Climate change policy

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Making use of your capacity for "genius" ideas:

I assume you have made an informed estimate of the voltage drop, impact of current carrying capacity, size of cables required, cost of installation and trenching (needed to avoid damage) all of which are related to distance.

Your starting point may be the interconnects between France and UK which are ~50 mile long and carry a total of 1-2GW - a small part (3-5%) of UK demand when needed.

Scale it up for trans Atlantic power cables - or possibly Aussie solar panels which can fill in the gaps when the UK is dark. Then let me know how much it will cost, and how to make it secure against threats from a rampant Putin etc.
Interconnects to America are being looked at already so maybe it’s not that crazy

How much did the gas pipe cost from Russia to Germany….that was a 1200mm dia pipe concrete clad, so quite expensive

https://www.energylivenews.com/2024/03/18/uk-eyes-us-electricity-with-transatlantic-power-cable/
 
I'm genuinely confused, why do you think suppliers would want to prevent this? Having householders store the surplus at off peak times? Seems eminently sensible to me.
One of the issues is that overnight there is no grid solar energy. During the off peak times generation is predominately from gas and wind.
Now, if more domestic battery systems are installed, then the ramp up demand will be met by increased gas electricity generation in the main. So we will be trading off increased non renewable usage, producing more harmful climate gases and consuming more fossil fuels.

What we really need is a way that the energy companies can use day time renewable and provide charging only reduced rates.
This battery storage energy could then be used at off peak times to meet the lower grid demand, sufficient to negate the need to use the gas generated electrcity.

The problem is finding a way to differentiate between domestic use, domestic battery charging and domestic EV charging.

it's only a theory I agree, but surely there is companies out there that could crack it.

Triple gain, more off peak renewable, less fossil fuel usage with less climate harming gasses..

.
 
Consumer prices of electricity are capped by OFGEN currently at ~25p kwh.

Energy companies have to buy electricity in the wholesale market - prices can vary from just about zero off-peak up to ~100p at peak periods. The wholesale price represents about 50% of the total as it excludes network and operating costs.

There is a profit to be made by investing in storage. However, doing so will tend to reduce the price differential between peak and off-peak prices - taken to a logical conclusion, as storage increases to absorb all excess production off-peak and peak prices will converge.

Timing depends on the speed of investment by energy companies and individuals, impacted by:
  • appliances increasingly set to operate, and EVs charge, at times of low energy cost
  • EVs increasingly able to feed energy back to the home/grid from their batteries.
For an energy company a major investment in storage seems fairly high risk with a high probability that the benefits will decline over time. It may become more attractive over the next few years as the costs of bulk storage decline.

Individuals may assess risks and benefits differently as they see only a total cost per unit, not the detail the energy companies use. Small scale storage costs are almost certainly much higher per kwh than bulk storage - an inefficient use of capital.
 
U.K. already has these inter connectors:

an AC connector to the Isle of Man, and DC connectors to Northern Ireland, the Shetland Islands, the Republic of Ireland, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark.
Yes good point.

Remember too that the Russia to Germany pipeline 2 was curtailed/shut off due to sanctions.

Also that another underwater gas line exploded, due to suspected nefarious countries/terrorism attack.

Also the destruction of underwater cables by "accidently" being cut, likely deliberate action.

Loss of international www connectivity when under water data cable got sliced

The risk to underwater global infrastructure is a major problem, not easily solved or protected.

This is one of the driving factors behind satellite communications for nations security, and the move from several large state communication satalites, to the mass array type like Starlink. Other countries, China include are already setting up there own mass array mini satellite systems, state owned and state controlled.
 
Interconnects to America are being looked at already so maybe it’s not that crazy

How much did the gas pipe cost from Russia to Germany….that was a 1200mm dia pipe concrete clad, so quite expensive

https://www.energylivenews.com/2024/03/18/uk-eyes-us-electricity-with-transatlantic-power-cable/
2022 - the Nord Stream gas pipelines exploded - believed to be the work of Putins team although difficult to prove conclusively.

These links are built, they are far from robust bits of infrastructure. Also very expensive Morocco
 
Consumer prices of electricity are capped by OFGEN currently at ~25p kwh.

Energy companies have to buy electricity in the wholesale market - prices can vary from just about zero off-peak up to ~100p at peak periods. The wholesale price represents about 50% of the total as it excludes network and operating costs.

There is a profit to be made by investing in storage. However, doing so will tend to reduce the price differential between peak and off-peak prices - taken to a logical conclusion, as storage increases to absorb all excess production off-peak and peak prices will converge.

Timing depends on the speed of investment by energy companies and individuals, impacted by:
  • appliances increasingly set to operate, and EVs charge, at times of low energy cost
  • EVs increasingly able to feed energy back to the home/grid from their batteries.
For an energy company a major investment in storage seems fairly high risk with a high probability that the benefits will decline over time. It may become more attractive over the next few years as the costs of bulk storage decline.

Individuals may assess risks and benefits differently as they see only a total cost per unit, not the detail the energy companies use. Small scale storage costs are almost certainly much higher per kwh than bulk storage - an inefficient use of capital.
Good points.
But the dreaded daily standing charge is a killer for low users.

The kicker for the home domestic energy production is you need to be connected to the grid to send your energy to them.
So you can end up with the scenario that if you can gerate enough surplus to charge a large battery system, so you can then sell back to grid, but not use anything from the grid, it will still cost you around £250+ for the standing charge for the privilege of the energy companies profiteering 🤣
 
Now, if more domestic battery systems are installed, then the ramp up demand will be met by increased gas electricity generation in the main. So we will be trading off increased non renewable usage, producing more harmful climate gases and consuming more fossil fuels.
I’m not sure that I follow your logic. Surely more battery capacity means more energy to displace fossil fuel derived energy?
What we really need is a way that the energy companies can use day time renewable and provide charging only reduced rates.
This battery storage energy could then be used at off peak times to meet the lower grid demand, sufficient to negate the need to use the gas generated electrcity.
We already have time variable tariffs with possible different rates between import to a home and export from it.

I am using these tariffs - encouraged by my energy company.
 
One of the issues is that overnight there is no grid solar energy. During the off peak times generation is predominately from gas and wind.
Now, if more domestic battery systems are installed, then the ramp up demand will be met by increased gas electricity generation in the main. So we will be trading off increased non renewable usage, producing more harmful climate gases and consuming more fossil fuels.

What we really need is a way that the energy companies can use day time renewable and provide charging only reduced rates.
This battery storage energy could then be used at off peak times to meet the lower grid demand, sufficient to negate the need to use the gas generated electrcity.

The problem is finding a way to differentiate between domestic use, domestic battery charging and domestic EV charging.

it's only a theory I agree, but surely there is companies out there that could crack it.

Triple gain, more off peak renewable, less fossil fuel usage with less climate harming gasses..

.
As I understand it, surplus electricity at night is more likely to be wind and nuclear. The nuclear power stations tend to run flat -out all the time, as they can't be ramped up and down very quickly. Gas fired power stations can and are ramped up and down to take out the slack in the system.
I agree about the lack of solar power at night, though. I've noticed that with the panels on our house.
 
I’m not sure that I follow your logic. Surely more battery capacity means more energy to displace fossil fuel derived energy?

We already have time variable tariffs with possible different rates between import to a home and export from it.

I am using these tariffs - encouraged by my energy company.
It's how we get the off peak energy to charge the batteries, it's mainly gas generated. See the chart I just posted.
 
So you're personally attacking an individual - and not discussing the topic at hand. Got it. I think. Although you've used a lot of words and implied that they are relevant to someone, without actually giving any evidence that your words fit that someone.

Oh, for what it's worth, I see much more of your diatribe in your behaviour, rather than anyone else's (whether that's Robin, whom you named, after quoting Chris's post, for instance, so I don't know to whom you were referring when crafting those generic words!)
I'll let others decide who my comments apply to. ;) One can very easily see the little ideological cliques here. I'm reminded of that column in Private Eye decades ago where the more grotesque examples of the artistic "luvvies" fawning over each other were reproduced for the enjoyment of the reader.

As for staying on topic considering what I see elsewhere in this forum, that is about as farcical as this topic itself. I won't waste any time attempting to convince you or any of the other true believers. 99.9999% of such folk had not the slightest interest in or knowledge of the subjects about which they fret and fume until they were told to when suddenly like professional mourners, up went the howls.:giggle: A Milgram experiment on a mass scale; after all the micro version accurately predicted how the macro version would turn out.

I don't know what chimera has you hypnotized, but there are a number to choose from these days.

Oh, I know: it feels so warm and fuzzy to think you are cheering along with your elders and betters. The sense of belonging is so comforting, and the self-righteous glow and sense of superiority so gratifying. Yes, enjoy yourselves by all means. Part of the game is to destroy the previous unifying ideas and myths and then offer new ones which fulfill the same needs while leading the lemmings in the direction intended.

One often observes on social media the same frumpy, bad-tempered, judgmental shrews who today try to enforce "correctness" just as their ancestors did in the past; all that has changed is what they consider "correct". :LOL:

As for me, common sense and the history of science shows that it is the outsiders and those scorned by the majority of their peers who are the innovators and original thinkers and who discern the truths which the orthodox go-alongs either miss completely or more often, aren't even slightly interested in; their mentalities are geared simply towards their own advantage, acceptance and all the craven perpetuals of human nature mentioned above.

Some I suppose make the effort to fool themselves, but most are simply fooled.

And now I must return to reality. Au revoir!
 
Looks like wind (green) is consistently generating more than gas (blue). Or am I reading it wrong?

Except during peak hours.
Apologies, I phrased my statement incorrectly. You are reading it right.
What I was trying to say was that we will be using more gas at off peak times if we increase domestic battery charging, as it is the gas generating the extra power we need to meet demand, so as off peak demand rises, we will burn more fossil fuel with the current system to meet it.

Again apologies to you and others for my poor/incorrect statement.
I hope the above clarifies what is was trying to get across.
 
One of the issues is that overnight there is no grid solar energy. During the off peak times generation is predominately from gas and wind.
Now, if more domestic battery systems are installed, then the ramp up demand will be met by increased gas electricity generation in the main. So we will be trading off increased non renewable usage, producing more harmful climate gases and consuming more fossil fuels.

What we really need is a way that the energy companies can use day time renewable and provide charging only reduced rates.
This battery storage energy could then be used at off peak times to meet the lower grid demand, sufficient to negate the need to use the gas generated electrcity.

The problem is finding a way to differentiate between domestic use, domestic battery charging and domestic EV charging.

it's only a theory I agree, but surely there is companies out there that could crack it.

Triple gain, more off peak renewable, less fossil fuel usage with less climate harming gasses..

.
1734583868452.png
The last 28 days are quite typical for us this time of year, massif daytime peaks in consumption. Wind energy when we get it does not stop at night. The problem is it's not good to generate more than you can use so we have a limit on how much wind capacity we can install. Increase storage in any form and the maximum economic wind generation capacity increases. Home batteries can make a small contribution, we need GW capacities. If you look at the period 10th to 13th a VERY rough estimate to replace gas we would need 25GW x 3 days or 1800 GWh capacity. Three days with low wind are not uncommon, occasionally we get three weeks. This problem will get solved possibly by long distance connection, possibly batteries, sand batteries etc. I doubt one single solution will be the best fit for all but anything that smooths out the peaks and troughs would make life a lot easier for those running the grid.
 
Apologies, I phrased my statement incorrectly. You are reading it right.
What I was trying to say was that we will be using more gas at off peak times if we increase domestic battery charging, as it is the gas generating the extra power we need to meet demand, so as off peak demand rises, we will burn more fossil fuel with the current system to meet it.

Again apologies to you and others for my poor/incorrect statement.
I hope the above clarifies what is was trying to get across.
Apologies accepted - we all make mistakes. (Me doubly so when using my phone 😒)

I was mentally drafting of a reply, but I think Ozi just said it - and better than I could.
 
I'll let others decide who my comments apply to. ;) One can very easily see the little ideological cliques here. I'm reminded of that column in Private Eye decades ago where the more grotesque examples of the artistic "luvvies" fawning over each other were reproduced for the enjoyment of the reader.

As for staying on topic considering what I see elsewhere in this forum, that is about as farcical as this topic itself. I won't waste any time attempting to convince you or any of the other true believers. 99.9999% of such folk had not the slightest interest in or knowledge of the subjects about which they fret and fume until they were told to when suddenly like professional mourners, up went the howls.:giggle: A Milgram experiment on a mass scale; after all the micro version accurately predicted how the macro version would turn out.

I don't know what chimera has you hypnotized, but there are a number to choose from these days.

Oh, I know: it feels so warm and fuzzy to think you are cheering along with your elders and betters. The sense of belonging is so comforting, and the self-righteous glow and sense of superiority so gratifying. Yes, enjoy yourselves by all means. Part of the game is to destroy the previous unifying ideas and myths and then offer new ones which fulfill the same needs while leading the lemmings in the direction intended.

One often observes on social media the same frumpy, bad-tempered, judgmental shrews who today try to enforce "correctness" just as their ancestors did in the past; all that has changed is what they consider "correct". :LOL:

As for me, common sense and the history of science shows that it is the outsiders and those scorned by the majority of their peers who are the innovators and original thinkers and who discern the truths which the orthodox go-alongs either miss completely or more often, aren't even slightly interested in; their mentalities are geared simply towards their own advantage, acceptance and all the craven perpetuals of human nature mentioned above.

Some I suppose make the effort to fool themselves, but most are simply fooled.

And now I must return to reality. Au revoir!
Hi BC'er
Hows things in BC?
A cold but sunny morning here, with a touch of snow forecast.
I'm making mince pies this morning - do Canadians have the same tradition?
Happy Christmas!
 
Last edited:
Making use of your capacity for "genius" ideas:

I assume you have made an informed estimate of the voltage drop, impact of current carrying capacity, size of cables required, cost of installation and trenching (needed to avoid damage) all of which are related to distance.

Your starting point may be the interconnects between France and UK which are ~50 mile long and carry a total of 1-2GW - a small part (3-5%) of UK demand when needed.

Scale it up for trans Atlantic power cables - or possibly Aussie solar panels which can fill in the gaps when the UK is dark. Then let me know how much it will cost, and how to make it secure against threats from a rampant Putin etc.

I'm not a genius - I was adopting a persona of irony/sarcasm/facetiousness - take your pick. I was trying to lead you to a certain Eureka moment of epiphany, but sadly, it missed the mark - maybe too subtle?

How do I know I'm not a genius? It's because I am aware (however superficial my awareness is) that these electricity power supply connections already exist. There is an image shared by Sachakins on this very thread that displays the "IMPORT" power requirement in purple area - I'll reproduce it below.

There has also been recent research into electricity transfer to UK from as far afield as Morocco. Let's get realistic, just for a moment, shall we, about Solar power and fossil fuel power costs, inputs and outputs, etc.

Groundwork:

-It is very, very clear to me that gas powered electricity production is not "cheap". It requires not only a generation plant (££s) but also raw materials (££s) and a great deal of active management (£s). Some of that control and management is automated, but there is still a highly skilled workforce payroll to satisfy.

-It is also very, very clear to me that Solar Power is cheap. Of course there's the cost of land to house it, but land in a desert, let's say is not expensive... Then there's the cost of the solar generation plant (££s). After this, there is no raw material requirement - it's basically free energy input... A skilled workforce is required to maintain, I agree, however, the cost of generation/running is extremely low compared to fossil fuel, due to having no raw material requirement.

-It is equally very clear to me that this Morocco-to-UK electricity supply is deemed viable by those that understand it. I trust the experts in their field, even if the (self-confessed) "free thinker iconoclasts" spout some drivel about "Argument from Authority" or other such bovine excrement.

-Finally, it is pretty obvious to me that since the generation of solar is basically FREE, then voltage drop becomes of little relevance, because you're not trying to minimise loss in order to maximise profit. Pretty much ANY power supplied off the generating capacity counts as profit.


The only real down-side to this explicit Morocco plan is that Morocco is at a similar longitude to the UK and therefore night is the same in both locations. However, if this serves only as a proof of concept (long distance power transfer), then there's no reason why we can't anticipate power transfer of cheap electricity (including free wind - since it won't be limited to domestic power draw requirements) across the globe from time zone to time zone.

There is one potential pitfall in all of this - and no it isn't Putin - multiple transfer routes could easily mitigate that and would only be vulnerable of a massive overt attack, where Putin only really deals in covert and unattributable attacks - the real threat to this becoming reality is, in my view, the fossil fuel industry, who will naturally try every dirty trick in their arsenal to minimise the uptake of renewables in order to maintain their profit stream and to keep their investments making money in the long term. Switching off fossil fuel company profit - when they have functioning generation supply chains that have been invested in for long term income will be the most difficult challenge to overcome. Tufton Street Ghouls will continue to lobby and to hoodwink the general populace of dumb fools that renewables are "more expensive" for many years to come (look at the imaginary and disprovable ideas that people like Tony have immovably wedded themselves to already - despite the facts proving otherwise.) The head of Octopus was on BBC Question Time 3 weeks ago and it was refreshing to see someone on MSM tell the truth that "we have crossed the rubicon - renewables are already cheaper". But holy hell - the non experts on the panel still continued to push back against his established expertise, despite him saying that he "bought more energy than anyone else in the room" <teehee>

So, no, I'm not a genius and am very much aware of that, but I do try to put in some leg work of my own to make up for it.

175528-Screenshot-20241218-212918-Chrome.jpg
 
Something I find quite interesting is how everyone is so obsessed with how electric is made, or stored, or transferred, but when it comes to water supply nobody pays any attention.

Water is as important (if not more so) than electricity yet other than pollution events and the occasional hose pipe ban, nobody is questioning the types of pumps in pumping stations or the size of reservoirs or groundwater aquifers, how water is piped and what those pipes are made of.

people shouting about how we can't possibly meet demand for electric with renewables but don't give a monkeys about how to meet water demands during certain times. So far out of water and electric, it is water that is limited at certain times of year and is far less reliable. Yet we just seem to accept that.

As long as electricity is still flowing out of your sockets what difference does it make if it comes from renewable energy, demanding that it be produced by fossil fuels because you 'feel' it is more reliable makes no sense. If anything it is more unreliable as it's pretty hard for another country to turn off our solar, wind and hydro but they can easily affect oil/gas and uranium supplies.
 
I look at this site from time to time. Wind and solar are currently supplying 52% at the moment.


IMG_2878.jpeg


I’ve got a friend who likes to make things up in his own head for some reason. He had a rant a while back about the UK getting 43% of its electricity from Europe. Today we’re using about 14%. There are several bi-directional interconnects between Europe and the UK. The maximum capacity is 8.8 GW. UK demand seems to swing from about 28GW to 38GW.
 
Last edited:


Write your reply...

Latest posts

Back
Top