The coming UK power shortage

Labour closed more mines than the Conservatives did



Between 1963 and 1979, Labour governments closed a total of 303 collieries. Successive Conservative governments shut 162 mines. Even the left-of-centre Energy Minister, Tony Benn, recognised the economic argument and closed more coal mines than Margaret Thatcher and Michael Heseltine put together.

Yet those 162 mines the Tories closed accounted for more job losses than the closure of the 303 that Labour closed.

You have to look at this from pit closures and job losses. Labour closed down the smaller ones, Tories closed the bigger ones.

Still doesn't alter the fact that the mines were losing 1.1 billion quid each year which, back in those days, was a hell of a lot of money. And the unions stepping in to shut production down in a strike that only had 30% backing thus making the mines that could open even more unproductive.
 

doc80905

War Hero
Solar panels can be made cheaply in China, and we missed the opportunity in the nineties to develop a wind turbine industry (by which I mean production) of our own by using aerospace skills from propellor and rotor blade manufacture, but due to the bulk of marine structures we have an opportunity.
There is a new wind turbine manufacturing plant sitting in boxes and containers in a big huge shed in Cambuslang just waiting to be set up. In fact the new overhead cranes can be seen from the M74 as they are outside the building. It'll be interesting to see if it all gets going, quite nice looking kit.
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
There is an interesting report from IEA. Nothing new, but absolutely heretical for the orthodoxal environmentalists.

Nuclear power in a clean energy system

Especially interesting is part of policy recommendation:
--------------------------
Policy recommendations
In this context, countries that intend to retain the option of nuclear power should consider the following actions:
  • Keep the option open: Authorise lifetime extensions of existing nuclear plants for as long as safely possible.
  • Value dispatchability: Design the electricity market in a way that properly values the system services needed to maintain electricity security, including capacity availability and frequency control services. Make sure that the providers of these services, including nuclear power plants, are compensated in a competitive and non-discriminatory manner.
  • Value non-market benefits: Establish a level playing field for nuclear power with other low-carbon energy sources in recognition of its environmental and energy security benefits and remunerate it accordingly.
  • Update safety regulations: Where necessary, update safety regulations in order to ensure the continued safe operation of nuclear plants. Where technically possible, this should include allowing flexible operation of nuclear power plants to supply ancillary services.
  • Create a favourable financing framework: Create risk management and financing frameworks that facilitate the mobilisation of capital for new and existing plants at an acceptable cost taking the risk profile and long time-horizons of nuclear projects into consideration.
  • Support new construction: Ensure that licensing processes do not lead to project delays and cost increases that are not justified by safety requirements.
  • Support innovative new reactor designs: Accelerate innovation in new reactor designs with lower capital costs and shorter lead times and technologies that improve the operating flexibility of nuclear power plants to facilitate the integration of growing wind and solar capacity into the electricity system.
  • Maintain human capital: Protect and develop the human capital and project management capabilities in nuclear engineering.
--------------------------
Talking about Britain, most important part, imho, is "maintain human capital". What do you think, what is more important for the British future - LGBT lessons or nuclear physics?
 

Yokel

LE
Offshore Wind Could Turn U.K. into Net Power Exporter to Europe in Five Years

Britain could become a net exporter of electricity to Europe as soon as 2026, according to S&P Global Platts.

The U.K. imports about 7% of its electricity from Europe now, but that’s set to reverse, in part due to new cables that will boost links with the continent. With Britain aiming to quadruple offshore wind capacity this decade, it could have excess power to send through those lines.

Power flows to where prices are highest. At the moment this is often Britain, particularly along the two cables from France. But prices are expected to rise in mainland Europe, especially in the biggest market — Germany — as coal, lignite and nuclear plants are closed down, according to Platts. That will alter the economics and flow of electricity.
 

Clunker

Old-Salt
Offshore Wind Could Turn U.K. into Net Power Exporter to Europe in Five Years

Britain could become a net exporter of electricity to Europe as soon as 2026, according to S&P Global Platts.

The U.K. imports about 7% of its electricity from Europe now, but that’s set to reverse, in part due to new cables that will boost links with the continent. With Britain aiming to quadruple offshore wind capacity this decade, it could have excess power to send through those lines.

Power flows to where prices are highest. At the moment this is often Britain, particularly along the two cables from France. But prices are expected to rise in mainland Europe, especially in the biggest market — Germany — as coal, lignite and nuclear plants are closed down, according to Platts. That will alter the economics and flow of electricity.
Not gonna happen. As part of the UK must fail project a regular surplus of electricty to EU would be hit by a "non EU generated electricity" tariff.
 
D

Deleted 4482

Guest
If they put too many wind turbines up the whole island of Britain will be propelled south-west .
Quite a few years ago, when the Plymouth Herald website had a forum, there was debate on a proposed windfarm in Plymstock. I jokingly commented about 'the helicopter effect' and that over time, Plymstock would move further towards Ivybridge.

Some people actually believed it! If I remember rightly, one woman was concerned about getting her kids to nursery or something...
 
Not gonna happen. As part of the UK must fail project a regular surplus of electricty to EU would be hit by a "non EU generated electricity" tariff.
Nobody in their right minds increases energy prices without a damn good reason
 
Put your first five words in conjunction with the commission in Bruxelles and there is the problem.
a nose knife interface.
Possibly, but the only potential reason Brussels would do that is to protect domestic manufacturers and encourage them to produce more. (Fuel duty was increased in the 70s in order to promote the development of more fuel efficient cars as well as raising tax.)

I fully understand that renewables aren’t reliable and can’t be relied on for base or peak load. But there has to be a tone of stuff that isn’t time critical that excess electricity can be used for.

do we still not UV treat waste water before discharge?

Do actually need desalination plants? If so, get them running on them when there’s excess renewables.



I’m not a big fan of battery powered industry but are there certain areas that you can put a BFO battery on and run if that when you need?

electricity generation is a difficult one to master especially when using renewables.

renewables aren’t reliable.
Nuclear’s great for base load but not very useful for peak demand as it’s too slow to react.
Gas and coal can be turned on with the fl of a switch but they’re fossil fuels.

what’s not often discussed is that if you look at Denmark for example which is much respected for its wind turbines, it’s not often discussed that it has traditional power stations ticking over in the background to pick up the slack should renewables drop and there’s significant variations in peak loading.
 
Possibly, but the only potential reason Brussels would do that is to protect domestic manufacturers and encourage them to produce more. (Fuel duty was increased in the 70s in order to promote the development of more fuel efficient cars as well as raising tax.)

I fully understand that renewables aren’t reliable and can’t be relied on for base or peak load. But there has to be a tone of stuff that isn’t time critical that excess electricity can be used for.

do we still not UV treat waste water before discharge?

Do actually need desalination plants? If so, get them running on them when there’s excess renewables.



I’m not a big fan of battery powered industry but are there certain areas that you can put a BFO battery on and run if that when you need?

electricity generation is a difficult one to master especially when using renewables.

renewables aren’t reliable.
Nuclear’s great for base load but not very useful for peak demand as it’s too slow to react.
Gas and coal can be turned on with the fl of a switch but they’re fossil fuels.

what’s not often discussed is that if you look at Denmark for example which is much respected for its wind turbines, it’s not often discussed that it has traditional power stations ticking over in the background to pick up the slack should renewables drop and there’s significant variations in peak loading.
I believe Denmark has the largest percentage of homes heated by district heating fed from combined hardly and power plants of any country. Something like 60% of Danish homes are connected to district heating. Their “traditional power stations ticking over in the background” aren’t traditional at all; they have multi-fuel installations that can operate on renewables, biomass and gas.

They’ve got installations that generate electricity from solar when the sun is strong enough, low temperature hot water when it’s not strong enough for power but will hear water and then they top up with biomass or gas.
 
I believe Denmark has the largest percentage of homes heated by district heating fed from combined hardly and power plants of any country. Something like 60% of Danish homes are connected to district heating. Their “traditional power stations ticking over in the background” aren’t traditional at all; they have multi-fuel installations that can operate on renewables, biomass and gas.

They’ve got installations that generate electricity from solar when the sun is strong enough, low temperature hot water when it’s not strong enough for power but will hear water and then they top up with biomass or gas.
When I say traditional power station, I mean it burns something. Burning things emits CO2, but power stations that burn things are more responsive than nuclear and more reliable than renewables.

keeping a power station ticking over in the background isn’t just cost effective, it’s surprisingly inefficient when it comes to emissions.

that unfortunately is the problem with moving away from fossil fuel/bio mass power stations. You can’t store excess electricity effectively.

I suppose if the EU did try and block us out if we did have excess, we could go on a massive spending spree to build up more pump storage power stations.

it might even be an effective way of moving water around the country to overcome droughts.(let’s be honest, there’s no shortage of water in the U.K., we just haven’t got the infrastructure to move it around effectively.

excess wind power pumps water to the top of a water tower (like the ones dotted all around France. Fill the tank up. When you need extra electricity, pull the plug, start the turbines up. Let gravity and height differences do the rest and move the water onto the next tower closer to where water is needed.

all of this is obviously expensive to do. That’s why renewables have massive subsidies and fossil fuels are taxed so heavily.
 
When I say traditional power station, I mean it burns something. Burning things emits CO2, but power stations that burn things are more responsive than nuclear and more reliable than renewables.

keeping a power station ticking over in the background isn’t just cost effective, it’s surprisingly inefficient when it comes to emissions.

that unfortunately is the problem with moving away from fossil fuel/bio mass power stations. You can’t store excess electricity effectively.

I suppose if the EU did try and block us out if we did have excess, we could go on a massive spending spree to build up more pump storage power stations.

it might even be an effective way of moving water around the country to overcome droughts.(let’s be honest, there’s no shortage of water in the U.K., we just haven’t got the infrastructure to move it around effectively.

excess wind power pumps water to the top of a water tower (like the ones dotted all around France. Fill the tank up. When you need extra electricity, pull the plug, start the turbines up. Let gravity and height differences do the rest and move the water onto the next tower closer to where water is needed.

all of this is obviously expensive to do. That’s why renewables have massive subsidies and fossil fuels are taxed so heavily.
The Danes don’t keep base load stations in the background ticking over; they’ve built biomass burners that can rapidly switch between being off or being on burning gas or wood chip. According to Wiki, Denmark is 80% renewable and 57% wind. Norwegian hydro and Swedish nuclear provide the stable base. Denmark also has significant installed methane capacity to generate district heating that generates power as a secondary output; sort of reverse conventional combined heat and power.

I don’t think pumped storage is the answer; the UK hasn’t got anywhere near enough suitable high ground to build a Snowy Mountains Hydro scheme. At best it can build (comparatively) small peak loppers like Llanberis.

I think we’ll see a shift from conventional base load thinking to a much more distributed power system with all sorts of small renewable and co-generation capacity. We’ll also see a huge increase in connected battery storage, not because anyone builds big batteries but because we’ll all be driving electric vehicles.

The enabler will be a market place that facilitates peer to peer transactions. IMHO there’s going to be huge entrepreneurial disruption of the power industry.
 

giatttt

War Hero
Possibly, but the only potential reason Brussels would do that is to protect domestic manufacturers and encourage them to produce more. (Fuel duty was increased in the 70s in order to promote the development of more fuel efficient cars as well as raising tax.)

I fully understand that renewables aren’t reliable and can’t be relied on for base or peak load. But there has to be a tone of stuff that isn’t time critical that excess electricity can be used for.

do we still not UV treat waste water before discharge?

Do actually need desalination plants? If so, get them running on them when there’s excess renewables.



I’m not a big fan of battery powered industry but are there certain areas that you can put a BFO battery on and run if that when you need?

electricity generation is a difficult one to master especially when using renewables.

renewables aren’t reliable.
Nuclear’s great for base load but not very useful for peak demand as it’s too slow to react.
Gas and coal can be turned on with the fl of a switch but they’re fossil fuels.

what’s not often discussed is that if you look at Denmark for example which is much respected for its wind turbines, it’s not often discussed that it has traditional power stations ticking over in the background to pick up the slack should renewables drop and there’s significant variations in peak loading.
Nuclear reactors run at full chat because the fuel costs are negligible. They can if desired be exceedingly flexible hence the global interest in new smaller reactors to provide backup to renewables. As shown below they are faster to spool up or down than coal or gas.

1623073945951.png


 
Last edited:

giatttt

War Hero
Talking about Britain, most important part, imho, is "maintain human capital". What do you think, what is more important for the British future - LGBT lessons or nuclear physics?
They won't need electricity in their brave new green world, with no fears of anyone assuming their chosen pronoun they can simply identify as "warm".
 

offog

LE
Britain and France have had a power connection for a number of year. The latest came on line in Jan21.


If we get the to the stage of exporting power I can't see the EU being a problem as it goes both ways.

Storing solar and wind power if the big issue and water pumps (with lots of black nasty to cover up the leaks) may be the way forward as batteries would be too big and costly and the tech is not there yet. Added to that the grid system I think will need a massive upgrade and investment.
 
Top