The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain
Discussion
alangla said:
1.5GW of coal showing on Gridwatch just now, which is the most I've seen in a while. What stations is it that are left? Ratcliffe? Part of Drax? anything else?
There was a website that provided power station by station breakdown of generation but I can't find it. Harrumph.Evanivitch said:
alangla said:
1.5GW of coal showing on Gridwatch just now, which is the most I've seen in a while. What stations is it that are left? Ratcliffe? Part of Drax? anything else?
There was a website that provided power station by station breakdown of generation but I can't find it. Harrumph.https://terravolt.co.uk/uk-plant-data-beta/
Hill92 said:
Evanivitch said:
alangla said:
1.5GW of coal showing on Gridwatch just now, which is the most I've seen in a while. What stations is it that are left? Ratcliffe? Part of Drax? anything else?
There was a website that provided power station by station breakdown of generation but I can't find it. Harrumph.https://terravolt.co.uk/uk-plant-data-beta/
Hill92 said:
irc said:
Anthing in this idea? Stop/restrict electricity exports to Europe so that high demand there does not push up UK prices.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/13/the-u-k-can-sl...
That would be exceptionally short sighted and bloody stupid. But no surprise for those two authors.https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/13/the-u-k-can-sl...
Stupidity is only propelled by such stuff and those that read, share it.
irc said:
Anthing in this idea? Stop/restrict electricity exports to Europe so that high demand there does not push up UK prices.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/13/the-u-k-can-sl...
Utterly stupid idea, as has been pointed out before when it was suggested. https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/13/the-u-k-can-sl...
We've taken advantage of cheap electricity elsewhere for years, and will do again when the situation normalises. If we ban exports as soon as it gets more expensive here then it doesn't foster a very good relationship, and would be akin to shooting oneself in the foot halfway round a marathon because you have a mole on it.
(Under the rules of how European grids behave it would also be illegal, but never let the facts get in the way of a stupid idea!)
Condi said:
Utterly stupid idea, as has been pointed out before when it was suggested.
We've taken advantage of cheap electricity elsewhere for years, and will do again when the situation normalises. If we ban exports as soon as it gets more expensive here then it doesn't foster a very good relationship, and would be akin to shooting oneself in the foot halfway round a marathon because you have a mole on it.
(Under the rules of how European grids behave it would also be illegal, but never let the facts get in the way of a stupid idea!)
So do the same rules prevent Norway from restricting exports as they are considering?We've taken advantage of cheap electricity elsewhere for years, and will do again when the situation normalises. If we ban exports as soon as it gets more expensive here then it doesn't foster a very good relationship, and would be akin to shooting oneself in the foot halfway round a marathon because you have a mole on it.
(Under the rules of how European grids behave it would also be illegal, but never let the facts get in the way of a stupid idea!)
Anyway, rules can be changed.
skwdenyer said:
There’s also the silliness around THORP - we had one of only 2 reprocessing plants, and we shut ours down because of a downturn after the GFC. Pretty daft IMHO. Could we restart it?
I imagine restarting THORP would be a nightmare but possible, it's just been that the economic case has been so poor.Gary C said:
skwdenyer said:
There’s also the silliness around THORP - we had one of only 2 reprocessing plants, and we shut ours down because of a downturn after the GFC. Pretty daft IMHO. Could we restart it?
I imagine restarting THORP would be a nightmare but possible, it's just been that the economic case has been so poor.irc said:
Condi said:
Utterly stupid idea, as has been pointed out before when it was suggested.
We've taken advantage of cheap electricity elsewhere for years, and will do again when the situation normalises. If we ban exports as soon as it gets more expensive here then it doesn't foster a very good relationship, and would be akin to shooting oneself in the foot halfway round a marathon because you have a mole on it.
(Under the rules of how European grids behave it would also be illegal, but never let the facts get in the way of a stupid idea!)
So do the same rules prevent Norway from restricting exports as they are considering?We've taken advantage of cheap electricity elsewhere for years, and will do again when the situation normalises. If we ban exports as soon as it gets more expensive here then it doesn't foster a very good relationship, and would be akin to shooting oneself in the foot halfway round a marathon because you have a mole on it.
(Under the rules of how European grids behave it would also be illegal, but never let the facts get in the way of a stupid idea!)
Anyway, rules can be changed.
Can’t you concede on any points ? Even when those here willing to entertain the b
ks and give you learned viewpoints.As earlier - the domain name gives a clue
PushedDover said:
Hill92 said:
irc said:
Anthing in this idea? Stop/restrict electricity exports to Europe so that high demand there does not push up UK prices.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/13/the-u-k-can-sl...
That would be exceptionally short sighted and bloody stupid. But no surprise for those two authors.https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/13/the-u-k-can-sl...
Stupidity is only propelled by such stuff and those that read, share it.
irc said:
So do the same rules prevent Norway from restricting exports as they are considering?
Anyway, rules can be changed.
Exports can be curtailed in the event they put the system at risk; in the case of Norway their power comes from water - once it's gone, it's gone. You can't just ring the man upstairs and get more on request. Norway have very low water levels for this time of year and are concerned about running out before it is replenished next spring. It's not a price thing, its a "we might run out of electricity" thing. Our grid is not under stress, and our power comes from gas which we have plenty of. That said, it wouldn't surprise me to see exports curtailed over winter for system reasons, both from GB to Europe and from Europe to GB at various times. Anyway, rules can be changed.
Rules can be changed, even unilaterally if so, but you'll be the first person in 12 months time complaining that the French are not sending any cheap power here in the event they are changed now. You can't have the benefits of cheap imports without accepting there are times we will end up being the exporters.
It's like almost every "solution" proposed to solve the short term problems at the moment - will bring down prices in the short term, but means higher bills for longer instead.
EDIT - while on the subject of market intervention and stupid ideas, the EU have released proposals for reform of EU electricity markets to try and bring down prices, raise taxes for generators and cap the price of renewables and non thermal power. Government intervention in markets is never a good idea.
The EU said:
The EU plans a "deep and comprehensive" reform of the electricity market to cope with an energy crisis sparked by Russia's war in Ukraine, European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said Wednesday.
The measures include a cap on electricity producers' profits that would raise 140 billion euros ($140 billion) and "cushion" consumers from high prices, she said in her annual State of the European Union address.
Other steps involve rationing energy, temporary state aid and decoupling the prices of gas and electricity.
She also announced the creation of a new bank designed to spur investment of up to three billion euros in hydrogen as a Green alternative to fossil fuels.
The measures were in response to soaring energy costs as Europe painfully unhitches its decades-long dependency on Russian fossil fuels.
Sanctions on Russia and retaliation by Moscow by cutting off gas supplies have sent prices skyrocketing, leaving Europe to confront a difficult coming winter.
"Russia keeps on actively manipulating our energy market. They prefer to flare the gas than to deliver it," von der Leyen said.
"This market is not functioning any more."
- Gas reserves -
To partly prepare for a tough winter, the bloc has hastily stockpiled gas reserves, hitting 84 percent of capacity well ahead of an October deadline, von der Leyen said.
But the hole left by missing Russian supplies will still hurt.
The idea to tax profits by non-gas electricity providers is to divert the money to households and businesses to weather the situation.
"These companies are making revenues they never accounted for, they never even dreamt of," von der Leyen said.
"In these times it is wrong to receive extraordinary record profits benefiting from war and on the back of consumers," she said.
She said "major oil, gas and coal companies" would also "have to give a crisis contribution".
At the same time, von der Leyen highlighted that the EU is pivoting to "reliable suppliers", naming the United States, Norway and Algeria among them.
Longer-term, the EU wants greater reliance on renewable energies, von der Leyen said, hammering a key promise of her mandate. The hydrogen investment bank proposal is another step towards that future.
The measures include a cap on electricity producers' profits that would raise 140 billion euros ($140 billion) and "cushion" consumers from high prices, she said in her annual State of the European Union address.
Other steps involve rationing energy, temporary state aid and decoupling the prices of gas and electricity.
She also announced the creation of a new bank designed to spur investment of up to three billion euros in hydrogen as a Green alternative to fossil fuels.
The measures were in response to soaring energy costs as Europe painfully unhitches its decades-long dependency on Russian fossil fuels.
Sanctions on Russia and retaliation by Moscow by cutting off gas supplies have sent prices skyrocketing, leaving Europe to confront a difficult coming winter.
"Russia keeps on actively manipulating our energy market. They prefer to flare the gas than to deliver it," von der Leyen said.
"This market is not functioning any more."
- Gas reserves -
To partly prepare for a tough winter, the bloc has hastily stockpiled gas reserves, hitting 84 percent of capacity well ahead of an October deadline, von der Leyen said.
But the hole left by missing Russian supplies will still hurt.
The idea to tax profits by non-gas electricity providers is to divert the money to households and businesses to weather the situation.
"These companies are making revenues they never accounted for, they never even dreamt of," von der Leyen said.
"In these times it is wrong to receive extraordinary record profits benefiting from war and on the back of consumers," she said.
She said "major oil, gas and coal companies" would also "have to give a crisis contribution".
At the same time, von der Leyen highlighted that the EU is pivoting to "reliable suppliers", naming the United States, Norway and Algeria among them.
Longer-term, the EU wants greater reliance on renewable energies, von der Leyen said, hammering a key promise of her mandate. The hydrogen investment bank proposal is another step towards that future.
Edited by Condi on Wednesday 14th September 18:42
dickymint said:
PushedDover said:
Hill92 said:
irc said:
Anthing in this idea? Stop/restrict electricity exports to Europe so that high demand there does not push up UK prices.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/13/the-u-k-can-sl...
That would be exceptionally short sighted and bloody stupid. But no surprise for those two authors.https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/13/the-u-k-can-sl...
Stupidity is only propelled by such stuff and those that read, share it.
Like the post made recently of some chump here cutting and pasting how our offshore windfarms are all Norwegian owned and posted a link, I knew was b
ks. No need to read.Same in this instance. Saw the post. Saw the initial responses from some posters who have known their onions, saw the URL.
Lo and Behold : b
ks again.TGCOTF-dewey said:
Talksteer said:
Gary C said:
Cobnapint said:
irc said:
We already know large scale nuclear works. We did it. France did it as well. We need to sort out the design and regulation. Then as someone on here said start a building programme so expertise is built up and maintained for at least a couple of decades or longer.
Far too sensible....Even though I work in the nuclear industry and am a supporter, we still haven't answered the spent fuel storage issue and we probably should before we ramp up nuclear generation.
There is plenty of stuff we put in land fill which will kill you if you eat it and never decays.
The nuclear industry should start explaining to the public how it is spending billions to avoid the slight chance of giving a banana dose to someone in a thousand years.
Not saying you're wrong, just curious. What are the dose rates?
After 500-1000 years all that is left in spent fuel is Americium, Plutonium and Uranium. None of which are particularly mobile or accumulated by the human body. You can handle them with gloves on and the shielding required to get gammas down to negligible is very thin.
From a safety perspective any adult could be trusted to handle these poisons at home in the same way that you can buy leathal poisons to clean things with zero training and safeguards. I'm not seriously suggesting that, just putting the hazard to health in context.
I think a more reasonable perspective would be to store the spent fuel in casks for 500 years and then let future generation decide where to store these now minimal hazards.
If society has collapsed the casks will be safe from interference anyway.
Talksteer said:
The safety case of GDFs is based on getting the radiation down to the same as for uranium ore. There is no particular science behind that.
After 500-1000 years all that is left in spent fuel is Americium, Plutonium and Uranium. None of which are particularly mobile or accumulated by the human body. You can handle them with gloves on and the shielding required to get gammas down to negligible is very thin.
From a safety perspective any adult could be trusted to handle these poisons at home in the same way that you can buy leathal poisons to clean things with zero training and safeguards. I'm not seriously suggesting that, just putting the hazard to health in context.
I think a more reasonable perspective would be to store the spent fuel in casks for 500 years and then let future generation decide where to store these now minimal hazards.
If society has collapsed the casks will be safe from interference anyway.
Thanks. After 500-1000 years all that is left in spent fuel is Americium, Plutonium and Uranium. None of which are particularly mobile or accumulated by the human body. You can handle them with gloves on and the shielding required to get gammas down to negligible is very thin.
From a safety perspective any adult could be trusted to handle these poisons at home in the same way that you can buy leathal poisons to clean things with zero training and safeguards. I'm not seriously suggesting that, just putting the hazard to health in context.
I think a more reasonable perspective would be to store the spent fuel in casks for 500 years and then let future generation decide where to store these now minimal hazards.
If society has collapsed the casks will be safe from interference anyway.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff