The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain

[PRTVR]

Ali G said:

A bit more background on the Hitach-GE ABW reactor proposed for UK deployment. Note that it is not guaranteed to go ahead, since there will have to be many more rounds of political ping-pong to be played other than design sign off in principle.

http://euanmearns.com/the-hitachi-advanced-boiling...

Interestingly a 39 month build time, although I would imagine this is not in the UK, I couldn't see anything getting built in the UK that quick.

[Gary C]

Evanivitch said:

Gary C said:

But, it would have been cheaper to stick with coal.

Would it? We have plenty of it left true, but who's going to approve more opencast? Deep pits are increasingly uneconomical compared to imports, but that raises the question of fuel security of relying on imports.

Cheaper rather than cheap, deep pits were a know quantity, and easy tech, increasingly mechanised and in the future it would have been robotised.

Cheap imports killed the deep pits, and the cost would be enormous to reopen a lot of them now, but I still think we could have continued at a cost less than the subsidy to get wind up and running.

So we have made a decision to decarbonise,

[LongQ]

Gary C said:

Evanivitch said:

Gary C said:

But, it would have been cheaper to stick with coal.

Would it? We have plenty of it left true, but who's going to approve more opencast? Deep pits are increasingly uneconomical compared to imports, but that raises the question of fuel security of relying on imports.

Cheaper rather than cheap, deep pits were a know quantity, and easy tech, increasingly mechanised and in the future it would have been robotised.

Cheap imports killed the deep pits, and the cost would be enormous to reopen a lot of them now, but I still think we could have continued at a cost less than the subsidy to get wind up and running.

So we have made a decision to decarbonise,

There are quite a few who would suggest that we have not de-carbonised but rather exported the use to other parts of the world.

That situation is likely to pertain a while longer - say 20 years or so - by which time who can guess how things might look globally?

[PRTVR]

LongQ said:

There are quite a few who would suggest that we have not de-carbonised but rather exported the use to other parts of the world.

That situation is likely to pertain a while longer - say 20 years or so - by which time who can guess how things might look globally?

Along with the much vaunted interconnections to Europe that will allow us to secretly feed on coal produced electricity, Germany sells its excessive coal produced electricity to France and Holland, we buy electricity from France and Holland, that's the wonderful thing with electricity,you do not know how it was made.

https://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/fr...

[turbobloke]

It's like recycling déja vu all over again.

UK landfill as ballast on a slow boat to China.

Green codswallop - there's usually somebody who'll swallow it.

[Toltec]

turbobloke said:

It's like recycling déja vu all over again.

UK landfill as ballast on a slow boat to China.

Green codswallop - there's usually somebody who'll swallow it.

It is more an exercise in creative accounting than being green, I had a quick look and could not find anything on how China disposes of the material that cannot be recycled.

[rolando]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Freebie for you that like a laugh :

http://renews.biz/109705/turbine-collapses-in-germ...




Vestas is sending technicians to the site of a collapsed wind turbine in Germany to determine the manufacturer and model of what is thought to be an old machine.
The turbine collapsed on 3 January during a storm in Volksdorf municipality in Schaumburg county, some 40km west of Hannover.
Nienburg police said that during the storm a blade from the 70-metre tall structure broke, followed by the collapse of the tower at about 1.30pm local time.
“We suspect the blade pitch control did not respond to the wind speeds,” the police said.
No one was hurt during the incident.

Only point I would make is that it is an old turbine - hardly a modern cutting edge job

Bloody good job it didn't fall onto a road like these could (built in the wrong place).

Yes, I know it's an old story but, despite everything, the planners have said that it's safe enough where it is. I hope they are never proved wrong.

PS Always enjoy seeing the white elephants fall in a safe place, of course.

[Ali G]

Toltec said:

turbobloke said:

It's like recycling déja vu all over again.

UK landfill as ballast on a slow boat to China.

Green codswallop - there's usually somebody who'll swallow it.

It is more an exercise in creative accounting than being green, I had a quick look and could not find anything on how China disposes of the material that cannot be recycled.

Further sound short term non-thinking from the devine UK leadership.

China is calling a halt to sorting our sh*t.

https://news.sky.com/story/china-rejects-tonnes-of...

Some Punter said:

However, China has announced that it will stop taking the UK's scrap from January and those in the industry are warning that the Government has no plan or infrastructure to deal with the situation.

Sailing up the Yangtze may not be as persuasive these days.

[turbobloke]

Summary from a weekend news item on the USA deep chill: to keep New England's lights on, the only hope lies in fossil fuels.
On Monday (last week) the United States burned more natural gas than on any day in its history. And as one technical magazine (Utility) explained, no source of electricity is likely to prove more vital to keeping the US lit and warm through the freeze than diesel.

Whatever happened to the 'unreliables of the future' when need is greatest?

[MYOB]

turbobloke said:

Summary from a weekend news item on the USA deep chill: to keep New England's lights on, the only hope lies in fossil fuels.
On Monday (last week) the United States burned more natural gas than on any day in its history. And as one technical magazine (Utility) explained, no source of electricity is likely to prove more vital to keeping the US lit and warm through the freeze than diesel.

Whatever happened to the 'unreliables of the future' when need is greatest?

Hence the recognition that we shouldn't be reliant on one single source. No-one is denying fossil fuel has a part to play.

[LongQ]

MYOB said:

turbobloke said:

Summary from a weekend news item on the USA deep chill: to keep New England's lights on, the only hope lies in fossil fuels.
On Monday (last week) the United States burned more natural gas than on any day in its history. And as one technical magazine (Utility) explained, no source of electricity is likely to prove more vital to keeping the US lit and warm through the freeze than diesel.

Whatever happened to the 'unreliables of the future' when need is greatest?

Hence the recognition that we shouldn't be reliant on one single source. No-one is denying fossil fuel has a part to play.

The challenge is whether the cost of duplicating sources and systems to cover all eventualities is affordable at a price the local economies can support.

The answer to the question - and indeed the mix of technologies that may be viable - is not the same worldwide or even on a fairly local basis in many situations.

[turbobloke]

MYOB said:

turbobloke said:

Summary from a weekend news item on the USA deep chill: to keep New England's lights on, the only hope lies in fossil fuels.
On Monday (last week) the United States burned more natural gas than on any day in its history. And as one technical magazine (Utility) explained, no source of electricity is likely to prove more vital to keeping the US lit and warm through the freeze than diesel.

Whatever happened to the 'unreliables of the future' when need is greatest?

Hence the recognition that we shouldn't be reliant on one single source. No-one is denying fossil fuel has a part to play.

Not sure that the UK gov't and others under communal greenspell agree with that, decarbonisation means what it says to the most ardent politico greenblobbers. They are under the spell and remain truly clueless as a result.

[MYOB]

LongQ said:

MYOB said:

turbobloke said:

Summary from a weekend news item on the USA deep chill: to keep New England's lights on, the only hope lies in fossil fuels.
On Monday (last week) the United States burned more natural gas than on any day in its history. And as one technical magazine (Utility) explained, no source of electricity is likely to prove more vital to keeping the US lit and warm through the freeze than diesel.

Whatever happened to the 'unreliables of the future' when need is greatest?

Hence the recognition that we shouldn't be reliant on one single source. No-one is denying fossil fuel has a part to play.

The challenge is whether the cost of duplicating sources and systems to cover all eventualities is affordable at a price the local economies can support.

The answer to the question - and indeed the mix of technologies that may be viable - is not the same worldwide or even on a fairly local basis in many situations.

Well yes of course. Goes without saying.

[Blue Oval84]

MYOB said:

Well yes of course. Goes without saying.

Not to some!

[alangla]

Worth mentioning that Gridwatch seems to be short of cash - http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/donate.html

[Brother D]

alangla said:

Worth mentioning that Gridwatch seems to be short of cash - http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/donate.html

I donated - I've used the site quite a bit over the years and found it really useful

[rolando]

Brother D said:

I donated - I've used the site quite a bit over the years and found it really useful

Me too.
By the way, our wonderful wind generating fleet is currently generating but 2.17GW from its 17.7GW installed capacity. At the same time we are generating 29.35GW by burning stuff (coal, gas, wood etc.) and thereby emitting shed loads of greenhouse gases and other pollution so hated by the green blob.
The rest of the 43.16GW demand is being met from nuclear and hydro plus pumped storage and imports from unspecified sources of generation. Solar is producing sod all as the sun isn't up yet.

[rolando]

Greenpi$$ forced to stop running ad campaign peddling bogus wind power message to politicians
Hope the ASA enforce the decision.

[rscott]

rolando said:

Greenpi$$ forced to stop running ad campaign peddling bogus wind power message to politicians
Hope the ASA enforce the decision.

Do you specialise in posting old news? This was mentioned back in October and the ASA verdict posted last year.

Could that site you linked to be more melodramatic :-

green-watch said:

That Greenpeace was able to away with this sort of thing scot-free is infuriating enough, but the fact that they were able to make these claims directly to British lawmakers for so long proves that there’s something seriously wrong with how the Green Lobby operates.

When it was actually just a pressure group running an advert which turns out to be inaccurate and gets reprimanded.

If they had any sense, Greenpeace could have a 'political party' offshoot, just for running these adverts, which would then be exempt from the ASA ( https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul... ).

[Ali G]

There is a Green party is there not?

So representative of public opinion that it has a single MP.