The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain
Discussion
StanleyT said:
dickymint said:
WhatHappenedThere said:
What?
who? A: Destruction of the UK power grid / generation.
by Greenwash activists.
by using obfuscted data and relying on government inertia to tackle the problem properly since about 1972.
rscott said:
StanleyT said:
dickymint said:
WhatHappenedThere said:
What?
who? A: Destruction of the UK power grid / generation.
by Greenwash activists.
by using obfuscted data and relying on government inertia to tackle the problem properly since about 1972.
Except the science thread, can't think why...
Can't remember where I read it, but apparently 1 out of 4 units at Fiddlers Ferry has either been closed or is about to - apparently the other 3 got capacity mechanism contracts, but this one didn't, so it's being turned off. Press release is here - https://sse.com/newsandviews/allarticles/2019/03/s...
Great Britain content - check. Future - Check :
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/03/24/sw...
Shell to switch 700,000 UK homes to renewable energy - Under the brand Shell Energy, it will become one of the country’s biggest green power suppliers overnight when it replaces First Utility, a year after acquiring the “big six” challenger brand.
Customers will automatically switch to green energy at no extra cost.
"Energy giant Shell has rebranded UK energy supplier First Utility to Shell Energy Retail and switched all of its British residential customers to 100% renewable electricity.
The company said clean power will now be offered as standard to all existing and new customers, along with discounts at Shell service stations across the country.
Shell Energy Retail will also roll out a range of smart home technology offers throughout the year, starting with smart thermostats and home electric vehicle charging, the company said.
The brand change comes a year after Shell acquired First Utility."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/03/24/sw...
Shell to switch 700,000 UK homes to renewable energy - Under the brand Shell Energy, it will become one of the country’s biggest green power suppliers overnight when it replaces First Utility, a year after acquiring the “big six” challenger brand.
Customers will automatically switch to green energy at no extra cost.
"Energy giant Shell has rebranded UK energy supplier First Utility to Shell Energy Retail and switched all of its British residential customers to 100% renewable electricity.
The company said clean power will now be offered as standard to all existing and new customers, along with discounts at Shell service stations across the country.
Shell Energy Retail will also roll out a range of smart home technology offers throughout the year, starting with smart thermostats and home electric vehicle charging, the company said.
The brand change comes a year after Shell acquired First Utility."
phumy said:
So how exactly does Shell send only "Green" energy to each and every one of its customers?
Others will probably know far better than me but I believe the answer is they obviously cannot make sure that every electron coming down the wire was generated from a "green" source unless they built a separate power grid, however they will know how much juice those customers are using and can make sure they have purchased that amount and provided it onto the grid using green sources rather than from CCGT or wherever.wombleh said:
Others will probably know far better than me but I believe the answer is they obviously cannot make sure that every electron coming down the wire was generated from a "green" source unless they built a separate power grid, however they will know how much juice those customers are using and can make sure they have purchased that amount and provided it onto the grid using green sources rather than from CCGT or wherever.
So its all advertising and marketing bks, of course they cant give everyone/anyone 100% green power but i bet theyre relying on people signing up to them on that premis. I know exactly how the system works, watch their prices ramp up too once theyve captured a fair chunk of the market, if theyre buying and selling "green" power only then it wont be the cheapest.phumy said:
wombleh said:
Others will probably know far better than me but I believe the answer is they obviously cannot make sure that every electron coming down the wire was generated from a "green" source unless they built a separate power grid, however they will know how much juice those customers are using and can make sure they have purchased that amount and provided it onto the grid using green sources rather than from CCGT or wherever.
So its all advertising and marketing bks, of course they cant give everyone/anyone 100% green power but i bet theyre relying on people signing up to them on that premis. I know exactly how the system works,
watch their prices ramp up too once theyve captured a fair chunk of the market, if theyre buying and selling "green" power only then it wont be the cheapest.
How can you prove or demonstrate that, out of interest ? It would be good for us all to know what you do.
phumy said:
So its all advertising and marketing bks, of course they cant give everyone/anyone 100% green power but i bet theyre relying on people signing up to them on that premis. I know exactly how the system works, watch their prices ramp up too once theyve captured a fair chunk of the market, if theyre buying and selling "green" power only then it wont be the cheapest.
That would be pointless as their customers would just change to another supplier when they tried to ramp it up. Simple example:
Imaginary power grid has demand for 100MW, supplied entirely from fossil fuel burning plants.
