Discussion ... ASHP(Air/Air) with Solar pv ....

JKenH

Martyn1981 wrote: »

A very important issue here is that extensions are not 'free'. They require huge additional investment each time, to ensure that the reactors are safe for the extended period. What we are seeing, all over the World, are generators not seeking extensions, or even shutting reactors early, simply because they are not economical.

Also, the longer these reactors are run, the harder the eventual clean up will be, incurring even more cost, and the UK fleet is already running at a lower level in order to provide for previous extensions.

But here's the best bit, nuclear is expensive, very expensive, despite over 60yrs of significant support in the UK. But RE is already far, far cheaper than nuclear, despite only ~10yrs of significant support in the UK, and what is the result, nuclear generation has been falling slowly and is around 20% now, whilst in just 10yrs, RE generation has risen from approx 5% to 35%, and there is a significant amount of 'cheap' off-shore wind already contracted, but not yet generating (commissioning dates 2022/23/24/25).

In short, we can do more, faster, and cheaper with RE.

Regarding night rates, since wind generation, especially off-shore, is a big night generator, and winter biased, then the impact on cheaper rates is pretty hard to predict.

If this projection is correct and a higher proportion of the grid is made up of wind then prices will swing wildly. That sounds like an argument for installing a substantial domestic battery with several days capacity to buy in when cheap and use when expensive. Ideally we need sophisticated switching systems that are linked to live pricing to optimise charge and discharge times. How far away is that likely to be?

GreatApe

Martyn1981 wrote: »

A very important issue here is that extensions are not 'free'. They require huge additional investment each time, to ensure that the reactors are safe for the extended period. What we are seeing, all over the World, are generators not seeking extensions, or even shutting reactors early, simply because they are not economical.

Also, the longer these reactors are run, the harder the eventual clean up will be, incurring even more cost, and the UK fleet is already running at a lower level in order to provide for previous extensions.

But here's the best bit, nuclear is expensive, very expensive, despite over 60yrs of significant support in the UK. But RE is already far, far cheaper than nuclear, despite only ~10yrs of significant support in the UK, and what is the result, nuclear generation has been falling slowly and is around 20% now, whilst in just 10yrs, RE generation has risen from approx 5% to 35%, and there is a significant amount of 'cheap' off-shore wind already contracted, but not yet generating (commissioning dates 2022/23/24/25).

In short, we can do more, faster, and cheaper with RE.

Regarding night rates, since wind generation, especially off-shore, is a big night generator, and winter biased, then the impact on cheaper rates is pretty hard to predict.

You're talking nonsense

The biggest nuclear fleet is the USA fleet and that is the fleet which has been extended the most
Something like 90% of their reactors have applied for and received 20 year life extensions
A few have applied for another 20 years (so will operate for 80 years) and the vast majority are expected to get a second round of extensions. If they decide to close down it will be because of very cheap shale gas run through very efficient CCGTs not because of wind or solar.

And their average cost is $33/MWh or £26/MWh which is half the cost of your offshore wind power before even considering the backup and grid upgrades needs of wind Vs just keeping nuclear going

The UK nukes are very different and neither of us know the costs
Only what's true is I'm sure you'd have said the same BS just before the last round of significant life extensions for UK nukes. You were wrong then and you are wrong now. The truth is you have no idea what life extension costs will be and the truth is that costs are not the only part of the equation the other side is revenue. If wholesale prices average £30 the costs may be too high if wholesale prices average £50 the costs may be perfectly find in both cases the costs are the same but with cheap electricity the costs aren't worthwhile. And wholesale prices get crushed thanks to subsidised wind power and solar.

This should be resolved by offering existing nuclear a CFD to allow for life extension
But as said earlier in my post this may not be necessary since neither of us know EDFs costs to maintain and upgrade to extend lives.

As for wind power
The UK plans to add about 20GW in the 2020s This will generate about 70TWh but some of it will have to be curtailed (even today in 2019 some wind power is curtailed)
During the same decade the UK will lose some 60TWh of nuclear output
So all the investment in offshore wind power will just about cancel out the lost old nuclear output
We will be standing still for 2020-2030 thanks to nuclear fear mongers

The UK grid will go more green thanks mostly to additional bulk french nuclear imports and bulk Norway hydropower imports from the new interconntors under construction. Assuming no mass electrification of transportation or heating

GreatApe

JKenH wrote: »

If this projection is correct and a higher proportion of the grid is made up of wind then prices will swing wildly. That sounds like an argument for installing a substantial domestic battery with several days capacity to buy in when cheap and use when expensive. Ideally we need sophisticated switching systems that are linked to live pricing to optimise charge and discharge times. How far away is that likely to be?

