Electric car boom will fuel demand for power, says National Grid

[zugzwang]

Somewhat stating the obvious but actually posing some hard questions. Specifically, given the astronomic costs of Hinckley Point, how is the UK going finance a vast expansion in generative capacity over the next thirty years? And how can an increasing dependence on imported gas/energy be made to sit with the govt's undeclared policy of debt destruction via currency debasement?

Good luck squaring that circle, inflationistas.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/13/electric-car-boom-power-demand-national-grid-hinkley-point-c

Quote

In all of the scenarios, new nuclear power stations are assumed to be built and the capacity of interconnectors that provide backup power from Europe rises from 4GW now to between 10GW and 19GW in 2030.

Fracking for shale gas is expected to produce zero gas in two of the greener scenarios. However, in one scenario of high fracking, shale gas is projected to provide 32bn cubic metres by 2031, a similar amount to the 36bn cubic metres the North Sea provided last year.

Regardless of how much of the UK’s gas comes from fracking, National Grid sees gas as playing a key role in power and heating for decades. It is not until 2050 in some of the group’s scenarios that alternative, electric heating technologies such as heat pumps begin to overtake gas for keeping homes warm.

“The story around gas is that it’s critical to our supply now and will continue to be in future,” said Quinn. “We see it as having a long-term role as a reliable, cost effective and flexible energy source, and it will be favoured by many consumers.”

But with North Sea gas production declining, National Grid expects the UK’s dependence on gas imports to continue for decades, to some degree. More liquefied natural gas is also expected to be shipped to the UK in the future.

Climate change could also pose new challenges, with the UK forecast to get hotter. As temperatures warm, the use of air conditioning in summer could cause peak electricity demand to reach the levels normally seen in winter.

 

[Sour Mash]

I think they´re going to rely on more renewables plus (personal and grid level) battery storage to help meet the bump in demand.  Probably fracking for natural gas too.

Don´t forget that there will be less demand for imported oil products, you´re just swapping importing crude oil for resources that can be used to generate electricity.

[Riedquat]

If most charging is done overnight then there'll be a degree of just smoothing out the demand.

The problem with Hinckley Point's costs isn't that nuclear is ludicrously expensive, it's just how they've gone about trying to do it in that particular incidence.

[kzb]

The CO2 emissions from battery production for an electric car exceeds that from the fuel burnt in a conventional engine over EIGHT YEARS.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/20/tesla-car-battery-production-releases-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-gasoline-driving/

 

[winkie]

Few years ago now, and it happened.......somehow the main water main found its way into the main gas main, how it happened is anyones guess, perhaps a main was damaged by workperson fixing something in the road, a mistake, an error, water got into the gas main.......nevertheless water started coming out of the back of gas cookers and fires in surrounding roads......all gas was turned off for safety reasons, many people and roads affected......therefore a few days before Christmas no gas central heating or hot water working, no gas cooking working........all those affected were given a free electric fan heater to warm themselves and a two electric ring hob to cook on.....two days later the National grid could not cope and shut down.....so no gas and no electricity.....twilight zone.

Edited July 13, 2017 by winkie

[bear.getting.old]

34 minutes ago, kzb said:

The CO2 emissions from battery production for an electric car exceeds that from the fuel burnt in a conventional engine over EIGHT YEARS.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/20/tesla-car-battery-production-releases-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-gasoline-driving/

 

Quote of the day. It should be framed and emailed to every tree hugger in the world.

[CunningPlan]

36 minutes ago, kzb said:

The CO2 emissions from battery production for an electric car exceeds that from the fuel burnt in a conventional engine over EIGHT YEARS.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/20/tesla-car-battery-production-releases-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-gasoline-driving/

 

I always guessed that was the case. The same applies to older cars. Good to see it being mentioned.

Electric cars are all about moving the pollution to someone else's backyard.

[Cosmic Apple]

39 minutes ago, kzb said:

The CO2 emissions from battery production for an electric car exceeds that from the fuel burnt in a conventional engine over EIGHT YEARS.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/20/tesla-car-battery-production-releases-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-gasoline-driving/

 

And thats just the batteries, what about charging them?

