Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

NigeWick

Martyn1981 said:

CfD round 6 auction results are out, and they look good with ~10GW of capacity awarded contracts. Roughly half of that being off-shore wind. These CfD contracts are for 15yrs.

Onshore wind prices have fallen back a bit from the inflationary highs of last year at £51/MWh v's £52.

PV is up a bit at £50 v's £47.

Off-shore wind has gone up considerably (from the £37 in the round 4 results), but at £59/MWh for 2/3rds of the bids and £54/MWh for the others, still way below the £73 bid max (panic) price that was introduced to ensure bids. [In the R5 auction the bid max was lowered from £46 to £44, despite the Ukraine invasion and costs spiralling, and attracted no bids.]

All auctions/prices use a 2012 baseline. So index linking of ~1.38x is needed to bring to 2024 (post Apr) pricing. For comparison HPC was issued a 35yr CfD at £89.50/MWh which is now ~£124/MWh.

Contracts for Difference Allocation Round 6 results

And how much does new nuclear cost?

Exiled_Tyke

NigeWick said:

Martyn1981 said:

CfD round 6 auction results are out, and they look good with ~10GW of capacity awarded contracts. Roughly half of that being off-shore wind. These CfD contracts are for 15yrs.

Onshore wind prices have fallen back a bit from the inflationary highs of last year at £51/MWh v's £52.

PV is up a bit at £50 v's £47.

Off-shore wind has gone up considerably (from the £37 in the round 4 results), but at £59/MWh for 2/3rds of the bids and £54/MWh for the others, still way below the £73 bid max (panic) price that was introduced to ensure bids. [In the R5 auction the bid max was lowered from £46 to £44, despite the Ukraine invasion and costs spiralling, and attracted no bids.]

All auctions/prices use a 2012 baseline. So index linking of ~1.38x is needed to bring to 2024 (post Apr) pricing. For comparison HPC was issued a 35yr CfD at £89.50/MWh which is now ~£124/MWh.

Contracts for Difference Allocation Round 6 results

And how much does new nuclear cost?

very interesting.  Have there been any recent nuclear contracts? If I had to guess I'd say it's getting even more expensive.  

What particularly pleases me, is that tidal (although relatively insignificant) is still pushing on.  MeyGen in particular (which has been through awful financial problems) is still bidding for growth which is very positive. 

Netexporter

Hinkley C was over £90/MWh, IIRC, so I guess any new projects would be bidding north of £100. I suspect the public would have to pick up the the clean-up bill, too.

I'm sure much more storage would be cheaper, more rapidly deliverable and less environmentally risky than nuclear.

michaels

Martyn1981 said:

CfD round 6 auction results are out, and they look good with ~10GW of capacity awarded contracts. Roughly half of that being off-shore wind. These CfD contracts are for 15yrs.

Onshore wind prices have fallen back a bit from the inflationary highs of last year at £51/MWh v's £52.

PV is up a bit at £50 v's £47.

Off-shore wind has gone up considerably (from the £37 in the round 4 results), but at £59/MWh for 2/3rds of the bids and £54/MWh for the others, still way below the £73 bid max (panic) price that was introduced to ensure bids. [In the R5 auction the bid max was lowered from £46 to £44, despite the Ukraine invasion and costs spiralling, and attracted no bids.]

All auctions/prices use a 2012 baseline. So index linking of ~1.38x is needed to bring to 2024 (post Apr) pricing. For comparison HPC was issued a 35yr CfD at £89.50/MWh which is now ~£124/MWh.

Contracts for Difference Allocation Round 6 results

I assume all the prices quoted are inflation adjusted?  If so that is a massive rise for offshore wind, I can't believe physical costs are up that much so assume the big factor must be the end of zero interest rates?  That may also explain why PV is also up despite the falls in global PV prices, presumably the shorter duration of PV projects explains why they are less impacted?

Are there any recent international results for comparison?

Martyn1981

Netexporter said:

Hinkley C was over £90/MWh, IIRC, so I guess any new projects would be bidding north of £100. I suspect the public would have to pick up the the clean-up bill, too.

I'm sure much more storage would be cheaper, more rapidly deliverable and less environmentally risky than nuclear.

Yep, the contract is listed on the CfD register as £89.50/MWh, but it's actually £92.50. The £3 discount is conditional on the sister project SZC being built too. If SZC isn't built, then HPC jumps to ~£128/MWh today.

Regarding storage costs, the previous Gov was advised to scale back nuclear plans in 2018 by the NIC (National Infrastructure Commission), and keep an eye on falling RE and storage costs.

Cool down nuclear plan because renewables are better bet, ministers told

Government advisers have told ministers to back only a single new nuclear power station after Hinkley Point C in the next few years, because renewable energy sources could prove a safer investment.

The National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) said the government should cool down plans for a nuclear new build programme that envisage as many as six plants being built.

Regarding 'new' nuclear, the much hyped hope of SMR's is not looking good, with some contracts in the US cancelled due to far higher estimated costs than was promised. And China is the only country rolling out a lot of new nuclear, approx 10 reactors / 10GW per year, (v's their RE rollout of around 340GW). And even at the relatively high rollout levels in China, they don't seem to be able to get the costs down significantly.

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 said:

Me and my milestones, I do like a nice big one!

UK wind power reaches historic 30GW milestone

The UK has today hit a historic milestone of 30 gigawatts (30,000 megawatts) of wind generation capacity. The opening of SSE Renewables’ Viking Wind Farm on the Shetland Islands boosted the country’s capacity by 443MW, taking the total past the 30GW threshold. 

Total operational capacity of combined onshore and offshore wind in the UK now stands at 30,299MW, as tracked by RenewableUK’s EnergyPulse, the industry’s  market intelligence service. This is enough to meet the annual power needs of more than 26 million homes and cut carbon emissions by more than 35 million tonnes a year.

Commenting on the milestone, RenewableUK’s Executive Director of Policy & Engagement Ana Musat said:
 
“It took 26 years to install the first 15GW of wind energy in the UK, so to double that to 30GW in just seven years represents a tremendous success for the industry. As the latest record-breaking figures from the Government show, wind is the backbone of our future energy system and a key driver of our transition away from expensive and volatile fossil fuels to become a clean energy superpower.
 
“Our research also shows doubling the UK’s onshore wind capacity by the end of the decade would boost the economy by £45 billion and create 27,000 jobs, whilst moving to an electricity system dominated by offshore wind by 2035 would leave consumers around £68 a year better off.”

Great to see this announcement although checking locations of onshore wind only one of circa 8MW's in England. Presumably there wasn't time between announcement of dropping ban on wind farms in England and the due date for submissions!

Bit of a shame really, it would appear over here in Suffolk we're being saddled with Sizewell C, lots of transmission infrastructure and pylons for moving generation on elsewhere, a monster of a Solar farm on border with Cambridge so a wind farm to boot would almost have made it a clean sweep.

Ah well, maybe next time.

S'funny how most of the energy being transmitted is for satisfying demand in the capital, which begs the question, why can't they produce it locally. After all, there's acres and acres of virgin rooftops already just waiting for PV to give them a bit of shade without the old chestnut of compromising food production when installing on agricultural land!

Martyn1981

I've lost track of all the planned storage deployments in Scotland, so this might have been mentioned a while back.

Green light for Kona’s 456MWh Smeaton BESS in Scotland

Developer Kona Energy has been granted consent for the construction and operation of its Smeaton BESS project in Scotland, which will total 228MW/456MWh of energy storage capacity.

The 2-hour battery energy storage system (BESS) in East Lothian is strategically located to enhance grid resilience and reduce grid constraints, Kona said. The nearby Torness nuclear power station is due to shut down in 2028, which will increase the utility of the Smeaton BESS, it added.

Kona did not say when it expected the project to come online, but said it would now be seeking investment to bring the project to market.

Martyn1981

Incredible how fast Australia, with it's very dirty leccy, is transitioning to RE. Took em a while to realise just how good and cheap wind and PV would be (despite the incredible adoption of domestic PV, around 30% of homes now).

Looks like there is no stopping them now. But the article does seem to conflate renewable energy, with RE leccy - I suppose as the leccy goes RE, and transport / any space heating go leccy, then there is a crossover, but not quite 2027 in S. Australia.

South Australia is aiming for 100% renewable energy by 2027. It’s already internationally ‘remarkable’

Wind and solar power in South Australia grew to 75% in 2023, with few other systems reaching comparable levels. For instance, frontrunner Denmark achieved 67% in the same year.

The International Energy Agency says demonstrating the ability to power a large grid with wind and solar is crucial in the context of climate change, and South Australia’s share is “remarkable”.

The state government is now attempting to legislate a target of 100% renewable energy by 2027. Experts say the state’s approach could provide a template for what can be achieved elsewhere.

Energy specialist Dr Gabrielle Kuiper says powering a jurisdiction of almost 2 million people with majority wind and solar is a globally significant achievement.

“One of the most impressive things about that feat, from a technical point of view, is there have also been periods, starting in September last year, where the entire state was powered by rooftop solar alone,” Kuiper says.

On New Year’s Eve 2023, rooftop solar met 101.7% of South Australia’s energy needs for 30 minutes. Australia’s energy operator says that’s a world record for a grid of that size. Its engineering roadmap seeks to enable similar milestones throughout the national grid.

Coastalwatch

A half hour session from Radio 4's Life Scientific programme - Peter Stott on Climate change deniers and Italian Inspiration.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0022ss3

Martyn1981

Hopefully the time has come for the Gov to require low-carbon homes. The article suggests this could save homeowners around £1,300 pa, with a construction cost increase of ~£5k. [I believe that cost increase doesn't include a battery, which is also being suggested.]

Low-carbon homes can save £1,341 in bills and should be compulsory, study shows

Building new homes to low-carbon standards would save the occupants thousands of pounds, new research has shown, as experts urged the government to change the regulations on housing development.

People living in a typical three-bedroom, semi-detached newly built house would save an average of £1,341 a year if it was equipped with solar panels, a heat pump, high-grade insulation and battery storage.

That would equate to about £46,612 over a 25-year mortgage term, according to modelling seen by the Guardian, carried out by the MCS Foundation charity.

According to the modelling, energy bills for an average three-bed, semi-detached home with a heat pump would be £1,764 a year, compared with £603 if solar panels were also installed, meaning £1,161 in annual savings. With battery storage, the savings rise to £1,342.

Developers can build more cheaply if they do not need to incorporate high-grade insulation and meet stringent regulations on airtightness, and if they can build with gas boilers instead of heat pumps. Equipping homes with low-carbon technology is estimated by the government to add about £5,000 to the cost of construction. It would be up to the developers whether or not to pass those costs on to the housebuyer.