Will smart meters be used for the rolling blackouts?

[Pedronicus]

fify

 

[D_W]

We haven't adequate electricity production and won't have for the foreseeable future, therefore there will eventually be blackouts. Can anyone suggest an easier way of forcibly limiting domestic power consumption than a smart meter? I wouldn't think anyone is being particularly paranoid to foresee their usage for this.

I guess the question is whether or not they'll use the smart meters vs. just doing it the old fashioned way like they do here, rotating entire areas.

Hospitals here, and I'm sure there, always have their own independent power production that comes on automatically. It's in the form of giant diesel generators now, but in the old days, it was sometimes completely independent power and heat production, period, with a powerhouse on any large hospital.

I kind of miss that idea -I know it's not efficient, but the building complexes of the older hospitals with on site everything were far more interesting than the boring buildings now.

 

[D_W]

Not only have EV's been in the pipeline for years but the Nuclear Industry have been telling the government for over 10 years that their ageing fleet of power stations would be winding down generation in 10 years time and replacements should be planned and contruction started. Alas the government response was "10 years you say, well we don't need to worry about that yet"

Fast forward 10 years and we see one power station under construction, one in design and I believe 6 current stations which are now being wound down for decommissioning. Suddenly the Government wants to moan at EDF and say "but why didn't you tell us" and "here's £700M. What do you mean it takes 10 years to design plan and construct a nuclear power station, can't we get them built any quicker ?"

Can they be recertified like they are here? It's not safety that takes them offline here, it's competitiveness due to the enormous employee costs (huge staff, usually with very robust benefits).

 

[Dave Moore]

Been reading about the potential for rolling blackouts this winter and one thing struck me. They talk about different blocks being temporarily shut off but also about how certain places will be exempt e.g. care homes, hospitals and people with specific needs.

I may well be wrong but from my limited understanding you can't just turn off a substation/section in an area without it affecting everyone in that area. The only conceivable way I can think of (other than manually disconnecting everyone) is to use smart meters!

Whilst I'm not in to peddeling conspiracies, it does seem to me that we are seeing more and more that smart meters aren't there for the benefit of the user and instead to provide more control to the electricity providers.

I don't have one as so far I have not been convinced that there is any benefit to me. I have a perfectly good non-smart digital one and I know how much elec I use as I have a separate display that monitors the incoming cable. I still cook my dinner for the same amount of time though.

So am I completely off the mark with this assumption?

Last week there was a report in the Daily Mail of a lady who had been put on a different tariff where she had to pay up front. All without her knowledge. I’d never have an unsmart meter, they are only there for their benefit and they can cut your supply remotely. Don’t worry we won’t have anything soon so that the elite can have everything. Watched a video on YouTube yesterday where it was explained we cannot produce more energy as the green renewable(cough!) only replace dwindling supplies of other fuels. Therefore if the population increases we run out of power and the elites won’t be able to keep flying to parties and eating what they wish, so we are going to be made poor or killed off.

 

[dgs2001]

Can they be recertified like they are here? It's not safety that takes them offline here, it's competitiveness due to the enormous employee costs (huge staff, usually with very robust benefits).

I think that's what's been happening over the last few years already. They are apparently no longer maintainable due to age and expected life span of certain elements etc.
There may be nothing really wrong with them but our thankfully cautious nuclear industry can only bend, reasses and rewrite so many of their own rules and regulations before some sort of incident causes the inevitable finger pointing. Trouble is when things do go wrong the powers that be will line up with the rest of us pointing and saying "well why did you do that" & "Why wasn't this plant decommissioned years ago"

I think it's a pretty risk averse industry so if 30/40 years ago people designed & signed off on a generation plant that was deemed good to run for 30/40 years then it would be somewhat of an admission to suggest that they were wrong and the plant is good for 50/60 years.

 

[sploo]

Last week there was a report in the Daily Mail of a lady who had been put on a different tariff where she had to pay up front. All without her knowledge. I’d never have an unsmart meter, they are only there for their benefit and they can cut your supply remotely. Don’t worry we won’t have anything soon so that the elite can have everything. Watched a video on YouTube yesterday where it was explained we cannot produce more energy as the green renewable(cough!) only replace dwindling supplies of other fuels. Therefore if the population increases we run out of power and the elites won’t be able to keep flying to parties and eating what they wish, so we are going to be made poor or killed off.

People who are getting into debt are being put on prepay tariffs by suppliers; which is rightly getting some attention at the moment. That said, if it was in the Daily Fail I'd be highly suspicious that story was probably made up - given that factual journalism is a complete unknown to them.

 

[selectortone]

. I’d never have an unsmart meter, they are only there for their benefit

That's privatisation for you. No profit in customer service, all that matters is return for the owners and shareholders. And to add insult to injury, much of that profit goes overseas now.

 

[Spectric]

Fast forward 10 years and we see one power station under construction, one in design and I believe 6 current stations which are now being wound down for decommissioning. Suddenly the Government wants to moan at EDF and say "but why didn't you tell us" and "here's £700M. What do you mean it takes 10 years to design plan and construct a nuclear power station, can't we get them built any quicker ?"

That one power station is already three billion over budget and years behind schedule along with an agreed price per unit that is just eyewatering. You cannot build these things very easily, problems start on day one because you need to find investors willing to risk millions of pounds for many years without any guarantee of returns. Then where do you build them, you don't want coastal due to rising sea levels and no one wants them anywhere near where they live because it devalues property and do you want to live near a potential Fujishima so another big issue. Then what about the waste, you cannot just keep stockpiling the waste because it is lethal for thousands of years and cost millions of pounds to baby sit for generations so the Germans have the right idea in getting rid of the nuclear plants as they are just such a risk to humanity. We need to invest heavily in renewables, windfarms at sea where you can build big and have huge concentrations rather than on land and start looking into tidal, but like everything we have just got greedy and people don't invest unless there are big returns.

 

[selectortone]

That one power station is already three billion over budget and years behind schedule along with an agreed price per unit that is just eyewatering. You cannot build these things very easily,

Or the answer could be SMRs - small nuclear reactors like the ones Rolls-Royce have been building for nuclear submarines since the 60s. Up to around 500MW, proven safety record, made in the UK, a fraction of the cost of a nuclear power station. Sounds like a no-brainer to me.

 

[D_W]

I think that's what's been happening over the last few years already. They are apparently no longer maintainable due to age and expected life span of certain elements etc.
There may be nothing really wrong with them but our thankfully cautious nuclear industry can only bend, reasses and rewrite so many of their own rules and regulations before some sort of incident causes the inevitable finger pointing. Trouble is when things do go wrong the powers that be will line up with the rest of us pointing and saying "well why did you do that" & "Why wasn't this plant decommissioned years ago"

I think it's a pretty risk averse industry so if 30/40 years ago people designed & signed off on a generation plant that was deemed good to run for 30/40 years then it would be somewhat of an admission to suggest that they were wrong and the plant is good for 50/60 years.

Well, some refurbishing of the plant can occur. I think in the US, nobody ever considered that the plants wouldn't be replaced by an improved version without 30/40 years.

In my area of work, people are often conservative (some aren't!) and not tied to only one answer being possible, so if you asked them in the context of something they could guarantee, they may say 30/40 years but actually think reasonably, the life could be twice that.

The stations here tend not to be recertified when it's politically unfavorable in a region.

Too, the enormous employee complements (1200, whatever) are often described as being necessary because everything is done twice, sometimes three times with the implication of "if it was just like everything else, we wouldn't do that".

Well, it's nuclear. It's not like everything else.

 

[niemeyjt]

That's privatisation for you. No profit in customer service, all that matters is return for the owners and shareholders. And to add insult to injury, much of that profit goes overseas now.

Except in France, where EDF is almost 100% State-controlled, smart meters aka Linky are mandatory.

 

[mikej460]

We haven't adequate electricity production and won't have for the foreseeable future, therefore there will eventually be blackouts. Can anyone suggest an easier way of forcibly limiting domestic power consumption than a smart meter? I wouldn't think anyone is being particularly paranoid to foresee their usage for this.

As I understand it Phil the problem isn't a lack of electricity generating capacity but a potential lack of gas for the gas driven generators. Years ago, despite producing gazillions of gas from the North Sea our government took the monumentally stupid decision to stop storing it. Instead, they did a deal with Yerp to ship excess over over there in the summer and buy it back in the winter. Then along came rootin tootin Pootin and sent that little scheme all to hell in a hand cart...

 

[Spectric]

Or the answer could be SMRs - small nuclear reactors like the ones Rolls-Royce have been building for nuclear submarines since the 60s. Up to around 500MW, proven safety record, made in the UK, a fraction of the cost of a nuclear power station. Sounds like a no-brainer to me.

Still an expensive option, all nuclear plants must have a site license and this involves huge cost because of the conditions set out in that license, safety case, maintenance and inspection, training and the list goes on not to mention the cost of the CNP to provide security so nuclear can never be cost effective unless we want to compromise on safety. The one major advantage the submarine has over land based SMR's is the abundance of cooling water which greatly reduces the size.

 

[ian33a]

Every time I research air and ground source heat pumps, I discover that their energy usage, when being grid powered is comparatively eye watering. We were told that, for our place, we'd either need three phase or a second single phase cable installed. Yes, in theory, solar can be installed but battery back up doesn't appear to be enough to power a residential heat pump when it is needed.

Ignoring the published efficiency advantage when they are not using the grid for power, I wonder how much the grid demand will/would be if they were to be universally adopted and if our existing or realistically planned can cope?

In so many ways it seems like brinkmanship to reply upon in increase in EV to smooth out demand for general commercial and domestic usage and for heating as well.

Boris had this great plan, I just wonder if much of that was hot air and if there was sufficient infrastructure to produce the hot air, or under floor heating water or whatever?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Every time I research air and ground source heat pumps, I discover that their energy usage, when being grid powered is comparatively eye watering.

They do do apparently work against your EPC because of it.

 

[woodieallen]

Bear in mind that they can 'cut off' your supply without any need to go to court or ask you. I put the 'cut off' in parenthesis as it is a bit oblique in concept. If you fall behind with your electricity payments then they can switch you over to a pre-payment (which IIRC is also much more expensive) without so much as a by-your-leave. So if you were struggling before, then you'll be struggling even more after this.

 

[Suffolk Brian]

They won't be prioritised over keeping people's lights on; again - that's the whole point of 15118-20 and OCPP 2.0; communication between the car, the charger, and the network operators, in order to schedule charging. A specific point of that system is that the EV charger "loses out" and must drop its power delivery when the available supply is low.

Few people drive overnight, so it doesn't matter if your car is charged at 8pm, 1am, or 5am (i.e. spreading the load over 24 hours).

Also, the amount of energy in an EV battery (compared to what's used in a home) is huge; so effectively having a distributed set of batteries all over the country means that with V2G (Vehicle to Grid) technology you've got a huge reservoir from which to draw power at peak demand.

As a rough example; UK households average around 10kWh of electric use per day. A single EV car with a 40kWh battery could therefore power 4 houses for the whole day. That's an extreme example; but the point is that you'd only need a handful of cars in a street with V2G technology to cover the whole street's load during peak hours, and those cars could then recharge overnight.

So, if you pay to charge your (EV) batteries, they then use your battery capacity to supply your neighbours, and then you have to charge your batteries again, will that mean you have to pay again to then recharge your EV?

 

[Oldman]

Loop Turn Down and Save are currently running trials to try shifting customers maximum load times away from 5-6pm.
"The aim is to reduce your usage by a minimum of 40% compared to normal. If successful, you will earn Amazon vouchers equivalent to £3 per kWh that you reduced your usage by. "
£3/kwh is not to be sniffed at if this is the realistic figure and not just a carrot for the trial, those who are struggling to pay their energy bills could shift their max load and perhaps gain credit on their account. As long as they have a smart meter that is....

 

[Pedronicus]

So, if you pay to charge your (EV) batteries, they then use your battery capacity to supply your neighbours, and then you have to charge your batteries again, will that mean you have to pay again to then recharge your EV?

One assumes you will get paid for feeding back from your car into the grid. Whether this payment would be in parity with what you pay to charge is another matter!

 

[clogs]

as for NUC power stations......
coud be wrong but arne't they useing/commisioned the old fashioned system as apposed to the newer type that use spent uranium....
If it cost ex billions of £'s to build several new stations I would think it's better we do it ourselves and not rely on foreign help/firms...esp the Chinese....
WE HAVE the skills to do it....
Take the best designs and use em.....
Nobody like NUC ok but it'd be a good semi temp get outta trouble source of elec untill the future product enable to go a greener way........
pity they didn't start earlier to build em.....
but of course those in power, either side of the house dont give a poo as they are a special case....they wont go without heat or light....
the way I see it, if on the dull days ur PV system is not powered up it could be as cheap to run a genny on propane and use the excess heat to heat ur home....giving u independance from the morons above us.....
A p up in a brewery comes to mind....
viva independance......