Energy news in general

stripling

Centrica is getting a public roasting from analysts who point out that not only are gas levels ok but it was Centrica who shut down 50% of the storage before the energy crisis and could currently easily fill storage over and over again from its own trading wing. But they're on the blag for subsidies... 😂

Meanwhile: "The UK gas market is not signalling any serious concerns about storage. Prices are pretty much flat until Q4 '25. If they were prices would be incentivising storage by trading at higher prices in later months. (Buy low now, sell high later). But they're not." Financial Times 

Chrysalis

stripling said:

@Chrysalis
The article states we paid well over normal market rate for the emergency supply, what part of that is inaccurate?  There was no part of the article that said it is all profit.
I have no bias towards the industry or feel any need to defend it, problems are problems.

For someone with 'no bias' you sure as hell read selectively and ignore the other posts. 😁 NESO - the Grid operator clearly stated it was no big deal and is a regular occurrence - I included links to the quote. The same article also points out that news media chooses to make scare story dramatic headlines for their own purposes. 

Alongside this, as I said, we have battery storage that COULD have been used but because of the way our broken market is structured the battery operators made more money selling their energy elsewhere instead of to the national grid... In an intelligent market design they should've been incentivised to operate as 'peakers' on the Balancing Mechanism (plugging grid shortages).  Instead, we leave the door open for gas plant owners to manipulate the market. 

The problems have almost zero to do with renewables and nearly EVERYTHING to do with the way our energy market is structured... Including, as I said, the way certain hedge funds are dirty dealing in the Dutch TTF market... Blowing up nonsense stories about 'geopolitics' or 'storage' pumping up their funds then dumping at a time of their choosing. As I said yesterday, even Donald Tusk is arguing they need stricter regulation to stop their manipulation. 

There's a lot of nonsense being promoted by vested interests in the carbon heavy industries, include utter twaddle about the Rough Storage facility being lobbied by Centrica who of course has an interest... 

Meanwhile, British consumers pay OTT prices... 

I think you have misunderstood what I said.

These shenanigans have happened enough that people have started to consider it a normal and acceptable, I think the industry has problems, so why would I be swayed by the grid operator who is part of the industry saying everything is all good with what is happening?
I find it quite incredible that there is people who think there is not much wrong with the energy sector right now.  Its completely baffling to be frank.

You think things like paying considerably over market rate for energy supply because of our broken structure shouldnt be reported just because an industry operator says its no big deal?

Feel free to quote posts you think I have deliberately ignored, I certainly have not read 225 pages of posts.

All I did was point out the article didnt make claims about profit, and asked what part of it wasnt accurate.

MacPingu1986

Chrysalis said:

I think you have misunderstood what I said.

These shenanigans have happened enough that people have started to consider it a normal and acceptable, I think the industry has problems, so why would I be swayed by the grid operator who is part of the industry saying everything is all good with what is happening?
I find it quite incredible that there is people who think there is not much wrong with the energy sector right now.  Its completely baffling to be frank, it would only make any sense if the individuals had some kind of vested interest or affiliation with those involved.

All stripling is saying is lets not attach *too* much weight to a scaremongering opinion piece published by a blogger  whose stock in trade is climate denial and various false claims about the cost of renewables.

Rather than scaremongering about blackouts a more accurate article title might have been "NESO demand management system operates as planned and expected".

Chrysalis

MacPingu1986 said:

Chrysalis said:

I think you have misunderstood what I said.

These shenanigans have happened enough that people have started to consider it a normal and acceptable, I think the industry has problems, so why would I be swayed by the grid operator who is part of the industry saying everything is all good with what is happening?
I find it quite incredible that there is people who think there is not much wrong with the energy sector right now.  Its completely baffling to be frank, it would only make any sense if the individuals had some kind of vested interest or affiliation with those involved.

All stripling is saying is lets not attach *too* much weight to a scaremongering opinion piece published by a blogger  whose stock in trade is climate denial and various false claims about the cost of renewables.

Rather than scaremongering about blackouts a more accurate article title might have been "NESO demand management system operates as planned and expected".

Why are you calling it scaremongering?
I wasnt scared by reading it, it just gave me some information.
Are you saying anything that might cause worry amongst people should be censored?  We would need to shut down the entire press as the majority of it is bad news in one way or another.

The problem is with "NESO demand management system operates as planned and expected"is it doesnt portray the reason for the story, to alert people how badly run things are to the point that the industry thinks its acceptable to be paying these sums of money to fire up power stations.  That would be the sort of headline you would print if you had a vested interest in making things look as rosy as possible.

I have no issue with a quote being in the article for industry representation to make the point this is what had planned, but the article never made the claim this was a by accident event, so that wouldnt really be needed, I never got the impression from reading it that it wasnt some pre planned process.

I just reread the article it is very fair, this quote is in there.

A spokesperson for Neso said: “This is a routine tool that we use most winters, and means we are asking market participants to make any additional generation capacity they may have available. [It] does not mean electricity supply is at risk.”

