Solar ... In the news

mmmmikey

silverwhistle wrote: »

Did you have to quote him Mikey?:D The level of his contributions don't get any better!

Whoops - I took the bait - schoolboy error on my part

mmmmikey

Martyn1981 wrote: »

That's one of the reasons I'd like to see standing charges removed, and all costs placed on the unit price.

100% agreement on this. I'm hoping that smart metering enables different charging regimes which engages consumers to the point where understanding of usage increases. At that point, with a suitably engaged mass audience, a change along the lines you advocate could lead to dramatic falls in demand. I probably use 50% less electricity that I did 10 years ago and most of what I've done to achieve this is just follow the bog-standard advice. Admittedly, I've taken this to the nth degree but that's only really for the last few %.

JKenH

mmmmikey wrote: »

100% agreement on this. I'm hoping that smart metering enables different charging regimes which engages consumers to the point where understanding of usage increases. At that point, with a suitably engaged mass audience, a change along the lines you advocate could lead to dramatic falls in demand. I probably use 50% less electricity that I did 10 years ago and most of what I've done to achieve this is just follow the bog-standard advice. Admittedly, I've taken this to the nth degree but that's only really for the last few %.

I would think that goes for most of us on this forum but how much of the consumption is used by the bill payer and how much by other family members who don’t share our enthusiasm? I left the kitchen unsupervised today to deal with a tradesman only to find on my return the oven, hob microwave and kettle all on at the same time as well as the two ASHPs.

silverwhistle

JKenH wrote: »

I would think that goes for most of us on this forum but how much of the consumption is used by the bill payer and how much by other family members who don’t share our enthusiasm? I left the kitchen unsupervised today to deal with a tradesman only to find on my return the oven, hob microwave and kettle all on at the same time as well as the two ASHPs.

LOL. I still havn't trained my GF not to overfill the kettle..

mmmmikey

silverwhistle wrote: »

LOL. I still havn't trained my GF not to overfill the kettle..

A word of caution here....


Although divorce has helped me with this kind of challenge and electricity demand is now significantly lower, when you factor in the divorce costs the economics don't stack up at all.



Only another 4,246 years to break even....

silverwhistle

We're not married, not even a civil partnership..:D

Martyn1981

mmmmikey wrote: »

I probably use 50% less electricity that I did 10 years ago and most of what I've done to achieve this is just follow the bog-standard advice. Admittedly, I've taken this to the nth degree but that's only really for the last few %.

Totally agree. Neighbours didn't believe how low our leccy and gas bills were* (pre PV), so I'd simply explain how we'd insulated the loft, had CWI, were using CFL's etc etc etc, all the stuff the government had been banging on about for years, and not really expensive.

Then with more efficient white goods, and LED TV's, the numbers keep dropping.

They also 'tried' to explain why water metering wouldn't work for them, then I explained that they'd cut their bills in half at the very least, and they now have water meters and go on about how much cheaper it is. People are so skeptical about some of this stuff, but it's pretty simple and cheap.

* In fairness to many, and many on here, our bills weren't that great, just the better side of average.

Martyn1981

Update on old stories about crop + PV land use giving a net 160% output. Well now it's up to 186%*, and even shows in this example for growing potatoes that the PV field out produced the 'normal' field.

The article also points to the benefits of having PV generation distributed for land use, such as electric tractors.

*Note the article claims a 186% increase, whereas (of course) the increase is 86%, the output is 186%.

Fraunhofer Reports Combining Farming With Solar 186% More Efficient In Summer Of 2018

GreatApe

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Yep, spot on. Gone are the days when energy could just be bought by the rich, so to speak, and wasted, as we now know that there are consequences to its use.

So energy needs to be priced accordingly, almost treated as a luxury, yeah I know that's going a bit far, but certainly not as a product that can be wasted, which is what happens when something has a high fixed price, and low marginal price.

That's one of the reasons I'd like to see standing charges removed, and all costs placed on the unit price. The 'petrol forecourt' solution.

Technically, the average consumer would see no price change, only the low and high users would see a change, rewarding low use and penalising high use.

But more importantly, as the unit price goes up, so do the savings from reduced waste, and the savings from buying more efficient goods, and the savings from self generation.

To test the ideas, take them to the extreme. If we had a £1,000 charge for having a leccy supply, then free leccy, we'd buy the cheapest lamps, possibly incandescents. If we had no standing charge and a £1/kWh fee, we'd all be 'fully' LED already. Not exactly complicated.

With petrol most the cost is the energy. Aprox 67% of the cost is the crude the other 33% is the many dozens of costs in turning that crude into petrol and getting it into a pump in your local (excluding taxes here)

With electricity the bulk of the cost is not the energy which makes up as little as 20% of your electricity bill.

With electricity you are really paying for the grid access, capacity payments, stability, advertising, meter readings, and many more things.

The most fair is a mix of the two but how to allocate this mix is a difficult question.

You can try to model it
What happens if national demand falls 30%?
per unit electricity costs increase by 34%

You do not gain much at all economically in reducing electricity demand.
Reduce consumption by 30% but pay 34% more for each unit of electricity

GreatApe

We need an accounting 'trick' to electrify heating

A hybrid system with two tiers of charges for different usage cases the sooner the better.

Normal Electricity is charged as is now (roughly 20p/Day standing charge + 14p/KWh)

Smart EV Charging and smart heating only pays 6p/KWh

Only available where these additional loads do not add to national or local peaks/limits so much that costly upgrades would be needed

A home with an EV using 3MWh and a heat pump using 7MWh would save ~ £800/Yr vs paying current rates

EVs and Smart Heating effectively get to use the spare capacity of the grid for 'free' since normal electricity usage is already covering it helping to more rapidly electrify transport and heating

The additional demand can be met with additional wind farms and PV farms paid £50/MWh CFDs

Especially for heating this could be a way to rapidly clean and electrify base load and seasonal heating. With 6p/KWh electricity for smart heat pumps I would switch out the gas fired boilers as they come to the end of their lives.

Even if powered by simple resistant heaters this would be fine as the additional demand would be supplied by offshore wind getting the £50-60/MWh from the retail side (and using the grid for 'free') but imo most people would use air to air heat pumps for seasonal heating just because it would be a relatively quick payback