The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain
Discussion
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
the target was set that across the interconnected EU their should be capacity of 10% of each countries generation capacity can be moved via interconnections.
More reading here rather than cut n pasting.
https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/...
Reasonable overview here too: https://www.euractiv.com/section/electricity/opini...
and from the FT - and more I line with the question you asked I guess:
https://www.ft.com/content/eb2f93c4-f9f4-11e7-9b32-d7d59aace167
" There are currently four operational interconnectors between the UK and the rest of the EU: one each with France and the Netherlands and two with the island of Ireland, which has its own integrated energy market between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.
At least 12 more UK interconnectors are at varying stages of construction or planning, five with France and others with Belgium, Denmark and Germany, as well as with non-EU Norway and Iceland.
If all these projects were completed, the UK’s interconnection capacity would increase from its current 4 gigawatts — about 7 per cent of peak domestic demand — to more than 20GW. That would be equivalent to more than double existing UK nuclear power capacity.
"
What does nuclear power capacity have to do with it? These will be to back up low wind output, what we need to know is what the projected wind capacity will be when these are completed and if the interconnectors will be able to supply enough power when there is no wind.More reading here rather than cut n pasting.
https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/...
Reasonable overview here too: https://www.euractiv.com/section/electricity/opini...
and from the FT - and more I line with the question you asked I guess:
https://www.ft.com/content/eb2f93c4-f9f4-11e7-9b32-d7d59aace167
" There are currently four operational interconnectors between the UK and the rest of the EU: one each with France and the Netherlands and two with the island of Ireland, which has its own integrated energy market between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.
At least 12 more UK interconnectors are at varying stages of construction or planning, five with France and others with Belgium, Denmark and Germany, as well as with non-EU Norway and Iceland.
If all these projects were completed, the UK’s interconnection capacity would increase from its current 4 gigawatts — about 7 per cent of peak domestic demand — to more than 20GW. That would be equivalent to more than double existing UK nuclear power capacity.
"
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Ali G said:
Russian threat to undersea cables, not the ones we are talking about but hey - here's a distraction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42362500
FTFYhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42362500
First para of your searched article even say :
The UK's most senior military officer has warned of a new threat posed by Russia to communications and internet cables that run under the sea.
Just shocking
LoonyTunes said:
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Ali G said:
Russian threat to undersea cables, not the ones we are talking about but hey - here's a distraction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42362500
FTFYhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42362500
First para of your searched article even say :
The UK's most senior military officer has warned of a new threat posed by Russia to communications and internet cables that run under the sea.
Just shocking
Cables dear - Cables!
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Toltec said:
What does nuclear power capacity have to do with it? These will be to back up low wind output, what we need to know is what the projected wind capacity will be when these are completed and if the interconnectors will be able to supply enough power when there is no wind.
the irony - as you yourself used 'nuclear power stations' as a unit of comparable measurement on this same page above ^^^^Toltec said:
Paddy_N_Murphy][url said:
While land-based wind turbines are proliferating worldwide, offshore wind farms have progressed mainly in Europe. Installed capacity totaled more than 18,000MW at the end of 2017, which at maximum capacity can produce as much power as 18 nuclear reactors.
Or about the same energy as two nuclear power plants per year.In the previous quote I wasn't the one that began the comparison with nuclear power, I just corrected the comparison between peak amalgamated output power and discrete reactors to make it a comparison of useful energy versus installations. I don't know how many WTG fields you need to add together to get the same as two nuclear plants though, is it more than 18? That would be ironic.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Ali G said:
Russian threat to undersea cables, not the ones we are talking about but hey - here's a distraction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42362500
FTFYhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42362500
First para of your searched article even say :
The UK's most senior military officer has warned of a new threat posed by Russia to communications and internet cables that run under the sea.
Ali G said:
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
how can certain poster intentionally link and post misleading articles on this thread and simply either ignore (TB post and Tesla) or hope that a shrug and 'oops' means they are excused.
Because some have far more intelligence than you demonstrate?
ks.
It's a shame that P&M + Gary C have abandoned the thread. But, they leave having never been able to satisfactorily answer the questions of intermittency of renewables and the impact of that on UK energy security as we fail to invest in adequate carbon or nuclear based generation technologies. ( imho.)
When you get people saying that "it's boring" being asked the same questions you have to ask whether the reason for the lack of any credible answer on their part has little to do with boredom, and much to do with them not actually having a satisfactory answer.
If Ali G and others take it upon themselves to shout "the king is in the altogether" rather than bow down to the "consensus" that "his doublet is a lovely shade of green" then far from ruining the thread they are actually doing us all a service.
Instead of constantly spouting theoretical wind generation capacity numbers as the answer to future demand, P&M would have done better to concede the point that "capacity is nowt, it's what's delivered when needed that counts" (Copyright Andymadmak!
) Seeking to mock and ridicule other posters for pointing out that there have been occasions in the not too distant past when reliance on renewables on the scale being envisaged would have seen the lights go out and people getting cold did not do P&M any favours imho.
When you get people saying that "it's boring" being asked the same questions you have to ask whether the reason for the lack of any credible answer on their part has little to do with boredom, and much to do with them not actually having a satisfactory answer.
