No, this:
http://www.genexpower.com.au/the-kidston-pumped-storage-hydr...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-21/pumped-hydro-renewable...
base load
Oh, the old baseload argument. I haven't heard that one for a couple of years now.
https://www.nrdc.org/experts/kevin-steinberger/debunking-thr...
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/12/02/3081889.ht...
https://theconversation.com/baseload-power-is-a-myth-even-in...
nuclear... relatively cheap across an entire life cycle
> Between 2002 and 2008, for example, cost estimates for new nuclear plant construction rose from between $2 billion and $4 billion per unit to $9 billion per unit, according to a 2009 UCS report, while experience with new construction in Europe has seen costs continue to soar.
https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/cost-nuclear-power
Plenty of other studies showing similar.
"The real challenge is to supply peaks in demand on calm winter evenings following overcast days. That’s when the peak-load power stations, that is, hydro and gas turbines, make vital contributions by filling gaps in wind and solar generation."
In the UK that translates to gas/diesel standbys which in the case of the latter is horrendously polluting
Now, if you look at all of those studies, they make the assumption that there there is gas/hydro to act as backup. that is a base load.
The NRDC link ~25-50% of the power comes from Gas, which puts out CO2. Then there is biomass, which is also environmentally problematic in its current form. (https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/styles/full_content...) Granted that does not take into account grid scale efficient storage.
But there is a base load, you can see it in the graphs. They almost exclusively use gas to plug that gap. If you want to reduce carbon output, that has to go.
Now, if I was to be in charge of a country, my route to energy security with minimal environmental impact would be thus:
1) insulation at a massive discount/loan.
2) diverse renewables, but not at any cost, and not on farm land. (UK based, so tidal, solar, wind)
3) small scale nuclear. Molten salt or similar with a negative feedback loop
4) Domestic & industrial power storage/generation incentives. If you can adjust the demands at source it greatly reduces the highs and lows.
Why in the UK is something like nuclear needed? Because if we are to reduce carbon output, we need to heat our homes with electricity instead of gas, that triples the power demand at a stroke. insulation standards of 0.6U or less would reduce this significantly. However its still more power than can be feasibly harvested with rooftop solar/wind/tidal alone.
Hydro: Used in the UK to provide peak backup (however thats pumped storage not generation. given the droughts and irrigation usage in aus, not the best idea) requires time to warm up. Has large environmental impact unless using a natural dam (~60 seconds to respond)
pump solar: I'm assuming you mean CSP (https://www.sulzer.com/en/applications/power-generation/rene...) for the sunny parts of Aus, possibly a good choice. Not cheap though (No response time, cannot operate as a base load)
Liquid salt storage: See above, less efficient, slow response time (unknown response time. Suspect in the order of tens of minutes, as heat has to be transfered into water for steam, better as base load)
Geothermal: needs the correct rock formation (again, unknown response time, better as base load)
Large scale solar + wind: Storage is the problem. The amount of lithium required to proper storage is utterly vast. (depends very much on the storage medium and controller, also the amount of wind solar in the preceding days)
Tidal: requires the right geology, can have massive environmental impact, power comes when it wants, but is predictable.(Has some ability to provide backup outside of high/low tide. )
Decentralised x: horrifically expensive, however the cost can be passed directly to consumers. Keeping it all in sync requires decent infrastructure. (without a new and secure mechanism unlikely to provide grid backup, but could be used to dynamically cut load. )
In conclusion nuclear provide a brilliant base load, which can be used for things like charging the various storage devices, or allowing for solar to not work at night. Its relatively cheap across an entire life cycle, and surprisingly dependable. In terms of environmental impact, significantly less that the constant low-level pollutants that are emmited by coal & gas, and the environmental changes caused by hydro. Also Lithium mining has a large environmental impact too, as does PV production.