Green energy company starts up, customers sign up who use 20MW. Green energy company therefore buys 20MW of electricity from green sources. That's 20MW less being purchased from the fossil fuels who are now only able to sell 80MW.
Any one of those customers is not having only electrons that were pushed out of a wind turbine instead of the gas turbine, it should be obvious why that's impossible to guarantee on the same electric supply grid, but as a whole the emissions have reduced by 20% so it's not worthless.
WhatHappenedThere said:
phumy said:
wombleh said:
Others will probably know far better than me but I believe the answer is they obviously cannot make sure that every electron coming down the wire was generated from a "green" source unless they built a separate power grid, however they will know how much juice those customers are using and can make sure they have purchased that amount and provided it onto the grid using green sources rather than from CCGT or wherever.
So its all advertising and marketing bks, of course they cant give everyone/anyone 100% green power but i bet theyre relying on people signing up to them on that premis. I know exactly how the system works,
watch their prices ramp up too once theyve captured a fair chunk of the market, if theyre buying and selling "green" power only then it wont be the cheapest.
How can you prove or demonstrate that, out of interest ? It would be good for us all to know what you do.
What do you do?
I dont have to prove or demonstate anything to anyone, certainly to a newcomer on this thread or anyone else.
phumy said:
WhatHappenedThere said:
phumy said:
wombleh said:
Others will probably know far better than me but I believe the answer is they obviously cannot make sure that every electron coming down the wire was generated from a "green" source unless they built a separate power grid, however they will know how much juice those customers are using and can make sure they have purchased that amount and provided it onto the grid using green sources rather than from CCGT or wherever.
So its all advertising and marketing bks, of course they cant give everyone/anyone 100% green power but i bet theyre relying on people signing up to them on that premis. I know exactly how the system works,
watch their prices ramp up too once theyve captured a fair chunk of the market, if theyre buying and selling "green" power only then it wont be the cheapest.
How can you prove or demonstrate that, out of interest ? It would be good for us all to know what you do.
What do you do?
I dont have to prove or demonstate anything to anyone, certainly to a newcomer on this thread or anyone else.
wombleh said:
That would be pointless as their customers would just change to another supplier when they tried to ramp it up.
Simple example:
Imaginary power grid has demand for 100MW, supplied entirely from fossil fuel burning plants.
Green energy company starts up, customers sign up who use 20MW. Green energy company therefore buys 20MW of electricity from green sources. That's 20MW less being purchased from the fossil fuels who are now only able to sell 80MW.
Any one of those customers is not having only electrons that were pushed out of a wind turbine instead of the gas turbine, it should be obvious why that's impossible to guarantee on the same electric supply grid, but as a whole the emissions have reduced by 20% so it's not worthless.
Logical but I'd make two pointsSimple example:
Imaginary power grid has demand for 100MW, supplied entirely from fossil fuel burning plants.
Green energy company starts up, customers sign up who use 20MW. Green energy company therefore buys 20MW of electricity from green sources. That's 20MW less being purchased from the fossil fuels who are now only able to sell 80MW.
Any one of those customers is not having only electrons that were pushed out of a wind turbine instead of the gas turbine, it should be obvious why that's impossible to guarantee on the same electric supply grid, but as a whole the emissions have reduced by 20% so it's not worthless.
1 - the fact that so many of the big suppliers are still in business goes to show that a high percentage of the population do not shop around, and do not switch when prices go up. I have shopped around the last few years and with cheap suppliers going bust and just generally being amateurs/charlatans I am starting to identify with those that are happy to pay a bit more to be with a big stable company and avoid the hassle.
2 - The 20% reduction in emissions which makes logical sense is not guaranteed as spinning reserve is needed for renewables. Figures to prove this one way or the other are not openly available AFAIK. My cynical side says if it were a good story the figures would be out there.
WhatHappenedThere said:
Jambo85 said:
dickymint said:
Newcomer? Benefit of the doubt for now
Haha - quite.Long term lurker, signed up recently.
Should I not question the long termers who know things the rest of us don't?
You'll quickly learn that that the length of ones PH membership is sometimes directly proportionate to the amount of bullst they spout.
wombleh said:
phumy said:
So its all advertising and marketing bks, of course they cant give everyone/anyone 100% green power but i bet theyre relying on people signing up to them on that premis. I know exactly how the system works, watch their prices ramp up too once theyve captured a fair chunk of the market, if theyre buying and selling "green" power only then it wont be the cheapest.
That would be pointless as their customers would just change to another supplier when they tried to ramp it up. Simple example:
Imaginary power grid has demand for 100MW, supplied entirely from fossil fuel burning plants.
