Live data from Hacker News

The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

archy.deberker.com

291–300 of 396 posts

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#291
post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Hydro is a long way from 90% in the UK. It's 4% of renewables.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#292
Given the point in the conclusion about planning relaxation not really helping to move future turbines closer to people, it seems that the sensible approach would be to factor any power network upgrades into the cost of wind when looking at TCO and ensure that the generators contribute to it. That, plus a small location-based payment bias plus eventual demand-based payment are all likely to be necessary - if oil/gas prices remain high, it is unrealistic to keep paying the same high cost per MWH to wind farms forever.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because, overall the wind power is the cheapest energy source available, and has been for a decade (recently overtaken by solar in some markets). Something that is cheap can have some percent wasted and still be cheaper overall than more expensive options. Focussing only on the waste without that bigger context is at best a false economy, at worst fossil fuel promoting propaganda.

What good is cheap if you can’t use it? Why would I want to pay for cheap wind energy I can’t use, and also pay for gas energy that I can use? Unless the cost of the wind is £0, paying for wind in addition to gas is just a waste of money.

The wind is 94% used. Which reduces the gas use. What do you mean "can't use"?

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#294

To the commenters saying that wind farms should move South or blaming wind farms or other energy producers. (My opinion and knowledge follows.) That is the whole idea of a robust and efficient transmission network: to transfer power from where it is cheaply generated across even countries; and mitigate any power production or transmission network failures. Say there is bad weather/physical catastrophe/heat wave in X…

UK has managed to cheap skate on many different fronts. When money was cheap they went on a cost cutting spree for a decade when they should have been using all of that money to invest in services and infrastructure. Now everything is crumbling.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#295
post #278

It's not surprising at all. Given the intermittent nature of wind/solar power, it would be a huge waste of transmission network capacity built to the maximum producing capacity. So, unless a storage facility is available, you will continue to see lots of wind/solar power get discarded as it's the most economical way: it's much more expensive to shut down or reduce output of other type of power generation such as gas…

For a given production of wind I would agree with you, but the installed capacity is only going to go up for the foreseeable, so the network needs to take that into account

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#296
post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, Sun Cable entered administration this week. I wouldn’t hold your breath. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-11/sun-cable-enters-admi...

G'damn it. That's a shame, I wasn't entirely onboard with the logistics of crossing the massive fault lines along the route .. but I admired the ambition and scope of the project. Be interesting to see if this is the end or just a pause waiting for fresh capital.

https://www.straitstimes.com/business/aussie-billionaire-urg...

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, that's not what the article is about. If more wind power gets built in Scotland to serve needs in England, then increasingly more of that output will have to be curtailed because we simply can't move the energy to where it needs to be, to the point where the only thing adding more wind farms would do is to provide a tad bit more energy when there's hardly any wind to distribute. In all other scenarios, having…

The article leaves an impression that curtailment is a problem that is costing us money. See most other comments here as evidence of that. I'm explicitly calling for more curtailment, because it isn't a problem and doesn't need to be solved. Burning fossil fuels is a problem to be solved. High electricity prices are a problem to be solved. Both of those problems can be solved by building more wind power , which almos…

The video you link is about that second scenario: intermittent high availability of renewable resources that can't be used, which is fine for the very same reason that when you're putting solar panels on your own roof you design for what you think it'll net on average, or even what you want to get out of it in fall winter and spring, not for peak power at noon on a cloudless summer day, which would be irrelevant and to call that "oversizing" would be something of a misnomer, it's well thought out dimensioning and hooray for curtailment!

The original article is about just being able to move any amount of energy whatsoever to where it is needed. If you don't improve distribution then you hit the saturation point much faster and more often than in an intermittent peak power scenario. Seeing that the original article links to multiple pages by the energy regulator/distributor about this very issue should maybe give us a hint that they, the actual experts, do think this is important enough to merit attention?

I upvoted your original post when you said that "it is hard for people to have constructive conversations about" negative prices and curtailing, but I'm starting to wonder whether you may be the common factor in some of those unconstructive conversations you've had in the past :-) Respectfully, it's not helpful to contribute to the discussion with a robotic pattern matched "curtailment is great actually!" whenever the topic is mentioned, without engaging with the arguments that are put forth.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the brave! But seriously (author of article here) I think that agile tariffs and more demand flexibility are probably a big part of the solution

I have the luxury of a 13khw battery, so it might make sense. But I suspect that when I need to use the grid will be uber peak £1.04 per kwhr. Edit: for those who are curious, here is some data on prices over the last month: https://agileprices.co.uk/

Octopus Agile cap the prices at £1/kwh.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#299
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand. Sure, letting turbines spin and not use the power, while burning extra gas, isn't worse for the environment than just burning gas in the first place (though it's significantly more expensive to triple-pay for the energy), but it's better is to turn that unused power into used power. The article wasn't decrying the existence of excess wind power, it was trying to describe the best solutions…

The article says we pay three times, curtail wind and then burn gas. Which is bad. But all the solutions are aimed at reducing the curtailment of wind. Rather than reducing the gas burnt. If the money saved by building more wind (or solar) and not having to burn gas saves more money then who cares if more wind is "wasted"? It would be nice to use every last drop, but I dont want to actually spend money to achieve tha…

> The article says we pay three times

It isn't true, though, is it?

The curtailment payment is instead of the regular payment, not in addition to it. Possibly also instead of some tax breaks the wind turbines got contingent on being operational - but that's only shifting costs from the taxpayers to the electricity consumers, who in the large are the same people.

Paying twice is still not as nice as paying once, but it makes me wonder what other sleight of hand the author is employing in his argument.

Re: The UK is wasting a lot of wind power

#300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article leaves an impression that curtailment is a problem that is costing us money. See most other comments here as evidence of that. I'm explicitly calling for more curtailment, because it isn't a problem and doesn't need to be solved. Burning fossil fuels is a problem to be solved. High electricity prices are a problem to be solved. Both of those problems can be solved by building more wind power , which almos…

The video you link is about that second scenario: intermittent high availability of renewable resources that can't be used, which is fine for the very same reason that when you're putting solar panels on your own roof you design for what you think it'll net on average, or even what you want to get out of it in fall winter and spring, not for peak power at noon on a cloudless summer day, which would be irrelevant and…

The video specifically mentions transmission congestion as an example of "lack of system flexibility" as one of several non-oversupply reason to curtail.

Timestamp: 1 minute 5 seconds.

If the NREL is specifically making videos to dispel unhelpful myths about a topic then it's worth at least watching their short video before continuing to spreading those very same unhelpful myths.

Post reply on HN