Cycling UK Forum

irc
I do understand your reservations about wind and solar.
Wind is a significant generator of the UKs power though -annually roughly on a par with coal.
Clearly its great weakness is when the "wind don"t blow".
The pumped storage we have in N.Wales - Dinorwig and Stwlan (Ffestiniog; link given above) were both in their conception designed to store excess nuclear electricity from Wylfa (N. Angelsey) and Trawsfynedd power stations. Now both closed.

I guess some of their stored energy now comes from the wind - when it blows.

Ffestiniog does generate some power as a result of normal hydro, the local rainfall is quite high but I would guess not very significant amounts.

There are however other smaller Hydro schemes locally. Some quite old, (Cwm Dyli, Dolgarrog and Maentwrog are all small but significant generators of pure hydro electric.
There are several other small schemes ( but I am not expert).
Overall N Wales is a net exporter of electricity.
The wind generation off the N Coast being quite important (when the wind blows!)
"An important part of our carbon neutral supply capability" was stated recently by a grid manager on BBC Wales.

There is certainly scope in N Wales for more pure hydro and tidal generation. Hopefully low impact stuff though the (present!) low price of fossil energy makes it likely to have a big question mark over viability.
But IMHO it is an area where money could be invested for future generations. No pun intended!

Ps. I think we should pioneer in Wales an electric railway system running entirely on renewables.
The Cambrian Coast Line has just been nominated (Guardian) one of the worlds most spectacular railway trips.
Now that is clearly open to raised eyebrows!! But it IS a fine and spectacular line.
My dream would be to see it running on sustainable electric from the ample hydro power (wind, tidal etc) along it's length.
A touristic world beater and a future proof transport resource for all of us. Freight too!

Another way to even out the fluctuations from solar & wind in the future could be liquefied air https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryogenic_energy_storage - doesn't need a mountain, or batteries using rare minerals which need replacing every few years

kwackers wrote:

irc wrote:Firstly on a European scale it isn't always windy somewhere.

I'm pretty sure I said "global".

Global - same issue as before relying on unreliable countries.

kwackers wrote:

irc wrote:Secondly do you want the UK's electricity to depend on political events in the Sahara or elsewhere. Global isn't good for security of supply.

Where do you think most of our energy comes from? Gas from Russia, electricity from various places even the raw materials for energy generation come from other countries (including uranium) so I'm not sure what your great plan for energy independence is but I doubt we're capable of it without some outside help.
I realise it's populist idea these days for countries to be "great" and "independent" but the reality is we're dependent on global supplies of everything from energy through food and resources and despite the right wing twaddle that's not about to change. If we can't negotiate energy from other places then we're pretty much screwed anyway..

We are buying gas from various places including the USA which is a stable democracy. The difference between gas and electricity is that gas can be stored. At a large scale electricity can't. I'm sorry you can't see the security advantages from being self sufficient in electricity but they are real

kwackers wrote:Won't be long before it becomes cheap enough to go off grid for a lot of people. Economies of scale mean those left on the grid will pay more for their power. I wonder which social group will be more likely to go off grid? The poor???
Here's a better idea. An integrated energy system, we're still a long way from producing too much solar energy so I wouldn't worry too much - as for "parasite" it's a bizarre word that means nothing in this context. At their current levels solar panels feed into the grid with no problems therefore the term is nonsense.

Of course they are parasites. They get a subsidy paid for by other consumers. In what way is that not being a parasite.

1.
an organism which lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.

Though you are correct that at the UK latitude they produce so little power they aren't the serious problem they can be in sunny areas. Our problem is wind. Again subsidised by consumers. Given guaranteed access to the grid, guaranteed prices above market rates, and paid to stop producing when there is too much power going to the grid.

kwackers wrote:As for Nevada, so what? Reducing the FIT only matters whilst solar is more expensive than conventional power. That's pretty much past now, even if there was no FIT solar can provide power pretty cheaply, the issue is storage and for domestic supplies that's fast becoming a reality.

Storage? So how much solar energy would have been produced for storage this past month?

If solar is so cheap where is the widespread un-subsidised installations.

How much do they cost? This is the key point to start with. The price of a typical solar panel system, including installation, is now around £5,000-£8,000. In the scheme's early days, a system this size used to cost £10,000-£12,000.

How much can you make back? There are three ways to recoup the outlay...

Electricity savings. First and foremost, you can use the electricity your panels generate, thus reducing your electricity bills. The Energy Saving Trust estimates a typical 4kWp system can knock off around £70 from a family's bills each year. .......

The export tariff. This is a payment for energy you don't use which is sent back to the grid (unless you have an export meter, it's normally assumed there's a 50:50 split). It's set at 4.91p/kWh. A typical house can earn £85/year through the export tariff.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilit ... panels#buy

So leaving aside the subsidy from the FIT you are spending at least £5000 to save £155 a year. Payback 32 years (not counting interest on 5K) . Reckon the system will last that long?

irc wrote:We are buying gas from various places including the USA which is a stable democracy. The difference between gas and electricity is that gas can be stored. At a large scale electricity can't. I'm sorry you can't see the security advantages from being self sufficient in electricity but they are real

USA is stable? Really!? You currently can't guarantee anything about what the US will be doing in the next few years.

And who says I can't see the advantages in being self sufficient - at what point did I say that?
What I said is we can't be self sufficient - and that's true. We simply don't have the resources so we have no option but to buy in energy. Even the so called 'clean' nuclear requires us to bid on an open market for uranium - we don't dig it up in Wales.

irc wrote:Of course they are parasites. They get a subsidy paid for by other consumers. In what way is that not being a parasite.

So basically anyone that gets a subsidy is a parasite - even where there's a net gain?
That then applies to every energy system we use, oil, gas, coal, nuclear, they all get subsidies in one form or another. What about the harm they do? Burning coal and gas for example - not only do these get subsidised but they 'harm' their hosts so in that respect they really are parasitic.

(Or does this only apply to the forms of energy production you don't like?)

irc wrote:Storage? So how much solar energy would have been produced for storage this past month?

I've no idea, do you? A friend of mine who runs a Tesla and reckons the solar panels on his roof effectively make it free to run between March and October reckons the last few months have been pretty good for solar - but that's obviously anecdotal and I've no idea what "pretty good" actually means.

But somewhere in the world the sun will be shining and it'll be summer - and back we go full circle to global distribution...

irc wrote:If solar is so cheap where is the widespread un-subsidised installations.

All over the world - did I mention "global"?

irc wrote:So leaving aside the subsidy from the FIT you are spending at least £5000 to save £155 a year. Payback 32 years (not counting interest on 5K) . Reckon the system will last that long?

Unfortunately their maths doesn't include local storage which improves that £155 significantly by a factor of between 3 & 4 depending on how you use your power and how big your storage is.
It's also not £5k - not any more. If you shop around you can pick up 4kW of panels for a lot less than 4 - in a couple of years it'll be 3, then 2. Local solar is a no brainer.

You obviously have a problem with a global power distribution network but not with global pollution or the global movement of resources to generate power (and presumably the foreign ownership of our power systems).
You also have a problem with subsidising green energy but not for subsidising all the other forms of energy - nor the hidden subsidisation based on their polluting effects.
It's a bit sad imo that people have such blinkered views. I suppose with recent events I shouldn't be too surprised, inward looking nations all looking over their shoulders suspiciously at their neighbours and no longer able to work together for the common good. Doesn't bode well for us.

irc wrote:Well worth all the subsidies and turning much of Scotland's scenery into industrial landscapes? Currently wind and solar energy between them are providing 1.1% of UK electricity demand.

Grid-Status (Medium)3.jpg

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

As usual nuclear coal and gas are keeping the lights on providing 87% of demand. They look like they are pretty flat out though. Power cuts this winter? Probably not. Among other measures the National Grid has paid for diesel generators to be on standby.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ional-grid

Last night, around 2:39am solar's contribution was much lower - so maybe we should give up solar power generation as it is so intermittent.

And, eating my sandwich it strikes me that today's wheat harvest in the UK is zero (no combine harvesters out here bringing in the crops). But fortunately us humans are smart enough (occasionally) and we invented "storage" where you collect things at times they are available so you can use them at times they are not available.

And keep burning all those carbon fuels and the climate is changing. Species will disappear, new species arrive - though the list as to which species is still being decided depending on just how stupid the human race really is and it's not looking good).

Ian

ChrisF wrote:Another way to even out the fluctuations from solar & wind in the future could be liquefied air https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryogenic_energy_storage - doesn't need a mountain, or batteries using rare minerals which need replacing every few years

Yet another way would be to use excess power to produce hydrogen through electrolysis which could then be used in fuel cells, IC engines or thermal plants to generate electricity during times of no wind/sun

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2014/07/hydrogen-energy-storage-a-new-solution-to-the-renewable-energy-intermittency-problem.html

Don't wonder how much... just look up one of the systems which publish their data...

http://www.newquayweather.com/wxsolarpv.php

4kWh so far today (4kWp installed) 0, slightly better than the 3kWh average so far this Dec. Which is between the last couple of years data... so basically predictable...

Payback (based on FIT alone) was under 5 years

Psamathe wrote:And, eating my sandwich it strikes me that today's wheat harvest in the UK is zero (no combine harvesters out here bringing in the crops). But fortunately us humans are smart enough (occasionally) and we invented "storage" where you collect things at times they are available so you can use them at times they are not available.

The ancient Egyptians mastered the art of storing a harvest for a year or more. Easy.

Storing oil and gas is easy as well. We used to store months of central heating oil in a tank in our garden. Electricity storage is hard and most people don't understand the numbers.

For example the whole world's pumped hydro capacity is around 500GWh. That would power the UK for less than day. Or to put it another way

Total global storage capacity with pumped hydro added works out to about 500 only GWh, enough to fill global electricity demand for all of ten minutes.

http://euanmearns.com/is-large-scale-en ... rage-dead/

Bill Gates said in 2010

"All the batteries we make now could store less than 10 minutes of all the energy [in the world]," he said. "So, in fact, we need a big breakthrough here. Something that's going to be of a factor of 100 better than what we have now."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/02/12/ ... an.energy/

[XAP]Bob wrote:Don't wonder how much... just look up one of the systems which publish their data...

http://www.newquayweather.com/wxsolarpv.php

4kWh so far today (4kWp installed) 0, slightly better than the 3kWh average so far this Dec. Which is between the last couple of years data... so basically predictable...

Payback (based on FIT alone) was under 5 years

Well it helps that Newquay is in the best part of the UK for solar.




I pay 10p per KWh for grid power. Since a solar installation gets to use the power, also gets the FIT subsidy at 1.4X the market rate paid as well, and also gets paid for exporting power to the grid whether they do or not it isn't surprising there can be a short payback in some areas. Subsidised by other consumers.

That Newquay system generated just under 4000KWh in the last year. Based on grid prices without subsidy it saved £400 of electricity. At minimum £4.5k installation cost that is an 11 year payback. For more complex/expensive installations in less favoured areas of the UK payback will of course be longer.

4kWp installations start at £4.5k.

http://www.cornwallsolarpanels.co.uk/ab ... choose-us/

irc wrote:

Psamathe wrote:And, eating my sandwich it strikes me that today's wheat harvest in the UK is zero (no combine harvesters out here bringing in the crops). But fortunately us humans are smart enough (occasionally) and we invented "storage" where you collect things at times they are available so you can use them at times they are not available.

The ancient Egyptians mastered the art of storing a harvest for a year or more. Easy.

Storing oil and gas is easy as well. We used to store months of central heating oil in a tank in our garden. Electricity storage is hard and most people don't understand the numbers.

