|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Apr 28, 2024 7:41:35 GMT
Last year there was much trumpeting of the UK becoming a clean green electricity net exporter, a new green Saudi Arabia of the west. Well I watch a site called gridwatch, I recommend and since the repair of the French nuclear fleet we are anything but. This morning I recon 20% of our electricity is being imported and figures of that order are not rare. Ok it's cheap and there must be a power glut in europe, but energy security , um, not when it's coming over in submarine cables. The government answer is new gas fired plant, but that does not aline well with our climate promises and anyway it does not solve the security issues, gas has to be imported. Not sure I have any easy answers, the need for large scale energy storage at an economic cost becomes more and more the answer to all our present issues but I don't see a great white hope technical solution out there. Anybody seen any bright new game changing solutions.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 28, 2024 8:11:07 GMT
gridwatch.co.uk/www.ofgem.gov.uk/energy-policy-and-regulation/policy-and-regulatory-programmes/interconnectorsImport France IFA = 1GW (2GW capacity) France IFA2 = 1GW (1GW) France Eleclink = 1GW (1GW) NL = 1GW (1GW) Belgium Nemo = 850MW (1GW) Norway (NSL) = 850MW (1.4GW) Export Ireland Moyle = 450MW (500MW capacity) Ireland EW = 530MW (500MW) Denmark = 60MW (1.4GW) Usage = 28GW I make that net import of 5.1GW, so 18%. UK renewable generation is 37% (includes biomass, excludes nuclear), UK carbon neutral generation is 52% (includes nuclear, excludes biomass) The import countries are all primarily nuclear or renewable generation. UK fossil generation is 16%. It's importing gas and oil from the gulf and from the eastern fringes of eurasia that are the threats to energy security, not importing "green" electricity from next-door neighbours in the EU and EEA.
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Apr 28, 2024 9:19:58 GMT
I agree at one level that the import of fuel from an unstable middle east is the immediate security issue, however if we ,godforbid got in a fisty cuffs with our Russian friends those cables are very vulnerable and lpg transported by sea from the US is also. That spare cheap electric from the EU may not be available for long as transport and heating goes electric in Europe at an increasing rate gobling up capacity. I know people do not like it but solar ,on shore wind and that magic large scale economic storage I think is the long term answer if the tecnical storage issue is solved. Nuclear energy will play a part but it's not really renewable and it is expensive.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 28, 2024 9:26:01 GMT
I agree at one level that the import of fuel from an unstable middle east is the immediate security issue, however if we ,godforbid got in a fisty cuffs with our Russian friends those cables are very vulnerable and lpg transported by sea from the US is also. That spare cheap electric from the EU may not be available for long as transport and heating goes electric in Europe at an increasing rate gobling up capacity. I know people do not like it but solar ,on shore wind and that magic large scale economic storage I think is the long term answer if the tecnical storage issue is solved. Nuclear energy will play a part but it's not really renewable and it is expensive. The likelihood of Russia destroying undersea cables under the English Channel or North Sea is not high. The likelihood of them cutting undersea gas pipelines under the Baltic, otoh... Oh, wait. As for consumption - it's fallen markedly over the last decade or two... Energy efficiency! Low-energy lighting, increased insulation, more efficient machinery and appliances. And, yes, also the move of manufacturing offshore... The peak was around the early '00s, nearly 400TWh. Last year was around 300TWh, lowest since the mid '80s.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Apr 28, 2024 10:09:58 GMT
The problem with UK energy security is the policies of this government and even worse the next Labour government. These policies are political and tax grab with no regard to energy security.
The UK does not have enough energy and is planning price changes to encourage people to cut back during peak periods, at present there are price reductions from time to time if you use less energy during certain periods.
Most if not all energy intensive industry have the left the UK, exceptions like steal recycling are only viable due to government funds.
Just because you import energy from stable countries does not make it secure, when there are issues and they do not have enough for themselves they will turn it off.
I have investments in some power generators, battery storage O&G (some UK only) and Uranium.
The issues with wind and solar are they are intermittent so require a backup, batteries are very expensive and only have limited capacity so you require backup generating capacity. There are 2 issues with this, the increased cost to build and maintain extra generating capacity which is only used some of the time and the costs of running it, large generators which need to be running all the time are a lot cheaper than the quick start generations.
UKs government policies
1. EPL is forcing a lot of NS O&G companies to leave the UK, Harbour (the biggest) has stated no more UK investments are now investing abroad. Harbour are stating the Labour changes to the EPL will result in 100%+ tax rate as not everything can be is offset against tax, anyway they are off. Kistos Andrew Austin (CEO) is very angry with UK tax will not be putting any new O&G deployments in the UK. SQZ are looking more towards investment outside the UK partly due to a lot of pressure from shareholders. Shell and BP have been downsizing in the UK for years and have only about 5% in the UK, Shell are likely to move the listing to NY because of ESG pressures bringing down share price in the UK and BP will no doubt follow, both are likely keep downsizings investments in the UK. Note EPL was brought in when the Oil price was very high and still there after it fell substantially.
2. Tax on generation and the amount you get paid for green energy in the UK have stopped all new developments, TRIG are selling off UK generation and have stated all new development will be outside of UK.GSF (battery storage company) have also stated no new UK developments, all new developments will be outside of UK, this is due to price paid in the UK and delays outside of their control to get new battery storage connected to the grid. Gresham House Energy Storage Fund Plc (GRID) has suspended all dividends due to these issues.
3. Lack of infrastructure for new green generation and storage as mentioned above, government will not pay for this and there is no one else willing to stump up the cash (as not commercially viable).
4. Lack of gas storage, the Rough (largest UK gas storage) is only running at a small part of its capacity due to UK government lack of funds and no one else willing to stump up the cash (as not commercially viable).
I am sure there are many more companies following the same route but these are the ones I follow.
In global terms
Biden has blocked new Gas export terminals forcing down the price of gas in the USA which in turn has caused many gas extraction companies to cut back and some have gone bankrupt.
There is a worldwide shortage of Uranium (U3O8), and Uranium enrichment facilities. This is made worse for the West due to loss of supplies from Niger and China stockpiling U3O8, a lot sent from Kazakhstan and Russia which used to go to the West. It can take up to 10 years for a new Uranium mine to come on stream and also long time to create new Uranium enrichment facilities.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Apr 28, 2024 11:52:25 GMT
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,315
Likes: 11,523
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 28, 2024 12:19:59 GMT
Yeah, sometimes. The issue is all the other times when fossil fuels are providing considerably more. eg last week when they were the largest source. That isnt likely to change due to the nature of electricity provision and demand eg inertia, grid balancing, base load etc. If other sources cant provide that 100% of the time then fossil fuels are still required or its blackouts, and those fossil fuel plants still have to be paid for when they arent being paid for electricity.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 28, 2024 12:28:00 GMT
Not just generative AI - datacentres of all flavours are a huge energy consumer, not only for powering the kit within, but especially for cooling. Global datacentre consumption was already around the same figure as the UK's total consumption - about 300TWh/year - a couple of years ago, and even with more efficient hardware, it's only going to go up. That figure *excludes* crypto mining, in large part because it's much more clandestine and hard to quantify - but is estimated to be at least another third (similar to the GenAI prediction) so north of 400TWh. More interesting is when you look at per capita consumption. The US is about 2.5x the UK... which puts it outside the global top ten! Both nice green energy-efficient Sweden and Norway are *WAAAAAAY* up in the leagues, topped by Iceland at nearly 5x the US figure, more than 10x UK. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_consumption
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Apr 28, 2024 13:13:32 GMT
Yeah, sometimes. The issue is all the other times when fossil fuels are providing considerably more. eg last week when they were the largest source. That isnt likely to change due to the nature of electricity provision and demand eg inertia, grid balancing, base load etc. If other sources cant provide that 100% of the time then fossil fuels are still required or its blackouts, and those fossil fuel plants still have to be paid for when they arent being paid for electricity. If you read the second half of the report, it says These technical requirements include maintaining the frequency of electricity supplies at close to 50Hz and responding to rapid changes in supply and demand through operational reserves.
NGESO also maintains the ability to restart the grid in the case of a total shutdown, sometimes referred to as “black start”, but now more formally called “restoration”.
Increases in wind and solar capacity mean low-carbon sources are now already sufficient to meet 100% of electricity demand in some periods. However, on the technical side, the 2025 target has been a “significant engineering challenge”, Dyke says:
“Getting to the 2025 ambition has been a significant engineering challenge, which we are solving.”
Grid services have, historically, been provided by fossil fuel power plants. Over the past five years, however, NGESO has been changing the way it procures these services, as well as reforming the rules of grid operation and the way it balances the grid in real time.
For example, through its “pathfinder” projects NGESO has contracted a series of sites that can offer grid services without fossil fuels. These include “synchronous condensers”, effectively giant spinning turbines that provide grid stability without burning fossil fuels.
Other key innovations include the use of batteries to manage the frequency of the grid and “grid forming inverters”, which use sophisticated power electronics to offer different types of grid support.
This development means renewable projects will be able to contribute grid stability services, such as “inertia”, that have traditionally only been offered by conventional fossil fuel generators.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,315
Likes: 11,523
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 28, 2024 13:31:47 GMT
Yeah, sometimes. The issue is all the other times when fossil fuels are providing considerably more. eg last week when they were the largest source. That isnt likely to change due to the nature of electricity provision and demand eg inertia, grid balancing, base load etc. If other sources cant provide that 100% of the time then fossil fuels are still required or its blackouts, and those fossil fuel plants still have to be paid for when they arent being paid for electricity. If you read the second half of the report, it says These technical requirements include maintaining the frequency of electricity supplies at close to 50Hz and responding to rapid changes in supply and demand through operational reserves.
NGESO also maintains the ability to restart the grid in the case of a total shutdown, sometimes referred to as “black start”, but now more formally called “restoration”.
Increases in wind and solar capacity mean low-carbon sources are now already sufficient to meet 100% of electricity demand in some periods. However, on the technical side, the 2025 target has been a “significant engineering challenge”, Dyke says:
“Getting to the 2025 ambition has been a significant engineering challenge, which we are solving.”
Grid services have, historically, been provided by fossil fuel power plants. Over the past five years, however, NGESO has been changing the way it procures these services, as well as reforming the rules of grid operation and the way it balances the grid in real time.
For example, through its “pathfinder” projects NGESO has contracted a series of sites that can offer grid services without fossil fuels. These include “synchronous condensers”, effectively giant spinning turbines that provide grid stability without burning fossil fuels.
Other key innovations include the use of batteries to manage the frequency of the grid and “grid forming inverters”, which use sophisticated power electronics to offer different types of grid support.
This development means renewable projects will be able to contribute grid stability services, such as “inertia”, that have traditionally only been offered by conventional fossil fuel generators.
I did, but its a bit vague. I was aware of this but cost & ability to deliver is uncertain.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Apr 28, 2024 13:53:22 GMT
I agree at one level that the import of fuel from an unstable middle east is the immediate security issue, however if we ,godforbid got in a fisty cuffs with our Russian friends those cables are very vulnerable and lpg transported by sea from the US is also. That spare cheap electric from the EU may not be available for long as transport and heating goes electric in Europe at an increasing rate gobling up capacity. I know people do not like it but solar ,on shore wind and that magic large scale economic storage I think is the long term answer if the tecnical storage issue is solved. Nuclear energy will play a part but it's not really renewable and it is expensive. The likelihood of Russia destroying undersea cables under the English Channel or North Sea is not high.The likelihood of them cutting undersea gas pipelines under the Baltic, otoh... Oh, wait. As for consumption - it's fallen markedly over the last decade or two... Energy efficiency! Low-energy lighting, increased insulation, more efficient machinery and appliances. And, yes, also the move of manufacturing offshore... The peak was around the early '00s, nearly 400TWh. Last year was around 300TWh, lowest since the mid '80s. Evidence? No me neither but I suggest the more war mongering leaders we have in the west with similar views to yourself, the more likely it is we will indeed have the world war you seem to crave.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 28, 2024 14:51:59 GMT
The likelihood of Russia destroying undersea cables under the English Channel or North Sea is not high.The likelihood of them cutting undersea gas pipelines under the Baltic, otoh... Oh, wait. As for consumption - it's fallen markedly over the last decade or two... Energy efficiency! Low-energy lighting, increased insulation, more efficient machinery and appliances. And, yes, also the move of manufacturing offshore... The peak was around the early '00s, nearly 400TWh. Last year was around 300TWh, lowest since the mid '80s. Evidence? No me neither but I suggest the more war mongering leaders we have in the west with similar views to yourself, the more likely it is we will indeed have the world war you seem to crave. I think you dropped the box of fridge poetry again.
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Apr 29, 2024 11:45:33 GMT
Hope nobody thinks I am a war mongerer, the word in my post is God forbid.I think the present conflict in Ukraine is an appalling failure of politics, an accomodation that would have solved Russia's historical fears of an invasion of it's western border and the lack of sensitivity of expansion east of NATO after promising not to after the fall of the USSR was foolish. Putin is a megalomaniac dictator wishing to return to the glory days of the USSR but the west enabled him to carry the Russian people forward with him. The right in the West ignoring Russia as defeated spent force while encourageing european states into become western political clones in the good old USA way have no political savvy at all. Ukraine's actions in trying to suppress the cultural heritage of it's Russian expat population did not help much ether and sure was not in any way freedom loving. Energy security is not only a matter of physical access but the ability to buffer ones state from the economic effects of world events effecting price. A diverse energy mix under ones own control in as far as that is achievable should be our aim , renewable would be nice to. Present storage solutions to stabilize the grid are short time solutions to last a few minutes while we wind up peaker plants on standtby. We need the sort of storage that could run the country for 2 or 3 days in a row and I see nothing to do that at present.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Apr 30, 2024 9:44:25 GMT
Interconnectors have trebled their contribution to base load on the UK grid in the last four years, so they are clearly part of the mix.
What has not been mentioned yet is Vehicle to Grid storage which has the potential to buffer supply and demand - if EVs grow at the rate they are coupled with ramping up the national charging infrastructure and a smarter grid. Beyond that, to deliver a carbon free grid by 2030 or 2035 the will probably need hydrogen turbines.
|
|
aj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 348
Likes: 465
|
Post by aj on Apr 30, 2024 11:33:16 GMT
The problem with UK energy security is the policies of this government and even worse the next Labour government. These policies are political and tax grab with no regard to energy security. I've actually dipped my toes into a couple of UK renewable funds (UKW/NESF) this year as the current tax grab has caused a bit of a fire sale of UK energy assets and they're trading at bargain basement prices. These funds are cutting right back on new investment and looking to spend their money on buybacks instead to shore up share prices (My gamble is on this succeeding) However, new investment in the sector is going to be tough to raise; If electricity prices go up, these companies get 'windfall taxed' to the hilt. Why take a gamble where if you win the government will change the rules and take your winnings?
|
|