News
news The great thaw of America's north is coming
news 3 Weird Impacts From Storm Ophelia Explained
news A Look Back at the McMinnville UFO Photos
news Chinese Space Station to Crash to Earth Soon
news An Eerie Anniversary: October 1987
news Shadow People On The Loose
news A mysterious hole nearly the size of South Carolina has opened in Antarctica's ice
news A Case for Time Travelers
news Floating Wind Farms in the North Atlantic Could Power the World
news UFO' spotted over Yellowstone volcano?
news Is A.I. Going Too Far?



Username:
Password: or Register
 
Thread Rating:
  • 6 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Natura Naturans
Registered User
User ID: 415819
06-19-2017 08:46 PM

Posts: 10,423



Post: #76
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Advertisement
MR2  Wrote: (06-19-2017 08:41 PM)
Natura Naturans  Wrote: (06-19-2017 08:36 PM)
South Australia is the unfortunate poster child of the failure of renewables. Electric power stopped twice and crippled the entire state causing many millions in damage to industries like aluminum smelters:



Federal Industry Minister Greg Hunt yesterday blamed the Victorian Labor government for abandoning energy security with a strong push to renewables, putting industry in that state also at risk.

The Australian Workers Union warned yesterday that the Alcoa plant, which employs 680 workers and indirectly supports 2000 jobs in Victoria’s oldest regional town, may never fully recover as the company took one of the smelter’s two potlines out of action, reducing its manufacturing capacity by 60 per cent.

The Portland smelter, about 350km southwest of Melbourne, lost power for 5½ hours on Thursday because of an issue in the Victorian transmission network, which affected the flow through the Heywood interconnector to South Australia. To balance the South Australian network — powered by gas and a 45 per cent renewables mix plus imported coal-fired generation — 220 megawatts of power was shed from it, blacking out 200,000 homes and shutting down industry.

BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam mine in South Australia lost power for more than four hours, while other companies including Oz Minerals were affected for six hours. During a September statewide blackout in South Australia, Olympic Dam was without full power from September 28 to October 13. Olympic Dam asset president Jacqui McGill said yesterday the two blackouts in little more than two months had cost it $100 million and “we can’t keep absorbing these kinds of costs”.

https://stopthesethings.com/2016/12/05/s...d-economy/

Jhikpghf and your failure to see why we are f**ked still astounds me..

It is the global warming alarmists like you who have caused the grid problems in Germany and South Australia. if you had listened to the scientists South Australia would never have put up so many costly, failed windfarms. As for your imagined global warming it IS man made, by the fake temperature records of climate alarmist.

“The highest activity a human being can attain is learning for understanding, because to understand is to be free.” --Baruch Spinoza
Quote this message in a reply

Natura Naturans
Registered User
User ID: 415819
06-19-2017 10:19 PM

Posts: 10,423



Post: #77
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Germans Horrified That Forests, “Strictly Protected” Species, Being Cleared Away For Wind Parks -

See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2017/02/19/germa...rYH4P.dpuf

“The highest activity a human being can attain is learning for understanding, because to understand is to be free.” --Baruch Spinoza
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 421894
06-19-2017 10:20 PM

 



Post: #78
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Natura Naturans  Wrote: (06-19-2017 06:50 PM)
Offshore Wind Farm Costs $150,000 Per Home Currently Powered
An offshore wind farm in Rhode Island went online Monday, but building it costed $150,000 for every household powered.

Three miles off the coast of Block Island, R.I., the wind farm is currently generating enough electricity to power 2,000 homes, but building the five turbines costed $300 million. That’s roughly $150,000 per household just to build the turbines, not to operate them.

OK, I'm not sure about "household powered", we measure power generated and its cost in MWh and $/MWh respectively. America's first offshore windfarm is a rather small affair with just five turbines and 30MW nameplate capacity. http://dwwind.com/project/block-island-wind-farm/ They have secured a generous $244/MWh strike price ( contract for difference ) presumably because they want to kickstart an American offshore wind industry. By contrast, the well established industry in North Sea has delivered a strike price of $66/MWh for two new Danish projects http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016...wind-farm/

Natura Naturans  Wrote: (06-19-2017 06:50 PM)
To put this in some perspective, the U.S.’s newest nuclear reactor, Watts Bar Unit 2, cost $4.7 billion to build but powered 4.5 million homes. That’s only about $1,044 per household, according to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s calculations. This means powering a home with the Block Island wind farm is almost 144 times more expensive than powering a home with the newest U.S. nuclear reactor.

Again household powered? I think someone is spinning you a load of crap here. Block Island has a nameplate capacity of 30MW and a load factor of 45%
Watts bar 2 has a nameplate capacity of 1,200MW and a load factor of 90% so we would expect it to power 80 times as many homes but you have it powering 2250 times as many homes so all you numbers are bullshit, sorry.

But there is a much bigger problem with the comparison, Watts Bar 2 is probably the worst ever attempt at building a nuclear reactor. Did you know that they have been trying to build that reactor for 43 years? A lot of the project costs were paid down decades ago so the cost of building the reactor in today's prices is missleading. http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/busin...on/348218/
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 421895
06-19-2017 10:35 PM

 



Post: #79
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
So what does a reactor that was designed in the 60s look like when viewed today? In a word, terrifying. Here are a few select facts:

"While the TVA and the nuclear industry describe Watts Bar 2 as “the first new nuclear generation of the 21st Century,” in fact the TVA resuscitated a demonstrably unsafe 1960s-era ice condenser design that was abandoned decades ago by the rest of the nuclear industry. Mismanagement and construction problems have driven the project’s price tag up with billions of dollars in cost overruns. Safety continues to be compromised as the NRC is allowing the TVA to delay post-Fukushima seismic design upgrades indefinitely."

Problematic, antiquated design. Despite having undergone significant recent (re)construction work, Watts Bar 2 is an old reactor design. Both of the Watts Bar 1100-megawatt units were built to the antiquated “ice condenser” containment design that has not been used for any other reactor construction in decades.

The Westinghouse Ice Condenser Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) was designed in the 1960s. Ice condensers deploy about 2 million pounds of chipped ice hanging in long, skinny baskets around the reactor core in an ice room. The theory—never tested in the real world for obvious reasons—is that in a loss of coolant accident the ice would lessen the excess temperature and pressure created by a meltdown. This flawed logic convinced the Atomic Energy Commission (predecessor to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission) to initially license the design with a less costly, smaller, weaker containment structure, often referred to as “eggshell-like” containment. The driving design goal was lower cost. It was not realized until later that safety had been seriously compromised; a report by Sandia National Laboratories in April 2000 concluded that "... ice condenser plants are at least two orders of magnitude [100 times] more vulnerable to early containment failure than other types of PWRs." http://thebulletin.org/watts-bar-unit-2-...y-tale8783

And it's had a rotten record since it opened, http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/...story.html and more problems https://www.forbes.com/sites/rodadams/20...14c4285712

Natura Naturans  Wrote: (06-19-2017 06:50 PM)
The extremely high cost of offshore wind doesn’t worry environmentalists and progressives however, because, as Salon.com says about the project, “it’s the precedent that counts.” The wind farm is eventually supposed to generate enough energy to power 17,000 homes.

Deepwater Wind’s five turbines began generating power in December.

Offshore wind power is expensive because installing and maintaining any kind of infrastructure underwater is extremely difficult. The salt water of the ocean is incredibly corrosive and makes operating such facilities difficult and expensive.

A larger offshore wind farm in New York will cost anywhere from $25,000 to $15,625 for every home it powers, according to calculations previously made by The DCNF.

Despite the extremely high cost, federal officials want to power 23 million homes with offshore wind by the year 2050. Offshore wind is so pricey that early investors, like Germany, plan to stop building new turbines to lower the costs of electricity. Electricity is so comparatively cheap in most parts of the U.S. that offshore wind isn’t generally necessary.

The average American’s electric bill has gone up 10 percent since former President Barak Obama took office in January 2009, due to government officials imposing regulations and taxpayer support for green energy projects.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/01/offsho...y-powered/

This screed has been written as if offshore wind was some kind of alien technology. The North Sea has multiple GW of offshore wind capacity installed with huge arrays like the London Array, Gwynt y Môr and Greater Gabbard each over 1/2 GW. As I said before, prices are now very competative with Kriegers Flak hitting just $55/MWh, the average European wholesale electricity price.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 421895
06-19-2017 10:48 PM

 



Post: #80
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
So how does a modern, safer nuclear reactor compare to renewables on cost? Not great. The EPR reactor is a modern design, supposedly 33% more efficient than older PWR reactors, with a complete redesign following the Fukushima disaster. The UK is building two new EPR reactors at Hinkley Point ( Hinkley Point C ). The government negotiated a 35 year index liked strike price of £92 in 2013. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsb...Davey.html

Agora Energiewende conducted a comparison of Hinkley Point C with renewables prices and found it was by far the most expensive option, twice the price of onshore wind power. https://www.agora-energiewende.de/filead..._final.pdf Since the study was conducted, PV prices have plumeted.

Last year Chile set a strike price of $29 per MWh, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...-than-wind that has been beaten now by Abu Dhabi with $24 per MWh http://www.thenational.ae/business/energ...from-solar less than half the price of coal generated power https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ce-of-coal

Its easy to see why when the wholesale price of polysilicon panels is as low as 30 cents / Watt https://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?Ind...l+poly+250 . Onshore wind is also cheaper than fossil fuels as will be offshore wind in the near future. http://www.norwea.no/nyhetsarkiv/visning...5&Action=1 and offshore http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016...wind-farm/

Whatever mistakes and wrongheaded policies have been pursued in the past, for projects starting today, renewable are the cheapest.
Quote this message in a reply
Natura Naturans
Registered User
User ID: 415819
06-19-2017 11:43 PM

Posts: 10,423



Post: #81
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:48 PM)
So how does a modern, safer nuclear reactor compare to renewables on cost? Not great. The EPR reactor is a modern design, supposedly 33% more efficient than older PWR reactors, with a complete redesign following the Fukushima disaster. The UK is building two new EPR reactors at Hinkley Point ( Hinkley Point C ). The government negotiated a 35 year index liked strike price of £92 in 2013. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsb...Davey.html

Agora Energiewende conducted a comparison of Hinkley Point C with renewables prices and found it was by far the most expensive option, twice the price of onshore wind power. https://www.agora-energiewende.de/filead..._final.pdf Since the study was conducted, PV prices have plumeted.

Last year Chile set a strike price of $29 per MWh, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...-than-wind that has been beaten now by Abu Dhabi with $24 per MWh http://www.thenational.ae/business/energ...from-solar less than half the price of coal generated power https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ce-of-coal

Its easy to see why when the wholesale price of polysilicon panels is as low as 30 cents / Watt https://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?Ind...l+poly+250 . Onshore wind is also cheaper than fossil fuels as will be offshore wind in the near future. http://www.norwea.no/nyhetsarkiv/visning...5&Action=1 and offshore http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016...wind-farm/

Whatever mistakes and wrongheaded policies have been pursued in the past, for projects starting today, renewable are the cheapest.
The main trouble with wind and solar is that they are intermittent. You only get power when the wind blows or the Sun shines. The second thing that makes renewables impractical is the necessity to balance them with a baseload like coal, gas or nuclear. In order to maintain stability of frequency and stability of load this is necessary. In countries that reach the 50% renewables target, the grid becomes unstable leading to blackouts. This is what has happened in South Australia and Germany and Denmark. It is the reason renewables will never be more than a fraction of any grids electricity mix. Read the links provided on South Australia to see this is why the grid went down several times recently and cost 350 MILLION in damages.

“The highest activity a human being can attain is learning for understanding, because to understand is to be free.” --Baruch Spinoza
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397443
06-19-2017 11:54 PM

 



Post: #82
teach RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Natura Naturans  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:43 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:48 PM)
So how does a modern, safer nuclear reactor compare to renewables on cost? Not great. The EPR reactor is a modern design, supposedly 33% more efficient than older PWR reactors, with a complete redesign following the Fukushima disaster. The UK is building two new EPR reactors at Hinkley Point ( Hinkley Point C ). The government negotiated a 35 year index liked strike price of £92 in 2013. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsb...Davey.html

Agora Energiewende conducted a comparison of Hinkley Point C with renewables prices and found it was by far the most expensive option, twice the price of onshore wind power. https://www.agora-energiewende.de/filead..._final.pdf Since the study was conducted, PV prices have plumeted.

Last year Chile set a strike price of $29 per MWh, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...-than-wind that has been beaten now by Abu Dhabi with $24 per MWh http://www.thenational.ae/business/energ...from-solar less than half the price of coal generated power https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ce-of-coal

Its easy to see why when the wholesale price of polysilicon panels is as low as 30 cents / Watt https://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?Ind...l+poly+250 . Onshore wind is also cheaper than fossil fuels as will be offshore wind in the near future. http://www.norwea.no/nyhetsarkiv/visning...5&Action=1 and offshore http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016...wind-farm/

Whatever mistakes and wrongheaded policies have been pursued in the past, for projects starting today, renewable are the cheapest.
The main trouble with wind and solar is that they are intermittent. You only get power when the wind blows or the Sun shines. The second thing that makes renewables impractical is the necessity to balance them with a baseload like coal, gas or nuclear. In order to maintain stability of frequency and stability of load this is necessary. In countries that reach the 50% renewables target, the grid becomes unstable leading to blackouts. This is what has happened in South Australia and Germany and Denmark. It is the reason renewables will never be more than a fraction of any grids electricity mix. Read the links provided on South Australia to see this is why the grid went down several times recently and cost 350 MILLION in damages.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_Count...ge_Station
Rolleyes
Quote this message in a reply
Natura Naturans
Registered User
User ID: 415819
06-19-2017 11:56 PM

Posts: 10,423



Post: #83
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Folly: All Of Europe’s Wind Power Capacity Only Could Steadily Provide Enough Electricity For Tiny Belgium!

By P Gosselin on 12. July 2016

Swedish site klimatsans.com posted a chart presented by Rolf Schuster showing Germany’s and much of Europe’s total wind power generation over the first 6 months of this year:

[Image: Schuster-160706-EU-Vind-2016.jpg]
Wind power production Germany and Europe. Chart by Rolf Schuster, from klimatsans.com.

The first thing one notices is wind power’s extreme supply volatility. In February wind production peaked at 75 gigawatts – enough to power all of Germany (for a few hours). Relying only on wind power, most of Germany would have been completely dark since late March.

Every month wind power fell multiple times close to zero, meaning that it would not even be possible to even power little Luxembourg.

And even if the technology existed to store the energy for a couple of days, the best all the installed wind power capacity in Europe could hope to consistently provide is some 15 gigawatts – which would be enough to power something on the order of Belgium only.

If power could be stored for an entire week, it would only be possible to supply only about half of Germany – the rest of the continent, France, Spain, Portugal, Benelux, United Kingdom, Ireland, Scandinavia, Greece, Austria, Switzerland, all of eastern Europe and the Balkan countries would have to go without.

This gives us an idea of how ridiculous the pursuit of 100% renewable energy supply really is.


- See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2016/07/12/folly...NtCas.dpuf

“The highest activity a human being can attain is learning for understanding, because to understand is to be free.” --Baruch Spinoza
Quote this message in a reply
Natura Naturans
Registered User
User ID: 415819
06-19-2017 11:58 PM

Posts: 10,423



Post: #84
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:54 PM)
Natura Naturans  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:43 PM)
The main trouble with wind and solar is that they are intermittent. You only get power when the wind blows or the Sun shines. The second thing that makes renewables impractical is the necessity to balance them with a baseload like coal, gas or nuclear. In order to maintain stability of frequency and stability of load this is necessary. In countries that reach the 50% renewables target, the grid becomes unstable leading to blackouts. This is what has happened in South Australia and Germany and Denmark. It is the reason renewables will never be more than a fraction of any grids electricity mix. Read the links provided on South Australia to see this is why the grid went down several times recently and cost 350 MILLION in damages.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_Count...ge_Station
Rolleyes

Pumped storage is very expensive and only available in mountanous areas. In most areas there is no room for such and no elevation difference for it to work. You only make an outrageously expensive renewable energy MORE EXPENSIVE!

“The highest activity a human being can attain is learning for understanding, because to understand is to be free.” --Baruch Spinoza
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397443
06-20-2017 12:03 AM

 



Post: #85
teach RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
https://www.ecowatch.com/coal-mine-hydro...24350.html

Germany is absolutely kicking our ass right now, but good thing you get a nickle for every post for the coal industry. chuckle
Quote this message in a reply
Mr ifnoc
Location: All of it
User ID: 421897
06-20-2017 12:07 AM

Posts: 7,621



Post: #86
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-18-2017 06:22 AM)
Everybody wants to have their cake and eat it too.

And sooner or later everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences.

Well in America. We call it. DIYS.

We don't all have rich mans tastes. Some of us, can live without homes, kill for food. Dang! We can even grow stuff...

Hyuuk yuk!

The Global Grids, Satellites, they the elite plans for exodus of this planet. Poof! It will all be lost. All of it.

Believe is or not. There is a way better way to live.

Just depends upon what one lusts for. Drop those, and things get so much more simple, and quiet.

It is what it is. Always temporary.Bump

There's a Newdawnrising Heartflowers


Rest in peace Galaxy.:( Candle

Spiddy said, 3/22/15: I generally plug my cerebral cortex into a vagina but I guess you're close enough Fred.
:)

"Hilderbeast" ,(hillderbeast), or any variation of, are belonging to me! ®©™ per Fork!:)

Pray for Uli <3
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397443
06-20-2017 12:10 AM

 



Post: #87
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Not to mention the super caps that are starting to come out.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 421895
06-20-2017 12:14 AM

 



Post: #88
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Natura Naturans  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:58 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:54 PM)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_Count...ge_Station
Rolleyes

Pumped storage is very expensive and only available in mountanous areas. In most areas there is no room for such and no elevation difference for it to work. You only make an outrageously expensive renewable energy MORE EXPENSIVE!

There you go again with this "outrageously expensive" nonsense. I've shown the figures for latest renewables CFD strike prices for new build plant, $24/MWh for PV, $40/MWh for onshore wind and $55/MWh for offshore wind, contrast with the cheapest new coal at $60/MWh up to a projected $130 for coal with CCS, $70 to $80 for CCGT gas and $115/MWh for new nuclear.
Quote this message in a reply
The Hermit
Registered User
User ID: 358581
06-20-2017 12:14 AM

Posts: 2,563



Post: #89
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
"The Westinghouse Ice Condenser Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) was designed in the 1960s. Ice condensers deploy about 2 million pounds of chipped ice hanging in long, skinny baskets around the reactor core in an ice room."

Just how f*cking high were they, when they thought that one up..

Consciousness is an ocean from a distance.
A wave from above.
Droplets from within.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 421908
06-20-2017 01:06 AM

 



Post: #90
RE: Daily Telegraph: There is No Such Thing as Affordable Renewable Energy
Natura Naturans  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:43 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:48 PM)
So how does a modern, safer nuclear reactor compare to renewables on cost? Not great. The EPR reactor is a modern design, supposedly 33% more efficient than older PWR reactors, with a complete redesign following the Fukushima disaster. The UK is building two new EPR reactors at Hinkley Point ( Hinkley Point C ). The government negotiated a 35 year index liked strike price of £92 in 2013. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsb...Davey.html

Agora Energiewende conducted a comparison of Hinkley Point C with renewables prices and found it was by far the most expensive option, twice the price of onshore wind power. https://www.agora-energiewende.de/filead..._final.pdf Since the study was conducted, PV prices have plumeted.

Last year Chile set a strike price of $29 per MWh, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...-than-wind that has been beaten now by Abu Dhabi with $24 per MWh http://www.thenational.ae/business/energ...from-solar less than half the price of coal generated power https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ce-of-coal

Its easy to see why when the wholesale price of polysilicon panels is as low as 30 cents / Watt https://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?Ind...l+poly+250 . Onshore wind is also cheaper than fossil fuels as will be offshore wind in the near future. http://www.norwea.no/nyhetsarkiv/visning...5&Action=1 and offshore http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016...wind-farm/

Whatever mistakes and wrongheaded policies have been pursued in the past, for projects starting today, renewable are the cheapest.
The main trouble with wind and solar is that they are intermittent. You only get power when the wind blows or the Sun shines. The second thing that makes renewables impractical is the necessity to balance them with a baseload like coal, gas or nuclear. In order to maintain stability of frequency and stability of load this is necessary. In countries that reach the 50% renewables target, the grid becomes unstable leading to blackouts. This is what has happened in South Australia and Germany and Denmark. It is the reason renewables will never be more than a fraction of any grids electricity mix. Read the links provided on South Australia to see this is why the grid went down several times recently and cost 350 MILLION in damages.

There is a way of doing renewables well and a way ( well many ways ) of doing it badly. IT looks like South Australia has done it poorly and Germany has paid the price of making renewables cheap for the rest of us https://energytransition.org/2016/01/how...ost-of-pv/

link to image: https://energytransition.org/wp-content/...are-01.png

I understand the UK market best of all so I will describe how those problems are addressed in the UK.

Firstly there will be no such thing as baseload in the future. Baseload dies when a country's renewable nameplate capacity matches or exceeds its current demand. There is no room for expensive thermal plants ( nuclear in particular ) when the power they generate may only be needed half the time. What you need instead is load following plants like modern efficient fast starting CCGT and for the countries that have it, hydro. Fortunately for the UK, offshore wind provides a fairly steady ( over %50 load factor for the best North Sea ) supply of power with PV matching the pattern of peak demand in the summer. As you point out sometimes there is no renewable generation and that's where the capacity market comes in. In the UK the capacity market is a regular auction of contracts to provide electricity. There is an order of merit with the most efficient plants, modern CCGT being brought online for the longest periods, through coal ( phased out by 2025 ) and OCGT down to reciprocating engines at the end of the order of merit. They have the lowest capital costs but are the least efficient and most expensive to run. Interconnectors with other countries and pumped storage also play a role https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinorwig_Power_Station

The second way of managing is with demand response of which frequency varying is the oldest method. In the UK big consumers that have signed contracts to load shift based on the spot price and spare capacity but in the future that will also include residential, think of washing machines, dishwashers, immersion heaters, battery charging all talking to the smart grid, working out when to switch on.

The third way is storage, at the moment that's pumped and hydro for the UK. 15 to 20 years out there should be a substantial fleet of EVs or home batteries that can store power when cheap and sell it back on peak ( V2G ) https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/...Technology Commercial scale flow batteries have already hit $50/MWh stored for mid scale storage, but are not widely deployed yet. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/...5bd14a5bde

So as way of illustration, here is a snapshot of the UK last weekend.

http://i.imgur.com/pWJSlIm.png

As you can see, we have a surplus of power, with the frequency over 50Hz, Coal is out of the picture, nuclear is providing our baseload as we currently don't have enough renewable capacity, the CCGT plant at 18% of supply is load following the renewables, wind is providing nearly 20% of power, we are adding about 2GW nameplate capacity per year focusing on offshore, pumped storage is spinning reserve, biomass is also at a low level, when supply is tighter it runs at 2GW, solar PV is providing over 20% of the power, OCGT is reserve capacity near the end of the order of merit, then we are drawing in French nuclear and Dutch wind energy through the interconnectors.
Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement









Contact UsConspiracy Forum. No reg. required! Return to TopReturn to ContentRSS Syndication