The Alternative Green Energy Thread

Pile_o_stone

ed110220 said:

joefizz said:

JKenH said:

We came pretty close to running out of electricity at teatime on the 15th September with prices of over £500/MWh. Coal generation exceeded wind on that day. 

Panic buttons were hit during the week when President Macron said they might shut off the interconnect (albeit temporarily) if theres a no deal Brexit.
Imagine what would happen in that case if it coincided with a winter lull in wind.
The UK is still in a transition phase and its no coincidence that coal stocks are being supplemented just in case....

I wouldn't worry too much about it. Perhaps counterintuitively, the times at which the direction of flow through the interconnector is from the UK to France are more often to be in winter when France's electricity demand is very high. As France's generating capacity is more than its average demand, but less than its peak demand it must import in these conditions (even though it is a net exporter). In these conditions thermal power stations in neighbouring countries can be profitably brought on line to cover the shortfall. This would suggest that the effect here of the interconnector being closed would be higher prices and higher GHG emissions but not blackouts.

It would be interesting to know just what the proportion of imported energy to exported energy is. Whenever I have looked on Gridwatch, we always seem to be importing from France. I just attributed it to them having a lot of nuclear that can't be ramped up and down, so the French are glad to export it elsewhere.

JKenH

Pile_o_stone said:

ed110220 said:

joefizz said:

JKenH said:

We came pretty close to running out of electricity at teatime on the 15th September with prices of over £500/MWh. Coal generation exceeded wind on that day. 

Panic buttons were hit during the week when President Macron said they might shut off the interconnect (albeit temporarily) if theres a no deal Brexit.
Imagine what would happen in that case if it coincided with a winter lull in wind.
The UK is still in a transition phase and its no coincidence that coal stocks are being supplemented just in case....

I wouldn't worry too much about it. Perhaps counterintuitively, the times at which the direction of flow through the interconnector is from the UK to France are more often to be in winter when France's electricity demand is very high. As France's generating capacity is more than its average demand, but less than its peak demand it must import in these conditions (even though it is a net exporter). In these conditions thermal power stations in neighbouring countries can be profitably brought on line to cover the shortfall. This would suggest that the effect here of the interconnector being closed would be higher prices and higher GHG emissions but not blackouts.

It would be interesting to know just what the proportion of imported energy to exported energy is. Whenever I have looked on Graidwatch, we always seem to be importing from France. I just attributed it to them having a lot of nuclear that can't be ramped up and down, so the French are glad to export it elsewhere.

These are some Q2 2020 statistics. If you follow the link below you will be able to look up other quarters.

https://electricinsights.co.uk/#/reports/report-2020-q2/detail/power-system-records-4?start=2019-11-16&_k=yxih6n

This table (Q4 2019] from the same source may be more helpful 

Pile_o_stone

Pile_o_stone said:

ed110220 said:

joefizz said:

JKenH said:

We came pretty close to running out of electricity at teatime on the 15th September with prices of over £500/MWh. Coal generation exceeded wind on that day. 

Panic buttons were hit during the week when President Macron said they might shut off the interconnect (albeit temporarily) if theres a no deal Brexit.
Imagine what would happen in that case if it coincided with a winter lull in wind.
The UK is still in a transition phase and its no coincidence that coal stocks are being supplemented just in case....

I wouldn't worry too much about it. Perhaps counterintuitively, the times at which the direction of flow through the interconnector is from the UK to France are more often to be in winter when France's electricity demand is very high. As France's generating capacity is more than its average demand, but less than its peak demand it must import in these conditions (even though it is a net exporter). In these conditions thermal power stations in neighbouring countries can be profitably brought on line to cover the shortfall. This would suggest that the effect here of the interconnector being closed would be higher prices and higher GHG emissions but not blackouts.

It would be interesting to know just what the proportion of imported energy to exported energy is. Whenever I have looked on Gridwatch, we always seem to be importing from France. I just attributed it to them having a lot of nuclear that can't be ramped up and down, so the French are glad to export it elsewhere.

I did some googling and found
"The UK has been a net importer of electricity in each year since the interconnector with France opened. At its peak in 2015 this was only responsible for 6.6% of UK electricity supply or 0.9% of total primary energy supply."
"In 2017, 49% of net electricity exports came from France, 46% from the Netherlands and 5% from the interconnectors with Ireland. Imports from the Netherlands have been relatively consistent since this interconnector started operating in 2011. Imports from France have varied to a much greater extent; as high as almost 15 TWh in 2014 and below 3 TWh in 2010. The UK has been a net exporter of electricity to Ireland for most of the years to 2015, but was a net importer in 2016 and 2017."

