We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Green, ethical, energy issues in the news
Comments
-
Martyn1981 wrote: »
Can I just say, as you are 'explaining' how all of my posts are incorrect on multiple threads now, that I'm not expressing random personal opinions, but digesting and regurgitating many articles, reports, facts and figures I've found. That's why I can support them all.
.
Your facts and figures supported the case for sub 4kWp installations on the roofs of houses, getting a massive subsidy for every kWh generated, were more efficient than solar farms.0 -
Your facts and figures supported the case for sub 4kWp installations on the roofs of houses, getting a massive subsidy for every kWh generated, were more efficient than solar farms.
That is not true.Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.
For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.0 -
Martyn1981 wrote: »Wrong. We are talking about excess renewable leccy, that needs storing. Elsewhere you are claiming that large scale battery storage doesn't exist, yet here you are arguing against alternative forms of storage.
Hydrogen can be used with fuel cells to produce leccy on demand, hence the storage medium, and bio-methane can be burnt at a CCGT plant again when demand is high and RE supply is low. Co-locating a bio-methan CCGT plant with a LAES storage site can lift the efficiency of the LAES storage to over 80%, in fact it can go over 100% (which may seem odd at first).
These forms of storage (plus CAES) are neither wasteful nor stupid, assuming you've read up on them.
Can you name a single electricity to methane plant in the world that produces the equivalent of say 1GW and what was its cost per cubic meter of methane?
No you cant name a single one
And its cost would be stupidly high
You dont convert high grade fuel into lower grade fuel
You will export the excess via the 15GW or so of UK interconnectors
You would dump the excess into EV batteries and in twenty years time when stationary batteries might be a thing maybe you dump them into that
If you still have an excess you just curtail it
Even with free electricity you can not run a hydrogen or methane plant at no loss
Methane is only 1.5p/KWh in the UK and its much cheaper in the USA/Russia/Middle-East/Etc
How do you think you are going to make methane for 1.5p/KWh
Even if you had a 67% efficient process you need electricity to cost 1p/KWh
And that is assuming your capital cost maintenance cost and labor costs are all zero which is a stupid assumption.
It will never be feasible outside of demonstration plants built at great cost
It is stupid in the same way hydrogen for cars is stupid
Stop wasting time with it and concentrate on improving PV and Wind0 -
Martyn1981 wrote: »And yet once again the facts contradict you. In the BNEF New Energy Outlook 2017 report they had to amend their 2016 emissions estimate for India by 44%
I accept wind and solar will play a big part of the future energy supply but not because they are economically competitive but because they have the ear of governments
A true economic accounting of renewable should only award them the marginal fuel saved which is only about 2.7p/KWh in the UK and closer to 1.8 cents/KWh in the USA. (Apart from solar where peak output and peak demands correlate eg in hot countries with lots of AC)
If this is not already obvious it will become so soon as more PV/Wind is added to the grids they will crash wholesale prices and be forced to sell into crashed price market. If PV gets too high any additional PV might find that it is selling the majority of its output during wholesale prices close to zeroCan I just say, as you are 'explaining' how all of my posts are incorrect on multiple threads now, that I'm not expressing random personal opinions, but digesting and regurgitating many articles, reports, facts and figures I've found. That's why I can support them all.
Most your articles are just random personal opinions of others who have a website.
And my views are not opinions they are simple math and economics
Do you not accept that in the UK all wind and PV do is displace fuel and hence that is their value the marginal cost of fuel saved?I appreciate that renewables are not for everyone, but the supporting arguments and data that go along with it are now relatively bullet proof, as over the last 1 or 2 years the economics have now shifted, and the world is, believe it or not, actually changing - not necessarily because it's good, mostly 'for the money', but it is happening, and there's now way back now, economics always wins.
You have me wrong I hope every country deploys lots of wind and PV
I am just making a note that it is not on its own merits of economic cost advantage but that it is on the back of the state who are choosing to support green power over other needs like maybe additional heathcare
I can see PV doing very well in the hot countries where they can get CFs of 30% or more on trackers. Add in batteries and it is conceivable that hot nations could go 60% PV
UK should drop all PV subsidies, like you keep saying they are economic right, and put it towards offshore wind.
India will have to build out coal/gas it has no choice it cant power itself with non controlable wind/PV. Yes I accept those coal/gas plants will run at lower capacities but they will still have to be built to control the grid and insure supplies.
India and China maybe could have avoided a lot of their coal build out if they had gone the french route but that is mostly too late for them0 -
Stop wasting time with it and concentrate on improving PV and Wind
So all the work into P2G is wrong then .... in your opinion.Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.
For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.0 -
I accept wind and solar will play a big part of the future energy supply but not because they are economically competitive but because they have the ear of governments
Nope, because they are cheaper.A true economic accounting of renewable should only award them the marginal fuel saved which is only about 2.7p/KWh in the UK and closer to 1.8 cents/KWh in the USA. (Apart from solar where peak output and peak demands correlate eg in hot countries with lots of AC)
If this is not already obvious it will become so soon as more PV/Wind is added to the grids they will crash wholesale prices and be forced to sell into crashed price market. If PV gets too high any additional PV might find that it is selling the majority of its output during wholesale prices close to zero
Why do all your posts, arguments, and structures remind me so much of 'cells' who seemed to have stopped posting in Oct 2016?
He too was obsessed with 'the marginal cost' of gas, completely missing the need to decarbonise the grid.Most your articles are just random personal opinions of others who have a website.
And my views are not opinions they are simple math and economics
Do you not accept that in the UK all wind and PV do is displace fuel and hence that is their value the marginal cost of fuel saved?
I'm sorry you feel that the national and international press are random opinions of others with a website.
Yes wind and PV displace fuel, that's exactly their job, but the displaced cost is more than just the cost of the fuel, unless you don't believe in AGW?
[Massive deja vu now!]You have me wrong I hope every country deploys lots of wind and PV
I am just making a note that it is not on its own merits of economic cost advantage but that it is on the back of the state who are choosing to support green power over other needs like maybe additional heathcare
PV and wind are cheaper, and reducing FF burning will benefit healthcare. The rollout of EV's ideally running on renewables leccy will do the same too.I can see PV doing very well in the hot countries where they can get CFs of 30% or more on trackers. Add in batteries and it is conceivable that hot nations could go 60% PV
UK should drop all PV subsidies, like you keep saying they are economic right, and put it towards offshore wind.
PV is already doing very well in hot countries. The leccy contracts issued are cheaper than any form of generation ... any form.
But UK PV doesn't compete with 'hot country' PV, it competes with other UK generation, and it's doing that very well. With PV in the mix, the renewables package, including wind is weakened. Without wind, PV is weakened.
Off-shore wind is doing very well in the CfD auctions, if you hadn't noticed on-shore wind and PV are currently excluded.India will have to build out coal/gas it has no choice it cant power itself with non controlable wind/PV. Yes I accept those coal/gas plants will run at lower capacities but they will still have to be built to control the grid and insure supplies.
India and China maybe could have avoided a lot of their coal build out if they had gone the french route but that is mostly too late for them
India and China are reducing their actual (China) and planned (India) coal consumption's thanks to wind and PV.
Both countries have cancelled plans for large numbers of coal generation plants, even if you don't believe in the information in any links.
China Cancels 103 Coal Plants, Mindful of Smog and Wasted CapacityThe cancellations make it likelier that China will meet its goal of limiting its total coal-fired power generation capacity to 1,100 gigawatts by 2020. That huge figure, three times the total coal-fired capacity in the United States, is far more than China needs. Its coal plants now run at about half of capacity, and new sources of power, like wind, solar and nuclear, are coming online at a fast clip.
India Cancels Nearly 14 Gigawatts Of Proposed Coal PlantsThe transformation of India’s electricity market continues to deliver, as shown this month by the cancellation of 13.7 gigawatts of proposed coal-fired power plants, an admission that 8.6 gigawatts of operating coal is already non-viable, and the parallel move of ever-decreasing solar costs helped along by the country’s record low solar tariffs.
I can't help thinking that if you didn't dismiss the media, facts, figures and evidence, but instead took a look at it, there would be little need for these exchanges.Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.
For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.0 -
Martyn1981 wrote: »So all the work into P2G is wrong then .... in your opinion.
Yes and it is obvious it is wrong and a waste of resources. Just as hydrogen fuel cells for cars are a waste of resources and time. Basic mathematics proves both are stupid
In the case of hydrogen cars, hydrogen is a energy carrier which has a round trip from electricity to hydrogen to electricity (or combustion) that is far lower than Electricity to battery to Electricity again.
Likewise with Electricity to Nat Gas or Hydrogen its the same thing
Electricity is a higher grade fuel you dont convert electricity into gas it is stupid
Nat Gas costs 1.5p/Kwh in the UK and closer to 1 cent/KWh in the USA
How the hell do you propose to build a massive conversion facility, to only operate some of the time only when he wind blows hard, and to do it at a profit converting electricity into 1.5p/KWh nat gas?
Plus it is not a problem that needs a solution for a long time
Interconnectors plus EV batteries will soak up excess
I think I know what you want it to work because if you could do wind power or solar power to nat gas you can in theory green the heating side of things which is going to be the most difficult to do. The problem you face is that nat gas is 1.5p in the uk and about half that price in places like the USA. You are not going to be building methane plants working off solar/wind and outputting the methane for 1-2 cents/kWh you would need virtually free wind power or solar power which is not possible. Right now wind power and solar need support to work in grids where wholesale is £50/MWh how are you going to get wind/solar down to £5/MWh where maybe it might make sense trying to turn that £5/MWh eletricity into £15/MWh natural gas? Also if you could get wind/solar to £5/MWh why not just use the eletricity directly to do your heating? Why convert to nat gas and tripple+ the price? We also probably do not want gas boilers in homes long term they cause local pollution so ideally homes and business will go to electrical heating.
Yes this presents a huge challenge as seasonal heating is so concentrated in a few months and is a MASSIVE demand. There is a solution but it isnt easy. That is to make long distance electrical transfer a lot cheaper. With a world grid you could just deploy solar in the right locations so it matches seasonal demand.0 -
Martyn1981 wrote: »Nope, because they are cheaper.
Hope so but I dont believe it. If you are convinced that is the case I presume you will be writing to your MP to tell him the good news and request he opposes any and all subsidy from this point
He too was obsessed with 'the marginal cost' of gas, completely missing the need to decarbonise the grid.
There is no need to do it at this stage, there is political will to do it because government have been told its popular to do
I'm sorry you feel that the national and international press are random opinions of others with a website. For real? You are surely aware that half the press cry that the other half are bozoes and wrong in their views?
Yes wind and PV displace fuel, that's exactly their job, but the displaced cost is more than just the cost of the fuel, unless you don't believe in AGW? I 100% believe that humans impact the world especially though land use how can it be any other way. Take the UK for example it would mostly be woodland but it isnt. However I do not believe the changes humans make are a net disaster that can not be solved or mitigated. Or even say hydroeletric dams they chang and flood massive areas so that is a big local and possibly global change too. However I do not see change in itself as bad
[Massive deja vu now!]
PV and wind are cheaper, and reducing FF burning will benefit healthcare.
Decarbing CCGTs a hundred miles away wont do anything much really. If you are that concerned invent a toaster that doesn't burn toast that will save more pollution contact than your CCGT a hundred miles away
The rollout of EV's ideally running on renewables leccy will do the same too.
EVs are interesting, they might add near baseload if for instance we go towards a self drive EV taxi fleet. Or if we stay with private EV cars then with smart meters EVs could mop up excess Solar/Wind
PV is already doing very well in hot countries. The leccy contracts issued are cheaper than any form of generation ... any form.I can believe that for countries where peak demand and peak output are correlated and that is great news they should be installing as much as their grids can take
But UK PV doesn't compete with 'hot country' PV, it competes with other UK generation, and it's doing that very well. With PV in the mix, the renewables package, including wind is weakened. Without wind, PV is weakened.I am happy for you to install as much PV on roofs as you like but at no subsidy you keep telling me its too cheap to meter so let people/business pay for it from their own pockets
Off-shore wind is doing very well in the CfD auctions, if you hadn't noticed on-shore wind and PV are currently excluded.Thats good news I wasnt aware of that
India and China are reducing their actual (China) and planned (India) coal consumption's thanks to wind and PV.Nothing to do with hydropower and nuclear up 200TWh between 2014-2016? Compared to the Wind+Solar of 130TWh. Perhaps the biggest factor has been replacing old lower efficiency coal plants with high efficiency super-critical coal plants. So why heap all the praise only wind and pv when it was probably. 1 more efficient coal plants 2 Hydro&Nuclear and 3 Wind&PV ??
Both countries have cancelled plans for large numbers of coal generation plants, even if you don't believe in the information in any links.This simply is false china already has the best part of 1,000 GW in coal capacity they dont need more than that they can generate 8000 TWh from coal with just their existing fleet. Likewise just watch india over the next 15 years they are going to need lots of controlable working CCGTs/Coal plants or they need to accept poverty for longer
China Cancels 103 Coal Plants, Mindful of Smog and Wasted Capacity
They simply do not need more coal stations their current fleet only operates at about 50%
CF if they need the control they should be building CCGTs or GTs to meet peak or guarantee supply the rest of the bulk can be picked up with the existing coal plants run at higher CFs if necessary. Seriously just look at their generating assets they simply do not need more control they have enough with their coal+CCGT+hydro+nuclear + the planned hydro+nuclear. They already have the best part of 1300-1400 GW of thermal plants
India Cancels Nearly 14 Gigawatts Of Proposed Coal Plants
That isnt difficult, here let me propose a coal plant for London. Ok now I have cancled it. Lets trow a party. PV in india will mean they need fewer coal plants than had PV not progessed to this point. However it will just mean the coal plants that they do build will operate at an average higher CF than otherwise. You should look not at the coal power stations built or not but the coal used in generating electricity the tons not the power stations
I can't help thinking that if you didn't dismiss the media, facts, figures and evidence, but instead took a look at it, there would be little need for these exchangesI dismiss much of the media but I dont dismiss facts and figures. I have already stated PV and Wind has a bright future as it has the ear of governments and a public not smart enough to see that higher bills due to mandate are just higher taxes in disguise put forward to buy Chinese PV panels instead of much needed additional funding for the NHS. I have also said I believe PV has a very bright future in hot countries where the demand correlates with output. Offshore wind might also get towards £30/MWh in which case fantastic lets go for 50GW of the stuff and hopefully the other EU nations go for 50GW of the stuff
Response in bold0 -
I think I know what you want it to work because if you could do wind power or solar power to nat gas you can in theory green the heating side of things which is going to be the most difficult to do.
Nope. P2G allows for a large amount of concentrated storage (possibly even seasonal storage) that can then be used to generate leccy during high demand / low supply periods, either via fuel cells or CCGT. It's principal benefit is to allow far greater capacity of RE onto the grid, which in turn displaces even more FF and its externalities - the whole point of RE.
I've already explained all of this, and whilst you dismiss the P2G industry / process / research out of hand, I personally think it will continue, and do rather well.Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.
For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.0 -
Response in bold
I'm really not sure where you were going with all of that, other than to deny facts, figures and national / international press info.
I believe we've been through all of this many times before - are you @cells posting under two names?
In which case nothing I say, nor links to what is actually happening, such as China cancelling coal powerstations will change your mind.
Anyone that values that gas displacement purely on the fuel cost whilst ignoring the AGW impact, will never understand the benefits of clean generation.
I recall @cells claiming that the health impacts of burning coal were false, as he'd smelt raw coal, and it was fine.Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.
For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards