The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain

[V8 Fettler]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

XM5ER said:

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

If "The answer is, you'd get 3.3X more low-carbon electricity from SMRs for a 22% extra investment."....

then why isn't anyone doing it ?

Because Nuclear.

And that's baad m'kay.

Not with me.
Happy for SMR's

The real problem is no one has the funds, nor the time line to deliver them.

Why is that ?

Lack of engineers involved in the political decision making process.

[TSCfree]

V8 Fettler said:

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

XM5ER said:

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

If "The answer is, you'd get 3.3X more low-carbon electricity from SMRs for a 22% extra investment."....

then why isn't anyone doing it ?

Because Nuclear.

And that's baad m'kay.

Not with me.
Happy for SMR's

The real problem is no one has the funds, nor the time line to deliver them.

Why is that ?

Lack of engineers involved in the political decision making process.

SMR's would make sense at somewhere like Heysham where the current plant is due for de-commission in the next 10 year or so. It has the infrastructure links, trained personnel, land parcelled away for development. I doubt EDF will build the 3rd reactor at Heysham given the issues at HP-C.

[rolando]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Are you saying the lack of Engineers is the reason why the numbers/ costs aren’t being translated to the installations ?

No, he isn't. Read the post. I'll repeat it just in case you missed it.
"Lack of engineers involved in the political decision making process" and I couldn't agree more.

[rolando]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

I got that.
So IF there was - more engineers in the political process - the costs would be different? Or that private money would be rushing to invest in SMRs ?
Or the State (due to your need for engineers to be in politics)

How would more engineers in politics change the count ?

They'd have far more of a clue about power generation than the PPE graduates who populate Parliament.

[rolando]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Interesting view but you haven’t answered the queation

Change the count of what?

[turbomoped]

As more and more people insulate their houses better and have some sort of solar installation
its likely peoples energy use from the big crooks will drop.
No worries though as the government seem to have made some changes where a standing charge
will be a requirement. This way some cash will still be coming in all year round even if you
only switch on the gas in the coldest months.
I guess the only way to avoid this is to get off the grid altogether.
No doubt some future tax will address this at some stage.

[rolando]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Please continue to describe the changes that would happen under your rationale. I think Politicians are out of depth idiots, don't get me misunderstood - but your 'excuse' for there not being SMR's deployed does not hold other than in emotional rational. An oxymoron in itself.

As you infer, the majority of politicians wouldn't know the difference between an SMR and a cow pat, even if either struck them full in the face. If there were sufficient engineers amongst the powers that be, there may be an understanding that electricity would be infinitely more reliably supplied using SMRs than by using pre industrial revolution technology such as windmills. Dusty Miller didn't give his up for a steam engine without good reason.

[V8 Fettler]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

V8 Fettler said:

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

XM5ER said:

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

If "The answer is, you'd get 3.3X more low-carbon electricity from SMRs for a 22% extra investment."....

then why isn't anyone doing it ?

Because Nuclear.

And that's baad m'kay.

Not with me.
Happy for SMR's

The real problem is no one has the funds, nor the time line to deliver them.

Why is that ?

Lack of engineers involved in the political decision making process.

Are you saying the lack of Engineers is the reason why the numbers/ costs aren’t being translated to the installations ?

A greater number of engineers involved in the political decision making process would almost certainly have resulted in a measured, considered approach to power generation, including the construction of a fleet of PWRs which would now be reaching the end of the construction phase, with the ability to provide baseload power until 2060 and beyond https://subtleengine.org/2014/06/28/mps-degrees-wh... (2014, but similar has applied over previous decades and continues to apply)

[Gary C]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Despite you both feeling that way - the price ?
Would the Private sector want to build ?

Or are you advocating the state pays ?

Before you say the state pays for Renewables - this is a sliding scale and as all of the wisdom denied that Renewables could ever be subsidy free (I still have the list of those who dithered on that bet )the voice of PH also never conceived that as soon as this year the LCOE number would be in the 50’s

The State is exiting from Renewables


So I say again - engineers would how deploy more SMRs in the country given a seat at westminster

Edf are seriously considering smr's and are the only company actually building so they have credibility.

[LongQ]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Gary C said:

Edf are seriously considering smr's and are the only company actually building so they have credibility.

I would say they are 'best' positioned - but a torrid year back home hasn't helped them going forward.

ETA - this is a State Nuclear company. Is that the answer for the UK ? State Energy ?

Edited by Paddy_N_Murphy on Sunday 1st October 20:18

Which countries in the world do NOT have core national energy supply systems that are heavily influenced by National state political decisions? In the case of the USA and Canada even Local State political decisions?

[LongQ]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

but the posters above ? the type that believe in 'Rule Brittania with Engineers', are against State inputs.
Just needs sensible Engineery types Shirley ?


(they think)

What?

You lost me.

[LongQ]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

LongQ said:

What?

You lost me.

The thread has recently taken a turn for the 'we would have more SMR's if we had engineers in Politics'
coupled with how you are suggesting State is the core to all other countries power generation.


There are posters that are claiming that Engineers in high places would fix it all, but have yet to say how that would deliver SMR's at a palatable price.
The driver would appear to come from the view that continuing on a fixed course they hold of loads of Nuclear is the single answer. (as there is no possibility to have a informed or adjusted view)

So, to deliver loads of Nuclear (simple solution for simple minds) - that must the require State influence (which those posters are not in general in acceptance too) as the private sector can't make the sums add up anymore. Engineers in Westminster or not.

Is that your serious response to the recent comments and your view of how political opinions, vacillating at every turn of government depending who holds the most senior government and Civil Service positions, influence long terms policies (and therefore the effectiveness of investment decisions)?

Or are you just in the mood for a Sunday evening wind up?

[katz]

The future of power generation in the UK is Community owned energy. With small scale localised energy grids, communities can use the income stream to provide their own social needs, with less reliance on LA funding. For instance, A Solar Farm funded by social investment can be set up as a social enterprise, so that residents benefit from lower prices, and from potential employment opportunities, thus allowing them to build marketable skill sets, and if necessary require those opportunities be given to their most vulnerable residents, so as to promote independence . If this was set up properly, with the right kind of storage, excess energy could be sold back to the grid, thus creating additional income stream that the community could use to provide social care where needed. All without state funding.

[s2art]

katz said:

The future of power generation in the UK is Community owned energy. With small scale localised energy grids, communities can use the income stream to provide their own social needs, with less reliance on LA funding. For instance, A Solar Farm funded by social investment can be set up as a social enterprise, so that residents benefit from lower prices, and from potential employment opportunities, thus allowing them to build marketable skill sets, and if necessary require those opportunities be given to their most vulnerable residents, so as to promote independence . If this was set up properly, with the right kind of storage, excess energy could be sold back to the grid, thus creating additional income stream that the community could use to provide social care where needed. All without state funding.

So, lets see some numbers on that. Hint; not a chance, barring huge subsidies. And why do we want to produce something that requires huge subsidies?

[Ali G]

The future is near and the future is cottage industry.

[LongQ]

katz said:

The future of power generation in the UK is Community owned energy. With small scale localised energy grids, communities can use the income stream to provide their own social needs, with less reliance on LA funding. For instance, A Solar Farm funded by social investment can be set up as a social enterprise, so that residents benefit from lower prices, and from potential employment opportunities, thus allowing them to build marketable skill sets, and if necessary require those opportunities be given to their most vulnerable residents, so as to promote independence . If this was set up properly, with the right kind of storage, excess energy could be sold back to the grid, thus creating additional income stream that the community could use to provide social care where needed. All without state funding.

OK.

How would you run that in, say, London?

[Ali G]

Or in a post bronze-age society?

[V8 Fettler]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Despite you both feeling that way - the price ?
Would the Private sector want to build ?

Or are you advocating the state pays ?

Before you say the state pays for Renewables - this is a sliding scale and as all of the wisdom denied that Renewables could ever be subsidy free (I still have the list of those who dithered on that bet )the voice of PH also never conceived that as soon as this year the LCOE number would be in the 50’s

The State is exiting from Renewables


So I say again - engineers would how deploy more SMRs in the country given a seat at westminster

Your last sentence is not the easiest to understand, is it a question or a statement? One more seat at Westminster would make no difference.

[rolando]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

Wind has been bumping along at 25 to 30 % all day on Grid watch...

Makes a change for it not to be in the usual single figures.

Edited to add
9.6% average over past 12 months
Source: http://nationalgrid.stephenmorley.org

Edited by rolando on Monday 2nd October 07:38

[AuBull]

LongQ said:

katz said:

The future of power generation in the UK is Community owned energy. With small scale localised energy grids, communities can use the income stream to provide their own social needs, with less reliance on LA funding. For instance, A Solar Farm funded by social investment can be set up as a social enterprise, so that residents benefit from lower prices, and from potential employment opportunities, thus allowing them to build marketable skill sets, and if necessary require those opportunities be given to their most vulnerable residents, so as to promote independence . If this was set up properly, with the right kind of storage, excess energy could be sold back to the grid, thus creating additional income stream that the community could use to provide social care where needed. All without state funding.

OK.

How would you run that in, say, London?

Something like this is being trialled in Oxford to help tackle fuel poverty, Moixa if my memory serves correctly. They've installed a large solar array on a community centre with a grid share platform and smart batteries installed in homes. It's a worthy effort to help those in energy poverty, although i have my reservations about its scale-ability.

Edited by AuBull on Monday 2nd October 08:47