Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

michaels

70sbudgie said:

When it comes to science, engineering and technology, I believe we actually have a wealth of solutions already available to us, to solve many of the current issues. The only reason there hasn't really been any "fixing" is totally due to politics. 

There is also a large and significant part of the puzzle you've not mentioned @zeupater and that is transmission and distribution. I completely agree that the popular topic of storage isn't going to solve anything if we don't have enough generation (which we don't). But the other big issue is that the generation is predominantly in a different part of this island to the demand and politics (again) has an impact on matching them up. 

The National Grid Regional Customer Connections videos make for some depressing viewing if you want to connect new generation.

Isn't storage a really good solution to grid (transmission not generation) capacity issues, allowing average grid capacity rather than peak to be the limiting factor?

shinytop

2nd_time_buyer said:

Interesting article in the Guardian from closet environmentalist Jacob Rees Mogg. It seems our cycnism of the fracking announcement to distract from the relaxing in planning for onshore wind was well founded.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/13/green-energy-guardian-reader-growth-net-zero-liz-truss-jacob-rees-mogg

Wait, was that actually a veiled vote of approval for JR-M and his policies?  Is that allowed on this forum? 

Exiled_Tyke

shinytop said:

2nd_time_buyer said:

Interesting article in the Guardian from closet environmentalist Jacob Rees Mogg. It seems our cycnism of the fracking announcement to distract from the relaxing in planning for onshore wind was well founded.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/13/green-energy-guardian-reader-growth-net-zero-liz-truss-jacob-rees-mogg

Wait, was that actually a veiled vote of approval for JR-M and his policies?  Is that allowed on this forum? 

Yeah. He actually said something sensible for once in his entire life.    

Exiled_Tyke

michaels said:

70sbudgie said:

When it comes to science, engineering and technology, I believe we actually have a wealth of solutions already available to us, to solve many of the current issues. The only reason there hasn't really been any "fixing" is totally due to politics. 

There is also a large and significant part of the puzzle you've not mentioned @zeupater and that is transmission and distribution. I completely agree that the popular topic of storage isn't going to solve anything if we don't have enough generation (which we don't). But the other big issue is that the generation is predominantly in a different part of this island to the demand and politics (again) has an impact on matching them up. 

The National Grid Regional Customer Connections videos make for some depressing viewing if you want to connect new generation.

Isn't storage a really good solution to grid capacity issues, allowing average grid capacity rather than peak to be the limiting factor?

This was probably more of an issue a year ago, illustrated by the occasions that Octopus Agile hit rock-bottom (even negative?) prices.  But on the whole I agree, we still need to help average the peaks and of course as RE generation increases the need for storage will become paramount, so surely it's time to get on with this now. 

70sbudgie

michaels said:

70sbudgie said:

When it comes to science, engineering and technology, I believe we actually have a wealth of solutions already available to us, to solve many of the current issues. The only reason there hasn't really been any "fixing" is totally due to politics. 

There is also a large and significant part of the puzzle you've not mentioned @zeupater and that is transmission and distribution. I completely agree that the popular topic of storage isn't going to solve anything if we don't have enough generation (which we don't). But the other big issue is that the generation is predominantly in a different part of this island to the demand and politics (again) has an impact on matching them up. 

The National Grid Regional Customer Connections videos make for some depressing viewing if you want to connect new generation.

Isn't storage a really good solution to grid (transmission not generation) capacity issues, allowing average grid capacity rather than peak to be the limiting factor?

Yes, but it is only part of the solution, not the whole solution (as its current popularity might lead one to believe). Those that have domestic batteries know that the amount of storage required, relative to generation and consumption rates, to avoid the need for imports is rather expensive, with low average storage rates. Obviously the technology mix is different at a grid scale, but the same calculation of generation vs storage vs demand capacities still applies.

And storage doesn't really go anywhere towards solving the issue of generation being in the north and demand in the south.

michaels

70sbudgie said:

michaels said:

70sbudgie said:

When it comes to science, engineering and technology, I believe we actually have a wealth of solutions already available to us, to solve many of the current issues. The only reason there hasn't really been any "fixing" is totally due to politics. 

There is also a large and significant part of the puzzle you've not mentioned @zeupater and that is transmission and distribution. I completely agree that the popular topic of storage isn't going to solve anything if we don't have enough generation (which we don't). But the other big issue is that the generation is predominantly in a different part of this island to the demand and politics (again) has an impact on matching them up. 

The National Grid Regional Customer Connections videos make for some depressing viewing if you want to connect new generation.

Isn't storage a really good solution to grid (transmission not generation) capacity issues, allowing average grid capacity rather than peak to be the limiting factor?

Yes, but it is only part of the solution, not the whole solution (as its current popularity might lead one to believe). Those that have domestic batteries know that the amount of storage required, relative to generation and consumption rates, to avoid the need for imports is rather expensive, with low average storage rates. Obviously the technology mix is different at a grid scale, but the same calculation of generation vs storage vs demand capacities still applies.

And storage doesn't really go anywhere towards solving the issue of generation being in the north and demand in the south.

But if the wires are big enough to cover average transmission demand but not big enough to cover peak then intraday storage close to demand is an ideal solution rather than upgrading the grid?

Martyn1981

michaels said:

70sbudgie said:

michaels said:

70sbudgie said:

When it comes to science, engineering and technology, I believe we actually have a wealth of solutions already available to us, to solve many of the current issues. The only reason there hasn't really been any "fixing" is totally due to politics. 

There is also a large and significant part of the puzzle you've not mentioned @zeupater and that is transmission and distribution. I completely agree that the popular topic of storage isn't going to solve anything if we don't have enough generation (which we don't). But the other big issue is that the generation is predominantly in a different part of this island to the demand and politics (again) has an impact on matching them up. 

The National Grid Regional Customer Connections videos make for some depressing viewing if you want to connect new generation.

Isn't storage a really good solution to grid (transmission not generation) capacity issues, allowing average grid capacity rather than peak to be the limiting factor?

Yes, but it is only part of the solution, not the whole solution (as its current popularity might lead one to believe). Those that have domestic batteries know that the amount of storage required, relative to generation and consumption rates, to avoid the need for imports is rather expensive, with low average storage rates. Obviously the technology mix is different at a grid scale, but the same calculation of generation vs storage vs demand capacities still applies.

And storage doesn't really go anywhere towards solving the issue of generation being in the north and demand in the south.

But if the wires are big enough to cover average transmission demand but not big enough to cover peak then intraday storage close to demand is an ideal solution rather than upgrading the grid?

Yes ... but! It could also be said that if the cables can be enlarged, as gen is still growing, then that might be a better solution to adding storage (today). In reality as we move to a more distributed grid, or intermittent RE, we are going to need to revise and change everything. So more RE, better transmission, and storage. But, once gen and transmission in any given area has been economically maximised forever (the foreseeable future) , then you're almost certainly right that storage would be a better choice.

Only my opinion, and tbh not so much an opinion based on my understanding (as I don't pretend to understand these huge changes) from most reports and economic suggestions, is that it's always more generation first, with economic spill/waste/curtailment, with storage coming later to make use of the excess, once there is enough, and it's regular enough to be worth deploying storage (economically).

I see it as a giant game of whack-a-mole, once gen gets big enough - WHACK - more cables, then as cables struggle - WHACK - more storage ..... and round and round we'll go, driven by CO2 targets and the relative economics at any given time to determine the next 'whack'.

I think this is fun and fascinating, as it's all very promising, be it RE, transmission or storage.


Almost certainly not fun and fascinating, but I do wonder how the balance of economics between curtailment and storage can be maintained long term, without some sort of nationalization (and I'm not suggesting we do that, it might be worse)? Maybe, the CfD mechanism, or something like that, long term, guaranteeing payments for curtailment, are a way of ensuring generation / transmission / storage all work together, rather than compete?

Martyn1981

Stole this from another forum as I thought it was truly excellent, especially as it's pretty short (considering).

So, it reads like a hit piece on hydrogen, however it's the comments of a guest speaker at a hydrogen conference, and he's simply placing the uses of H2 within context, explaining that most of these potential uses have better / more economic solutions already (such as BEV's for transport).

I think it's worth reading in full, and too many excellent answers to pick any quotes, as it covers energy, manufacturing, road/rail/sea/air transport, heating and more. But I thought it was worth quoting the last two paragraphs, just to put the comments in context, in case anyone thinks it's an anti-H2 rant:

However, Liebreich’s speech was not all doom and gloom for the hydrogen industry as huge amounts of green and blue H2 would still be needed — and would be produced at “massive hubs” around the world.

“I don’t want to give the impression that I hate hydrogen... I feel no hatred toward any element on the periodic table. I am thrilled [at the numbers of] people here, serious people [working on clean hydrogen solutions]. And there are great reasons for optimism. The experience curve will do for green hydrogen what it did for solar and wind [power] and what it is doing with batteries.”

Liebreich: 'Hydrogen is starting to look like an economic bubble — and here’s why'

[Edit - Just to say, it doesn't cover H2 as a means for longer term energy storage, so I think we'll have to wait and see if it's suited to that role, or if other solutions, like CAES, flow batts etc are better, or something yet to come perhaps.]

zeupater

70sbudgie said:

[ ... ]

Yes, but it is only part of the solution, not the whole solution (as its current popularity might lead one to believe). Those that have domestic batteries know that the amount of storage required, relative to generation and consumption rates, to avoid the need for imports is rather expensive, with low average storage rates. Obviously the technology mix is different at a grid scale, but the same calculation of generation vs storage vs demand capacities still applies.

And storage doesn't really go anywhere towards solving the issue of generation being in the north and demand in the south.

Hi

Actually it's similar, but not the same .... the issue being missed is that to consider the point as being valid, you would have to scale from off-grid microgeneration+storage to a national scale, whereas for the majority of cases (probably close to all reading this!) whatever microgeneration & storage there is in place it's backed up & supplemented from outside by grid connectivity.

Grid connectivity results in the ability to install far less storage than would otherwise be the case ... for example, if 10 day guaranteed autonomy was required for electrical supply in an average household, the storage required would likely be 80-100kWh and the microgeneration system would need to be upscaled to maintain more than 10 day average household demand in the worst part of the year for whatever technology is employed, so for a typical household this would likely result in somewhere in the range of ~30-40kWh of solar PV ....

So, for example, considering that somewhere in the region of 40kWh of PV with 100kWh of storage would be an average requirement off grid, then that's what we'd really looking to scale, so, based on domestic supply only (40% of demand) that's a scaling to ~1TW of PV with ~2.5TWh of storage ... which, winding back the timeline a little, isn't to far from the domestic proportion of the calculated strategic storage (40% of the 7.2TWh=2.9TWh) requirement from this thread on 7/10, effectively reinforcing the concept that autonomy provision through storage cannot be the answer to the intermittency created by reliance on a limited focus on generating technologies as opposed to planning a strategy around sources that can be fully predictable to a defined generating schedule, which, even if more expensive on a stand-alone basis, the inclusion of the associated investment reduction in storage requirements makes far more sense ...

Effectively, on a national scale, poor planning of generation capacity results in the need for both excess generating & storage investment, whereas in spreading the generating risk associated with any individual technology across a range of diverse technologies, the total installed generating capacity can be significantly reduced across the board, with the requirement for strategic storage reducing to a fraction of what would otherwise be needed.      

HTH - Z            

Coastalwatch

That one sentence from Simon Maine below highlighted for me the double standards seemingly applied to the two different forms of energy generation. Whereas the renewable source can be erected and generating within months the other is little more than a prospecting exercise requiring significant amounts of energy to complete.

‘Extraordinary we’re talking about banning solar on farmlands,’ says Brookfield

“I find it extraordinary that we are talking about banning solar on farmlands, but we are talking about putting oil drills on farmlands – it is an industrialised process,” said Simon Maine, managing director, corporate communications at investment firm Brookfield Asset Management.

Discussing this at Energy UK’s annual conference, Maine responded to recent claims that the government is planning on banning solar on some farmlands at the same time that it is actively pursuing fracking opportunities on the same land.

“We need to think about priorities when it comes to the bigger challenges at hand,” Maine added.

https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/extraordinary_were_talking_about_banning_solar_on_farmlands_says_brookfield