"Direction of flow for electricity transferred

Since 2014 the majority (87.8%) of electricity transferred by interconnector has been imported into Great Britain."

lol, so France is threatening to shut off an interconnector that exports so much of their surplus electricity. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!! 

JKenH

I am just quoting my source below - nothing relevant there other than the graph.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/10/28/markets-live-latest-coronavirus-news-pound-euro-ftse-100/

JKenH

Just saw this comment from Electrek’s Frederic Lambert (in response to an article on Tesla FSD cost as it happens but that doesn’t really matter).  Something for all of us to think about maybe (including me). 

If anyone is "triggered" by this headline, they should take a moment and appreciate how easy their life most be that this is the threshold for them to be bothered by something enough to comment on it. Especially in these times.

joefizz

Cardew said:

A quote from the link above states:

'The work also shows “no evidence to date for increasing methane release from the Arctic'

Yet a google for 'Artic Tundra warming releases methane' gives numerous websites from respected organisations(NASA National Geographic etc) that paint a different picture.

It ties in with your earlier post about where we source information.

I think it was on the BBC or the Guardian that I read a comment about how global warming was causing tree loss up to the Arctic Circle....
It was quoted on here and morphed into tree loss inside the Arctic Circle.... ....I guess that poster didnt pay much attention to Geography in school (nor has travelled inside the Arctic Circle).

I was at MOSI in Chicago last year (seems more than a year ago these days...) and I was surprised (well not really) to see such a large exhibition on coal. I, of course, thought it was a legacy exhibition but no, school kids were being given lectures on 'clean coal'. This being one of orange man bads catchphrases I never paid much attention to it....
...skip forward a year and Im studying for energy constraints within in the environment (harvardx - good course, you can do the online course for free, its only accreditation you have to pay for and Im hoping I can roll it into my masters) and it goes into the clean coal thing.
I didnt realise Id already been through most of it here in NI in the 80s and 90s. Pretty much all newbuilds then had coal central heating, either glass fronted fires with back boilers or decidated boilers. Most of Belfast (it being in a valley and all) was designated a smokeless zone (as most of the place is now) so we had to burn 'clean coal' or anthracite or the equivalent. High grade coal with less output.
Going back to the MOSI exhibit, it was only then that I twigged how much of the US electricity supply runs on brown coal or lignite, so moving to 'clean coal' or anthracite etc would be a massive improvement.

Its not that coal is clean but more than some coal is cleaner than others. Of course the argument is that when you use anthracite etc it is possible that the scrubbers wont be overwhelmed by the output and may just be able to cope.... ...hmmmm....

One of the reasons for studying now (other than being forward looking for jobs of the future in green tech) is to give an idea of how things are taught now and although I dont consider the course Im doing now to be of masters standard (certainly not at the level my first masters was) it is interesting that a lot of the geo-political and macro ideas arent developed or even discussed. For example, just completed some research into Chinas coal plant production. Very bad. Obviously. All talk of GW installed and blah blah blah but no mention of it being a job creation exercise (despite the fact that existing installations are either not working or running at vastly reduced capacity). Just look at the ghost cities and so on, its not about using the maximum installed values and being all shouty shouty about emissions as if they were all running 100% 24/7. The socio economic and geo political aspects of the previous energy 5 year plan have to be taken into consideration in the discussion. Their next 5 year plan should be interesting. At least they have a plan...(although I see more nuclear green light in the UK, would expect to hear more drip fed in over the next while)

JKenH

There was a big disconnect this evening between the day ahead and real time electricity pricing.

larrylee

I am a huge fan of solar energy and using it for long period of time. Here some pluses that i noticed:
- imapact on the environment. Solar energy has the least negative impact on the environment compared to any other energy source. It does not produce greenhouse gases and does not pollute the water. It also requires very little water for its maintenance, unlike nuclear power plants for example, needing 20 times more water. Solar energy production does not create any noise, which is major benefit, since a lot of solar installations are in urban areas, such as domestic solar panels. I usually buy all my solar panels here. It's really nice place and they have friendly customer support. 
- reduce energy bills. Generating your own electricity means that you will be using less from the utility supplier. This will immediately translate to savings on your energy bill. Plus, you can also make money by selling the unused electricity, which you have generated, back to the grid. Through solar panel grants offered, you can make your green investment even more beneficial. The more energy you produce, the less you will need from the supplier which will increase your energy self reliance.

JKenH

The cost of keeping Britain’s power system stable has soared, and now adds 20% onto the cost of generating electricity. 

https://reports.electricinsights.co.uk/q2-2020/the-cost-of-staying-in-control/

JKenH

Britain’s Blackout

Engineers must be quick to develop new ways of keeping Britain’s power system under control as it moves into bold new territory, suggests Electric Insights special report.

https://www.drax.com/energy-policy/britains-blackout/