Batteries are too expensive and have an associated pollution level both CO2 and other pollution in their manufacture. Plus they are just far far too expensive and their return efficiency is below 85%

What makes more sense is to give wind farms a CFD based on capacity factor
The subsidy should force up the CF to 60% or higher
This can be achieved by using bigger towers and longer blades
60% CF wind farm is much more useful and much easier to integrate into the grid than a 40% wind farm or a 11% solar farm

Links to Norway will help
One is under construction one was about to start but the Norwegians are having cold feet
If those two get built it's 2.8 GW acting like a long term battery
They will buy when we have cheap electricity and sell when we don't
It's not a full solution by any means but it helps

Likewise all the other interconntors to France Germany Netherlands Belgium etc will help too

Martyn1981

mmmmikey wrote: »

Thanks both, so putting this together it sounds like (whether you think this is good or not) you both think it's unlikely that the first 8 nuclear power stations will be kept open when the end of their planned life in 4 or 5 years time.


Assuming this nuclear energy is replaced with wind, then it would seem reasonable to expect that on windy nights energy will be cheaper than it is now, but on still nights it will be more expensive because we'll have to fire up some gas generators. So it seems quite possible things will average out at about the same, so my theory from a few posts back may well hold out, albeit for the wrong reasons.


All this might sound a bit obscure, but predicting future energy prices is critical to assessing the impact of any personal investment decisions in things like solar panels, batteries and heating systems.

I think a combination of 'not a clue' and 'probably little change' are OK, if somewhat bemusing.

We really don't know, but for domestic customers tariffs are based around expected average cost of leccy, plus costs, plus profits, so putting aside specialist tariffs, we don't really need to worry about spot prices as they have little to no impact on us in real time.

Sorry if I've posted this for you before, or you've seen me post it elsewhere, but I can't stress the importance of these numbers enough - the NAO has massively reduced its estimates for future wholesale prices, down from around a peak of £85/MWh (2030), to about £70/MWh in 2027, down again to about £55/MWh in the mid 2020's.

Please look at these two pages, and the three estimates, again, the scale of change, and the speed of the revision is staggering, and even the latest report pre-dates the shocking (ly low) off-shore wind auction prices in 2017, and of course the ludicrously low recent prices*:

Page 40

Page 40


* perhaps worth an additional bit of waffle in itself, as the government in 2012 estimated 2030 off-shore wind would cost £85-£109/MWh.

Th̲i̲s̲ i̲s̲ t̲h̲e̲ ̲G̲o̲v̲'̲t pr̲e̲d̲i̲c̲t̲i̲o̲n̲ f̲o̲r̲ 2̲0̲3̲0̲.̲ ̲(2012 pricing)
Onshore wind to be in the range £45-72/MWh
Offshore wind will be in the range £85-109/MWh
Nuclear, at £69-99/MWh.
For solar they predict £59-73/MW

But in 2017, for 2022/23 delivery we saw £57.50/MWh, and in 2019 for 2024/25 delivery we saw £40-£42/MWh. Again, all 2012 baseline, but a half to one third the government's old prediction, and for delivery 5+yrs earlier.

JKenH

Martyn1981 wrote: »

We really don't know, but for domestic customers tariffs are based around expected average cost of leccy, plus costs, plus profits, so putting aside specialist tariffs, we don't really need to worry about spot prices as they have little to no impact on us in real time.

But we were discussing TOU charges in the context of time shifting with a battery. Are you saying these won’t move in line with spot prices or are these the specialist tariffs you refer to, in which case we do need to worry about spot prices.

Edit: perhaps worry is not the right word. Wildly fluctuating prices present both challenges and opportunities.

1961Nick

JKenH wrote: »

But we were discussing TOU charges in the context of time shifting with a battery. Are you saying these won’t move in line with spot prices or are these the specialist tariffs you refer to, in which case we do need to worry about spot prices.

Edit: perhaps worry is not the right word. Wildly fluctuating prices present both challenges and opportunities.

"Wildly fluctuating" is probably not very helpful if you're trying to manage consumption without turning it into a full time job. ... and risking a nervous breakdown in the process!

Predictably fluctuating is manageable with limited intervention.

