Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

archy.deberker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 396 posts

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#251

Post by KptMarchewa »

pstrateman wrote: post #220
Reason077 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It won't be long (perhaps in the next 2-3 years) before the UK grid will be able to operate for periods without any CCGTs running at all. We've already come quite close this winter, with record low CCGT output and record high wind turbine production. Wind turbine output, although variable, is also fairly predictable: so good modelling and scheduling should ensure that when CCGTs do operate, they can run as efficientl…

It's easy to reduce gas usage if you simply don't provide power arbitrarily. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/national-gri...

Why link something that has already been proven false?

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#252

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

dTal wrote: post #245
derriz wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Varying output from a nuclear plant is mostly achieved by simply releasing the generated steam into the atmosphere instead of sending it through the turbine[1]. But operating a nuclear plant in this fashion pushes up the price per MWh considerably given their very high cap-ex and op-ex. And while fuel cost is negligible for nuclear, creating more nuclear waste per useful MWh generated is a further drag on costs. So a…

I am skeptical that renewables are cheaper than nuclear when one factors in the impossible amounts of energy storage required to make them meet the same reliability guarantees that nuclear (and fossil) can meet - indeed, as far as I know, there exists no proven, cheap, scalable technology to store power at grid scale at all .

You get a lot of storage "for free". Some examples are house heating and hydro-electric that you would have the dams for anyway for flood control. Also, fuel based power-plants are very low capex so it's totally reasonable to have 50% demand able to be met by fossil fuels and then just keep them off whenever you have enough renewables.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#253

Post by dahfizz »

scythe wrote: post #234
rlpb wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Surely HVDC links between Scotland and England could be built? The article covers this and explains why it's not enough. Provisioning time for the links exceeds projected generation capacity increases in the Scotland.

It seems like the planning isn't so great, though. They expect to have another 4 GW of links by 2029, which is enough for the wind overshoot today, but there will be a lot more wind by 2029... so, double the investment and build 8 GW of links by 2029.

I'm sure the people in charge of the project wish they could snap their fingers and double their budget.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#254

Post by fijiaarone »

dTal wrote: post #245
derriz wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Varying output from a nuclear plant is mostly achieved by simply releasing the generated steam into the atmosphere instead of sending it through the turbine[1]. But operating a nuclear plant in this fashion pushes up the price per MWh considerably given their very high cap-ex and op-ex. And while fuel cost is negligible for nuclear, creating more nuclear waste per useful MWh generated is a further drag on costs. So a…

I am skeptical that renewables are cheaper than nuclear when one factors in the impossible amounts of energy storage required to make them meet the same reliability guarantees that nuclear (and fossil) can meet - indeed, as far as I know, there exists no proven, cheap, scalable technology to store power at grid scale at all .

“Renewables” means hydro, solar, and wind — with hydro being 90%+ of the total, and the infrastructure already build for it counted as free.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#256

Post by landemva »

belorn wrote: post #239
derriz wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Varying output from a nuclear plant is mostly achieved by simply releasing the generated steam into the atmosphere instead of sending it through the turbine[1]. But operating a nuclear plant in this fashion pushes up the price per MWh considerably given their very high cap-ex and op-ex. And while fuel cost is negligible for nuclear, creating more nuclear waste per useful MWh generated is a further drag on costs. So a…

It seems obvious that nuclear can not compete against natural gas when natural gas is priced cheaply and the pollution caused by fossil fuel is put on society rather than the operator. A combined grid of renewables and fossil fuels has been the primary strategy in most European countries and was working very well in keeping prices low until Russia invaded Ukraine. The big problem is that energy prices are set based o…

> The big problem is that energy prices are set based on the most expensive unit that needs to be turned on

That is not a problem, it is the incentive to have supplies available so they can be turned on.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#257

Post by presentation »

redleader55 wrote: post #39
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #4

Curtailment, like negative prices, seems like something that it is hard for people to have constructive conversations about. Probably the cheapest and best option is to build more wind and not care too much if it increases curtailment. Yes, all the things mentioned should be looked into and done when it makes financial sense but "wasting wind" is much less a thing to worry about than "burning gas", and I'd rather was…

Balancing a nationwide power grid is very complex. Some energy sources can be started and stopped instantly, but are limited - water. Others are plentiful, but unpredictable - wind. Others are predictable, but take a long time to start and stop - gas, coal(several hours), nuclear(1 day to start, fast to stop, but very expensive). A balanced grid will need all of them, will need them in quantities which can cover faul…

How about redirecting excess nuclear energy to eg produce hydrogen fuel cells?

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#258

Post by cwalv »

TheDudeMan wrote: post #226
sh1mmer wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only there were some actually useful use of excessive energy that weren’t mining bitcoin.

Why not Bitcoin? You can sell it for cash. Do you not like cash? You can plant trees with cash or lots of other green things.

If you live in a developed market with no need for the utility bitcoin provides, then to you bitcoin is only a waste of energy, and energy generation is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. In this case you see it as all cost and no benefit, and any counterpoint goes against your dogma, which is 'inconvenient' or irritating

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#259

Post by cwalv »

youngtaff wrote: post #181
sh1mmer wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only there were some actually useful use of excessive energy that weren’t mining bitcoin.

Charging cars, heating water in a well insulated tank

It's great when we can use off peak energy for things like this, but they're not as easy to locate onsite as bitcoin miners .. and difficulty with transmission is a big part of the problem

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#260

Post by alvah »

avianlyric wrote: post #162
consumer451 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To repeat, curtailment is not a problem and does not need to be solved. Agree 95%. The only valid question involving curtailment is how much must occur at each individual turbine or farm to make it a bad investment.

Curtailment is never a bad investment. If anything it’s fantastic for wind investors. Someone is paying you twice for not using your assets. You get all the revenue, and have zero wear and tear on your equipment. In an extreme scenario you could even be paid for not turning on non-functional equipment. What a fantastic deal.

Is it fantastic for energy consumers? Somebody has to pay for it.
Post reply on HN