For example the whole world's pumped hydro capacity is around 500GWh. That would power the UK for less than day. Or to put it another way

Total global storage capacity with pumped hydro added works out to about 500 only GWh, enough to fill global electricity demand for all of ten minutes.

http://euanmearns.com/is-large-scale-en ... rage-dead/

Bill Gates said in 2010

"All the batteries we make now could store less than 10 minutes of all the energy [in the world]," he said. "So, in fact, we need a big breakthrough here. Something that's going to be of a factor of 100 better than what we have now."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/02/12/ ... an.energy/

Maybe you are right and we should just destroy our climate and make the planet not really suitable for humans to live on because "Electricity storage is hard" and "All the batteries we make now could store less than 10 minutes of all the energy". Hard so lets just give-up.

Or we could think about non-hydro storage, even not using batteries or different battery technology. There are many ways to store energy and just because 2 you chose are limited. Maybe think about using what we have plus alternative means (people use the term battery for a very very wide range of technologies related to energy storage ).

Ian

irc wrote:

[XAP]Bob wrote:Don't wonder how much... just look up one of the systems which publish their data...

http://www.newquayweather.com/wxsolarpv.php

4kWh so far today (4kWp installed) 0, slightly better than the 3kWh average so far this Dec. Which is between the last couple of years data... so basically predictable...

Payback (based on FIT alone) was under 5 years

Well it helps that Newquay is in the best part of the UK for solar.

UK-solar-map-243x300.png


I pay 10p per KWh for grid power. Since a solar installation gets to use the power, also gets the FIT subsidy at 1.4X the market rate paid as well, and also gets paid for exporting power to the grid whether they do or not it isn't surprising there can be a short payback in some areas. Subsidised by other consumers.

That Newquay system generated just under 4000KWh in the last year. Based on grid prices without subsidy it saved £400 of electricity. At minimum £4.5k installation cost that is an 11 year payback. For more complex/expensive installations in less favoured areas of the UK payback will of course be longer.

4kWp installations start at £4.5k.

http://www.cornwallsolarpanels.co.uk/ab ... choose-us/

Of course it helps that Newquay is one of the best places for solar power - I just happen to know of that installation putting it's data online. I should also point out that if you go down the A30 there is a serious amount of solar panels on the side of the road, so it's not a bad place to look for 'how bad is it this month' figures.

And solar panel lifetime is expected to be beyond 10 years... Most are rated to >80% after 20 years...
So there is plenty of benefit from installing them. Of course if you can add some local storage (battery and/or heat store) then you can use the vast majority of that...

Yes the FIT helps reduce the payback time, but it's not essential. And it's far lower than it used to be (reflecting the reduction in cost of the solar arrays)

It's more of an optimistic picture tonight.
Wind is making nearly 18% of our energy.
Nearly double that of coal and closing in on the nuclear output of 23%.
It is likely to continue quite high for the next days.

We came over Cold Northcott Moor (Leanest on the A395) past the wind farm.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.64809 ... a=!3m1!1e3

Dunno how many windmills there are - 20 or more?
Only one was running and whizzing round like a gud un.
Why weren't the others running?

Also, you can see other wind farms around, and rarely - if ever - are all the 'mills going round.
Why aren't they ALL running when it's windy?

Couple of reasons they might not all be running:

The demand might not be there... Other power stations take time to spin up/down, so there is inertia in the grid, and it's not always possible to absorb extra power from the turbines.
This is factored into the price paid for electricity from various sources (including nuclear, which takes a very long time to spool down)

Maintenance (although I'd expect that to be one or two, not 19/20)

And of course the most dramatic reason:
[youtube]oAWMpxX60KM[/youtube]
(Although I'd expect none, rather than one)

Thanks Bob.
That makes a great deal of sense. It makes me feel a whole lot better to understand.

We drive (and I ride) past loadsa these 'farms, and rarely are they all running. I was feeling that these things produce free energy, so why not use them? Supply and demand is the answer, and like you say, power loads need to be spooled up and down.