The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain
Discussion
RobDickinson said:
PRTVR said:
But is not the problem with batteries the fact that they have a relatively short life, they will need to be replaced in 5 to 10 years at considerable cost and this cost is ongoing as long as they are in use.
But hey it's only money we all like higher electricity prices don't we ?
who says they'll need to be replaced? thats unlikely, these are not your phone batteries.But hey it's only money we all like higher electricity prices don't we ?
PRTVR said:
Harry Biscuit said:
Battery storage has legs but is still in its infancy & is eye-wateringly expensive, comparatively speaking. Well, the high-tech stuff is.
But is not the problem with batteries the fact that they have a relatively short life, they will need to be replaced in 5 to 10 years at considerable cost and this cost is ongoing as long as they are in use.But hey it's only money we all like higher electricity prices don't we ?
You will see the deployment of these in the coming years & they will become a natural part of the distribution infrastructure. But not necessarily at base load level, more localised to the downstream parts of the network.
I won't comment on the economics of them outside of micro-generation because I don't have any direct experience. However economic viability changes when costs of technology fall (as they inevitably do) & often in the absence of alternative options.
I don't see it as a panacea though & base load generation with constant, perpetual output will never not be needed. Well, until we morph into troglodytes.
Harry Biscuit said:
PRTVR said:
Harry Biscuit said:
Battery storage has legs but is still in its infancy & is eye-wateringly expensive, comparatively speaking. Well, the high-tech stuff is.
But is not the problem with batteries the fact that they have a relatively short life, they will need to be replaced in 5 to 10 years at considerable cost and this cost is ongoing as long as they are in use.But hey it's only money we all like higher electricity prices don't we ?
You will see the deployment of these in the coming years & they will become a natural part of the distribution infrastructure. But not necessarily at base load level, more localised to the downstream parts of the network.
I won't comment on the economics of them outside of micro-generation because I don't have any direct experience. However economic viability changes when costs of technology fall (as they inevitably do) & often in the absence of alternative options.
I don't see it as a panacea though & base load generation with constant, perpetual output will never not be needed. Well, until we morph into troglodytes.
PRTVR said:
The problem I see is that we are trying to fix a problem now with that we do not need to fix, the amount of CO2 put out by our few coal fired power stations is insignificant in the grand scheme of things, I also have concerns over security of supply for gas and the interconnection, unfortunately in the distant past I had to attend a course on anti terrorism, It was terrifying the predictions for the break down of society with an interruption to electricity supply , but it's ok I have my cave picked out.
There is a problem that needs to be fixed. The power infrastructure at MV & LV will not support the way which power use is going.Need drives innovation & the pace of change. Solutions at one level get adapted to meet other needs.
The evolution of LED as a light source has been astonishing, many laughed but here it is. At what cost? Huge investment, but are we better off? Absolutely.
Looking at central, base-load power generation alone for all but the very short-term needs is not particularly useful in the grand scheme of things.
Efficiency, environment & conservation of resources should be at or near the top of the list for the engineering that delivers it.
Undoubtedly, the drive for renewables has been somewhat hijacked by the political animal & that has led to much cynicism & bun-fighting. But it's a valid platform that has it's place.
What does appal me though is the utter dog's breakfast the authorities seem to have made of the programme for Nuclear provision.
Harry Biscuit said:
PRTVR said:
The problem I see is that we are trying to fix a problem now with that we do not need to fix, the amount of CO2 put out by our few coal fired power stations is insignificant in the grand scheme of things, I also have concerns over security of supply for gas and the interconnection, unfortunately in the distant past I had to attend a course on anti terrorism, It was terrifying the predictions for the break down of society with an interruption to electricity supply , but it's ok I have my cave picked out.
There is a problem that needs to be fixed. The power infrastructure at MV & LV will not support the way which power use is going.Need drives innovation & the pace of change. Solutions at one level get adapted to meet other needs.
The evolution of LED as a light source has been astonishing, many laughed but here it is. At what cost? Huge investment, but are we better off? Absolutely.
Looking at central, base-load power generation alone for all but the very short-term needs is not particularly useful in the grand scheme of things.
Efficiency, environment & conservation of resources should be at or near the top of the list for the engineering that delivers it.
Undoubtedly, the drive for renewables has been somewhat hijacked by the political animal & that has led to much cynicism & bun-fighting. But it's a valid platform that has it's place.
What does appal me though is the utter dog's breakfast the authorities seem to have made of the programme for Nuclear provision.
Taking your l.e.d. example, the UK has been involved via Cambridge Univerity in the development of coloured l.e.d.s using indium-doped gallium nitride. These are now fitted in a lot of the country's traffic lights and are safer (more visible in various conditions) and save money (use less energy than conventional lamps and last longer). Nobody paid the development teams a third of a £billion NOT to produce these advanced semi-conductors, as per wind farm operators being paid NOT to produce electricity, and what about ongoing subsidies? There's no parallel as claimed.
Agreed regarding nuclear power.
Harry Biscuit said:
PRTVR said:
Harry Biscuit said:
Battery storage has legs but is still in its infancy & is eye-wateringly expensive, comparatively speaking. Well, the high-tech stuff is.
But is not the problem with batteries the fact that they have a relatively short life, they will need to be replaced in 5 to 10 years at considerable cost and this cost is ongoing as long as they are in use.But hey it's only money we all like higher electricity prices don't we ?
You will see the deployment of these in the coming years & they will become a natural part of the distribution infrastructure. But not necessarily at base load level, more localised to the downstream parts of the network.
I won't comment on the economics of them outside of micro-generation because I don't have any direct experience. However economic viability changes when costs of technology fall (as they inevitably do) & often in the absence of alternative options.
I don't see it as a panacea though & base load generation with constant, perpetual output will never not be needed. Well, until we morph into troglodytes.
Social mobility efforts suggest that, ultimately, getting to that state of non-reliance might be the long term objective. It's much quicker to level something than to build it.
I read something yesterday about China presenting ideas about a "Silk Road" for electricity based on the concepts of "the wind is always blowing somewhere" bit more focused on solar and "the sun is always shining somewhere".
It's an interesting concept that has particular application potential in China given its land area.
It also makes good sense to avoid shipping component parts of the generations system (solar panels for example) huge distances when they could be deployed more locally and simply deliver the resulting commodity more reliably.
The concept can be made especially attractive if local demand at the customer end is constrained or even reduced by demand management or the pricing pushing. manufacturing elsewhere.
Of course China can help with that too.
It's a win win all round so long as the end consumer masses can find just enough income to pay for the service and the imported results of the manufacturing base in the East now benefiting from guaranteed energy supply based on the increased overall capacity available locally.
That sort of suggests that the Future of (Electric) power generation in the UK ought to be focused on developing world leading transmission technology.
The logical Eurasian land mass for which this concept is most obviously suitable (assuming it can be made possible) has China at one end and the most Western parts of Europe at the other. It would therefore seem sensible for the most Westerly European countries of any size (UK, France, Spain for example) to be involved and earning some revenue from the technology so that they can trade that to all the countries along the route and recoup the charges those countries will demand for allowing the supply line to cross their territory.
That leaves the question of security of supply but I suspect anyone looking at the wider picture for renewables has long since recognised that that is a topic which is best quietly ignored at all times. For the UK the same comment applies to traditional FF sources as well.
Ali G said:
There is hydro powered aluminium smelting operation in the UK. It is small scale and requires the highest mountain the UK has to offer, and a lot of rain (the latter is not in short supply)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-is...
Go to stop that. Aluminium production makes lots of CO2 you know !!!!!!http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-is...
A thought. If fossil and nuclear fuel power stations were changed from electricity generators to energy generators, exporting electricity and heat, wouldn’t that throw a spanner in all the other electricity production methods? I was thinking of Malmo in Sweden, which I believe has just about the highest energy efficiency on the planet.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
As for the Rnewables causing net job losses ... its growing year on year - the boys in the Oilfields are the ones worried -and thats due to the barrel price.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/feb/06/bp-aims-to-invest-more-in-renewables-and-clean-energyThe Guardians headline is in the URL.
However the article also reports BP opening new Oil and Gas developments.
I guess that is what makes a "balanced" market.
Well, that and sensible legislation about how a market operates.
Meanwhile if the UK's objective behind all of this investment and consumer price bumping is intended to have a significant impact on greenhouse gas output and thus "save the planet" they are seriously misleading themselves and the politicians must know it if they can read or hear. Therefore we must conclude that policy is being driven by virtue signalling. Thus whoever can identify what actions will be considered most virtuous in the next 10 to 20 years will probably be able to predict how policy will develop and thus predict the future for the Power Generation industry.
A decent article on Lithium mining and Li ion batteries here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/business/b...
Needless to say - there are ecological concerns regarding the mining process and the delicate regions where Li is sourced. It certainly cannot be classed as a 'renewable' although a certain amount may be recyclable from expired batteries.
Demand is more likely to rise considerably if Li becomes a part of solving intermittency of renewables on a global scale.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/business/b...
Needless to say - there are ecological concerns regarding the mining process and the delicate regions where Li is sourced. It certainly cannot be classed as a 'renewable' although a certain amount may be recyclable from expired batteries.
Demand is more likely to rise considerably if Li becomes a part of solving intermittency of renewables on a global scale.
Ali G said:
A decent article on Lithium mining and Li ion batteries here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/business/b...
Needless to say - there are ecological concerns regarding the mining process and the delicate regions where Li is sourced. It certainly cannot be classed as a 'renewable' although a certain amount may be recyclable from expired batteries.
Demand is more likely to rise considerably if Li becomes a part of solving intermittency of renewables on a global scale.
My understanding is that for re-cycling of Lithium or any of the other components to be become viable, mining costs and scarcity would need to put the price up a long way. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/business/b...
Needless to say - there are ecological concerns regarding the mining process and the delicate regions where Li is sourced. It certainly cannot be classed as a 'renewable' although a certain amount may be recyclable from expired batteries.
Demand is more likely to rise considerably if Li becomes a part of solving intermittency of renewables on a global scale.
That or regulations would need to be passed forcing recovery - which would have the same effect on costs.
Continuity of battery use - along the lines of recycling tired auto batteries into domestic or industrial applications - is more likely in the predictable future.
That said the potential for having a technical fix no matter what the cost does not sit well with how energy prices sit within a "successful" (i.e. at the very least viable) economy.
LongQ said:
My understanding is that for re-cycling of Lithium or any of the other components to be become viable, mining costs and scarcity would need to put the price up a long way.
That or regulations would need to be passed forcing recovery - which would have the same effect on costs.
Continuity of battery use - along the lines of recycling tired auto batteries into domestic or industrial applications - is more likely in the predictable future.
That said the potential for having a technical fix no matter what the cost does not sit well with how energy prices sit within a "successful" (i.e. at the very least viable) economy.
Tesla had announced a recycling scheme for their batteries - https://www.tesla.com/blog/teslas-closed-loop-batt... - which claimed that recycling Roadster batteries was actually a profitable activity.That or regulations would need to be passed forcing recovery - which would have the same effect on costs.
Continuity of battery use - along the lines of recycling tired auto batteries into domestic or industrial applications - is more likely in the predictable future.
That said the potential for having a technical fix no matter what the cost does not sit well with how energy prices sit within a "successful" (i.e. at the very least viable) economy.
Not been able to find any further info to know if this is also recycling Model S batteries yet.
rscott said:
LongQ said:
My understanding is that for re-cycling of Lithium or any of the other components to be become viable, mining costs and scarcity would need to put the price up a long way.
