The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain
Discussion
Evanivitch said:
Jambo85 said:
Suspect PRTVR meant annual emissions continue to increase, rather than cumulative, the latter being, as you say, blindingly obvious.
This is not unexpected either as the UK is only about 1-2% of global energy consumption, and one of the few countries doing anything meaningful about it. And electricity is one of the smaller parts of the pie.
Made easier by off-shoring a lot of our heavy manufacturing and consumer goods production.This is not unexpected either as the UK is only about 1-2% of global energy consumption, and one of the few countries doing anything meaningful about it. And electricity is one of the smaller parts of the pie.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-why-the-uks-c...
Talksteer said:
Off shoring is not a big factor in the CO2 reduction.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-why-the-uks-c...
Point me to it, because all I saw was "reduction in industrial activity". Do you think we consume less products than 1990?https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-why-the-uks-c...
Does it contradict this data which confirms the UK is an importer of emissions?
https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2
PushedDover said:
PRTVR said:
If we had tenfold number of wind turbines over the last week it would not have changed the output, another means of electricity generation was required, and had to be paid for by the consumer whose bills will rise to pay for the infrastructure required along with standby costs and shut down costs, if the wind blows when the electricity is not required,
Long term storage is another capital expense that will be passed on to the consumers
( is something like that possible to keep the UK grid going for 7 days.)
Who suffers most when energy prices rise ? The poor , a larger part of their income is set aside for energy bills.
There is a difference in that something can be measured ie the UK reduction in CO2 production, and the actual CO2 in the atmosphere that continues to climb, the only one that matters is the latter, so as changes go it is symbolic.
Remember sending production offshore doesn't reduce your CO2 production ,just moves it to another country's statistics, if you consume you generate.
Where ?Long term storage is another capital expense that will be passed on to the consumers
( is something like that possible to keep the UK grid going for 7 days.)
Who suffers most when energy prices rise ? The poor , a larger part of their income is set aside for energy bills.
There is a difference in that something can be measured ie the UK reduction in CO2 production, and the actual CO2 in the atmosphere that continues to climb, the only one that matters is the latter, so as changes go it is symbolic.
Remember sending production offshore doesn't reduce your CO2 production ,just moves it to another country's statistics, if you consume you generate.
In your prediction where is the tenfold of turbines positioned ?
Same place as the existing ? Or elsewhere?
PRTVR said:
Where they are positioned doesn't matter, what matters is the position relative to the high pressure that is sat over the UK.
But if we had any generation from wind, say 0.5GW, then if we had 10 times as many turbines we'd have 10 times as much output, so 5GW. The only time that isn't true is when output from national wind = 0MW which I've seen maybe once or twice. The more of the turbines which go further offshore the less likely that is to happen in future too.
PushedDover said:
PRTVR said:
So we are in agreement that the UK reducing CO2 will not make a difference to global CO2,
It is only symbolic,
How much is this symbolism costing in real money and jobs along with making the poor poorer ?
Before you answer it best you understand that the American climate envoy believes that America going Carbon free will not change the global situation.
https://nypost.com/2021/01/27/kerry-zero-emissions...
Costing in 'real money' or costing in jobs? Costing ? WTF do you mean by that - other than emotional twaddle.It is only symbolic,
How much is this symbolism costing in real money and jobs along with making the poor poorer ?
Before you answer it best you understand that the American climate envoy believes that America going Carbon free will not change the global situation.
https://nypost.com/2021/01/27/kerry-zero-emissions...
By 2030 it is projected that offshore wind in the UK will support 27,000 jobs.
Yes thats correct , electricity customers, great hit the poor again.......
Most green jobs require massive government subsidies, in the North east they are building a turbine blade factory, with a large grant from the government along with its location being inside a freeport , creating big savings for the company,
green jobs are not cheap and sadly rarely materialise in the numbers forecast, google vice-president Bidens promise on green jobs.
I always find it amusing when green jobs are mentioned, why are they not there now ? what will change to make these jobs suddenly appear when we are constructing massive amounts of wind turbines now, its never the whole turbine only the blades or the towers and in the case of the deep-sea turbines nothing at all.
PRTVR said:
If we had tenfold number of wind turbines over the last week it would not have changed the output, another means of electricity generation was required, and had to be paid for by the consumer whose bills will rise to pay for the infrastructure required along with standby costs and shut down costs, if the wind blows when the electricity is not required,
Long term storage is another capital expense that will be passed on to the consumers
( is something like that possible to keep the UK grid going for 7 days.)
Who suffers most when energy prices rise ? The poor , a larger part of their income is set aside for energy bills.
There is a difference in that something can be measured ie the UK reduction in CO2 production, and the actual CO2 in the atmosphere that continues to climb, the only one that matters is the latter, so as changes go it is symbolic.
Remember sending production offshore doesn't reduce your CO2 production ,just moves it to another country's statistics, if you consume you generate.
Awaiting you response to why renewables don’t work :Long term storage is another capital expense that will be passed on to the consumers
( is something like that possible to keep the UK grid going for 7 days.)
Who suffers most when energy prices rise ? The poor , a larger part of their income is set aside for energy bills.
There is a difference in that something can be measured ie the UK reduction in CO2 production, and the actual CO2 in the atmosphere that continues to climb, the only one that matters is the latter, so as changes go it is symbolic.
Remember sending production offshore doesn't reduce your CO2 production ,just moves it to another country's statistics, if you consume you generate.
https://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.bbc...
PushedDover said:
Awaiting you response to why renewables don’t work :
https://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.bbc...
Let's be very clear, Scotland is still dependent on non-renewable energy from England to maintain grid stability with fluctuations in wind generation.https://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.bbc...
PushedDover said:
What would you like to know about the LM factory ?
And what is the site currently ? And why is it derelict ? And what was their canvassing to place the factory there and why the f
k are you so miserable about progress?
OK what percentage of the cost of the wind turbine will be built in the UK at the LM factory?And what is the site currently ? And why is it derelict ? And what was their canvassing to place the factory there and why the f
k are you so miserable about progress?Historically when grants stop so do jobs.
I am not miserable about process, but realistic about what is promised and what will be delivered ,especially when politicians are involved.
Here is a piece by our PM
World leader in wind technology
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54421489
PushedDover said:
So a mix then?
Hank you. That’s what we have been saying - but you can’t argue with the volumes
But what happens when the wind blows when we don't need the electricity ?Hank you. That’s what we have been saying - but you can’t argue with the volumes
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020...
PRTVR said:
PushedDover said:
So a mix then?
Hank you. That’s what we have been saying - but you can’t argue with the volumes
But what happens when the wind blows when we don't need the electricity ?Hank you. That’s what we have been saying - but you can’t argue with the volumes
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020...
You think I’m even going to click that link
Condi said:
Jambo85 said:
Suspect PRTVR meant annual emissions continue to increase, rather than cumulative, the latter being, as you say, blindingly obvious.
Maybe so. In the UK emissions are about 1/3rd below their 1990 level, mainly due to the change in the energy sector. Someone has to do something, if nobody ever starts then nothing will change. The Paris agreement holds all developed economies to reduce their CO2 emissions, so over time worldwide emissions will fall.
PushedDover said:
PRTVR said:
PushedDover said:
So a mix then?
Hank you. That’s what we have been saying - but you can’t argue with the volumes
But what happens when the wind blows when we don't need the electricity ?Hank you. That’s what we have been saying - but you can’t argue with the volumes
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020...
You think I’m even going to click that link
It is about a Telegraph article that reported wind turbine operator's were paid £9.3 million to stop producing on a single day, £6 million of that went to Scotland.
PRTVR said:
What are you scared of ?
It is about a Telegraph article that reported wind turbine operator's were paid £9.3 million to stop producing on a single day, £6 million of that went to Scotland.
I'm pretty sure that was when the Western HVDC connector was down, as it has been notoriously unreliable.It is about a Telegraph article that reported wind turbine operator's were paid £9.3 million to stop producing on a single day, £6 million of that went to Scotland.
And so it wasn't a case that we had too much power in the UK, it was that we couldn't transfer the power to where we needed it or even export it.
We continue to bring North-South connectors online to address the huge potential the North Sea and Scotland has for renewables.
PRTVR said:
But what happens when the wind blows when we don't need the electricity ?
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020...
More storage or interconnectors - we either need to store that power for use later or send it to Europe and displace some of their thermal generation. https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020...
Since that article the interal UK interconnector (Western Link) is back operating which gives another 1GW or so of England/Scotland capacity, 2 more GB/EU interconnectors have been commissioned allowing us to export an additional 2GW to Europe, and a 3rd one from Scotland to Norway will be up and running later this year which also avoids the Scotland/England boundary problem.
The storage problem is why hydrogen is a more interesting decarbonising idea than just using heat pumps to heat houses, You can use all that "spare" wind power to use later, and then stick that in your car or whatever.
Also, back in May last year demands were unusually low because of Covid.
Condi said:
PRTVR said:
Where they are positioned doesn't matter, what matters is the position relative to the high pressure that is sat over the UK.
But if we had any generation from wind, say 0.5GW, then if we had 10 times as many turbines we'd have 10 times as much output, so 5GW. The only time that isn't true is when output from national wind = 0MW which I've seen maybe once or twice. The more of the turbines which go further offshore the less likely that is to happen in future too.
Condi said:
PRTVR said:
But what happens when the wind blows when we don't need the electricity ?
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020...
More storage or interconnectors - we either need to store that power for use later or send it to Europe and displace some of their thermal generation. https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020...
Since that article the interal UK interconnector (Western Link) is back operating which gives another 1GW or so of England/Scotland capacity, 2 more GB/EU interconnectors have been commissioned allowing us to export an additional 2GW to Europe, and a 3rd one from Scotland to Norway will be up and running later this year which also avoids the Scotland/England boundary problem.
The storage problem is why hydrogen is a more interesting decarbonising idea than just using heat pumps to heat houses, You can use all that "spare" wind power to use later, and then stick that in your car or whatever.
Also, back in May last year demands were unusually low because of Covid.
your comment really is on a par with " let them eat cake "
Condi said:
More storage or interconnectors - we either need to store that power for use later or send it to Europe and displace some of their thermal generation.
But we know that interconnectors are not going to be the total answer. Studies have shown that wind can be insufficient over a very large area such that imports to the UK would not be sufficient just when we needed them (given a large proportion of wind generation and insufficient alternate generation)Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff