Didcot Powerstation Fire - Looks bad :(

[hidetheelephants]

Fizpop said:

That wind is creating non-polluting, fuel-less generation - how on earth can that be 'very poor'?

It isn't non-polluting or fuel-less; this is nonsense promulgated by the green lobby. For every windmill there is a spinning reserve back-up, which burns either coal or gas.

[phumy]

hidetheelephants said:

Fizpop said:

That wind is creating non-polluting, fuel-less generation - how on earth can that be 'very poor'?

It isn't non-polluting or fuel-less; this is nonsense promulgated by the green lobby. For every windmill there is a spinning reserve back-up, which burns either coal or gas.

The spinning reserve back up isnt sitting there at no load waiting to get synched to the grid, spinning reserve is already synced and probably supplying anywhere between 60 and 90% of its declared capacity, so when the wind drops or stop they just load up the plants that can increase up to their base load. The order in which they increase load will be the most efficient plants first. All plants have to declare their selves to grid on a daily basis and one of the dec's is its efficiency and then capacity, then availabilty (how long it takes from start up to synch), then from synch to full load (ramp time). There are also many other factors taken into account on this "league table" that grid uses to call the next plant on. So its not just a wet finger in the air and guess which is next on load or ramped up.

[PRTVR]

phumy said:

hidetheelephants said:

Fizpop said:

That wind is creating non-polluting, fuel-less generation - how on earth can that be 'very poor'?

It isn't non-polluting or fuel-less; this is nonsense promulgated by the green lobby. For every windmill there is a spinning reserve back-up, which burns either coal or gas.

The spinning reserve back up isnt sitting there at no load waiting to get synched to the grid, spinning reserve is already synced and probably supplying anywhere between 60 and 90% of its declared capacity, so when the wind drops or stop they just load up the plants that can increase up to their base load. The order in which they increase load will be the most efficient plants first. All plants have to declare their selves to grid on a daily basis and one of the dec's is its efficiency and then capacity, then availabilty (how long it takes from start up to synch), then from synch to full load (ramp time). There are also many other factors taken into account on this "league table" that grid uses to call the next plant on. So its not just a wet finger in the air and guess which is next on load or ramped up.

All the power generated by wind has to have a 100% back up for the times the wind is to strong or to little, we are paying through the nose for windmills along with the back up,wind cannot be used for base load because it is unpredictable, it is also not controllable, so no use for high demand times, there is a reason windmills were replaced as a means of producing power.
Do some research into the making of the windmills, the pollution in China is terrible, but that's OK because its not here,then there are all the birds that are getting killed,windmills are not as green as some people think.

Its interesting that with all the problems with power production in the UK, along with the prospect of power cuts, not once have I heard anybody report that its a good job we have so much renewable energy, why do you think that is?

[phumy]

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

hidetheelephants said:

Fizpop said:

That wind is creating non-polluting, fuel-less generation - how on earth can that be 'very poor'?

It isn't non-polluting or fuel-less; this is nonsense promulgated by the green lobby. For every windmill there is a spinning reserve back-up, which burns either coal or gas.

The spinning reserve back up isnt sitting there at no load waiting to get synched to the grid, spinning reserve is already synced and probably supplying anywhere between 60 and 90% of its declared capacity, so when the wind drops or stop they just load up the plants that can increase up to their base load. The order in which they increase load will be the most efficient plants first. All plants have to declare their selves to grid on a daily basis and one of the dec's is its efficiency and then capacity, then availabilty (how long it takes from start up to synch), then from synch to full load (ramp time). There are also many other factors taken into account on this "league table" that grid uses to call the next plant on. So its not just a wet finger in the air and guess which is next on load or ramped up.

All the power generated by wind has to have a 100% back up for the times the wind is to strong or to little, we are paying through the nose for windmills along with the back up,wind cannot be used for base load because it is unpredictable, it is also not controllable, so no use for high demand times, there is a reason windmills were replaced as a means of producing power.
Do some research into the making of the windmills, the pollution in China is terrible, but that's OK because its not here,then there are all the birds that are getting killed,windmills are not as green as some people think.

Its interesting that with all the problems with power production in the UK, along with the prospect of power cuts, not once have I heard anybody report that its a good job we have so much renewable energy, why do you think that is?

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

[V8 Fettler]

Fizpop said:

turbobloke said:

That would appear to focus on the benefits while not looking too closely at the costs, or the fact that from your numbers more than 50% of the resource has cost a lot and is costing a lot but doing nothing. It's very poor. Then we wait for a freezing and calm winter snap and see how many pensioners' lives are lost or saved by wind.