For me, the Octopus Go TOU tariff is a lot more attractive than Octopus Agile. Knowing exactly when I have 4 hours of 5p/kWh electricity means I can program the batteries to charge, set delay timers on the DW, WM & TD, use the ASHP to maintain the background temperature, and use the last hour for underfloor heating ... should still be plenty of latent heat when I get up at 5.30.

Assuming I do get a TM3 next year, I'll have imported 50 kWh by the time I get up in the morning!

Martyn1981

JKenH wrote: »

But we were discussing TOU charges in the context of time shifting with a battery. Are you saying these won’t move in line with spot prices or are these the specialist tariffs you refer to, in which case we do need to worry about spot prices.

Edit: perhaps worry is not the right word. Wildly fluctuating prices present both challenges and opportunities.

If you think about it logically, it will become self regulating, we are back to basic supply and demand economics.

Start out at the extremes, the best example of that is probably Australia and their summer peak demands and prices. A few years ago we saw the domestic battery owners joining large consortiums who would sell their leccy at peak times, one example was spot prices hitting A$1,400/MWh, and domestic households getting paid A$1/kWh (A$1,000/MWh).

That would 'prove' the issue of "wildly fluctuating prices", and perhaps TOU tariffs, though this example is about selling, not buying leccy.

But, what does economics suggest will happen next? The profitability of this source of high priced sale will encourage more domestic batts, and commercial batts, and even supply side batts (like the big Tesla battery).

What's the result of more of these batts, they will erode the 'wildly' away and flatten the extreme curves out a bit.

But domestic batts, and even the first few supply side batts will pale into insignificance v's the rollout of BEV's and smart charging, with cars that will have anything from 3 or 4, to 20x the domestic batts capacity.

I fully accept that what I'm suggesting is just speculation, but it is, I believe, a pretty obvious trajectory, and that's before we reach a point where consistently low enough prices and volumes start to make longer term storage (such as hydrogen, bio-gas, LAES etc) viable, which will effectively create a minimum price (before they step in to buy) and a maximum price (before they step in to sell).

It's all fascinating and fun, but I'd suggest self limiting over the very time period that it starts to happen, as the demand and supply technology already exists.

Additional point, something I may not have repeated for some time - both the wind and PV supply sites have made it absolutely clear, that as and when storage becomes economically viable for them, they will roll it out, as they already have the available space on site, and there is no retro-action cost penalty for them.


Edit - Just realised my post is a right downer on the fun part of all this. So perhaps this is something to enjoy quickly, just in case I'm right over the medium to longer term!

JKenH

Mart, I don’t disagree with any of what you say. I am just trying to get a handle on what sort of peaks and troughs we might see on a TOU tariff like Octopus Agile over the next ten years to calculate whether to purchase a battery myself. I was expecting that when wind takes up a higher proportion of generation there will be times when electricity is very cheap and when it is very expensive before it settles down, if and when the big batteries arrive.

Even if domestic battery prices remain static they will make more financial sense both for home consumption and trading if TOU prices become more volatile.

1961Nick

JKenH wrote: »

Mart, I don’t disagree with any of what you say. I am just trying to get a handle on what sort of peaks and troughs we might see on a TOU tariff like Octopus Agile over the next ten years to calculate whether to purchase a battery myself. I was expecting that when wind takes up a higher proportion of generation there will be times when electricity is very cheap and when it is very expensive before it settles down, if and when the big batteries arrive.

Even if domestic battery prices remain static they will make more financial sense both for home consumption and trading if TOU prices become more volatile.

There's a strong possibility that the arrival of Big Batteries could be delayed by the roll out of EVs & to some extent domestic batteries. Tesla's output is already battery limited & the problem is forecast to get worse across the industry in the short term. This would suggest that battery prices may plateau ... or even rise until supply catches up.

Tesla's recent interest in buying key elements of the battery supply chain indicates that they feel the need to control this aspect to ensure continued growth.

mmmmikey

1961Nick wrote: »

There's a strong possibility that the arrival of Big Batteries could be delayed by the roll out of EVs & to some extent domestic batteries. Tesla's output is already battery limited & the problem is forecast to get worse across the industry in the short term. This would suggest that battery prices may plateau ... or even rise until supply catches up.

Tesla's recent interest in buying key elements of the battery supply chain indicates that they feel the need to control this aspect to ensure continued growth.

Just wondering - what are batteries made of and when does it run out........?