[LudwigNagasena]

> The fact that Victoria exports back non-renewable power isn't in their control.

So it is not in their control to be powered only by non-renewable energy. The rest of what you have written doesn’t change this simple fact.

[Retric]

They could use energy storage just fine. However, by on net exporting electricity they reduce the amount of fossil fuels Victoria uses so it’s a net win environmentally.

Nuclear has similar issues where baseload generation is inefficient when trying to cover shifting power demand. Thus small cities next to nuclear will import power even if they are a net exporter. In the end larger electricity grids are simply more efficient.

[LudwigNagasena]

What does any of this have to do with the fact that the title is incorrect?

[Retric]

The title is correct. They are also using another area as an efficient battery which is both environmentally and economically a net positive.

[LudwigNagasena]

Show me how all these numbers add up to 100%.

[Retric]

Production always exceeds consumption due to transmission losses.

So, simplified you can produce 120% export 15% and import 5%. That’s net export, and covering 100% of demand. That’s also how they can have a “200 per cent renewable target by 2040.”

[LudwigNagasena]

If I open Wikipedia what I see is "100% renewable energy refers to an energy system where all energy use is sourced from renewable energy sources." which is completely what I would expect from the definition of "100% renewable energy." What you are talking about seems like meaningless political wordplay.