Do you think that any sector of the UK generation fleet runs at full capacity at all times? Our make up is hugely diverse and at the moment wind is contributing 17% of that generation from around 45% of installed capacity whilst the base load is coming from around 32% of the coal fired fleet. That wind is creating non-polluting, fuel-less generation - how on earth can that be 'very poor'?

It's pretty alarmist to think that wind power will kill pensioners. There is adequate CCG and other quickly dispatchable generation types to cover the eventuality you describe, not to mention base load coal and nuclear generators and the interconnectors.

On the coldest, darkest winter's evening, when the frost is thick, the air is still and demand for electricity is at its highest, how much electricity will the windmills and solar be contributing to the grid?

It's the high cost of electricity that kills pensioners, primarily due to an incoherent energy policy, part of which is the drive to wind and solar.

There are lessons to be learnt .... from the Germans. More coal-fired Drax please.

[phumy]

V8 Fettler said:

Fizpop said:

turbobloke said:

That would appear to focus on the benefits while not looking too closely at the costs, or the fact that from your numbers more than 50% of the resource has cost a lot and is costing a lot but doing nothing. It's very poor. Then we wait for a freezing and calm winter snap and see how many pensioners' lives are lost or saved by wind.

Do you think that any sector of the UK generation fleet runs at full capacity at all times? Our make up is hugely diverse and at the moment wind is contributing 17% of that generation from around 45% of installed capacity whilst the base load is coming from around 32% of the coal fired fleet. That wind is creating non-polluting, fuel-less generation - how on earth can that be 'very poor'?

It's pretty alarmist to think that wind power will kill pensioners. There is adequate CCG and other quickly dispatchable generation types to cover the eventuality you describe, not to mention base load coal and nuclear generators and the interconnectors.

On the coldest, darkest winter's evening, when the frost is thick, the air is still and demand for electricity is at its highest, how much electricity will the windmills and solar be contributing to the grid?

It's the high cost of electricity that kills pensioners, primarily due to an incoherent energy policy, part of which is the drive to wind and solar.

There are lessons to be learnt .... from the Germans. More coal-fired Drax please.

And the enegry policy is all driven, or linked to the Kyoto Protocol

[PRTVR]

phumy said:

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

No argument with what you say,but spinning reserve for wind and solar has to be 100%, we do not have spinning reserve at that level for any other types of generation,
Every windmill that is added to the grid requires backup that's a fact you can't get away from.

[phumy]

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

No argument with what you say,but spinning reserve for wind and solar has to be 100%, we do not have spinning reserve at that level for any other types of generation,
Every windmill that is added to the grid requires backup that's a fact you can't get away from.

I would be really interested in seeing where you got this infomation from about this 100% spinning reserve for wind and solar and am willing to learn something new if you can point me in the right direction.

[RemyMartin]

McWigglebum4th said:

Oh tecnical learny stuff

I always thought they were just big hollow concrete tubes

Though why they build power stations away from the sea is a mystery to me

Because desalination is fooking expensive.

[PRTVR]

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

No argument with what you say,but spinning reserve for wind and solar has to be 100%, we do not have spinning reserve at that level for any other types of generation,
Every windmill that is added to the grid requires backup that's a fact you can't get away from.

I would be really interested in seeing where you got this infomation from about this 100% spinning reserve for wind and solar and am willing to learn something new if you can point me in the right direction.

Could you run a grid of any size on wind power alone? What % back up would you need.

[phumy]

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

No argument with what you say,but spinning reserve for wind and solar has to be 100%, we do not have spinning reserve at that level for any other types of generation,
Every windmill that is added to the grid requires backup that's a fact you can't get away from.

I would be really interested in seeing where you got this infomation from about this 100% spinning reserve for wind and solar and am willing to learn something new if you can point me in the right direction.

Could you run a grid of any size on wind power alone? What % back up would you need.

Show me where it is stated that 100% back up in spinning reserve is required 24 hrs a day for wind and solar and i will agree with you, if anywhere it will be stated in the national Grid Operating Policy. So theres one place you can look for it, if of course its there

[phumy]

RemyMartin said:

McWigglebum4th said:

Oh tecnical learny stuff

I always thought they were just big hollow concrete tubes

Though why they build power stations away from the sea is a mystery to me

Because desalination is fooking expensive.

Not sure what you are thinking of but cooling water (Cooling towers) have nothing to do with desalination, cooling water can be either, fresh water, brackish water or sea water, it doesnt need to be desalinated.

[PRTVR]

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

No argument with what you say,but spinning reserve for wind and solar has to be 100%, we do not have spinning reserve at that level for any other types of generation,
Every windmill that is added to the grid requires backup that's a fact you can't get away from.

I would be really interested in seeing where you got this infomation from about this 100% spinning reserve for wind and solar and am willing to learn something new if you can point me in the right direction.

Could you run a grid of any size on wind power alone? What % back up would you need.

Show me where it is stated that 100% back up in spinning reserve is required 24 hrs a day for wind and solar and i will agree with you, if anywhere it will be stated in the national Grid Operating Policy. So theres one place you can look for it, if of course its there

You appear quite knowledgeable on the subject, could you please answer my question about a wind powered grid. Thanks.

[phumy]

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

No argument with what you say,but spinning reserve for wind and solar has to be 100%, we do not have spinning reserve at that level for any other types of generation,
Every windmill that is added to the grid requires backup that's a fact you can't get away from.

I would be really interested in seeing where you got this infomation from about this 100% spinning reserve for wind and solar and am willing to learn something new if you can point me in the right direction.

Could you run a grid of any size on wind power alone? What % back up would you need.

Show me where it is stated that 100% back up in spinning reserve is required 24 hrs a day for wind and solar and i will agree with you, if anywhere it will be stated in the national Grid Operating Policy. So theres one place you can look for it, if of course its there

You appear quite knowledgeable on the subject, could you please answer my question about a wind powered grid. Thanks.

I could ask you to answer mine, but I see you have swerved away from answering my question of where can see where its stated that there should be 100% spinning reserve for all wind and solar generated power.

To answer yours, it would be extremely difficult to run a stable grid using wind power alone, note the word stable, due to the wind not being constant. So if you had a grid of only wind power, you wouldnt have a back up would you?

Now, you answer mine, where is it stated about this 100% back up for wind power

[PRTVR]

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

No argument with what you say,but spinning reserve for wind and solar has to be 100%, we do not have spinning reserve at that level for any other types of generation,
Every windmill that is added to the grid requires backup that's a fact you can't get away from.

I would be really interested in seeing where you got this infomation from about this 100% spinning reserve for wind and solar and am willing to learn something new if you can point me in the right direction.

Could you run a grid of any size on wind power alone? What % back up would you need.

Show me where it is stated that 100% back up in spinning reserve is required 24 hrs a day for wind and solar and i will agree with you, if anywhere it will be stated in the national Grid Operating Policy. So theres one place you can look for it, if of course its there

You appear quite knowledgeable on the subject, could you please answer my question about a wind powered grid. Thanks.

I could ask you to answer mine, but I see you have swerved away from answering my question of where can see where its stated that there should be 100% spinning reserve for all wind and solar generated power.

To answer yours, it would be extremely difficult to run a stable grid using wind power alone, note the word stable, due to the wind not being constant. So if you had a grid of only wind power, you wouldnt have a back up would you?

Now, you answer mine, where is it stated about this 100% back up for wind power

I think you have answered your own question.

[phumy]

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

PRTVR said:

phumy said:

Even if there was no such things as windmills and wind turbines had never ever been thought of and never invented there would still be spinning reserve as there was in the 70`s and 80`s when i first joined the electricity supply industry. Spinning reserve is nothing new, it has always been there so you have always been paying through the nose for it. Its the insurance for a safe and good supply when a big incident occurs and a large power plant trips and you might lose around 2000MW in one hit, then the spinning reserve is called to load up immediately to fill in the loss.

No argument with what you say,but spinning reserve for wind and solar has to be 100%, we do not have spinning reserve at that level for any other types of generation,
Every windmill that is added to the grid requires backup that's a fact you can't get away from.

I would be really interested in seeing where you got this infomation from about this 100% spinning reserve for wind and solar and am willing to learn something new if you can point me in the right direction.

Could you run a grid of any size on wind power alone? What % back up would you need.

Show me where it is stated that 100% back up in spinning reserve is required 24 hrs a day for wind and solar and i will agree with you, if anywhere it will be stated in the national Grid Operating Policy. So theres one place you can look for it, if of course its there

You appear quite knowledgeable on the subject, could you please answer my question about a wind powered grid. Thanks.

I could ask you to answer mine, but I see you have swerved away from answering my question of where can see where its stated that there should be 100% spinning reserve for all wind and solar generated power.

To answer yours, it would be extremely difficult to run a stable grid using wind power alone, note the word stable, due to the wind not being constant. So if you had a grid of only wind power, you wouldnt have a back up would you?

Now, you answer mine, where is it stated about this 100% back up for wind power

I think you have answered your own question.

That was not my question, my question was, where did you get this magical figure of 100% back up, show us your information and how you derived it? You cant because you keep dodging it, you swerve away from it, you come back with another question.

The National Grid will have strong links and ties with the meterological office to watch the weather as they do their daily operating running of the grid, as the effect of the weather has an effect upon the grid demand. They will be able to see weather fronts coming in, warm weather and winds approching all the different wind farms around the country and they will have some idea on which ones will reduce power and which one will increase, its a balancing game, a game of risk. How often have you know the wind over the whole of the counrty to drop or stop (in your instance) imediately at exactly the same time? The weather just doesnt happen like that and thats why they wont need 100% back up (spinning reserve).

Anyway i have a power plant to run, im spending far too long on here trying to edumacate you lot, any other questions i will answer later.

[FiF]

phumy said:

RemyMartin said:

McWigglebum4th said:

Oh tecnical learny stuff

I always thought they were just big hollow concrete tubes

Though why they build power stations away from the sea is a mystery to me

Because desalination is fooking expensive.

Not sure what you are thinking of but cooling water (Cooling towers) have nothing to do with desalination, cooling water can be either, fresh water, brackish water or sea water, it doesnt need to be desalinated.

Yep it gives you different problems to be addressed in material selection at the design stage but nothing insurmountable and whilst it may increase some costs not especially significant ones in the overall project build and running costs.

[226bhp]

FiF said:

phumy said:

RemyMartin said:

McWigglebum4th said:

Oh tecnical learny stuff

I always thought they were just big hollow concrete tubes

Though why they build power stations away from the sea is a mystery to me

Because desalination is fooking expensive.

Not sure what you are thinking of but cooling water (Cooling towers) have nothing to do with desalination, cooling water can be either, fresh water, brackish water or sea water, it doesnt need to be desalinated.

Yep it gives you different problems to be addressed in material selection at the design stage but nothing insurmountable and whilst it may increase some costs not especially significant ones in the overall project build and running costs.

I can imagine salt water being problematic in that as the water evaporates off it leaves the salt behind, potentially clogging the waterways up perhaps?

It will have been thought about before, but why are we wasting heat energy in this way; Just cooling off water and letting the steam rise out of the top into the atmosphere? Why can't it be harnessed and used?

[Scuffers]

226bhp said:

It will have been thought about before, but why are we wasting heat energy in this way; Just cooling off water and letting the steam rise out of the top into the atmosphere? Why can't it be harnessed and used?

that's been talked about and played with for decades.

the issues are really all about the costs and difficulties of transferring said heat to where you want it.

Birmingham have been doing various schemes for years, trouble is on the scale of a power station, it's just not economic, the current best systems are smaller CHP systems where the heat is used on the same site.

this is one of Birmingham's schemes

http://chp.decc.gov.uk/cms/district-heating-birmin...

[FiF]

226bhp said:

FiF said:

phumy said:

RemyMartin said:

McWigglebum4th said:

Oh tecnical learny stuff

I always thought they were just big hollow concrete tubes

Though why they build power stations away from the sea is a mystery to me

Because desalination is fooking expensive.

Not sure what you are thinking of but cooling water (Cooling towers) have nothing to do with desalination, cooling water can be either, fresh water, brackish water or sea water, it doesnt need to be desalinated.

Yep it gives you different problems to be addressed in material selection at the design stage but nothing insurmountable and whilst it may increase some costs not especially significant ones in the overall project build and running costs.

I can imagine salt water being problematic in that as the water evaporates off it leaves the salt behind, potentially clogging the waterways up perhaps?

It will have been thought about before, but why are we wasting heat energy in this way; Just cooling off water and letting the steam rise out of the top into the atmosphere? Why can't it be harnessed and used?

It's not unusual to use saltwater cooling across the world the problems are known and as a part of overall build and running costs aren't that significant.

It all depends upon the local conditions and the solutions have to be tailored to that. For example one PS in Queensland is on the coast and draws cooling seawater from an area of mangrove swamps. The presence of mangroves gives rise to an increase in H2S, which gives corrosion problems that you don't face elsewhere. So you pick different materials, more expensive in purchase price, and slightly more costly in fabrication, but it basically works. The PS a couple of hours inland, built near an opencast, uses water piped from Lake Awoonga and doesn't have the same problems. But for them the cost of the pumping and pipework rom that lake and their own reservoir are costs that the first PS doesn't have.

On the subject of additional cost it has been argued that the very high thermal efficiencies claimed by the Danes for their PF fired thermal plants is partly down to the very cool cooling water from the Baltic. This gives the possibility to extract a fraction more energy from the cycle and push up efficiency by a half a percent. That sort of increase in efficiency could save a station like Drax over 60,000 tonnes of coal per year. Not an insignificant amount in financial terms..