Green energy company starts up, customers sign up who use 20MW. Green energy company therefore buys 20MW of electricity from green sources. That's 20MW less being purchased from the fossil fuels who are now only able to sell 80MW.
Any one of those customers is not having only electrons that were pushed out of a wind turbine instead of the gas turbine, it should be obvious why that's impossible to guarantee on the same electric supply grid, but as a whole the emissions have reduced by 20% so it's not worthless.
a) Multiple companies all offer green deals for new customers or to switch to. Surely there is only so much green electricity in terms of MW. What happens when it is all subscribed up to?
b) If we have say 20,000 MW of production going on from green, but then say the wind goes off, do those customers on the green deals get their electricity turned off (after all, one would hate to have on their conscious that they are using the old dirty electricity. I suppose smart meters could do.
I have to admit a family link to the industry. Sister used to sell electricity for Yorkshire Electric Board. When they were asked about green electricity if the customers was over a certain age the reply was "Next time you have someone around who can open a plug up, there should be a green / yellow wire in there - that is the one we use for you". Blue was hydro, brown burning wood / bio, black coal and red for gas. Nuclear at the time was included in the green mix as it got part of the levy still for carbon. Wind didn't exist.
It doesnt quite work like that.....
Generally, everyone buys and sells power in the same market - whether that be power from a coal station, wind turbine, CCGT, hydro, or whatever. Shell dont know (or care), where the energy comes from when its actually supplied to a customer.
When a renewable generator produces power it is 'given' a Renewable Obligation Certificate (ROC). These ROC's are 'proof' of its green credentials, and can be traded between companies.
A company supplying '100% renewable power' has to ensure it has bought enough ROCs to cover 100% of the power it buys over the course of a year. Companies like SSE/Eon/Orsted etc with large renewable generation but not much demand for ROCs will sell theirs to Shell. This ensures that the total UK energy being supplied as '100% green' isnt more than the total UK renewable generation.
There are exceptions, some companies have PPA's (power purchase agreements) with renewable generators which is a direct contract to buy the power from a wind farm, solar farm etc, but when the wind doesnt blow, and the sun doesnt shine, they will still buy thermal power from the market.
Also, I dont fully know how that works with new Contract for Difference wind sites, as they are not provided with ROCs to trade, and yet they still generate green electric.
Generally, everyone buys and sells power in the same market - whether that be power from a coal station, wind turbine, CCGT, hydro, or whatever. Shell dont know (or care), where the energy comes from when its actually supplied to a customer.
When a renewable generator produces power it is 'given' a Renewable Obligation Certificate (ROC). These ROC's are 'proof' of its green credentials, and can be traded between companies.
A company supplying '100% renewable power' has to ensure it has bought enough ROCs to cover 100% of the power it buys over the course of a year. Companies like SSE/Eon/Orsted etc with large renewable generation but not much demand for ROCs will sell theirs to Shell. This ensures that the total UK energy being supplied as '100% green' isnt more than the total UK renewable generation.
There are exceptions, some companies have PPA's (power purchase agreements) with renewable generators which is a direct contract to buy the power from a wind farm, solar farm etc, but when the wind doesnt blow, and the sun doesnt shine, they will still buy thermal power from the market.
Also, I dont fully know how that works with new Contract for Difference wind sites, as they are not provided with ROCs to trade, and yet they still generate green electric.
Edited by Condi on Monday 25th March 18:19
Interesting day yesterday.....
Peak demand over the day (midnight to midnight) was actually about 3-4pm in the afternoon (it is usually about 4am), and National Grid seemed to run out of flexible thermal generation to turn down. They turned down Drax biomass units at negative bid prices (ie NG were paying Drax to generate less), and were also turning off wind generation tagged as energy.
We always guessed that one day nuclear, wind, hydro and solar would satisfy demand, and it looks like that happened yesterday. Cashout/Imbalance price was minus £50 for 5 hours through the middle of the day!
Peak demand over the day (midnight to midnight) was actually about 3-4pm in the afternoon (it is usually about 4am), and National Grid seemed to run out of flexible thermal generation to turn down. They turned down Drax biomass units at negative bid prices (ie NG were paying Drax to generate less), and were also turning off wind generation tagged as energy.
We always guessed that one day nuclear, wind, hydro and solar would satisfy demand, and it looks like that happened yesterday. Cashout/Imbalance price was minus £50 for 5 hours through the middle of the day!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff