of course the pumped hydro scheme being proposed for Lake Onslow is a more ambitious approach for offsetting generation scheduling. Lower winter sunshine levels are thereby also offset by rainfall capture during that period. The real issue in New Zealand however is the split generation/transmission model instigated by the Bradford reforms which works against smaller competing generators penetrating the existing market due to advantages enjoyed by the encumants. That's why we're seeing the likes of Todd and NZ Refining being those with the economic clout to take on the big power co's.

While wind turbines' noise output is relatively low in volume the low frequencies are problematic in terms of psychological effects on nearby properties so isolated locations are required. Smaller horizontal axis (propeller style) such as those for individual properties can generate significant volumes (think Cessna on take off) so council consents are an issue. Also wind turbines, big or small, like wave or tidal generating systems have plenty of moving parts and operate in challenging environments so maintenance of them is a major consideration. Fixed PV panels are very low maintenance in comparison.

Domestic sized PV installations require good design to be economically viable as their economic viability is far more precarious than for utility scale installations. We have recently completed a 5kW PV installation on our property that cost us $14K with a ~10 year payback period. That installation uses our hot water cylinder as storage via a Paladin 'power diverter' for excess generation, rather than exporting to the grid, and provides most charging for our Nissan Leaf EV, and a planned second EV which will further improve the PV's investment value and ROI. Also owning an EV or two made the economies of including battery storage non-viable as our vehicles are essentially batteries on wheels.

We had a similar sized PV installation at our previous property so had plenty of prior experience going into this one and were disappointed with much of the poor advice we received from potential installers so I'm well aware that there will be plenty of poor PV choices being made and it would be advisable to shop wisely if you're considering investing in home solar. Keep an eye out for a coming blog on our website detailing our solar venture for more information in that regard.

Well that looks great - is that what they plan for here?

Why are we not using our hydro potential to the fullest I wonder?

[harm_less]

Yes, I've seen large acreages covered in them in Eastern Europe.. viable flat farmland as far as I could tell.  Should not be put on viable flat farmland unless at a suitable height that allows grazing.

---

Well that looks great - is that what they plan for here?

Why are we not using our hydro potential to the fullest I wonder?

The usual reason. Just follow the money. State funded hydro dams sold off on the sharemarket so their operation needs to turn a profit for the shareholders. That was a National government move that was great for investors but resulted in a situation that continues to distort the economics of the NZ electricity sector to the detriment of consumers.

[Wainuiguy]

Yes, I've seen large acreages covered in them in Eastern Europe.. viable flat farmland as far as I could tell.  Should not be put on viable flat farmland unless at a suitable height that allows grazing.

---

Why are we not using our hydro potential to the fullest I wonder?

The usual reason. Just follow the money. State funded hydro dams sold off on the sharemarket so their operation needs to turn a profit for the shareholders. That was a National government move that was great for investors but resulted in a situation that continues to distort the economics of the NZ electricity sector to the detriment of consumers.

The biggest issue with new Hydro isn't the money - it is environmental issues.  The last major hydro plan was scuppered for that reason not money.  That is why it is doubtful any new hydro will be built in this country.

[Magoo]

The usual reason. Just follow the money. State funded hydro dams sold off on the sharemarket so their operation needs to turn a profit for the shareholders. That was a National government move that was great for investors but resulted in a situation that continues to distort the economics of the NZ electricity sector to the detriment of consumers.

The biggest issue with new Hydro isn't the money - it is environmental issues.  The last major hydro plan was scuppered for that reason not money.  That is why it is doubtful any new hydro will be built in this country.

which is dumb
when we do hydro we build lakes and canals.
why do the environmentalists hate lakes and canals?
would they prefer we go nuclear?, burn more coal?

theyve lots in the way of dont do this, dont do thats but 5 eighths of fuck all in the way of solutions.
it would greatly enhance their relevance to the debate, and give them some credence to do so.
so easy to pick the low hanging fruit by telling us all whats wrong, any fool can do that.

[Wainuiguy]

The biggest issue with new Hydro isn't the money - it is environmental issues.  The last major hydro plan was scuppered for that reason not money.  That is why it is doubtful any new hydro will be built in this country.

which is dumb
when we do hydro we build lakes and canals.
why do the environmentalists hate lakes and canals?
would they prefer we go nuclear?, burn more coal?

theyve lots in the way of dont do this, dont do thats but 5 eighths of fuck all in the way of solutions.
it would greatly enhance their relevance to the debate, and give them some credence to do so.
so easy to pick the low hanging fruit by telling us all whats wrong, any fool can do that.

Agree it is dumb.  We have many rivers that could be used in NZ similar to what they did on the waikato but that type of construction would never be done now.

[Magoo]

hydro is the most attractive we have on offer so far.
the alternatives are not sustainable and their environmental impact abhorrent.
the best of a not great bunch, we used to be proud of our hydro engineering achievements.

[king1]

I guess the other consideration is, if in fact usage is declining and continues to do so, there is greater use of in home systems, tiwai point smelter goneburger... is there any point in adding more generation capacity?

[harm_less]

I guess the other consideration is, if in fact usage is declining and continues to do so, there is greater use of in home systems, tiwai point smelter goneburger...  is there any point in adding more generation capacity?

In that regard I can't understand why our government isn't incentivising installation of domestic PV installations. It makes so much sense when combined with home charging of electric vehicles both in terms of relieving burden on the national grid and also in reducing people's power bills.

And in reply to those who are advocating hydro but dismissing utility scale solar generation the area of potentially productive land required by solar farms is minor compared to that which a hydro lake floods, and the carbon input required by concrete structures such as hydro dams and their construction is massive and would take decades to offset by their generation capacity.

[Wainuiguy]

I guess the other consideration is, if in fact usage is declining and continues to do so, there is greater use of in home systems, tiwai point smelter goneburger...  is there any point in adding more generation capacity?

In that regard I can't understand why our government isn't incentivising installation of domestic PV installations. It makes so much sense when combined with home charging of electric vehicles both in terms of relieving burden on the national grid and also in reducing people's power bills.

And in reply to those who are advocating hydro but dismissing utility scale solar generation the area of potentially productive land required by solar farms is minor compared to that which a hydro lake floods, and the carbon input required by concrete structures such as hydro dams and their construction is massive and would take decades to offset by their generation capacity.

The last dam considered would have seen 2nd gen Bush flooded in unusable gorges.  This solar farm would see 1000 hectares covered in panels and you know it wouldn't be like what you posted earlier.

[Magoo]

I guess the other consideration is, if in fact usage is declining and continues to do so, there is greater use of in home systems, tiwai point smelter goneburger...  is there any point in adding more generation capacity?

In that regard I can't understand why our government isn't incentivising installation of domestic PV installations. It makes so much sense when combined with home charging of electric vehicles both in terms of relieving burden on the national grid and also in reducing people's power bills.

And in reply to those who are advocating hydro but dismissing utility scale solar generation the area of potentially productive land required by solar farms is minor compared to that which a hydro lake floods, and the carbon input required by concrete structures such as hydro dams and their construction is massive and would take decades to offset by their generation capacity.

i certainly wouldnt dismiss solar, seems like the direction we are headed. its day will come. but nor should we dismiss hydro as inferior. the by product on its worst day wouldnt be anywhere near the other alternatives, including solar.
and just restricting it just solar as an alternative is short sighted when wind farming and tidal flow generation is leaping in technology just as quickly.

the day is coming when our energy will not be generated on the planet itself, but from up there. *points to sky*

[harm_less]

In that regard I can't understand why our government isn't incentivising installation of domestic PV installations. It makes so much sense when combined with home charging of electric vehicles both in terms of relieving burden on the national grid and also in reducing people's power bills.

And in reply to those who are advocating hydro but dismissing utility scale solar generation the area of potentially productive land required by solar farms is minor compared to that which a hydro lake floods, and the carbon input required by concrete structures such as hydro dams and their construction is massive and would take decades to offset by their generation capacity.

The last dam considered would have seen 2nd gen Bush flooded in unusable gorges.  This solar farm would see 1000 hectares covered in panels and you know it wouldn't be like what you posted earlier.

The Agrivoltaics example I posted a link to earlier was a case of possibilities for those areas where horticultural land warrants dual productivity. I would argue that the horticultural intensity in NZ is not of a level that makes such development necessary and/or feasible.

Not familiar with which hydro scheme you are referring to as you provide no references to it but I would suggest that the carbon load of the concrete and construction required would be a consideration in its environmental viability. The construction and materials input of a solar farm would be very minor in comparison.

---

.....

the day is coming when our energy will not be generated on the planet itself, but from up there. *points to sky*

Virtually all of the energy sources we use here in NZ have a solar origin. Hydro is reliant on rainfall that results from sun driven weather, as is the case for wind and wave activity. Fossil fuels are the result of photosynthetic activity from Earth's prehistoric past which are compressed and concentrated by geological activity over the eons.  Tidal energy is more driven by lunar influences, but still cosmic in origin.

Nuclear is our replication of the sun's energy production mechanism but obviously not part of NZ's energy generation for the foreseeable future.

[Wainuiguy]

The last dam considered would have seen 2nd gen Bush flooded in unusable gorges.  This solar farm would see 1000 hectares covered in panels and you know it wouldn't be like what you posted earlier.

The Agrivoltaics example I posted a link to earlier was a case of possibilities for those areas where horticultural land warrants dual productivity. I would argue that the horticultural intensity in NZ is not of a level that makes such development necessary and/or feasible.

Not familiar with which hydro scheme you are referring to as you provide no references to it but I would suggest that the carbon load of the concrete and construction required would be a consideration in its environmental viability. The construction and materials input of a solar farm would be very minor in comparison.

---

.....

the day is coming when our energy will not be generated on the planet itself, but from up there. *points to sky*

Virtually all of the energy sources we use here in NZ have a solar origin. Hydro is reliant on rainfall that results from sun driven weather, as is the case for wind and wave activity. Fossil fuels are the result of photosynthetic activity from Earth's prehistoric past which are compressed and concentrated by geological activity over the eons.  Tidal energy is more driven by lunar influences, but still cosmic in origin.

Nuclear is our replication of the sun's energy production mechanism but obviously not part of NZ's energy generation for the foreseeable future.

Can't recall the name but it was the one on the west coast.  1000 hectares buried under steel and glass - sounds like a pretty big environmental impact right there.

[king1]

In that regard I can't understand why our government isn't incentivising installation of domestic PV installations. It makes so much sense when combined with home charging of electric vehicles both in terms of relieving burden on the national grid and also in reducing people's power bills.

And in reply to those who are advocating hydro but dismissing utility scale solar generation the area of potentially productive land required by solar farms is minor compared to that which a hydro lake floods, and the carbon input required by concrete structures such as hydro dams and their construction is massive and would take decades to offset by their generation capacity.

i certainly wouldnt dismiss solar, seems like the direction we are headed. its day will come. but nor should we dismiss hydro as inferior. the by product on its worst day wouldnt be anywhere near the other alternatives, including solar.
and just restricting it just solar as an alternative is short sighted when wind farming and tidal flow generation is leaping in technology just as quickly.

the day is coming when our energy will not be generated on the planet itself, but from up there. *points to sky*

Are you talking Helium-3? Mining on the Moon...

Iron Sky - average movie, could have been done better...

[king1]

The Agrivoltaics example I posted a link to earlier was a case of possibilities for those areas where horticultural land warrants dual productivity. I would argue that the horticultural intensity in NZ is not of a level that makes such development necessary and/or feasible.

Not familiar with which hydro scheme you are referring to as you provide no references to it but I would suggest that the carbon load of the concrete and construction required would be a consideration in its environmental viability. The construction and materials input of a solar farm would be very minor in comparison.

---

Virtually all of the energy sources we use here in NZ have a solar origin. Hydro is reliant on rainfall that results from sun driven weather, as is the case for wind and wave activity. Fossil fuels are the result of photosynthetic activity from Earth's prehistoric past which are compressed and concentrated by geological activity over the eons.  Tidal energy is more driven by lunar influences, but still cosmic in origin.

Nuclear is our replication of the sun's energy production mechanism but obviously not part of NZ's energy generation for the foreseeable future.

Can't recall the name but it was the one on the west coast.  1000 hectares buried under steel and glass - sounds like a pretty big environmental impact right there.

maybe this one
https://www.westpower.co.nz/news/article...u-informed

[Wainuiguy]

Can't recall the name but it was the one on the west coast.  1000 hectares buried under steel and glass - sounds like a pretty big environmental impact right there.

maybe this one
https://www.westpower.co.nz/news/article...u-informed

No because the one I was thinking of was delined a number of years ago.
This one I believe.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korih...ati-waewae

[harm_less]

The Agrivoltaics example I posted a link to earlier was a case of possibilities for those areas where horticultural land warrants dual productivity. I would argue that the horticultural intensity in NZ is not of a level that makes such development necessary and/or feasible.

Not familiar with which hydro scheme you are referring to as you provide no references to it but I would suggest that the carbon load of the concrete and construction required would be a consideration in its environmental viability. The construction and materials input of a solar farm would be very minor in comparison.

---

Virtually all of the energy sources we use here in NZ have a solar origin. Hydro is reliant on rainfall that results from sun driven weather, as is the case for wind and wave activity. Fossil fuels are the result of photosynthetic activity from Earth's prehistoric past which are compressed and concentrated by geological activity over the eons.  Tidal energy is more driven by lunar influences, but still cosmic in origin.

Nuclear is our replication of the sun's energy production mechanism but obviously not part of NZ's energy generation for the foreseeable future.

Can't recall the name but it was the one on the west coast.  1000 hectares buried under steel and glass - sounds like a pretty big environmental impact right there.

Did you miss the bit in the article in the OP about the solar farm including "sheep grazing, cropping, pollinator planting and beekeeping"? Pretty difficult to do those activities in a flooded valley. And the solar farm will retire land from its current dairy farming use which arguably a questionable activity on pumice based soils.

---

maybe this one
https://www.westpower.co.nz/news/article...u-informed

No because the one I was thinking of was delined a number of years ago.
This one I believe.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korih...ati-waewae

So, how many hectares would the dam have inundated. Considering it was designed to produce "20 megahertz [sic] of electricity", which I assume was meant to be 20 MW it would have had 1/20 of the generating capacity of Nova's planned solar installation so the comparative generation capacity was likely to be a no-contest on a MW/ha basis.

[Magoo]

i certainly wouldnt dismiss solar, seems like the direction we are headed. its day will come. but nor should we dismiss hydro as inferior. the by product on its worst day wouldnt be anywhere near the other alternatives, including solar.
and just restricting it just solar as an alternative is short sighted when wind farming and tidal flow generation is leaping in technology just as quickly.

the day is coming when our energy will not be generated on the planet itself, but from up there. *points to sky*

Are you talking Helium-3? Mining on the Moon...

Iron Sky - average movie, could have been done better...

no, i saw a doco some time back about harvesting solar winds and energy from space and projecting it to earth.