The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain
Discussion
Harrison Bergeron said:
People always talk about smelting as a sink for excess energy but who is going to stump up the millions for a new plant just to sit idle until the excess energy conditions allow it to pull cheap or negative value energy from the grid. I can just imagine the managers:-
“Winds up boys. Come back to work the smelter is going!’
Or do they run it off the grid normally and just pay less when the elecy is cheap? But then they’re still on the grid adding to the required base load.
A third option would be to run their own massive generators and switch over to the cheap stuff when it happens to be available but then again you’re buying in a lot of expensive equipment that might not get used. And their generators won’t be as efficient as the massive base load ones.
I’d genuinely like to know if someone has done it and how it works out.
Aluminium smelters can't just be switched off and left for days or weeks then just turned back on. An hour is ok, much more than that is a big struggle, the resistance of the cooling cryolite just makes restarting an entire potline almost impossible. I've seen individual pots brought back online and the electricity arc like lighting as it tries to find a path from the anode to the cathode. Aluminium smelters require cheap, constant, reliable power. We had our own coal fired power station to supply the smelter. They would switch a potline off for an hour or so at the request of the grid when demand peaked for electricity. “Winds up boys. Come back to work the smelter is going!’
Or do they run it off the grid normally and just pay less when the elecy is cheap? But then they’re still on the grid adding to the required base load.
A third option would be to run their own massive generators and switch over to the cheap stuff when it happens to be available but then again you’re buying in a lot of expensive equipment that might not get used. And their generators won’t be as efficient as the massive base load ones.
I’d genuinely like to know if someone has done it and how it works out.
Talksteer said:
3: If you actually look at how much power the whole UK "needs" it is pretty low. Compare how much electricity your lights use (probably less than 50W normally) vs how much oven or tumble dryer uses. There is potential to cut base load substantially by paying people not to use electricity.
Tumble drier is a optional workload that is easy to time shift, cooker - well to an extent it is. What about heating - with the push to stop using Gas and Oil boilers (both forms of stored energy) and replace them with Electric which cant be easily/economically stored right now we are going to see at the very least no more overnight off peak (because we are all charging cars) and higher peak costs because people need to heat their houses.As an Agile user you become more tuned to the capacity market and even now "cheap" overnight electric has been pretty rare in the last few months.
Harrison Bergeron said:
People always talk about smelting as a sink for excess energy but who is going to stump up the millions for a new plant just to sit idle until the excess energy conditions allow it to pull cheap or negative value energy from the grid. I can just imagine the managers:-
“Winds up boys. Come back to work the smelter is going!’
The government! Part of reducing carbon emissions at Port Talbot would be to implement an electric arc furnace.“Winds up boys. Come back to work the smelter is going!’
eliot said:
we are going to see at the very least no more overnight off peak (because we are all charging cars) and higher peak costs because people need to heat their houses.
As an Agile user you become more tuned to the capacity market and even now "cheap" overnight electric has been pretty rare in the last few months.
I would imagine you would still need to make it cheaper overnight, even if the amount produced stayed the same, otherwise people would just heat their homes and charge their cars in the evening.As an Agile user you become more tuned to the capacity market and even now "cheap" overnight electric has been pretty rare in the last few months.
Talksteer said:
There is a new argument being built around this:
1: Wind and solar are typically counter cyclic
2: As the geographic spread increases the times when you get very low outputs are limited
3: If you actually look at how much power the whole UK "needs" it is pretty low. Compare how much electricity your lights use (probably less than 50W normally) vs how much oven or tumble dryer uses. There is potential to cut base load substantially by paying people not to use electricity.
Thus you maybe need a dependable 5-10GW which is provide by some gas or diesel plants which practically never operate.
I don’t agree really, you might be able to reduce the 7pm peak, but the daily TWh isn’t going to be decreased meaningfully unless the cost of electricity increases by an order of magnitude, which won’t be allowed to happen because low earners wouldn’t be able to cook or heat their homes.1: Wind and solar are typically counter cyclic
2: As the geographic spread increases the times when you get very low outputs are limited
3: If you actually look at how much power the whole UK "needs" it is pretty low. Compare how much electricity your lights use (probably less than 50W normally) vs how much oven or tumble dryer uses. There is potential to cut base load substantially by paying people not to use electricity.
Thus you maybe need a dependable 5-10GW which is provide by some gas or diesel plants which practically never operate.
The UK’s middle of the night minimum power demand is about 20GW, which is close to our total installed wind capacity. It’s hard to imagine there is much happening at 3am which isn’t necessary.
I did some fag packet maths recently which suggested if we all moved to electric cars tomorrow and charged them evenly throughout the day, demand would be 50 GW continuous or thereabouts. Electric heating for the nation would be an additional 150 GW at peak times if memory serves, so we would need 200 GW capacity, at least.
Your counter cyclic point is broadly valid but there is plenty of time when neither wind nor solar are generating a GW.
When you say increasing geographic spread are you suggesting moving power between hemispheres!? Have you worked out the transmission losses on that or the cost of the inverters and rectifiers!?
Your numbers are adrift there-
Does everyone fill their car with fuel / electricity everyday for example ?
Heating systems drift in and out- dont bang away 24/7
Power consumption per capita is declining - despite the shift to electricity
Your wind figure as it stands today (never mind the growth rate) is 25% out
Does everyone fill their car with fuel / electricity everyday for example ?
Heating systems drift in and out- dont bang away 24/7
Power consumption per capita is declining - despite the shift to electricity
Your wind figure as it stands today (never mind the growth rate) is 25% out
Edited by PushedDover on Monday 12th April 22:56
Jambo85 said:
I don’t agree really, you might be able to reduce the 7pm peak, but the daily TWh isn’t going to be decreased meaningfully unless the cost of electricity increases by an order of magnitude, which won’t be allowed to happen because low earners wouldn’t be able to cook or heat their homes.
The UK’s middle of the night minimum power demand is about 20GW, which is close to our total installed wind capacity. It’s hard to imagine there is much happening at 3am which isn’t necessary.
I did some fag packet maths recently which suggested if we all moved to electric cars tomorrow and charged them evenly throughout the day, demand would be 50 GW continuous or thereabouts. Electric heating for the nation would be an additional 150 GW at peak times if memory serves, so we would need 200 GW capacity, at least.
Your counter cyclic point is broadly valid but there is plenty of time when neither wind nor solar are generating a GW.
When you say increasing geographic spread are you suggesting moving power between hemispheres!? Have you worked out the transmission losses on that or the cost of the inverters and rectifiers!?
Google the Future Energy Scenarios. Put the gag packet in the bin.The UK’s middle of the night minimum power demand is about 20GW, which is close to our total installed wind capacity. It’s hard to imagine there is much happening at 3am which isn’t necessary.
I did some fag packet maths recently which suggested if we all moved to electric cars tomorrow and charged them evenly throughout the day, demand would be 50 GW continuous or thereabouts. Electric heating for the nation would be an additional 150 GW at peak times if memory serves, so we would need 200 GW capacity, at least.
Your counter cyclic point is broadly valid but there is plenty of time when neither wind nor solar are generating a GW.
When you say increasing geographic spread are you suggesting moving power between hemispheres!? Have you worked out the transmission losses on that or the cost of the inverters and rectifiers!?
PushedDover said:
Your numbers are adrift there-
Does everyone fill their car with fuel / electricity everyday for example ?
No - that 50GW figure (as I said) is based on it being spread evenly, calculated based on number of vehicles on the road, average mileage and kWh per mile. I.e. the best case scenario, the reality is likely to be considerably worse in terms of peak demand on the grid. Does everyone fill their car with fuel / electricity everyday for example ?
PushedDover said:
Heating systems drift in and out- dont bang away 24/
Correct - but the biggest variable is the weather, and when it’s -10C outside everyone’s system is flat out. At the same time. Peak demand is what matters.PushedDover said:
Power consumption per capita is declining - despite the shift to electricity
That’ll soon reverse if the shift to electricity goes as some suggest. LED lightbulbs become fairly irrelevant when we start talking about EVs and ASHPs.PushedDover said:
Your wind figure as it stands today (never mind the growth rate) is 25% out
Yes, I don’t think that really detracts from the point I was making though.PushedDover said:
Your numbers are adrift there-
Does everyone fill their car with fuel / electricity everyday for example ?
Heating systems drift in and out- dont bang away 24/7
Power consumption per capita is declining - despite the shift to electricity
Your wind figure as it stands today (never mind the growth rate) is 25% out
Jon Ward (youtube) did the calcs for car charging taking into account that we don’t actually need to charge fully every day and reckons there’s enough overnight capacity to cope.Does everyone fill their car with fuel / electricity everyday for example ?
Heating systems drift in and out- dont bang away 24/7
Power consumption per capita is declining - despite the shift to electricity
Your wind figure as it stands today (never mind the growth rate) is 25% out
Edited by PushedDover on Monday 12th April 22:56
It didn’t allow for haulage or busses going electric and the move from gas boilers to electric - which is what i would like to see the maths on.
eliot said:
Jon Ward (youtube) did the calcs for car charging taking into account that we don’t actually need to charge fully every day and reckons there’s enough overnight capacity to cope.
It didn’t allow for haulage or busses going electric and the move from gas boilers to electric - which is what i would like to see the maths on.
Yes - I agree with him, as we can do 50GW all day just now if needed. What I’m disputing is doing it all on wind and solar with just 5GW of diesel backup that would be hardly ever used.It didn’t allow for haulage or busses going electric and the move from gas boilers to electric - which is what i would like to see the maths on.
As for heating - 150GW peak as already stated. And you have to assume your ASHP has a CoP of 1 when it’s -10C outside.
Did I miss the memo that said we all have to hand our boilers over for Electric ones?
New houses, coincidentally thermally efficient houses, will be heading down that path- not every house.
Similarly the trucks and alike will not all shift to electric, but will also have hydrogen variants
New houses, coincidentally thermally efficient houses, will be heading down that path- not every house.
Similarly the trucks and alike will not all shift to electric, but will also have hydrogen variants
Changing to heat pumps needs a lot of local changes like insulation upgrades, potentially local grid uplifts to carry extra load plus changing the way people use their heating. Ok for new builds but trickier to retro fit on older houses. Newer pumps can do 70 degrees water but I think they use a lot of power doing that.
Hydrogen is being looked at and sounds promising, potentially avoiding the local changes by reusing the gas grid and just swapping the boiler.
Hydrogen is being looked at and sounds promising, potentially avoiding the local changes by reusing the gas grid and just swapping the boiler.
Jambo85 said:
No - that 50GW figure (as I said) is based on it being spread evenly, calculated based on number of vehicles on the road, average mileage and kWh per mile. I.e. the best case scenario, the reality is likely to be considerably worse in terms of peak demand on the grid.
Correct - but the biggest variable is the weather, and when it’s -10C outside everyone’s system is flat out. At the same time. Peak demand is what matters.
That’ll soon reverse if the shift to electricity goes as some suggest. LED lightbulbs become fairly irrelevant when we start talking about EVs and ASHPs.
Yes, I don’t think that really detracts from the point I was making though.
Why do people constantly make their own rubbish up?Correct - but the biggest variable is the weather, and when it’s -10C outside everyone’s system is flat out. At the same time. Peak demand is what matters.
That’ll soon reverse if the shift to electricity goes as some suggest. LED lightbulbs become fairly irrelevant when we start talking about EVs and ASHPs.
Yes, I don’t think that really detracts from the point I was making though.
https://www.nationalgrideso.com/future-energy/futu...
PushedDover said:
Did I miss the memo that said we all have to hand our boilers over for Electric ones?
New houses, coincidentally thermally efficient houses, will be heading down that path- not every house.
Indeed - NEW houses will be banned from using Gas boilers from 2025, existing houses are OK for the moment.New houses, coincidentally thermally efficient houses, will be heading down that path- not every house.
Evanivitch said:
Jambo85 said:
No - that 50GW figure (as I said) is based on it being spread evenly, calculated based on number of vehicles on the road, average mileage and kWh per mile. I.e. the best case scenario, the reality is likely to be considerably worse in terms of peak demand on the grid.
Correct - but the biggest variable is the weather, and when it’s -10C outside everyone’s system is flat out. At the same time. Peak demand is what matters.
That’ll soon reverse if the shift to electricity goes as some suggest. LED lightbulbs become fairly irrelevant when we start talking about EVs and ASHPs.
Yes, I don’t think that really detracts from the point I was making though.
Why do people constantly make their own rubbish up?Correct - but the biggest variable is the weather, and when it’s -10C outside everyone’s system is flat out. At the same time. Peak demand is what matters.
That’ll soon reverse if the shift to electricity goes as some suggest. LED lightbulbs become fairly irrelevant when we start talking about EVs and ASHPs.
Yes, I don’t think that really detracts from the point I was making though.
https://www.nationalgrideso.com/future-energy/futu...
As for why I think for myself - the reason is I'm an electrical engineer working in oil & gas, and I like to evaluate periodically if I should change industry, to electricity distribution or renewables for example.
The point I am making indirectly, is that full electricification of the UK would take generating capacity and grid handling roughly 4x the energy it is today AND there's a drive to get that from non-polluting sources. I really don't think it is happening in my lifetime. And that's without considering 80% of the inhabited planet which really doesn't give a damn.
I agree that hydrogen, specifically blue hydrogren, is going to play a part for a long, long time to come, and thus I should be able to work in oil & gas for a while yet.
Jambo85 said:
What is it that I have said specifically that you disagree with? And which part of which document on the whole website that you have linked to are you using to refute that?
The bit where you've made up numbers. Really poorly.Jambo85 said:
As for why I think for myself - the reason is I'm an electrical engineer working in oil & gas, and I like to evaluate periodically if I should change industry, to electricity distribution or renewables for example.
So you know more than the actual people working the grid. Hilarious. I think the answer is you couldn't.Jambo85 said:
The point I am making indirectly, is that full electricification of the UK would take generating capacity and grid handling roughly 4x the energy it is today AND there's a drive to get that from non-polluting sources. I really don't think it is happening in my lifetime. And that's without considering 80% of the inhabited planet which really doesn't give a damn.
Then read the goddamn FES document to realise you are wrong. Unless you plan to die by 2030.Jambo85 said:
I agree that hydrogen, specifically blue hydrogren, is going to play a part for a long, long time to come, and thus I should be able to work in oil & gas for a while yet.
Probably explains your slightly biased view then.wombleh said:
Changing to heat pumps needs a lot of local changes like insulation upgrades, potentially local grid uplifts to carry extra load plus changing the way people use their heating. Ok for new builds but trickier to retro fit on older houses. Newer pumps can do 70 degrees water but I think they use a lot of power doing that.
Hydrogen is being looked at and sounds promising, potentially avoiding the local changes by reusing the gas grid and just swapping the boiler.
The hydrogen thing is interesting.Hydrogen is being looked at and sounds promising, potentially avoiding the local changes by reusing the gas grid and just swapping the boiler.
H2 really loves to leak, I can't see our existing network being suitable for pure hydrogen (I know thats not on the cards at the moment) without huge investment.
And boy, the home gas explosions we see occasionally will be nothing compared to when someone forgets to turn their hydrogen fuelled gas ring off
It might not be a surprise, but EFD's publication a while back was pointing out that the loss of AGR's, Coal and quite a few gas stations by 2030 is a significant risk given that near Europe lull in wind events do occur and while interconnectors are great, if the host countries need the power themselves, it ain't going to flow to us. Of course we then go on to say that this means we need new nuclear installations
Jambo85 said:
Evanivitch said:
Probably explains your slightly biased view then.
I don't understand the need for the ad hominem attacks - why not tell me the specifics of what you disagree with and why?You made it a personal discussion by bringing your supposed "credentials" into the discussion.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff