Coal finished as renewable costs crash

Bloomberg just published another stark reminder of the shifting landscape for energy generation – fossil fuels have a limited time as viable sources of energy. And I’m not talking about saving the planet or carbon taxes, simply economics.

Coal, gas, oil, all have economics based on a scarcity curve: the more we use, the deeper we need to dig and more expensive to extract. Solar and battery power is on a technology curve: the more the world produces, the cheaper it becomes.

My view is we will reach an energy parity where technology curve becomes an upper bound for the scarcity curve. i.e. the price of energy won’t exceed the cost of Solar+Batteries.
Solar+Batteries are the “killer app” – extremely scalable once they reach an acceptable cost. The trillion-dollar question: what is that price? If it can be reached in 5 years, then there are significant implications for stocks right now. If it is 20 years, then investors can relax.

Don’t relax.

All the current trends point to energy parity being sooner rather than later for electricity. Oil has different issues – backup generation is being disrupted right now, cars will take longer, I’ll deal with oil another day.

The Numbers

There are a few big-picture numbers that you should be aware of. All figures are USD/kWh for international comparability. We use levelized cost of energy, which adjusts for the up-front cost of building power plants or solar arrays, asset life and tax issues. This means the numbers rely on a lot of assumptions, vary by country and region, and should be treated as approximate. In general, the numbers are for new installations with recent technology.

Utility Electricity numbers:

  • Solar: About $0.04. Higher in less sunny areas.
  • Solar + battery:  If you just want to shift some of the daytime into the evening peak then about $0.07. To get round the clock, around $0.09.
  • Coal power: About $0.07 to $0.08. Only moderately sensitive to the coal price. Operating costs are about half the cost – i.e. solar (in sunny areas) is almost cheaper than the operating cost of an existing coal plant.
  • Gas power: About $0.04 to $0.08. Very sensitive to the gas price.
  • Oil power: About $0.23 from a small scale diesel generator. Was generally useful as backup/remote region power, but batteries and solar power have all but killed this market.
  • The power of compounding: Costs have been decreasing by about 20% per annum for both batteries and solar. If this continues then in 5 years then even cheap US gas will no longer be economic in sunny regions.

Retail Electricity numbers:

  • Retail Prices: US, China, India about $0.15. Australia $0.25-$0.35. Japan $0.25. Europe $0.30 (varies widely – Germany = $0.40)
  • Time of Day charging: The above charges are averages. Time of day charges vary widely, but Off-peak prices of less than $0.10 and peak prices greater than $0.40 are indicative of the range.
  • Rooftop solar: About $0.13. Higher in less sunny areas.
  • Rooftop Solar + battery:  If you just want to shift some of the daytime into the evening peak then about $0.31. To get round the clock, around $0.39.

There are also continuing demographic shifts in investor attitudes:

Solar Cost Trends

However you measure it, the cost of solar has fallen dramatically relative to other energy sources:

Long Term solar cost

This graph way oversimplifies the issue, and there is a giant asterisk on solar and wind costs in that solar only supplies power during the day, and wind power is intermittent. What they need is something to store the energy, and fortunately, batteries are on the same type of price curve:

This is greatly aided by the fact that a few billion people want a longer battery life for a device they carry with them everywhere and stare at constantly. So, the best minds that money can buy are pretty focused on the task. Battery prices will continue to fall.

There are other battery options other than the Lithium-Ion batteries shown above. I have focussed on Lithium-Ion, but there may be another technology that supersedes it.

Putting batteries together with the solar gives us two options:

  1. Full shifting: a large battery to generate power throughout the night
  2. Partial shifting: a battery to shift some power from the day to the evening peak use

Future Prices

There is a range of different outcomes we could see for electricity prices.

Below I have focused on two different scenarios, one where solar+battery costs fall at 10% per year for the next five years, another at 20%.

In the last ten years, costs have fallen around 20% per year. Given how low solar costs are, the critical assumption is battery prices. A 20% fall in battery prices will have a much larger impact than a 20% fall in the cost of solar.

Either way, there is very little scope for coal prices to rise. If the 10% per annum cost savings are achieved then there will be no new fossil fuel power plants in even moderately sunny climates.

If 20% per annum cost savings are achieved, existing coal-fired plants with lots of remaining life will start shutting down.

Now 20% per annum cost savings compounded for 5 years is a tall order. But:

  • those cost savings have been achieved in recent times
  • governments (in some countries) are lending considerable support to fight climate change
  • phone makers are spending considerable research and development money on the battery problem
  • electric vehicle makers are spending considerable research and development money on the battery problem
  • there are a range of new, more efficient solar technologies that have been proven in the lab but haven’t progressed to the real world yet
  • as more batteries are produced, there are relatively simple scale manufacturing benefits that will also help

which means that 20% is not out of the question.

Rooftop Solar

I have deliberately left Rooftop Solar out of the above tables, as rooftop solar is less comparable than you would think. Roof-top solar has costs of around $0.13 which is much higher than the costs above.

But that is not important. Rooftop solar is not competing with a coal plant, or even with utility solar.

Rooftop solar is competing with grid power + grid infrastructure. It is an important distinction.

I don’t care whether my rooftop solar produces cheaper than the local coal-fired power station, I care whether it produces at a cheaper rate than I pay for power – and it does:

The issue is my panels provide power during the day when everyone else’s panels are also producing electricity. So, unless I use it myself to offset the above charge, I get paid a fraction of what the power company will charge my neighbour for using my spare electricity. Also, the peak rate (in the evening) for time-of-day pricing is much higher than during the day.

At $0.31 for partial shifting, (i.e. generating enough power to get you through the evening peak), having some batteries is profitable in the right climate, but the return is low.

The big assumption is the discount rate. If you are prepared to accept a lower return (and lock in electricity prices), then partial shifting can be worth it at current prices.

But batteries aren’t yet a “no brainer” cheaper option.

Looking at the 10% cost reduction and 20% cost reduction scenarios again:

There are lots of questions that the above table raises. If everyone starts going off-grid, who pays for the poles and wires? Do we end up in a “death spiral” where more people leave the grid, raising the cost for those who remain, which means more people leave and so on?

All valid questions.

My best bet is that it is going to be a battle of vested interests. Wealthier people will leave the grid when it becomes economic as they can afford the upfront cost. This leaves renters and the poor left paying higher bills to account for the transmission assets. Governments will have three options:

  1. Prevent retail electricity price rises, support the rights of the many over the few and make the asset owners pay the cost of their mistaken investment
  2. Socialise the losses and bail out the transmission asset owners
  3. Let the asset owners raise prices, shift the cost of adjustment onto the poor

While option 1 would be my preferred choice, I have a sinking feeling that option 3 will be the path of least resistance. The lobbyists will no doubt be hard at work on option 2 in case any government have the fortitude to explore option 1.

Solar Features & Challenges

The main issue is solar produces an excess of power during the day and a shortage at night.

Solar energy has a lower marginal cost (almost zero marginal cost) than gas or coal, and so the “duck curve” (see below) will only get worse:

I expect this to be a permanent feature of the system going forward. i.e. electricity prices during the day to be much lower than evening prices.

Solar resources are immense

The below chart from the IEA has lots of problems, it understates the effect of renewables by showing annual potential for renewables vs total potential for non-renewables. Then it offsets that error in the other direction by grossly overstating solar.

However, the thrust is principally right: solar is a massive, mostly untapped, source of energy.

IEA Global energy resources

Source: Perez, M. Perez, IEA (2009,2015)

Maybe there will be an alternative technology breakthrough which drives electricity prices lower more quickly. I’m not saying it isn’t possible. However, for investors, the main game is solar – colossal potential and a history of steep cost reductions.

My take is that other renewable technologies will contribute to lower prices at the margin, but solar is the main issue for electricity costs.

Picking solar winners will be difficult

It is hard to pick solar winners – there are so many competing technologies that are improving, all with different economics:

Keep in mind this chart is a comparison of conversion efficiency – not of economics. A 20% efficient (low cost) thin-film technology that can be painted onto structures might be much cheaper per kW than a 48% multijunction cell.

The net effect is you can try to invest in a manufacturer, but for all you know the technology will be superseded.

Solar Resources

It matters whether you are in a sunny location or not.

Cities like L.A., Sydney, New Dehli will find solar costs 20% cheaper than somewhere like New York, Beijing, Tokyo as they simply get more sun. At the other end of the spectrum, London or Moscow get about half the solar resources of L.A. or Sydney:

world solar resources

Source: Solargis

You will also note from the above chart that solar resources are pretty good in most emerging countries – which is where most of the growth in demand is coming from.


At the moment, it looks like less than 5 years until we see significant changes in the electricity market, even if the rate of cost reductions halves. And don’t sleep on rooftop solar + batteries – they are a lot more expensive than coal, but retail power prices are a lot more expensive than wholesale. There is a decent chance rooftop solar + battery users going off-grid start a “death spiral” for electricity transmission.

Battery costs are the primary determinant at this point – if the rate of improvement slows significantly, then it may take 10 years. My base case is that battery improvement will be sustained, but its far from a given – this is the assumption to watch.

I’m expecting power prices during the day to continue to fall over the next few years as we end up with a surplus of power from renewables. This will actually drive the pick up in batteries – the more significant the difference between the day price and the evening price, the bigger the incentive for batteries to arbitrage the difference.

The US is not the market to watch – energy costs are lower there than almost any other developed market. A better indicator of the future will be developments in Europe.

So, how does this affect investments:

  • Coal/Gas: I’m in no way saying that coal and gas will cease to be used when we hit parity. However, the price will be limited to no more than solar+batteries, and that cost will fall year after year. Any investment in these companies should be made with falling commodity price expectations – i.e. value them in run-off. There may be short-term shortages/price spikes, but these are selling opportunities. Increases in electric car penetration may limit the downward trend for a few years.
  • Solar companies: Solar manufacturers are difficult – the technology is moving too fast to work out if there will be a “winner takes all”. Service providers to the solar industry are probably a better investment (if you can find one that’s not already very expensive). We have made a few profitable investments in semi-conductor stocks that manufacture “commodity-type” parts for solar companies. It is not a sexy area of the market (and thin margins), but at the right price, some of these stocks are interesting.
  • Industrials: Companies that have high electricity bills during the daytime (or can shift costs to the daytime) will benefit. There are many European materials and refining companies that have struggled to compete with US companies because of the lower-cost US energy in recent years that will benefit.
  • Oil: At the margin, less diesel will be used for power generation in remote areas. Expect this to continue. It is not a large part of the oil market, but it will mean oil demand will be weaker than they would have otherwise been.
  • Electricity Transmission: Will these companies get bailed out? Will they be allowed to increase prices to offset falling customers, or will they take the pain of the “death spiral”? It is a country by country decisions – lots of risk in this trade.
  • Electricity Production: The toughest thing about an investment today for these companies is that the company who builds a solar array next year will have lower costs than the one who built last year. Plus the regulatory risks from the “death spiral”. Another risky trade.

None of this relies on carbon taxes. Carbon taxes will only accelerate these changes.


Damien Klassen is Head of Investments at the Macrobusiness Fund, which is powered by Nucleus Wealth.

The information on this blog contains general information and does not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Past performance is not an indication of future performance. Damien Klassen is an authorised representative of Nucleus Wealth Management, a Corporate Authorised Representative of Nucleus Advice Pty Ltd – AFSL 515796.

Follow me
Latest posts by Damien Klassen (see all)


  1. Now all we need is the intercontinental HVDC links. Which will come in time.
    Australia could be a huge exporter during our day as half the rest of the world is still dark.

    We’re getting sunset as the Brits wake up.
    First step: Indonesia.
    Next step: Malaysia.
    From there, we’re potentially linked terrestrially to the entire Indian-Asian-European-African world.

    Most of the world’s population.

    • Draw a line from Malaysia to the Pilbara.

      Draw a line from Malaysia across the bay of Bengal to India. They’ll get it.

      If this line then relays onto the Arabian Gulf to offer redundancy, more so.

      I wouldn’t be so confident it’ll be us based on geography alone.

      Then add in our managerial ability to compete within the sphere of corrupt energy markets, no chance.

  2. Yeh….so we’re going to revert using windmills and sundials are we?? Whilst we’re at it, why don’t we completely de-industrialise and use horses and manpower to pull barges down the canals just as they did in pre-industrial Britain….

    • HadronCollision

      G’day Jim! Just wondering if you’re able to walk and chew gum simultaneously old son?
      Also, I am wondering, do you ever avail yourself of the tasty delights of the local Indian or Chinese takeaway?

      • @Hadron not confident in arguing the merits of allowing China and India to pollute the planet whilst the West is compelled by bad actors to de-industrialise?? Oh and BTW old boy, were you in the vicinity of Box Hill police station on October 1??

        • HadronCollision

          Just so I’m clear.
          You’re saying thsi is all hogwash anyway because India/China still pollute (we all do)
          So we should do nothing, or else it’s not relevant.
          But you’re also saying because the BHPC raised a Chinese flag, this entire post and the edifice upon which the renewables industry/growth is built is all meaningless/wrong/pointless/insert adjective


        • Where was the call to de-industrialise? I thought I missed it on my first read, so I went back again and I cant see it…..

    • Hi Jim,

      Given that Damien provided an interesting and quite compelling analysis into the economics of electricity generation both at a wholesale and retail level, I’d be keen to hear what your thoughts are. Opposing views shouldn’t be disregarded, if they are well presented with credible evidence.

      • sure, renewable energy is a meme advocated by bad actors who simply want to use it as a strategy to further de-industrialise the West for the benefit of China and India, oh and BTW why don’t we see China and India advocating for renewable energy?? Because they understand an industrialised modern economy cannot rely on renewable energy as its primary source of electricity which was demonstrated in September 2016 in South Australia.

        • Ok, I was hoping to keep away from Ideology and look at the economics of it all. That said I think you are right when it comes to making sure that China and India do more to decrease their emissions. I don’t particularly care for some of the theories running around, I like to look at dollars and cent cost and the risk of those investments being out of the money in the future due to large scale technological changes. This has been seen many times over history as changes have been written off due to perception when in the end pure economics drives the change anyway.

          Given that renewable energy can generate just as much if not more energy as previously done at a cheaper price, why do we need to de-industrialise? I’m interested to know what you think this is a movement to indeed de-industrialise. I have not seen such evidence. From what I can see move to de-industrialise came decades prior due to economics of utilising cheaper production facilities. There was no serious thought to whether they were doing it to decrease emissions in “Western” or advanced economy nations. They just wanted to make more money.

          The SA event consequences was in part due to the regulator and the operators of the wind farms not understanding how to manage them in such a storm, so in part I feel you are right, however the storm that caused major infrastructure to be blown down was not caused by renewable energy. So I respectfully question whether that is a good example to provide of not being able to rely on renewable energy.

          • One of the main reasons why heavy manufacturing was off-shored was due to the introduction of Environmental regulators in the West in the early 70’s and a common argument in the US has been the EPA imposes un-due costs on US manufacturers which is partly true.

            Secondly, you cannot have a manufacturing sector without a reliable source of electricity and prior to the advent of electrical motors, industries were located where access to natural resources such as coal and water were close by so as to ensure a reliable source of energy hence my sarcastic comment invoking pre-industrial Britain. Also, China is the largest manufacturer of steel and aluminium and other metals which require access to reliable electricity for the smelting process and India is a developing economy with the same needs and unless the West can compel them to adopt clean air laws, then it is not in their economic and hence national interest to tie one of their hands behind their backs as the West is so willing to do and therefore, any actions taken by Western countries to mitigate the impact of climate change are in-effective as they don’t address the practices and behaviours of the two largest polluters on the planet, China and India.

          • I think we both agree that any change needs to be worldwide and that it needs to managed properly. There are real questions surrounding reliability due to the untested nature of aspects of renewable technologies. Too many people are waxing lyrical about the large battery in SA without analysing the underlying subsidies and longer term capacity of the battery given the characteristics of Lithium. So while you may or may not be for or against renewables, it doesn’t really matter, as your caution surrounding dispatchability is justified.

            Given that developed economy emissions were effectively outsourced to “developing nations” shouldn’t it be partly their responsibility to work with them to remedy that? Sometimes I approach it this way, that the end user of the product is at least partly responsible for the emissions that are associated with the manufacture/assembly/distribution/sale of the product that they use. Not sure how to deal with it, however it is something I consider at times.

            Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. I was interested in your position. Back to work for me. Enjoy the day.

          • It has been reported widely that China and India are two of the largest contributor’s to air pollution on the planet, the WTO grants them special privileges to behave in this way as somehow ‘developing economies’ are absolved of their responsibilities to act as a good global citizen despite climate change being global in nature.

          • Jim

            I think the problem stems from not considering national trajectories over a specific time line. Per se China has done in decades what took America much longer albeit will ultimately go down the same path of de-industrialization. Too many legacy costs – see Summers memo, wink.

            Additionally I think part of the rub is China being both a late comer and manifold the market of say the U.S., this gives them the same up tick as Japan and Germany did post WWII over the C-corp looting that [waves at Munger et al] the U.S. was experiencing.

            Heck a large part of Brexit is over regulations mucking with profit in the guise of liberties and freedoms, E.U. has higher standards.

  3. As long as it’s economics and not ideology I’m comfortable with that.

    Taxpayers subsidising dubious ideological pursuits is beyond retarded and utterly immoral.

      • I’m merely making the point that taxpayer subsidies only appear to be necessary when the private and public sectors have opposing views on the veracity of some or other venture. Ideology and politics so often trump common sense and basic economics.

  4. Damien, could you please include pumped hydro in your analyses?

    With respect, as your analysis is good; however, I read far too many commentaries on renewable storage that only talk about solar and batteries, when the major way to store renewables for major, non-intermittent distribution is pumped hydro.

    My 2c

    • Damien KlassenMEMBER

      I left it out as I can’t see how the cost of storage will fall for pumped hydro over time. I agree that it is one of the better storage mechanisms at the moment but if batteries keep getting cheaper then it seems to me that pumped hydro will also get priced out of the energy equation.
      Let me know if you have seen anything that suggests otherwise?

      • An interesting consideration at a utility level is that lithium may not be the best technology. Also if lithium will continue to drop as much as it is predicted. Looking at the cost inputs and understanding if they can decrease significantly especially with a potential constrained supply of lithium.

        Thanks for the analysis.

      • Pumped Hydro’s future depends almost entirely on the AUD exchange rate
        If the AUD says above 50c than Pump Hydro will play second fiddle to Batteries but it still has an important role to play.
        BTW any system that even approaches 100% renewable needs the ability to store energy at a rate of at least 4 times that at which it uses energy. None of our centralized storage pumped hydro systems have anywhere near this rating (from memory they peak at about 1/4 current national grid electricity consumption….that’s only a factor of 16 below what’s needed.
        BUT keep in mind If the AUD falls below 30c than Batteries are too expensive to be used to store bulk electricity so coal and gas will dominate once again.

    • Pumped hydro is no good when the fake left wants to import 60 million immigrants by 2050 and 120 million by 2080.

  5. HadronCollision

    You’ve missed an option apropos rooftop PV + part/full storage
    Paying people a proper FIT on solar, particularly in high demand times, so as to reflect their investment in renewable power
    This would include taking power from EV during day (to a point and where people agree notwithstanding “i might need some emergency power to get my baby to the Dr ” or similar)

    A decentralised renewable grid (with attendant upgrade to poles and wires) paying FITs reflecting the reality.

    • HC. I have installed solar with a 15c/kw FIT vs 25 c/kw buy rate. My guess is that the spread is about right, especially as we have to allow our foreign owned monopoly “utility” infrastructure companies a chance for a fair (rip-us off) return with poorer quality service.

      Until we start to focus on local service networks optimising feed-ins (and minimising investment in distribution systems, it will be an uphill battle. As always monopolists only have one focus – maximising (while hiding) their profits.

      • Out of interest, How are you heating your hot water?
        I’ve noticed that with several friends they’re exporting power for a lower FiT than they are paying to heat their water, which is a bit foolish if you think about it.
        What’s also amusing is that in NSW “Off-Peak” water heating used to be enabled for about 6 hours each night but is now being enabled in the middle of the day. So we have a situation where people are exporting power to the grid and simultaneously buying it back at a higher price to heat their own water, makes sense if your Fit exceeds your off-peak tariff otherwise it’s a bit crazy.

  6. Diogenes the CynicMEMBER

    Thanks Damien good update on your analysis. I’m just at the point of investigating solar+battery options for a house. The economics have changed markedly from when I installed a 5kW array in 2010!

    • Be very interested in where you land. I looked about 18mths ago and batteries didn’t quite stack up. We have 10kw solar but no batteries yet – my other thought was whether the declining AUD would offset the decline battery price?

  7. Jumping jack flash

    I’m looking forward to the days of off grid solar + an electric car = total energy independence.
    A position not seen on a global scale for hundreds of years, not since when we trotted around on horses, burnt dung to cook our food, and motors weren’t a thing.

    Those times are coming quickly, and its going to be a massive shake up of the global economy.
    the most obvious being that a lot of debt capacity and therefore debt growth is created by the gouging of energy prices by oligopolistic providers.

    But then again, if this avenue of gouging and debt growth is removed, it may well be transferred onto another essential for life, like food or textiles, perhaps.

    It is all about the debt, and its continued growth, forever.

    • HadronCollision

      Speaking to wifey about this
      Next car, pending model availability, electric
      10kW PV + storage
      Grid interactive inverter
      Free (opex) for fuel. Save us loads of money.
      The NSW Govt solar loan scheme will be interesting to watch unfold

      • Jumping jack flash

        +This FTW!

        I just have to come to terms with the gargantuan pile of debt I’m going to have to take on first to be able to implement this… I’m not looking forward to it. Not at all. I will probably need anti-anxiety meds for the next 30 years…

        Or perhaps something else will happen. I don’t know.

        When I am able to, it will be 100% offgrid. Probably backup diesel.

      • The Sono Sion is an interesting proposition. It is designed to be a basic car, with solar panels embedded into the body. One of the goals is to have most repairs easily done by owners. There will be an instruction manual that is available to all. That includes independent mechanics if it is work you aren’t comfortable doing yourself. They are expected to start rolling out by the end of this year. €17,000. So, about $500,000 after all the Australia taxes are added. Though, they are building it at a factory that uses to build Saab motor vehicles. Perhaps they could be built here as well? We’ve a few old car assembly plants just taking up space.

    • I’m looking forward to the day when China realizes that it has replaced Saudi Arabia as the huge leach that profits from the worlds addiction to energy consumption.
      Imagine some time in 2050 when for strategic reasons China decides to stop exporting Solar Panels,
      everyone has electric cars and coal fired power stations are but a distant memory, Talk about a stranglehold China will be able to choke us at will.

  8. Good start, but I’d suggest you focus on the question:
    What purpose will excess residential electric power be put to if the grid is no longer used to “store” power?
    This is not an academic question but rather a practical one. The answer to the question, suggests to me that further divisions will develop within our society that are based on a sort of managed electricity scarcity (some might even say electricity poverty)
    The answer raises questions that go way beyond today’s concept of equality/inequality

    • Jumping jack flash

      The future of the grid is its death entirely, or its breakup and replacement by community grids.

      The future is decentralised electricity. Everyone provides their own electricity needs, or perhaps voluntarily buy into a community grid, owned by the community, not some gouging corporation, its upkeep paid for by some kind of membership system, perhaps.

      If the grid was attempted to be gouged then everyone would simply leave. If everyone has control over their own electricity generation, community grids would only be there as an insurance.

      Electricity companies should be planning for this scenario now, and try to lobby to sell [portions of] their grids back to the government as soon as possible before they become irrelevant.

  9. For the Australian context, this analysis is unfortunately silent on the huge elephant in the room – limited distribution and transmission infrastructure. While the cost of tech might come down, it has increasingly become almost impossible for utility scale renewable projects to connect to the grid. Connection applications take 12-18 months+ just for an NSP to evaluate, theres a huge skills shortage in PSCAD modelling both for NSPs and RE developers, and some solar farms are getting stuck at commissioning hold points for months. This is without mentioning the recent issue of plummeting Marginal Loss Factors which seriously hurts the business case of up and coming RE projects in areas with good resources, but away from NIMBY population centres. We need more infrastructure if the share of renewables is to increase.

    The other side of the ledger is much more interesting – in a grid with high penetration of RE, consumers (C&I but also residential) need to see price signals and be compensated for responding to them. This makes batteries that can respond in those peak shoulder periods much more valuable staying on the grid and participating, rather than death spiraling out.

    • Good comment, wish MB would put as much effort into covering this topic as the gas debacle, its equally important.

    • Damien KlassenMEMBER

      Thanks – this was meant to be a broad overview of the economics and where they are going rather than a dive into implementation issues, which are manifold and not just in Australia.
      I agree the holdups are an interesting topic to explore in more detail – do you have some information sources we can look at?

  10. There are a few solar challenge teams shopping in at the Darwin Bunnings at the moment. SA TAFE has a team in. The Swedish team is sponsored by Volvo. I couldn’t make much from the team car in the car park.