The quote I accept as accurate, but I also think it misses the point, the point isnt about stability of supply but how much these two stations got paid. 

I am talking about the guardian article, I think you are talking about this https://watt-logic.com/2025/01/09/blackouts-near-miss-in-tighest-day-in-gb-electricity-market-since-2011/ which I simply considered informative, was interesting to learn how things work, I didnt really camment much more then that.

Here is the guardian article, which my comments were aimed at.  The losing the lights comment wasnt in regards to that watt logic article, I couldnt be bothered to make a separate post to quote scot.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/08/two-power-station-owners-to-get-more-than-12m-for-three-hours-of-electricity

matt_drummer

Chrysalis said:

The quote I accept as accurate, but I also think it misses the point, the point isnt about stability of supply but how much these two stations got paid. 

How can anybody make a judgement about how reasonable the amount paid was if we don't know their costs?

That is the point, the article doesn't mention what the costs were, just what the two companies were paid for three hours of electricity.

What does that even mean? What is three hours worth of electricity?

The article is written to make readers think the amount paid was exorbitant, was it?

What were the costs of those three hours of electricity?

The_Green_Hornet

Why have Britain’s energy costs soared and what does it mean for Labour?

Claims that power plants are gaming the system to charge huge sums to switch on in the UK’s cold weather

A rise in electricity costs this week has raised fears that officials operating Great Britain’s power market could be held to “ransom” by owners of gas power plants during cold, windless days in order to keep the lights on. Here, we look why costs have increased sharply, the trading rules for plants and the implications for Labour’s clean power ambitions.

Why have Britain’s energy costs soared and what does it mean for Labour? | Energy industry | The Guardian

stripling

@Chrysalis
I am talking about the guardian article, I think you are talking about this https://watt-logic.com/2025/01/09/blackouts-near-miss-in-tighest-day-in-gb-electricity-market-since-2011/ which I simply considered informative, was interesting to learn how things work, I didnt really camment much more then that.

I was addressing the lot... The Guardian article was not the greatest... they could've gone into the issues better.  Plus in posts directly above yours I defined clickbait.... And spelled out the nonsense lurking behind these stories. 

Right now, because this period in time is seen as an 'energy transition' (not the greatest description but it ill do) there's all kinds of competing interests and agendas. Plus, because many media outlets are running on low staffing numbers, too much reporting is cut-and-paste from press releases. Hence all the recycling of Centrica's nonsense on storage. And it is nonsense... storage is not a problem plus there's a huge glut of LPG loitering at sea in tankers. 

However, I'm not having a go at you - this is just an FYI and a cautionary tale for anyone who is interested in our energy market.  The WattLogic article is extremely inaccurate - it's written with an anti renewables agenda. It is suggesting we were around 580MW away from power demand exceeding supply which is just plain not true.  

NESO: say this is incorrect: "One of the standard operating reserves held...at all times is for the largest power generator on the system, which last night was 1400MW, not the 580MW that has been quoted online.”

Meanwhile, gas finished back down at 43€ on the Dutch TTF today, in other words sanity (in winter terms) returns. The naughty thing is these price spikes, which were "blamed" on the 'Ukraine gas transit ending', were priced in months ago... the moment the so-called 'threat' was first discussed in market terms.  

That's right.... it was the IDEA not the reality that fed the hedge fund monsters that drove up the wholesale prices (or were they actually throwing it out as bait..... ho hum. 🤔🤫).

This is one of multiple reasons why our energy market needs an intelligent rethink and marginal pricing (linking electricity prices to gas) needs changing. 

QrizB

Despite the inaccuracies in the article, I've enjoyed the discussion of the topic. Thank you all!

Chrysalis

stripling said:

However, I'm not having a go at you - this is just an FYI and a cautionary tale for anyone who is interested in our energy market.  The WattLogic article is extremely inaccurate - it's written with an anti renewables agenda. It is suggesting we were around 580MW away from power demand exceeding supply which is just plain not true. 

When I read it, I didnt take particular great notice to the specific numbers mentioned, as I had already factored in QrizB stating he cant vouch for the accuracy, my interest was more to do with the processes that are followed when dealing with supply and capacity.

The_Green_Hornet

Ofgem extends Jonathan Brearley’s term as CEO for five more years

Ofgem’s Board has extended Jonathan Brearley’s appointment as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to 31 January 2030.  

Mark McAllister, Chair of Ofgem, said:  

“Jonathan has led Ofgem through unprecedented challenges over the past five years: the fallout from COVID-19, energy market turbulence and the price shock following Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.  

“He and his senior team have shown great dedication in stepping up to meet these challenges, whilst establishing the foundations required to create a clean power electricity system to get us to net zero by 2050 - the biggest ever transformation of the energy industry.

Ofgem extends Jonathan Brearley’s term as CEO for five more years | Ofgem