So the CON is in the wholesale price calculation?

BUFF

peter3hg said:

Section62 said:

Ectophile said:

Section62 said:

new_owner said:

jj_43 said:

But it takes time to build wind farms, solar, nuclear and there are a lot of vested interests which preferring directing investment to high cost production, gas, ignoring the price signal.

Especially when more wind and solar have been refused planning in 2022 than ever before.

What's the context for that?

Could it be that more (inappropriate) applications for wind and solar have been under consideration in 2022 than ever before?

Could it be that war in the place where a significant proportion of Europe's grains, seeds and food oils come from have led to some re-evaluation of the need to protect agricultural land?

I think the reasons behind this statistic will be complex.

It's mostly because the government has caved into the NIMBYs.  It's almost impossible to get permission to build an on-shore wind farm in England.  And large scale solar isn't looking too good either.

Which is a pity because on-shore wind is about the cheapest source of electricity you can get at the moment.  Off-shore may be more efficient, but it costs a lot more to install.

Not really, for those who believe food security is more important than people having limitless access to cheap energy.

On-shore wind doesn't take up much agricultural land at all. Look at the largest Euorpean on-shore wind farm in Romania ( https://goo.gl/maps/pTsb8J3cM41TdZqy5 ). The turbines take up a tiny % of the agricultural land and provide power for the equivalent of about a million homes.
Solar is a different story of course.

The UK's largest onshore wind farm is Whitelee near Glasgow & isn't much smaller than the one in Romania (~10% less output) - it isn't built on agricultural land at all (there might be the odd sheep & certainly there is forestry).
Scotland has continued to plan & build wind & hydro (not all get approved & there certainly are environmental concerns). Even here you can't rely on wind though, you need base load generation.

[Deleted User]

BUFF said:

peter3hg said:

Section62 said:

Ectophile said:

Section62 said:

new_owner said:

jj_43 said:

But it takes time to build wind farms, solar, nuclear and there are a lot of vested interests which preferring directing investment to high cost production, gas, ignoring the price signal.

Especially when more wind and solar have been refused planning in 2022 than ever before.

What's the context for that?

Could it be that more (inappropriate) applications for wind and solar have been under consideration in 2022 than ever before?

Could it be that war in the place where a significant proportion of Europe's grains, seeds and food oils come from have led to some re-evaluation of the need to protect agricultural land?

I think the reasons behind this statistic will be complex.

It's mostly because the government has caved into the NIMBYs.  It's almost impossible to get permission to build an on-shore wind farm in England.  And large scale solar isn't looking too good either.

Which is a pity because on-shore wind is about the cheapest source of electricity you can get at the moment.  Off-shore may be more efficient, but it costs a lot more to install.

Not really, for those who believe food security is more important than people having limitless access to cheap energy.

On-shore wind doesn't take up much agricultural land at all. Look at the largest Euorpean on-shore wind farm in Romania ( https://goo.gl/maps/pTsb8J3cM41TdZqy5 ). The turbines take up a tiny % of the agricultural land and provide power for the equivalent of about a million homes.
Solar is a different story of course.

The UK's largest onshore wind farm is Whitelee near Glasgow & isn't much smaller than the one in Romania (~10% less output) - it isn't built on agricultural land at all (there might be the odd sheep & certainly there is forestry).
Scotland has continued to plan & build wind & hydro (not all get approved & there certainly are environmental concerns). Even here you can't rely on wind though, you need base load generation.

There's even worries at the moment that the output of wind farms is over-estimated in planning assumptions - despite the effective capacity factor already being less than 20% in most cases..

tux900

peter3hg said:

On-shore wind doesn't take up much agricultural land at all. Look at the largest Euorpean on-shore wind farm in Romania ( https://goo.gl/maps/pTsb8J3cM41TdZqy5 ). The turbines take up a tiny % of the agricultural land and provide power for the equivalent of about a million homes.

I was about to say you've pasted the wrong URL as there was nothing of note there... until I eventually saw the turbines dotted around which is of course your point! 

michaels

This is such a red herring. 

When you buy milk in the supermarket you don't have a choice whether you pay the price of the lowest supplier or the highest, there is just the price.  Same for energy, just like any other market, the price moves to where supply and demand are in balance, regardless of the production cost for individual producers.

Due to the international situation some suppliers will make 'windfall' profits, these can be taxed.

chris_n

michaels said:

This is such a red herring. 

When you buy milk in the supermarket you don't have a choice whether you pay the price of the lowest supplier or the highest, there is just the price.  Same for energy, just like any other market, the price moves to where supply and demand are in balance, regardless of the production cost for individual producers.

Due to the international situation some suppliers will make 'windfall' profits, these can be taxed.

Take a trip to the supermarket and have a look at how many different packages of milk that are nominally the same you can buy. The range goes from the mainstream supermarket brand to specially selected expensive / exclusive / organic stuff. Don't actually know what those prices are in the UK atm but you certainty do have a choice how much you want to pay for your litre of milk.

ab1234567890abcdefgh

michaels said:

This is such a red herring. 

When you buy milk in the supermarket you don't have a choice whether you pay the price of the lowest supplier or the highest, there is just the price.  Same for energy, just like any other market, the price moves to where supply and demand are in balance, regardless of the production cost for individual producers.

Due to the international situation some suppliers will make 'windfall' profits, these can be taxed.

Yes, that's true.

However I would imagine that "the price" is based off the mix of different suppliers milks, so it's priced at an average of the costs of those milks + profit, not at the cost of the highest supplier + profit.

BikingBud

chris_n said:

michaels said:

This is such a red herring. 

When you buy milk in the supermarket you don't have a choice whether you pay the price of the lowest supplier or the highest, there is just the price.  Same for energy, just like any other market, the price moves to where supply and demand are in balance, regardless of the production cost for individual producers.

Due to the international situation some suppliers will make 'windfall' profits, these can be taxed.

Take a trip to the supermarket and have a look at how many different packages of milk that are nominally the same you can buy. The range goes from the mainstream supermarket brand to specially selected expensive / exclusive / organic stuff. Don't actually know what those prices are in the UK atm but you certainty do have a choice how much you want to pay for your litre of milk.

I could buy from the local milkman or any variety of shops all competing downwards on the price of the basics to entice us in and then sell other goodies. Or I could buy nut or other product based "milks" or indeed I could decide that i don't want to buy milk at all.

Not something you can easily do with energy.