[winkie]

9 minutes ago, Northern Welsh Midlander said:

And thats just the batteries, what about charging them?

.....and the cost of buying them and replacing them once no charge left in them....one already very reliable form of transport to replace every ten or fifteen years is better than two parts of one that unable to work without the other part that has completely failed to charge.......

[Saving For a Space Ship]

2 hours ago, kzb said:

The CO2 emissions from battery production for an electric car exceeds that from the fuel burnt in a conventional engine over EIGHT YEARS.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/20/tesla-car-battery-production-releases-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-gasoline-driving/

 

 

1 hour ago, bear.getting.old said:

Quote of the day. It should be framed and emailed to every tree hugger in the world.

 

1 hour ago, CunningPlan said:

I always guessed that was the case. The same applies to older cars. Good to see it being mentioned.

Electric cars are all about moving the pollution to someone else's backyard.

 

1 hour ago, Northern Welsh Midlander said:

And thats just the batteries, what about charging them?

The " findings of the meta-study (a compilation of other studies) are based on assumptions that are far from the real-world truth", it's credibility is pulled apart here...  

  Bizarre Swedish study claims electric cars are worse for the environment

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1111266_bizarre-swedish-study-claims-electric-cars-are-worse-for-the-environment

Quote

Electric vehicles shouldn't be considered all-out carbon footprint saviors, but they can legitimately be viewed as the great minimizers.

The benefits of electric vehicles over those with internal-combustion engines are vast, but a strange new study is making rounds that claims electric cars are worse for climate-change emissions.

The study—conducted by IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute and not peer-reviewed before publication—makes a handful of peculiar assumptions to reach its final conclusions.

Simply put, the findings of the meta-study (a compilation of other studies) are based on assumptions that are far from the real-world truth, as summarized by Clean Technica.

A few claims lifted from the IVL study include the suggestion that an electric vehicle must be driven 250,000 kilometers (155,000 miles) before its environmental benefits kick in.

That figure is in relation to a "moderately consuming" diesel vehicle; the study then goes further to state an electric car must be driven 20 years before it can be considered environmentally friendly....

 

 

[bear.getting.old]

Also we don't have enough electricity that is generated through solar or wind to power these cars, so that means that the cars will be effectively running off nuclear or coal. Very non green!. To generate all green power is very expensive, its only through large subsidy or environmental levies that renewables are feasible. For example in Ireland they add a environmental levy tax to your electric bills

Edited July 13, 2017 by bear.getting.old

[Riedquat]

1 hour ago, bear.getting.old said:

Also we don't have enough electricity that is generated through solar or wind to power these cars, so that means that the cars will be effectively running off nuclear or coal. Very non green!. To generate all green power is very expensive, its only through large subsidy or environmental levies that renewables are feasible. For example in Ireland they add a environmental levy tax to your electric bills

Nuclear fits the green bill.

[bear.getting.old]

Not if it goes japanese it doesn't.

[Confusion of VIs]

1 hour ago, bear.getting.old said:

Also we don't have enough electricity that is generated through solar or wind to power these cars, so that means that the cars will be effectively running off nuclear or coal. Very non green!. To generate all green power is very expensive, its only through large subsidy or environmental levies that renewables are feasible. For example in Ireland they add a environmental levy tax to your electric bills

Millions of people have cars that spend most of their days parked on the drive while they commute to work. These could be charged by solar panels.

I am one of these millions and considering replacing our second car (Fiesta) with a BMW I3. It actually works out cheaper over 5 years than replacing the Fiesta, plus I worked out that our average 150miles a week would easily be covered by a standard 4KW solar panel system, so no load on the grid, in fact as the car battery can be set up to power the house or feed back into the grid during peak times it could actually help with balancing.   

 

[Confusion of VIs]

20 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Nuclear fits the green bill.

Too expensive.

Also the carbon emissions associated with building, fueling and decommissioning a nuclear power plant are huge - I recal but cannot now find l one estimate that it was not far off that of a coal plant and higher than gas. 

[bear.getting.old]

Cheaper ? £27,830 ?? I take your word for it. But what about depriciation? Fine if you already have a solar system but you will be taking power you would otherwise consume in the house or not being paid for generation.

Edited July 14, 2017 by bear.getting.old

[cashinmattress]

7 hours ago, Northern Welsh Midlander said:

And thats just the batteries, what about charging them?

So? Same for the 'leccy that you get at the forecourt where you gas up. Power for pumps, lights, transport, IT, then wages, insurance, HSE, etc...

Less than a percent of the vehicles are on batteries..of course there will be a 'boom'.

The grid can handle all sorts... generation can't. There in lay the problem. We have a petri-energy / hydrocarbon based energy economy...99.9% of our work depends on it.

[Confusion of VIs]

58 minutes ago, bear.getting.old said:

Cheaper ? £27,830 ?? I take your word for it. But what about depriciation? Fine if you already have a solar system but you will be taking power you would otherwise consume in the house or not being paid for generation.

First year depreciation is very high (I expect this to come down as its down to overblown fears about batteries wearing out - they are performing much better than predicted)  so we are looking at getting one second hand. Also we pay the London congestion charge about twice a week, which adds up over 5 years.

Comment about the panels was more about the possibility of adding several million electric vehicles without impacting on the National Grid 

[bear.getting.old]

I can see how in London it can make a lot more sense than outside

[Peter Hun]

7 hours ago, bear.getting.old said:

Also we don't have enough electricity that is generated through solar or wind to power these cars, so that means that the cars will be effectively running off nuclear or coal. Very non green!. To generate all green power is very expensive, its only through large subsidy or environmental levies that renewables are feasible. For example in Ireland they add a environmental levy tax to your electric bills

Solar power is gradually becoming the cheapest power source, significantly cheaper than cola already in some countries.

Not that coal is relevant, there wont be any coal produced electricity in a couple of years in the UK.

[kzb]

To the nearest whole per cent, what is the percentage of energy, world wide, that is produced by wind power?

.......the answer is zero (0.46% rounds down to 0%).

[kzb]

<<Simply put, the findings of the meta-study (a compilation of other studies) are based on assumptions that are far from the real-world truth, as summarized by Clean Technica. >>

One of the things claimed to be far from the real-world truth on that site is the following:

5. They assume electric vehicle drivers are driving their vehicles on 50% fossil fuel in the electricity mix. While this is true for some grids, the normal case for electric vehicle drivers is to purchase clean electricity, or what they believe is to be a clean energy mix, or simply produce their own.

Well certainly in the UK, most electricity still comes from fossil fuels.  A lot of what is claimed to be renewables is in reality wood-chip burning ("biomass").  This was exposed as a scam a few months back, as using wood chips has a higher carbon footprint than burning coal.

In fact the 50% figure is probably an underestimate in the UK, especially when you take into account the wood chip fiasco.

[kzb]

8 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Too expensive.

Also the carbon emissions associated with building, fueling and decommissioning a nuclear power plant are huge - I recal but cannot now find l one estimate that it was not far off that of a coal plant and higher than gas. 

Similar arguments can be made for renewables.  Think how much energy goes into the steel production for a wind turbine, a generator that will operate for about 25% of the time and extracts a dilute energy source.  

[Locke]

9 hours ago, bear.getting.old said:

Not if it goes japanese it doesn't.

Simple: don't let the Israelis install your plant.

[Kurt Barlow]

6 hours ago, kzb said:

To the nearest whole per cent, what is the percentage of energy, world wide, that is produced by wind power?

.......the answer is zero (0.46% rounds down to 0%).

Its not a far comparison between wind (electricity) and primary energy sources. A better comparision is winds share of global electricity production.

As of 2016 wind constituted 4% of global electricity supply. That compares with nuclear at 10%