Renewable Energy Discussion thread

[Seeker]

Originally Posted by SV650rules

which is why Germans continued to build coal burning power stations, and why they are one of the worlds largest industrial economies....

that's not wholly true. The public outcry after the Japanese Fukushima disaster within Germany forced the governments hand to phase out nuclear power which in turn required them to build coal fired power stations.

The German public have a history of mistrusting nuclear power hence the "Atomkraft? Nein danke" protests.

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by SV650rules

... we are burning it in power stations by the megalitre instead of using if more efficiently for local heat in gas boilers

That would be an interesting comparative analysis to see. Gas transmission and distribution isn't straightforward or without losses too. I'm open minded, I've never looked at the large scale economics.

Originally Posted by SV650rules

Only a matter of time before we have rolling blackouts in UK, all because our politicians are incapable ...

I still have enough trust in National Grid and DNO staffers not to worry about this coming true. Politicians and their lapdog civil servants at Ofgem and in senior management on the other hand ...

Originally Posted by SV650rules

Having to rely on France for nuclear generated power in the ultimate irony, several times for periods of 4 days or more in the last few months solar and wind have contributed a tiny dribble of power to our grid while everything else runs flat out to keep our lights on. Would be so funny if HS2 could not run due to lack of power when the money would have been better spent of proper power stations. I read an article by the German professor who used to run German grid, he said 'for every renewable you have to build 100% conventional generating backup'

Arguably this is where thinking 'country' in isolation doesn't help. It's probably more efficient to interconnect than to build lots of local country-based systems. In that respect, I value the pan-european work of ENTSOE-E and others. (N.B. this isn't intended to start a Brexit debate. On a technical level, the challenge of 'balancing the system' remains the same irrespective of the administrative and economic framework in place.)

Originally Posted by SV650rules

... Germans continued to build coal burning power stations, and why they are one of the worlds largest industrial economies....

Isn't this one of the things people criticise China for? Ironic?

I also understand that the Germans invest heavily in renewables, especially wind, and personally I think 100% conventional backup at national scale is unecessary. For example, large scale interconnection as mentioned above is viable to help minimise excessive cumulative plant margin.

[SV650rules]

Originally Posted by Seeker

that's not wholly true. The public outcry after the Japanese Fukushima disaster within Germany forced the governments hand to phase out nuclear power which in turn required them to build coal fired power stations.

The German public have a history of mistrusting nuclear power hence the "Atomkraft? Nein danke" protests.

Makes no difference why they built them, the fact is they did and are using them... the same German expert said that as long as renewables are less than 25% of your system you were OK because the other systems could cover the inevitable shortfall.... Germany seems to be more pragmatic than us when it comes to powering their country, but hold on a minute we dumped dirty manufacturing and now have a low carbon service economy.....

[Seeker]

Originally Posted by SV650Rules

As for Maggie Thatcher, she did what she had to do to drag this country into the modern world, away from the power of unions.

quote from "Justified Vandalism" thread.

Originally Posted by SV650Rules

but hold on a minute we dumped dirty manufacturing and now have a low carbon service economy

Yes, she crushed the unions and closed the mines and dragged the country into the modern world... no coal mines and, until Drax power station recently switched over to wood pellets, coal was being imported (via Immingham) from Poland.

If we had politicians with science and engineering degrees instead of "Classics, ancient literature and classical philosophy" (BoZo) maybe things would improve although, having said that, Thatcher was a chemist.

We need a coherent, long term energy plan because all we have now are aspirations and like "leveling up", they are mere sound bites.

The German government wanted to retain nuclear but bowed to the will of the people, they want Russian gas but are now being pressured by the US to stop that (NordStream2); they can't win and so coal it is. We have choices but no plan - we commit to Hinkley Point C and need the French and Chinese to build it for us and then have to guarantee to pay well over the going rate for its electricity.

[Grant66]

UK is building modular nuclear reactors though.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-54703204

Sent from an S20 using Tapatalk with that kin cr4p blocked

[Seeker]

Originally Posted by Grant66

UK is building modular nuclear reactors though.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-54703204

Sent from an S20 using Tapatalk with that kin cr4p blocked

...from that link (my stressing)
"The consortium says the first of these modular plants could be up and running in 10 years, after that it will be able to build and install two a year."

So 2030, isn't that cutting it a bit fine? Like I said, no coherent energy plan. I had wondered who made the nuclear submarine reactors (RR) and if they could be adapted but they are about a third the power of these modular reactors.

Incidentally the EDF Hinkley Point C reactor is the same type as the Olkiluoto 3 (Finland) reactor which is over 10 years behind schedule.

[Grant66]

Didn't say it was coherent

It does seem to be a fire fighting exercise, government has probably been dithering about making a decision for a few years.

Sent from an S20 using Tapatalk with that kin cr4p blocked

[Sir Trev]

Originally Posted by SV650rules

... but hold on a minute we dumped dirty manufacturing and now have a low carbon service economy.....

I'm not so sure it's as low carbon as people think. The IT industry uses massive amounts of energy to power networks and especially storage facilities. Some of that will be out of this country though as the cloud means your data will often be stored in a location with cheaper (not necessarily renewable-sourced) energy. It's very hard to judge.

[ethariel]

Well the first big tranche of Carbon Savings in the Uk came from all the low cost/no cost savings in the run up to the CRC (Which everyone got kicked in the nuts over when HM Gov decided they were keeping all the money instead of paying it back to those making the most difference) something to do with an income of £12/tonne CO2 = probably in the region of 1-2 billion a year since 2009, got to fun the stupid FIT prices offered to Solar/Wind somehow!

[Seeker]

The only problem with being cynical is that when you read a science headline with "could" in the title you're immediately prejudiced...

https://techxplore.com/news/2020-12-...-industry.html

...on the other hand, I planted a tree today Then the cynicism kicks in because I remember reading that it takes about 60 trees to equate to most people's carbon footprint (can't find source though, so it might have been a dream).