...and the GB Power Generation Capability Goes Downhill AgaIn

[whole diary]

[simonw]

Interestingly, see http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/index.php, Wind power has contributed 14-16% of UK^▸ (United Kingdom) power, see

[TonyK]

Interestingly, see http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/index.php, Wind power has contributed 14-16% of UK^▸ (United Kingdom) power, see

One swallow does not make a summer. Today, with low demand and our first named storm Abigail blowing a hoolie, has seen 16% of our rather low demand of 36.8GW provided by wind. Look again throughout the week,as demand increases and the storm begins to abate. You will see nuclear and coal remain pretty much constant, with CCGT^▸ (Combined Cycle Gas Turbine) increasing.

[ChrisB]

we're an island surrounded by water that is continually on the move....can't we harness that?

[IndustryInsider]

I suspect, as with most things, it could be done.  But it would cost an enormous amount.

[ChrisB]

More than nuclear?

[Rhydgaled]

we're an island surrounded by water that is continually on the move....can't we harness that?

As I posted earlier, somebody was/is going to try. Didn't see any mention of the kinked cable in that article, maybe that was just a rumor.

[simonw]

I believe the government has backed a plan for 7-8 tidal lagoons to be managed to generate power and control flooding.

See http://www.tidallagoonpower.com/.

The Swansea bay scheme I believe has funding and if all 7/8 schemes are given go-ahead this should meet 10% of our power needs, and as a bonus, provide improved protection for many areas, ie Somerset Levels, from uncontrolled flooding.

[TonyK]

I believe the government has backed a plan for 7-8 tidal lagoons to be managed to generate power and control flooding.

See http://www.tidallagoonpower.com/.

The Swansea bay scheme I believe has funding and if all 7/8 schemes are given go-ahead this should meet 10% of our power needs, and as a bonus, provide improved protection for many areas, ie Somerset Levels, from uncontrolled flooding.

Done right, this could be a real game-changer. Done wrong, it could an economic and ecological disaster. The Swansea Bay scheme should be a proof-of-concept option. It's never going to give free power because of maintenance - removing silt and the like - but an honest audit should tell us whether it is wworth going for on a national scale.

[SandTEngineer]

Oh well, it is the begining of the end: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34851718

The UK^▸ (United Kingdom)'s remaining coal-fired power stations will be shut by 2025 with their use restricted by 2023, Energy Secretary Amber Rudd has announced.

Ms Rudd wants more gas-fired stations to be built since relying on "polluting" coal is "perverse".  "We need to give a clear signal to people who are in the market for building gas stations that coal will no longer crowd out new gas."

Environmentalists are concerned little is being done to promote renewables.

'Energy crisis'
Currently, coal provides almost a third (28%) of the UK's electricity, but Ms Rudd said "We are tackling a legacy of underinvestment and ageing power stations which we need to replace with alternatives that are reliable, good value for money and help to reduce emissions."

Ms Rudd also said investment in nuclear power is vital to the government's policy.  She believes that plans for new nuclear power stations, including at Wylfa in Wales and Moorside in Cumbria, could provide almost a third of the low carbon electricity the UK needs for the next 15 years.

The speech comes amid concerns that the UK could suffer from blackouts as a result of short supplies, brought about in large part from the closure of a number of power stations that have come to the end of their working lives.

Tony Lodge, who has published a report from the Centre for Policy Studies, said Britain is on the verge of an "energy crisis" with electricity demand set to outstrip available supply in the near future.  "We have called for an independent person separate from government to give a lead on security of supply. If we don't have that we could be in real trouble in 18 months."

However, National Grid and many experts have dismissed these concerns.

That last line really worries me. Reminds me too much of the statements that Network Rail kept making that it could deliver the world if asked, and look where that has got us.......

[Tim]

Oh well, it is the begining of the end: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34851718

[
That last line really worries me. Reminds me too much of the statements that Network Rail kept making that it could deliver the world if asked, and look where that has got us.......

That is the problem with our current crop of politicos.  They are all lawyers and accountants and managers by background.  They think that to make something happen you just need to agree on a price (and a brand identity) and then "the market" or "the experts" will take care of it.  Amber Rudd (who I actually regard as a reasonably good egg in many ways and who has a cameo in Four Weddings and a Funeral) has a history degree and experience in journalism.  It is not her lack of specific engineering knowledge that bothers me.  If it was simply information she lacks that is not a problem because she can simply ask an expert.  The thing that worries me is that she swims in a milieu of politicians, journalists and civil servants who collectively have no experience of solving real and difficult problems as opposed presentational or organisational problems.

Their approach to energy generation is to set the rules and then assume that the market will deliver.  Well it might and it probably will on good days, but it is one hell of a risk to be taking with something so important.
(and I speak as a lawyer (of sorts) but one that works with scientists and engineers)

[Rhydgaled]

Ms Rudd also said investment in nuclear power is vital to the government's policy.  She believes that plans for new nuclear power stations, including at Wylfa in Wales and Moorside in Cumbria, could provide almost a third of the low carbon electricity the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) needs for the next 15 years.

There must be some mistake surely. How can new power stations which will probably take the best part of 15 years to build provide a 3rd of our low-carbon electricity in the same time frame?

[ChrisB]

Poor journalism, I reckon

[stuving]

Its worse than that - I doubt whether plans for power stations will generate much electricity at all - just lots of words and other data.

[Western Enterprise]

Aren't there plans for a new gas fired station at the moment, but its held up by lack of funding?
No one wants to invest in plant that may not be economic, so nothing gets built.
Meanwhile, existing Gen capacity gets shut down.
It then become economic to build, but takes 5 years plus to do so ?

Am I mad ?