If Ali G and others take it upon themselves to shout "the king is in the altogether" rather than bow down to the "consensus" that "his doublet is a lovely shade of green" then far from ruining the thread they are actually doing us all a service.
Instead of constantly spouting theoretical wind generation capacity numbers as the answer to future demand, P&M would have done better to concede the point that "capacity is nowt, it's what's delivered when needed that counts" (Copyright Andymadmak!
) Seeking to mock and ridicule other posters for pointing out that there have been occasions in the not too distant past when reliance on renewables on the scale being envisaged would have seen the lights go out and people getting cold did not do P&M any favours imho. andymadmak said:
If Ali G and others take it upon themselves to shout "the king is in the altogether" rather than bow down to the "consensus" that "his doublet is a lovely shade of green" then far from ruining the thread they are actually doing us all a service.
Yes, lets get rid of the only contributor who, since I've been reading this thread, is clearly the only one posting who is in the industry.LoonyTunes said:
andymadmak said:
If Ali G and others take it upon themselves to shout "the king is in the altogether" rather than bow down to the "consensus" that "his doublet is a lovely shade of green" then far from ruining the thread they are actually doing us all a service.
Yes, lets get rid of the only contributor who, since I've been reading this thread, is clearly the only one posting who is in the industry.More wind / solar
Interconnectors
More efficient use of energy.
None of those things are going to be worth a hill of beans when Europe has an extended cold cold winter, and we cannot get anything through the interconnectors because those on the other end need it as much as we do. Efficient use of energy is of course highly desirable but is equally entirely academic when you don't have enough energy being produced in the first place to meet even your "efficient" needs!
Is the answer really more wind? I dunno. I did pick up that P&M felt that wind was sensible because, with a massive wind generating capacity being put in place, largely out to sea, then the logic was that "it must be windy somewhere".
Which begs the question how much "wind redundancy" needs to be put in place to guarantee energy security ? If you go by the output averages from wind turbines the requirement will be utterly huge, and thus massively expensive - and that's before you get into the environmental concerns associated with the build of so many of these things on that scale, or the logistical/maintenance nightmares associated with keeping them running.
Wind just seems like a massive red herring!
One cold hard winter would see significant deaths amongst the old and vulnerable if energy to heat homes ran short. Yet P&M mocked the notion of winters like we have seen in living memory ever happening again! How do you think that affected his credibility on here?
I (like others) genuinely asked for data and all we got was a mix of slogans, assertions and articles that answered questions that were not being asked.
Yes, I get that some posters took the piddle out of him, but even those of us that didn't had in the main part long since given up any hope of getting anything truly useful or informative from him
turbobloke said:
The BBC's Harrabin has received a rap on the knuckles for misleading reporting, following a complaint from an anonymous complainant as publicised by NALOPKT. Well done to somebody.
Just adding the source for this image, which has useful items like the article in question and the correction.https://www.thegwpf.com/roger-harrabin-forced-to-r...
andymadmak said:
It's a shame that P&M + Gary C have abandoned the thread. But, they leave having never been able to satisfactorily answer the questions of intermittency of renewables and the impact of that on UK energy security as we fail to invest in adequate carbon or nuclear based generation technologies. ( imho.)
When you get people saying that "it's boring" being asked the same questions you have to ask whether the reason for the lack of any credible answer on their part has little to do with boredom, and much to do with them not actually having a satisfactory answer.
If Ali G and others take it upon themselves to shout "the king is in the altogether" rather than bow down to the "consensus" that "his doublet is a lovely shade of green" then far from ruining the thread they are actually doing us all a service.
Instead of constantly spouting theoretical wind generation capacity numbers as the answer to future demand, P&M would have done better to concede the point that "capacity is nowt, it's what's delivered when needed that counts" (Copyright Andymadmak! ) Seeking to mock and ridicule other posters for pointing out that there have been occasions in the not too distant past when reliance on renewables on the scale being envisaged would have seen the lights go out and people getting cold did not do P&M any favours imho.
Both contributed a lot to this thread, unlike Ali G in particular, who seems to revel in posting the same "the king is in the altogether" statement rather than engage in any hint of sensible debate.When you get people saying that "it's boring" being asked the same questions you have to ask whether the reason for the lack of any credible answer on their part has little to do with boredom, and much to do with them not actually having a satisfactory answer.
If Ali G and others take it upon themselves to shout "the king is in the altogether" rather than bow down to the "consensus" that "his doublet is a lovely shade of green" then far from ruining the thread they are actually doing us all a service.
Instead of constantly spouting theoretical wind generation capacity numbers as the answer to future demand, P&M would have done better to concede the point that "capacity is nowt, it's what's delivered when needed that counts" (Copyright Andymadmak!
) Seeking to mock and ridicule other posters for pointing out that there have been occasions in the not too distant past when reliance on renewables on the scale being envisaged would have seen the lights go out and people getting cold did not do P&M any favours imho. If PnM dare quote selectively from an article to support his views, he's attacked by the usual suspects in this thread. If one of those completely misrepresents the facts when quoting from a link (eg 'accidentally' confusing turbine and blade numbers, or the recent comms cable article linked to) then anyone who dares point that out is criticised.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff