Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

Martyn1981 · 11 November 2018 at 10:23AM

michaels wrote: »

These numbers make sense but currently we are still only talking short term storage not the sort of storage that covers a foggy November. If we don't have nukes does that mean we need more FF generation overall - IE more carbon overall? Does putting a realistic price on the extra CO2 help the economics of nuclear?

Further to my earlier reply, I thought it might be interesting to look at the scale of nuclear subsidies/costs again. So taking the HPC example, 3.2GW capacity and approx 2.95GW generation (92% cf) and a subsidy of £45bn, and see what else we could get for the money.

First let's match the average annual generation with off-shore wind, as I mentioned earlier, so at £64/MWh v's £100/MWh, and 15yrs v's 35yrs, and a wholesale price of £50/MWh we get:

2,950MW x £14 x 24hrs x 365days x 15yrs = £5.43bn

Next, that only matches nuclear on an average yearly basis, obviously wind generation will vary across days, weeks, months and years, so let's provide gas generation capacity of 3GW in case the wind stops, so that's approx £3bn for the plant [I won't include gas costs as any generation from the gas plants will be in excess of wind and the annual generation from HPC].

So we are up to £8.43bn v's £45bn.

Now, ideally we don't want to burn any gas, so let's add in some on-shore wind and PV to help spread the load. To match HPC (again) we will after allowing for cf need approx (2.95GW / 2) / 11%cf = 13.4GWp of PV and ((2.95GW / 2) / 25%cf = 5.9GW of on-shore wind.

Both technologies were around £1m/MW to deploy a few years back, but have fallen in costs, so let's go for £0.75m/MW, so an additional 13.4GWp of PV + 5.9GW of wind at £1bn/GW = £19.3bn. [Edit - Oops, that should be "at £0.75bn/GW = £14.5bn.]

[Note, I'm adding the cost of PV and on-shore wind, despite the subsidy being zero, because we're adding these in purely as a way to support the intermittency issues of RE.]

So now we are at £22.9bn v's £45bn

At this point we now have twice the annual generation of HPC, plus we have the gas generation to match HPC again on stand by if needed, and we have £22.1bn in change to pay for interconnectors to make the nations grid more robust, and short term storage for some of the peak generation periods, and for longer term storage such as hydrogen/methane production which ideally would be used to fuel the gas generation back up 'gennies' if needed.

I hope this has been fun, and apologise for waffling and thinking out loud, but perhaps that's the downside of the "just asking questions" tactic - the answers might strengthen the argument more than the questions can undermine it?

Martyn1981 · 11 November 2018 at 10:47AM

Martyn1981 wrote: »

BTW this November has been pretty grey yet we saw near record wind generation a day or so back.

Correction, apparently 9th November saw a new wind generation record of 14.5GW. :T

Coastalwatch · 11 November 2018 at 2:19PM

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Correction, apparently 9th November saw a new wind generation record of 14.5GW. :T

Just to compliment the growing energies being generated by renewable sources, rapidly expanding storage facilities appear to be under development. Two of which are detailed in the link below.
Once complete these will assist in supporting the grid in terms of storing excesses(when demand is low) and then, almost instantly, being brought on stream at times of peak demand. It may mean that the dependency and frequency of gas powered Peaker Plants being fired up will be marginally reduced.
When compared to grid demands of GW's of power then in themselves they are not huge storage facilities, but it would appear that Mart's vision of growing storage facilities are beginning to take shape. Not only that but all based upon investment and subsequent returns expected from it without subsidy from the government or you and I.

I wonder if any of those organisations seemingly threatened by the growing renewable industies have taken the opportunity to divert any funds across?

Gresham House has raised £100 million to drive its energy storage fund onto the London Stock Exchange, half the amount planned last month but enough to progress plans to acquire a 70MW seed portfolio......
.....The net proceeds of the issue are to be used to acquire 70MW of operational batteries, previously developed by Gresham House New Energy and Noriker Power, for a consideration of £57.22 million.
It will then set out to invest in an exclusive portfolio of projects, which last month consisted of 132MW combined capacity across four projects, ranging from 5MW to 49MW, however this has since risen to 182MW........

https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/gresham_house_raises_100_million_for_energy_storage_fund_to_enter_stock_exc

Martyn1981 · 11 November 2018 at 7:16PM

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Spending on nuclear takes money out of the subsidy pot that could provide storage in the form of overcapacity of cheap RE, short term storage (intra-day) and even chemical storage such as hydrogen or bio-gas which could be used to run gas generation when things are really bad, such as a foggy November. BTW this November has been pretty grey yet we saw near record wind generation a day or so back.

I thought these items from this week's Carbon Commentary fitted in quite well with this conversation since they show the possibilities of longer term storage and the reality regarding the argument that "RE will lead to more gas generation":-

1, Hydrogen into gas networks. A one year UK experiment will see hydrogen injected into the natural gas grid on the campus of a university. Most EU states allow some H2 to be added but none more than about 12%. Keele University will be allowed to take that up to 20% by volume (3% by mass) after a survey of the safety of appliances on campus. Hydrogen will be provided by an ITM electrolyser. At current average UK wholesale prices, the electrolyser will be generating hydrogen at approximately £70/MWh (€80/€90) compared to the wholesale gas price of about £23 (€26/$30). However high winds last night (8/9th November) brought the electricity price down to a level for three hours that would have made conversion of power to gas economically rational.

4, Gas ‘peaker’ plants. The rise of renewables was expected to produce a surge in the sales of small gas turbines, used for responding rapidly to power shortages. Recent results from GE, the world’s leader in gas turbines, show just how wrong this assumption was. The company has sold only 9 units worldwide so far this year, down from well over 40 in 2017. The market is now less than half what GE was predicting in April 2018. The whole global gas turbine market is sharply contracting but the rate of decline is fastest in the sector that was expected to be the most resilient. Instead, battery installations are growing more rapidly than forecast.

Quick thought - the viability of longer term but less efficient forms of storage when prices fall has a secondary benefit, since it helps to buoy up the minimum price that renewables can expect to sell at when supply is high and demand is low. This will almost certainly help them to reach economic viability, though we mustn't forget that storage also reduces the max price that RE can sell at since it will step in when a profit can be made. The result should be some flattening out of prices, that's too say the peaks and troughs will be less extreme ...... I think?

michaels · 11 November 2018 at 11:24PM

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Quick thought - the viability of longer term but less efficient forms of storage when prices fall has a secondary benefit, since it helps to buoy up the minimum price that renewables can expect to sell at when supply is high and demand is low. This will almost certainly help them to reach economic viability, though we mustn't forget that storage also reduces the max price that RE can sell at since it will step in when a profit can be made. The result should be some flattening out of prices, that's too say the peaks and troughs will be less extreme ...... I think?

Makes sense to me - think on a personal level, fitting a battery store would allow arbitrage between peak and off peak prices (for example on the Octopus time of day spot tariff) but if everyone tried to do this peak demand would be lower and so command a lower price and off-peak demand higher.

ASavvyBuyer · 12 November 2018 at 9:52AM

michaels wrote: »

Makes sense to me - think on a personal level, fitting a battery store would allow arbitrage between peak and off peak prices (for example on the Octopus time of day spot tariff) but if everyone tried to do this peak demand would be lower and so command a lower price and off-peak demand higher.

However, for a home battery, you need to consider that for every kWh you put into the battery costs an extra 5 to 10p (depending on the fully installed cost of the battery) on top of the off-peak rate you pay for it. Therefore, for example, if the off peak rate is 7.5p/kWh and the battery cost per unit is 7.5p/kWh, you are not actually making a saving on the average peak rate of 15p/kWh.

Martyn1981 · 14 November 2018 at 2:36PM

Lots of wind:

Scottish Wind Delivers Equivalent Of 98% Of Country’s October Electricity Demand

“What a month October proved to be, with wind powering on average 98 per cent of Scotland’s entire electricity demand for the month, and exceeding our total demand for a staggering 16 out of 31 days,” said Dr Sam Gardner, acting director at WWF Scotland.

So, gonna need some storage:

Energy Storage Is A $1.2 Trillion Global Investment Opportunity & Is Soaring In The UK

This is vitally apparent in the United Kingdom which, according to a report published by renewable energy trade body RenewableUK and the country’s Solar Trade Association, has all but exploded in size over the past seven years. Specifically, the report shows that planning applications in the UK have soared from 2 MW in 2012 to 6,874 MW in 2018.

michaels · 14 November 2018 at 2:51PM

ASavvyBuyer wrote: »

However, for a home battery, you need to consider that for every kWh you put into the battery costs an extra 5 to 10p (depending on the fully installed cost of the battery) on top of the off-peak rate you pay for it. Therefore, for example, if the off peak rate is 7.5p/kWh and the battery cost per unit is 7.5p/kWh, you are not actually making a saving on the average peak rate of 15p/kWh.

I was more thinking if you faced this sort of time of day price curve:

https://octopus.energy/agile/

then if you could use storage to timeshift any usage between 14:30 and 22:30 you might be quids in.

Martyn1981 · 14 November 2018 at 7:21PM

Bristol seems to pop up in quite a lot of news articles, particularly PPA PV deals operated by the Council, so this news makes sense:

Bristol plans to become carbon neutral by 2030

Bristol has declared a “climate emergency”, with the council unanimously backing a commitment to be carbon neutral by 2030 in an effort to avoid catastrophic climate breakdown.

The motion put forward by Green party councillor Carla Denyer and passed on Tuesday means the city has the most ambitious emissions targets of the UK’s core cities group – with radical policy implications in the coming years.

The move was triggered by a UN report last month which said the world has just 12 years left to avoid catastrophic climate breakdown.

Denyer said: “This is a fantastic day for Bristol and I’m delighted the council will be bringing forward its target for making the city carbon neutral by 2030.

silverwhistle · 14 November 2018 at 7:22PM

Seems that Sark might want to look at renewables, from an article in The Guardian:

Fifty years on, the relationship between SEL and the Sark authorities has soured. The new role of the independent Sark electricity price control commissioner was created in 2016 and he decided that islanders were paying too much for their electricity and ordered SEL to reduce its tariff from 66p/kWh to 52p.
But the chief executive of SEL, David Gordon-Brown, said the company cannot afford to make the cut. “The last thing I want to do is turn off the electricity just before Christmas but I am not going to have any choice,” he said.
He claimed SEL had already lost £65,000 this year because the island’s economy was struggling and businesses were closing, and he accused the Chief Pleas of wanting to force him to sell the company. “I’m not prepared to do that,” he said.

66p per kWh! He can't make money at that rate and complains about being forced to sell. Cake and eat it springs to mind. Presumably there must be covenants on the properties that prevent the installation of solar panels as at that unit rate a PV/battery solution would make sense.

Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free