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

The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

ukerc.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–79 of 79 posts

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#71

Post by pyrale »

dhx wrote: post #64

Generation curtailment is expected though in a 100% VRE power grid because it's necessary to overbuild, and this strategy is found to be economically viable almost anywhere on the planet.[1][2] Generation curtailment could be minimised though with demand-side flexibility (eg. turn on aluminium smelters when it's windy), not necessarily just with pumped storage hydro and/or lengthy transmission line builds to other re…

> eg. turn on aluminium smelters when it's windy

I'd be curious to learn how you intend to amortize that aluminium smelter, while also being competitive on aluminium markets.

> The variable-to-firm transformation enablers include energy storage, the optimum blending of VREs and other renewable resources, geographic dispersion, and supply/demand flexibility.

Yeah... provided someone else does that for them, VREs are very cheap.

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#72

Post by mytailorisrich »

onraglanroad wrote: post #44
mytailorisrich wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has experienced the 2 largest annual growth on record in the last 5 years, with +755k mid-23 to mid-2024 alone [1]. Even your link shows about 11% growth since 2010 and higher growth rates since ~2004. So we can argue about what "very large" means, but population growth is significant. [1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populati...

> about 11% growth since 2010 So much less than 1% a year. > we can argue about what "very large" means Yeah, you can argue that less than 1% a year is "very large". I'm not sure anyone else will be convinced.

The UK does have record population growth, the rest is semantics as mentioned. That certainly does not help with all the infrastructure issues the country has. That's it. Please refrain from flamebaits and political assumptions, and let's have a substantive discussion instead.

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#73

Post by onraglanroad »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #72
onraglanroad wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> about 11% growth since 2010 So much less than 1% a year. > we can argue about what "very large" means Yeah, you can argue that less than 1% a year is "very large". I'm not sure anyone else will be convinced.

The UK does have record population growth, the rest is semantics as mentioned. That certainly does not help with all the infrastructure issues the country has. That's it. Please refrain from flamebaits and political assumptions, and let's have a substantive discussion instead.

No, it's not semantic it's numeric. It's less than 1%.

And I didn't make any political assumptions. Didn't even mention them. Might want to tighten the cord there, looks like a mask is slipping.

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#74

Post by krona »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #65

Generally fair take, though most of the comments here don't seem to reflect the article's take that it is high gas prices and ongoing work to upgrade transmission that accounts for much of the cost. They don't mention the previous government effectively banning onshore wind in England which seems relevant. The current version of that party is abandoning net zero to win back gullible voters they themselves misinformed…

The capacity factor of onshore wind in UK (~27%) is far worse than offshore (~40%). So we'd need even more reliable generation if we wanted to cover the hills in windmills and actually depend on them to do anything useful.

Let's not even talk about the capacity factor of solar in the UK.

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#75

Post by ZeroGravitas »

krona wrote: post #74
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #65

Generally fair take, though most of the comments here don't seem to reflect the article's take that it is high gas prices and ongoing work to upgrade transmission that accounts for much of the cost. They don't mention the previous government effectively banning onshore wind in England which seems relevant. The current version of that party is abandoning net zero to win back gullible voters they themselves misinformed…

The capacity factor of onshore wind in UK (~27%) is far worse than offshore (~40%). So we'd need even more reliable generation if we wanted to cover the hills in windmills and actually depend on them to do anything useful. Let's not even talk about the capacity factor of solar in the UK.

Solar capacity factor in good locations like Australia averages about 22 and peaks under 30%. That isn't going to stop it being the primary source of energy for the human race soon.

It's just weird numerology that gets people hung up on these numbers. It's not clear people even understand what they mean when they bring them up.

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#76

Post by tomrod »

leoedin wrote: post #32
philipallstar wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the inevitable capacity meltdowns Capacity is constantly being hit by very large population growth. Just like water and housing. Money available is lowered by state-enforced price caps. Purchase prices are raised by state-mandated net zero rules that subsidise green sources.

> Capacity is constantly being hit by very large population growth. Is this really true in the UK? Electricity production in the UK peaked in 2005. It's down 20% on that today. The issue here is that in 2005 electricity was primarily produced in large power stations reasonably close to where it was consumed, while in 2025 it's increasingly produced in locations far from population centres. The actual ability of the g…

Texas solved this with the CREZ

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#77

Post by ZeroGravitas »

pyrale wrote: post #71
dhx wrote: post #64

Generation curtailment is expected though in a 100% VRE power grid because it's necessary to overbuild, and this strategy is found to be economically viable almost anywhere on the planet.[1][2] Generation curtailment could be minimised though with demand-side flexibility (eg. turn on aluminium smelters when it's windy), not necessarily just with pumped storage hydro and/or lengthy transmission line builds to other re…

> eg. turn on aluminium smelters when it's windy I'd be curious to learn how you intend to amortize that aluminium smelter, while also being competitive on aluminium markets. > The variable-to-firm transformation enablers include energy storage, the optimum blending of VREs and other renewable resources, geographic dispersion, and supply/demand flexibility. Yeah... provided someone else does that for them, VREs are v…

Smelters around the globe are doing this already. Rio Tinto operates one in New Zealand to help manage seasonal hydro flows for example.

In Australia the same firm is vocal that unless the local area moves from coal to renewables they won't hit price points that are competitive on the global market.

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#78

Post by defrost »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #77
pyrale wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> eg. turn on aluminium smelters when it's windy I'd be curious to learn how you intend to amortize that aluminium smelter, while also being competitive on aluminium markets. > The variable-to-firm transformation enablers include energy storage, the optimum blending of VREs and other renewable resources, geographic dispersion, and supply/demand flexibility. Yeah... provided someone else does that for them, VREs are v…

Smelters around the globe are doing this already. Rio Tinto operates one in New Zealand to help manage seasonal hydro flows for example. In Australia the same firm is vocal that unless the local area moves from coal to renewables they won't hit price points that are competitive on the global market.

Further info re: Australian Aluminium production

   The four aluminium smelters in Australia consume 10% of the nation’s electricity and produce close to 5% of total emissions.
  Smelting is so energy intensive that in many countries, it has driven the construction of new fossil fuel power plants.

  That’s why it’s nicknamed “congealed electricity”.

  This week, the federal government proposed a new policy aimed at making aluminium smelting green.
* https://www.climateworkscentre.org/news/will-tax-incentives-...

* https://aluminium.org.au/australian-industry/australian-alum...

Re: The Quiet Driving Force Behind Rising Curtailment Costs in Great Britain

#79

Post by subscribed »

mikeyouse wrote: post #43
subscribed wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why borders have to be considered unspoilt if most of it is the shore soaked with untreated sewage, so with limited allure to the tourists (considering that taking a swim can land you in the hospital).

Not necessarily defending this branch of NIMBYism but contaminated beaches can be cleaned and made usable within a few years if there’s the will and funding to do so. Building energy infrastructure is much more permanent and will alter the landscape for several decades. IMO it’s still worth building the transmission but it’s not logically incoherent or anything to protest it (as it is to protest new infra in existing…

Thank you, that was a great way to put it. I stand corrected.
Post reply on HN