Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Low-carbon Strategy Will Raise Household Energy Bills By £200 A Year


Recommended Posts

I'm not so sure. Modern turbines have sophisticated control systems. They reach their maximum output before the wind reaches shut-down speed. After they reach maximum output, as the wind speed rises further, the control system alters the pitch of the turbine blades to maintain the same rotation speed, thus 'dumping' efficiency. When maximum wind speed is detected, the brake comes on and the turbine shuts down. That's how I understand it, anyway.

the big problem isn’t when the wind is blowing to hard, as you point out new designs can operate at higher wind speeds before shutting down.

the problem is that sometimes the wind just doesn’t blow no matter the pitch of the blades or how advanced the design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My point was that we COULD derive all our electricity from wind turbines for much of the time - not that it would be desirable or practical to do so. But it is planned that we will get a significant propertion of our electricity from wind - I think taking all current windfarms and all the proposals including round 3 offshore, the envisaged figure is 25 gigawatts, a bit more than one third of our total electricity requirement. In reality, most of the time the total output from wind turbines would be less than that figure, but that is a given, as it were.

the problem is that sometimes the wind just doesn’t blow no matter the pitch of the blades or how advanced the design.
On days when windpower, nationally, is low, then other sources of power need to be used, like gas-turbine stations which are ideal for quick start-up and shut down.

But the other side of the equation is that on days when windpower is good, the gas-turbines can be shut down, thus saving fossil fuels and emissions.

Nuclear and coal-fired power stations are best if operated at a near constant output, so they would remain as a core resource.

Edited by blankster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point was that we COULD derive all our electricity from wind turbines for much of the time - not that it would be desirable or practical to do so. But it is planned that we will get a significant propertion of our electricity from wind - I think taking all current windfarms and all the proposals including round 3 offshore, the envisaged figure is 25 gigawatts, a bit more than one third of our total electricity requirement. In reality, most of the time the total output from wind turbines would be less than that figure, but that is a given, as it were.

On days when windpower, nationally, is low, then other sources of power need to be used, like gas-turbine stations which are ideal for quick start-up and shut down.

But the other side of the equation is that on days when windpower is good, the gas-turbines can be shut down, thus saving fossil fuels and emissions.

Nuclear and coal-fired power stations are best if operated at a near constant output, so they would remain as a core resource.

This backup capacity is not a real option without adding lots of cost.

Having a gas power plant sitting idle say 80% of the time is not feasible unless the 20% of the time it is operating it can charge a ridiculous price.

Plus there is a second problem with wind. It can give you too much power.

If we build 30GW wind, we assume on average we will get 10GW power. But it can be as low as, say 1GW and as high as say 25GW. Thus you need to have some sort of backup to gap the 9GW and more difficult you need someway to address the problem of overcapacity. If the wind is blowing hard and your producing 25GW instead of the 10GW expected then you need to turn off 15GW of coal.

Well that isn’t easy or cheap to do.

Alternatively you draw and dump the excess power which is a real massive waste. (ie think a massive 10GW heater system outside to dump excess)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we didn’t waste it, as a nation if we didn’t produce that oil/gas then we would have been poorer or more indebted.

back then what were bond yields? 10%?? 15%??

at 12.5% over 25 years, selling the oil instead of taking on debt means we sold $380 oil and we are buying it back at $50-100

barging.

Back in the early 1980's sterling went sky high on the back of the petro dollar boom. This knackered much of British Industry.

This probably does more to explain our structural balance of trade deficit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8146954.stm

Rising unemployment and higher energy prices are likely to push hundreds of thousands more homes into fuel poverty, a key government advisory body says.

The Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (FPAG) says about 4m households in England are already in fuel poverty, spending more than 10% of their income on energy.

And it has urged ministers to set out a detailed plan for meeting their own target of ending the problem by 2016.

The government says it has spent £20bn on cutting fuel poverty since 2000.

Vulnerable

One of the key causes of fuel poverty is high energy prices. Average domestic fuel bills have increased by 125% over the past five years.

The report warns that the long-term trend on prices is likely to be upwards, not least due to the huge industry investment needed to meet green energy targets.

Unemployment is becoming a key factor too, the report added. The jobless rate is expected to hit three million in the next year and about 38% of those out of work are fuel poor.

And the following day we have this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This backup capacity is not a real option without adding lots of cost.

Having a gas power plant sitting idle say 80% of the time is not feasible unless the 20% of the time it is operating it can charge a ridiculous price.

Plus there is a second problem with wind. It can give you too much power.

If we build 30GW wind, we assume on average we will get 10GW power. But it can be as low as, say 1GW and as high as say 25GW. Thus you need to have some sort of backup to gap the 9GW and more difficult you need someway to address the problem of overcapacity. If the wind is blowing hard and your producing 25GW instead of the 10GW expected then you need to turn off 15GW of coal.

Well that isn’t easy or cheap to do.

Alternatively you draw and dump the excess power which is a real massive waste. (ie think a massive 10GW heater system outside to dump excess)

Fortunately the National Grid manage our electricity requirements, and not you!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_demand_(electric_power)

Dynamic demand copes with our highly variable production vs requirements, and the grid has capacity for a significant increase in renewables.

10GW dump load :lol::lol::lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what you are saying is that we perhaps do have the technology to get ourselves out of this mess if only the VI would stop enslaving us to oil?

Yes, we've had Nuclear plants since the 1950s. Even the primitive, dangerous and wasteful ones we currently use generate a decent chunk of our electricity with no CO2 emissions. But it's had a pretty successful propaganda campaign waged against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This backup capacity is not a real option without adding lots of cost.

Having a gas power plant sitting idle say 80% of the time is not feasible unless the 20% of the time it is operating it can charge a ridiculous price.

Plus there is a second problem with wind. It can give you too much power.

If we build 30GW wind, we assume on average we will get 10GW power. But it can be as low as, say 1GW and as high as say 25GW. Thus you need to have some sort of backup to gap the 9GW and more difficult you need someway to address the problem of overcapacity. If the wind is blowing hard and your producing 25GW instead of the 10GW expected then you need to turn off 15GW of coal.

Well that isn’t easy or cheap to do.

Alternatively you draw and dump the excess power which is a real massive waste. (ie think a massive 10GW heater system outside to dump excess)

Good post. Exactly how much wind or solar output did we get in the brutally cold spell we had this winter. Zero.

Our whole energy policy is in a complete mess thanks to the guilt-ridden post-socialist climate-change scum who have found the next great scam to make everyone's lives more difficult.

It says it all that their Leader Al Gore uses 10 times the energy the average American uses to heat/cool his home, and that's for someone who half the time is flying around the world lecturing the next group of gullible idiots on pseudo-science to get them to invest in his Renewables Investment company.

I just hope more people get woken up to this scam in time to stop too many billions of wastage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be cheaper if the govt decided to implement it properly. If they avoid quangoiing it then it could be managed cheaply and effectively. Although now I've typed that out, it'd be insane to think this govt could do it cheaply.

But it's what should be done.

navitron.org.uk

BUDGETKIT

budget kit - 1x20tube 47mm panel

includes: roof mounting kit, retro-fit coil, antifreeze, circulation pump, pressurised system kit, filling kit, pipework and armaflex insulation

£ 899.00

(incl. VAT)

£ 781.74

(excl. VAT)

When you consider how much they will have to spend building new power stations ...

And how much to pay the man (men) to fit it?

Your average numpty is not going to be willing to undertake fitting this type of kit, even if they think that they are able.

tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the early 1980's sterling went sky high on the back of the petro dollar boom. This knackered much of British Industry.

This probably does more to explain our structural balance of trade deficit.

Yeh but we sold our oil for the equivalent of nearly $400 and are now buying it back at sub $60. Isn’t that a bargain? :lol:

As for you oil, sterling, industry death.

That is a fallacy. Oil didn’t dictate our currencies strength, it was politicians and banks. We can have as weak a currency as we wish. Look at Zimbabwe if you want tips on how to do it.

Plus what ignorant information have you read that told you a weak currency is a good thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fortunately the National Grid manage our electricity requirements, and not you!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_demand_(electric_power)

Dynamic demand copes with our highly variable production vs requirements, and the grid has capacity for a significant increase in renewables.

10GW dump load :lol::lol::lol::lol:

Dynamic demand cannot absorb a difference of 30GW for a few seconds let alone a difference of 30GW for perhaps a month long.

Please tell us how you would store 30GW instead of an expected 10GW for a month straight?

Or how you would provide 10GW from an expected 10GW but a production of none over a period of a month?

It isnt really possible without either lots of very costly gas power plants or costly hydro. for hydro we dont even have the landscape for the required storage.

Edited by cells
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dynamic demand cannot absorb a difference of 30GW for a few seconds let alone a difference of 30GW for perhaps a month long.

Please tell us how you would store 30GW instead of an expected 10GW for a month straight?

Or how you would provide 10GW from an expected 10GW but a production of none over a period of a month?

It isnt really possible without either lots of very costly gas power plants or costly hydro. for hydro we dont even have the landscape for the required storage.

Well, the National Grid don't see it as a problem.

http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/A...heet2020SO1.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one but you mentioned a perpetual motion machine.

No machine is 100% efficient but adding a sterling engine to an air conditioning unit would make it more efficient, would it not? (That was my the question in my original post).

What are you - an apologist for the fossil fuel industry?

Not at all. What you proposed is akin to using an electric motror to drive a generator, that helps to provide power to the electic motor. You lose twice, if you did'nt you cloud have a motor that never stops i.e. perpetual motion. Of couse you could never extract any energy from the system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the National Grid don't see it as a problem.

http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/A...heet2020SO1.pdf

Like I said, almost anything can be done but at a price.

Having backup gas is going to cost an arm and a leg.

A gas power plant sitting idle 80% of the time still costs money. Lots of money.

There is no cheap way to store the excess or a cheap way to buffer the system when there is a deficit of wind.

Edited by cells
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, almost anything can be done but at a price.

Having backup gas is going to cost an arm and a leg.

A gas power plant sitting idle 80% of the time still costs money. Lots of money.

There is no cheap way to store the excess or a cheap way to buffer the system when there is a deficit of wind.

Whatever we do is going to cost money. The critical point is that we don't rely on one form of generation. It's all about a broad mix of generation.

While your gas plant is sitting idle, it uses much less fuel. While your wind/hydro/solar etc are producing, the fuel is free.

Excess is not going to be a problem - export/storage heaters/electric vehicles/smart metering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excess is not going to be a problem - export/storage heaters/electric vehicles/smart metering.

At times of surplus, the spill price on to the National Grid can (and indeed does) go negative. So you end up paying money for having generated at a time of excess. Some may see this as a problem, but then making a profit is not really the idea behind windpower is it. :blink:

Windpower as a novelty is fine if people want to waste their money, but you can't run even a small country on it. We need to stop all the subsidies and inflation of the electricity price through onerous regulations if we want the UK to have a viable power supply next decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever we do is going to cost money. The critical point is that we don't rely on one form of generation. It's all about a broad mix of generation.

While your gas plant is sitting idle, it uses much less fuel. While your wind/hydro/solar etc are producing, the fuel is free.

As an idea, a 2GW gas plant sitting idle costs about £800,000 a day, if it is producing it costs about £1.5m a day (but produces about £1.8m worth of electricity).

So we would need about 5 of these plants as backup. Or we would need to pay £4m a day as a country to provide the backup power just in case. A huge cost.

And that is if we have 10-15GW wind.

Excess is not going to be a problem - export/storage heaters/electric vehicles/smart metering.

Small periods of excess or shortage may not be a problem. We are talking 12 hours to 24 hours. But with wind, you may find excess of a month or a shortage of a month.

We have no way to dump 20GW of excess. Well we can easily dump that electricity but we have no way to use it constructively.

The only real way to deal with excess is to try and ramp down your coal/gas electricity (but that also adds cost). That might provide say 5GW-10GW of leeway.

However the only real option is to export the electricity when we have excess wind. That would be to France and beyond and hopefully to import from France and beyond when we have a shortfall.

But again that adds lots of costs and is not easy. Dumping 20GW to France would fry her; we are looking at dumping that energy across 5 or more large European countries.

However it is much more feasible than trying to store it which is nearly impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At times of surplus, the spill price on to the National Grid can (and indeed does) go negative. So you end up paying money for having generated at a time of excess. Some may see this as a problem, but then making a profit is not really the idea behind windpower is it. :blink:

Windpower as a novelty is fine if people want to waste their money, but you can't run even a small country on it. We need to stop all the subsidies and inflation of the electricity price through onerous regulations if we want the UK to have a viable power supply next decade.

Wind power can provide perhaps 10% of a nations electricity. More than that and it gets problematic and very expensive.

As for wind power being too expensive. Yes it is.

However the government is going to tax and bless us dry. Might as well spend it on inefficient (but somewhat useful) wind turbines then to spend it on sex change equality and fairness officers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At times of surplus, the spill price on to the National Grid can (and indeed does) go negative. So you end up paying money for having generated at a time of excess. Some may see this as a problem, but then making a profit is not really the idea behind windpower is it. :blink:

Windpower as a novelty is fine if people want to waste their money, but you can't run even a small country on it. We need to stop all the subsidies and inflation of the electricity price through onerous regulations if we want the UK to have a viable power supply next decade.

In reality, the windfarm would be shut down if there genuinely was an excess which was costing the producer money.

What would you suggest as a viable power supply?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all. What you proposed is akin to using an electric motror to drive a generator, that helps to provide power to the electic motor. You lose twice, if you did'nt you cloud have a motor that never stops i.e. perpetual motion. Of couse you could never extract any energy from the system.

No, that's not quite right, surely?

The air conditioning unit creates the temperature differential.

The sterling engine exploits that differential. The Sterling engine generates energy without counter-acting the effort expended by the AC unit and that is what we want. It won't provide the same amount of energy back that the aircon put in but it would surely produce energy. If you know differently for sure lets see the evidence. I'm open to that.

In Singapore and other hot countries many aircon units reduce the temperature down from say 33C to 21C and that is what I'm hoping we can exploit. In large buildings that adds up to a whole lot of energy. Maybe what you're ignoring here is the ambient air temperature (sweltering in Singapore) that is caused by that elephant in the room - the sun.

Edited by Dave Spart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reality, the windfarm would be shut down if there genuinely was an excess which was costing the producer money.

More likely the government will pass a law, which says a minimum of ….erm… 0.1p for wind energy to the grid.

So wind farms will not stop.

But that screws the coal/nuclear plants that cannot stop without it being costly.

So what will happen is that nuclear and coal plants will continue, but dump their load in a big pool of water or some such. That will make wind turbines look good and coal/nuclear look bad. It will also transfer costs to those two from wind farms.

What would you suggest as a viable power supply?

What is the current plan?

It depends on what you mean by viable

If your paranoid that the Russians will turn the gas off and choose to live in more poverty. Then the following would be quite viable.

35% coal

40% nuclear

25% gas.

The coal and nuclear you can buy from many countries and stock lots of it.

25% gas we can supply from the north sea quite easily.

If by viable you mean the lights don’t go out.

Well we don’t have to do anything. the current mix works and is cheap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's not quite right, surely?

The air conditioning unit creates the temperature differential.

The sterling engine exploits that differential. I'm assumig it does it without making the room warmer. If so the Sterling engine generates energy without counter-acting the effort expended by the AC unit then that is what we want. IOt won't provide the same amount of energy back that the aircon put in but it would surely produce energy.

If you know differently for sure lets see the evidence. I'm open to that.

In Singapore and other hot countries many air con units reduce the temperature down from 33C down to say 21C and that is what I'm hoping we can exploit. In large buildings that adds up to a whole lot of energy. Maybe what you're ignoring here is the ambient air temperature (sweltering in Singapore) that is caused by that elephant in the room - the sun.

A levels physics equation says no

1eaf1b5f3b3c7cb1acfe3ad669e7807c.png

19026261d69f6e82244fbb5ff8304ba0.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_engine

Edited by cells
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dynamic demand cannot absorb a difference of 30GW for a few seconds let alone a difference of 30GW for perhaps a month long.

Please tell us how you would store 30GW instead of an expected 10GW for a month straight?

Or how you would provide 10GW from an expected 10GW but a production of none over a period of a month?

It isnt really possible without either lots of very costly gas power plants or costly hydro. for hydro we dont even have the landscape for the required storage.

No need because this level of variability is completely outside the observed ranges of wind fluctuations over any given month since records began.

You are creating hurdles for the renewables industry that simply do not exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's not quite right, surely?

The air conditioning unit creates the temperature differential.

The sterling engine exploits that differential. The Sterling engine generates energy without counter-acting the effort expended by the AC unit and that is what we want. It won't provide the same amount of energy back that the aircon put in but it would surely produce energy. If you know differently for sure lets see the evidence. I'm open to that.

In Singapore and other hot countries many aircon units reduce the temperature down from say 33C to 21C and that is what I'm hoping we can exploit. In large buildings that adds up to a whole lot of energy. Maybe what you're ignoring here is the ambient air temperature (sweltering in Singapore) that is caused by that elephant in the room - the sun.

A Stirling Engine (SE) works by transfering heat from a hot place, which becomes colder, to a cold place which become hotter, producing mechanical energy. This is the opposite of aircon (AC) which uses mechanical energy to transfer heat from one place which becomed colder to another place which becomes hotter. Neither process is 100% efficient. Your proposal would produce energy, however, not enough to cover extra energy needed by the AC that would be required due to the flow of heat back through the SE. Get some perfect insulator, some perfact conductor and some perfectly rigid rods and you may get close, but you can never ever make on the deal. If you can do it, I'd say the Nobel Prize for Physics is yours for the taking.

The sun can be used to make the hot place in your SE hot. Add some matt black fins in the shade and you ave somewhere to dissipate this heat. Get clever with some gas and a piston and you have your SE. That what the folks in the original clip were doing. SEs get less efficient as they get bigger, primarily as heat takes time to flow through the materials they are made from. So I'd be vary wary in investing in their upscaling efforts, they are doomed to failure. There are rotary SE designs that would scale up, I'm surprised no-one has done this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.