That or regulations would need to be passed forcing recovery - which would have the same effect on costs.
Continuity of battery use - along the lines of recycling tired auto batteries into domestic or industrial applications - is more likely in the predictable future.
That said the potential for having a technical fix no matter what the cost does not sit well with how energy prices sit within a "successful" (i.e. at the very least viable) economy.
Tesla had announced a recycling scheme for their batteries - https://www.tesla.com/blog/teslas-closed-loop-batt... - which claimed that recycling Roadster batteries was actually a profitable activity.That or regulations would need to be passed forcing recovery - which would have the same effect on costs.
Continuity of battery use - along the lines of recycling tired auto batteries into domestic or industrial applications - is more likely in the predictable future.
That said the potential for having a technical fix no matter what the cost does not sit well with how energy prices sit within a "successful" (i.e. at the very least viable) economy.
Not been able to find any further info to know if this is also recycling Model S batteries yet.
Until it is at scale they have no way to prove that proposed methods will scale up. Nor that they will be cost effective compared to whatever the market price might be by then for the materials. Nor that the various battery developments and technologies from different suppliers will lend themselves to a standardised process.
So at the moment this seems to be a "watch this space" situation and if the idea of re-using the batteries as they stand for backup storage - where the performance demands are very different - become the norm if could be another decade before recycliing gains enough scale for any sort of cost effectiveness to be assessed.
So right now there are no claims that can be made either way that have any certainty associated with them.
Or so it seems.
Clearly, it is responsible for Tesla to provide recycling of its Li-ion batteries, the cost of which will presumably be factored into initial purchase cost. Recycling of Li-ion batteries is relatively new with hurdles to be overcome and although it may be possible to recycle 100% of the batteries it is less likely that 100% of the Lithium will be recovered.
A little more on recycling here:
https://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/201704/b...
Ultimately, if Li-ion batteries form a significant part of renewables, then the financial, environmental and EROEI of their full lifecycle will have to be taken into consideration by policymakers.
A little more on recycling here:
https://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/201704/b...
Ultimately, if Li-ion batteries form a significant part of renewables, then the financial, environmental and EROEI of their full lifecycle will have to be taken into consideration by policymakers.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
And another poster opting to take the Negative not Positive from the batteries as opposed to those in the industry saying otherwise
Why??
Paddy - are you saying that people in the battery industry are saying good things about the battery industry?Why??
Why?
Is it likely they would say otherwise under any circumstances?
This is from the grauniad (so must be right)
https://www.theguardian.com/vital-signs/2015/jun/1...
https://www.theguardian.com/vital-signs/2015/jun/1...
Armchair said:
Even Panasonic – supplier of the lithium-ion cells that form the foundation of Tesla’s batteries, and partner on the company’s forthcoming battery factory – calls Musk’s claims hyperbole.
“We are at the very beginning in energy storage in general,” says Phil Hermann, chief energy engineer at Panasonic Eco Solutions. “Most of the projects currently going on are either demo projects or learning experiences for the utilities. There is very little direct commercial stuff going on.
“Elon Musk is out there saying you can do things now that the rest of us are hearing and going, ‘really?’ We wish we could but it’s not really possible yet.”
“We are at the very beginning in energy storage in general,” says Phil Hermann, chief energy engineer at Panasonic Eco Solutions. “Most of the projects currently going on are either demo projects or learning experiences for the utilities. There is very little direct commercial stuff going on.
“Elon Musk is out there saying you can do things now that the rest of us are hearing and going, ‘really?’ We wish we could but it’s not really possible yet.”
You are itching to tell us all how energy density of Li-ion battery tech has been overcome - feel free to educate and provide links. As far as I am aware Tesla still makes use of Panasonic Li-ion cells which have a fundamental theoritical limit on energy density as determined by physics.
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/04/11/panasonic-hin...
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/04/11/panasonic-hin...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff