Energy news in general

wrf12345

More info here, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ed-miliband-warm-homes-solar-power-energy-bills-b2892047.html

Looks like the amount of help will be geared to household income and those relatively well off will get a "loan" that will be paid back via the energy bill, so won't really cut the bill - this failed dismally under a previous government when the loan was added to the land registry charges so doubt if many will take it up.

matt_drummer

Where did you think the money was going to come from?

Those rich people who work?

wrf12345

Just saying the previous loan scheme was a dismal failure, but having millions of homes with solar/battery is a good thing for the country with less stress on the grid and less need for nuclear - Octopus CEO has made the point that the grid does not need to expand in its projected form if Green energy is expanded even more than expected with ever cheaper batteries and solar (alas, one downside of the grants is they tend to increase the cost as various nefarious companies take their cut). Thus the money could come from cuts in nuclear or grid expansion rather than loans that probably won't be taken up. Note, not talking about solar alone but solar combined with batteries, which is the key going forward.

Also looks likely "balcony" solar panels will be allowed, so that opens up the market - be interesting to see if they let you have the export money without the MCS installation.

michaels

wrf12345 said:

Just saying the previous loan scheme was a dismal failure, but having millions of homes with solar/battery is a good thing for the country with less stress on the grid and less need for nuclear - Octopus CEO has made the point that the grid does not need to expand in its projected form if Green energy is expanded even more than expected with ever cheaper batteries and solar (alas, one downside of the grants is they tend to increase the cost as various nefarious companies take their cut). Thus the money could come from cuts in nuclear or grid expansion rather than loans that probably won't be taken up. Note, not talking about solar alone but solar combined with batteries, which is the key going forward.

Also looks likely "balcony" solar panels will be allowed, so that opens up the market - be interesting to see if they let you have the export money without the MCS installation.

Will solar export have any value if there is a surplus?

I also wonder if there are diminishing returns to battery ownership as penetration increases.  I do very well currently buying 95% of my leccy at 6.7p per unit but obviously the economics of that don't work if everyone was able to time shift. Once there are enough batteries then we should see arbitrage pretty much equilising day and night rates with possibly a small overall total saving with less peak generation and infrastructure offset by battery capital costs and round trip efficiency.

So whilst now batteries can be an economic no brainer in 5 or so years time they may actually stop recouping the capital outlay?

wrf12345

"So whilst now batteries can be an economic no brainer in 5 or so years time they may actually stop recouping the capital outlay?"
Rising demand for EV's and heat pumps may still make batteries work, especially with a fifty percent discount in the short term (more in the long term) as home sodium batteries become more available (they are also safer so can be installed inside).

Netexporter

Unless human nature/behaviour change radically, I predict there will be surplus electricity at night and an evening peak, for the foreseeable future.

Having said that, my proposed strategy is to maximise self consumption and ensure security of supply (I live in a power cut prone area) and treat any export income as a bonus.

Scot_39

Solar is frankly a very poor source of energy for quite a large part of UK - especially in winter when demand highest - always has been.

Tolerable when a tiny fraction of supply or a personal choice - unbearably wasteful in both summer and winter now approaching 20GW domestic and impacting us all - without that choice - now grid level.

One solar user posted a range of potential outputs to another recently - 0.5kWh per day on a poor day in winter - 30 kWh in summer.

For the low - the grid capacity still has to cope with delivering everything above that low remember - there are no nice averages without batteries - currently too expensive and so too large batteries to match future demand for many using current tech - for projected say EV and ASHP based future we are rapidly being pushed towards - far far more rapidly than other nations so increasing UK costs even more.

The 0.5kWh makes very little difference to winter energy demand - for those reliant on electric heating - even an ASHP will maybe consume 30-40x that on a winters day - conventional more like 100x that - even in a modest 3 bed semi.

The 30kWh in summer - brings its own problems too - as that generates at a time when there is currently little or no demand for the power - for most of the day.

When a typical generation mix this summer might have been along the lines of 

5GW domestic solar once those with batteries say filled by midday or earlier (4kVP array, 10kWh battery - many with GCH wont fit that large a storage anyway - lets say average 2.5-3 hours)

12 GW grid solar

10-12GW wind (at average load factor from last years 30GW installed - now ?)

5GW nuclear

So 32-34GW potential average generation vs demand typically currently in the 20-25GW region.

Approaching 50% over capacity in summer.

So unless the EV and ASHP demand accelerates rapidly - it has consistently undershot green projections for years - we risk creating even more imbalance in the system.

Batteries though I agree can help smooth the demand out - but people need to remember the losses in individual user systems are high - 15-20% for both cycles not unheard of.

And the more using power off peak to charge them - and using less peak as taking power from them - the less off peak saving it likely becomes.

And at a time of constraints on public purse - now is not the time for taxpayers money to be subsidising households - particularly home owners sitting on £10,000s or £100,000s in equity - easily releasable equity - for many.  The same is sadly also largely true for EV grants and BUS grants without means testing.

Its just more greenwashed policy - put ahead not only of our electricity bill costs but the nations fiscal reality - as quickly approaching £3Tn in debt with the increased borrowing despite increase taxation this term.

Given some of the other big costs we all face - like the imminent £3bn for grid thermal constraints to wind farms - which this wont save a penny on - you really do wonder if this is the best use of govt money right now to address out net zero policy loaded bills.

This arguably just another admission of the failed promises of cheap green energy.

A desperate attempt - like the budget shifts to taxation of 75% of the RO and the ECO schemes - to mask the reality of UK's renewables policy - and its poor value for our electricity bills.

The PC2 cap up 7.4% in 3 months from midnight.  Not like dual fuel homes saved from govt policy and network costs by dropping fossil energy costs for 80% of their energy demand. 

matt_drummer

I am interested Scot.

How much do you think it is costing an average user with electric heating over and above how things would be following your plan?

Let's say somebody in a flat using 8,000 kWh pa, is that realistic for an average two bed flat? 6,000 for heating and 2,000 for everything else

What would they pay today, something like £1,800 including the standing charge, about £150 per month on E7

What could it be, do you think?

Scot_39

I dont know about flats - but I live in a compact 2 bed mid terrace - and neighbours either side used c7000/8000 kWh the last time I could use iirc the CTM quote tool without an email address for quotes to see their use.

So lets run with the 8000kWh - which I think is high - I definitely wouldnt want to pay bills for 6000kWh heating - even although thats just over half the median TDCV for gas at the now reduced 11500kWh.

And remember chances are of the median DF gas home goes ASHP - they could be spending near 4000kWh on electric heating - after spending BUS extras or worse when BUS disappears full cost of ASHP upgrades.

Well given recent announcements of renewables clear costs on domestic bills

£92 inc vat iirc is coming out of our average electric bills for 75% of the RO - so thats £123 for 100% of the RO alone.

But the RO costs arent going away - 25% is remaining and the 75% is being paid by taxation instead. So for once electric users will save relative to duel fuel users - at least for 3 years.

And as unit based - thats probably based on far closer to duel fuel cap 2700kWh median tdcv than pc2 electric use.

If that was for exactly 2700 kWh - then 8000 kWh would be £364

The last Ofgem figure for CfDs £27 ex vat wholesale for 2700kWh - so add another £84 inc vat at your 8000 kWh

So just those two lines potentially £448 cheaper in your hypothetical £1800 = 25%

As you can seen we are not talking pennies.

That's nearly 3x the £150 WHD benefit given to now 6.1m homes.  And that of course if part of the other thing escalating all our bills - policy costs - up 50% in the last 21 months alone to now £236 from midnight  for dual fuel.  Which includes the recent WHD extension for an extra 2.7m homes.  

The £19 of the £24 in network costs added in Oct covering in part escalating curtailment - another 1.3%.

The £14 added for nuclear nRAB funding - which based on Blair era - Labour only backing as low carbon - another 0.7%.

£33+vat / 2%

If both scaled 2700kWh to 8000 kWh - £112+vat / 6.5% - but not sure they would.

Or we could look at the costs of FIT for older solar installs - that sees some get SEG export + 75p/kWh for 50% deemed export - over 10x market rates.  That adds to costs. 

And the real pending biggies - take out curtailment costs in network costs  - take out the financing costs of spending £10s bns on new physical networks to avoid them - higher than necessary due to geographical locations 100s of miles from markets that only add for every mile needed - and you can add more to that £448 figure / 25%.  

And then your left with the problem of mismatched generation vs demand - and curtailment for that.

As both of those network costs continue to ramp up / accumulate - the grid thermal alone to £3bn in 4 years time. There is far more pain to come - and at the moment it's aimed squarely at electric users far more than duel fuel gas.  The Ofgem median TDCV is approx 20% electric 80% gas - PC2 users pay the electric unit rate penalties on 100% - not 20% of their bills.  Perverse for a govt whos aim is to shift use - domestic use included - from gas to electric.

matt_drummer

Putting up gas will upset more voters than electric only voters.

£450 before WHD means actually `only' £300 in reality for 6.1 million of the `poorest' homes

You cant have your cake and eat it, we have to take account of the WHD.

So the `extra' cost is actually about £25pm based on 8,000 kWh of electricity which you say is high so maybe even less.

Whilst nobody wants unnecessary costs for people who are already struggling, £25 pm for cleaner air is not really that much.

I'd quite happily pay the extra for four homes of this sort just to stop burning so much.


I think we all get the points you keep making (even though I find it quite difficult to understand sometimes) but it really isn't quite as bad as you make out. is it?