13 Days of Low Levels of UK Wind Power Rectified by £632 billion of Powerpack 2 Batteries!
July 29, 2018
By Paul Homewood
Repost from Prisms UK:
The UK’s installed wind power capacity is 19,261 MW
Load Factor for all wind: 30.1%
At 30.1% load factor, 19,261 MW of capacity is generating on average over the year 5,797.6 MW.
But for a 13 day x 24 hour period (312 hours) it only generated 963.4 MW.
That’s 4,834.2 MW lower than average.
For battery storage to make up this shortfall it would have to deliver
4,834.2 MW x 312 hours: 1,508,270 MWh
Read the full post here.
75 Comments
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
Sorry off-topic, but another dead polar bear, shot dead because of … you know what:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/29/polar-bear-shot-dead-attacking-cruise-ship-tour-guide-climate/
£632 billion is chicken feed to our switched-on politicians. Anyway, it is always other people’s money. They have already allowed well over 500MW of battery storage with lots more in the pipeline. It is madness on steroids.
Of course the £632 billion is in addition to the huge excess costs of weather dependent renewables.(wind and solar so far).
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/estimating-the-excess-costs-of-weather-dependent-renewables-over-gas-firing-for-generation-in-the-eu28-and-the-usa/
Plus the costs of replacing it all again in 10 years for the batteries and 20 years for Solar & Wind.
Plus the excessive maintenance costs for Off Shore Wind blades etc.
Plus the backup. Sheesh!
And how long and at what cost will it take to recharge the batteries?
Where will the electicity come from to do so?
I think it’s even more understandable to express it as a price per person in the UK – around £9,700 each or say £24,000 per UK household! That’s a big electricity bill. In any case the electricity stored in the batteries has to have been previously generated and paid-for, even if off-peak.
This last 30 days it has been at least 20 days with virtually no generation at all.
so add 50% to that £632Billion to cope with this last month.
Alternative visualisation (but for the 14 days – midnight to midnight)
This goes beyond madness. This is criminality!
If we look at the performance of the Big South Australian Battery, we find that it has a round trip efficiency of only about 80%. That means you’d need another 25% more energy to charge the batteries up in the first place.
What I have also noticed is that solar power has also been a little inconsistent. Instead of peaking daily at 8GW it has frequently struggled to get above 6GW on supposedly sunny days during our warm spell.
This is rather misleading for a blog that purports to correct misleading information. Obviously, existing gas peaking plants can balance the system for now – but they don’t need to be run – saving costly fuel – when the wind is blowing..
The grid needs to maintain voltage, power and frequency over three phases to work effectively. Renewables can only provide a small proportion otherwise those components cannot be maintained.
The purpose is to show how much battery storage you would need if you had nothing else.
The renewable lobby would like us ti believe storage is the answer to intermittency
30% of energy demand in 2018 delivered by renewables technologies over the year seems rather more significant than a “small proportion”.. http://renews.biz/111954/clean-power-nears-30-in-uk/.. As this proportion continues to grow, gas and nuclear can fill the gap, but in the longer term, it is probable that storage technologies will continue a steep cost reduction (not to mention pumped storage which is already economically competetive) – to allow them to compete on an even keel with new build gas and nuclear. Nobody I know in the “renewbales lobby” is seriously suggesting millions of Powerwalls to do the job!
It is not 30% of Energy, it is 30% of Electricity, two totally different things
Have you any idea how inefficient and costly it is to have an alternative fossil fuel power station just hanging around for the time the scam part time mickey mouse wind farms ?Why on earth should we do that? Where is the emergency which forces this situation? Oh of course hysteria! The problem with the GWEEN lobby is a lack of maths physics and chemistry! Wind DOES NOT WORK! Do the maths yourself. You cannot make steel with the pitiful interrupted output of wind farms. Anyone who claims otherwise is either in the pay of them or not bothered by numbers or simply lying. The irony of ironies is you must burn a lot of coal to make the steel for one wind tower, burn more coal to make the concrete pads and make parts of Mongolia a wasteland to get at the rare earths for the magnets. Oh yes ever so Gween….not
Makes the Brexit bill look pretty cheap to me; but seriously:
I had a go at this calculation some time back using the Dinorwic Pumped Storage facility in Wales as a cost datum point. It cost £425M in 1974 equivalent to some £4.2 Billion today.
It stores 9.1 GWhrs and can deliver some 1.650 MW for about 7 hrs. when you compare this to what is needed to offset the likely Wind shortfall periods the figures become mind boggling; so I gave up and arrived at £HUGE,000,000,000.B and just wonder how it is possible that the bean counters can cast this all aside and press forward with the current irresponsible energy policies. What on earth has happened to our civil service?
The authors don’t know the difference between megawatt and megawatt-hour. Someone should explain to them that it is similar to a difference between a mile-per-hour and a mile.
Common mistake unfortuately.
I did the sums – can you explain what you mean?
When will our corrupt and ignorant politicians actually do some simple maths about wind and solar?
Or are most of them too busy pocketing the brown envelopes from the green lobbyists?
In general they don’t hold degrees in Electrical Engineering or engineering in general. Why therefore expect them to understand?
GCSE maths would do.
But our politicians are as thick as mince.
Just look at the Abbopotamus, for example.
I did rather enjoy this story:
https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/16384395.electric-car-charge-point-out-of-order-for-months/
I’m sure he’d have been even happier had he been required to park to deliver V2G power against a wind shortage.
The troll is trying to claim 30% of energy generated by windmills referencing an article that claims 30% of Electricity./SAD
What’s the betting he’s on a 100% renewable ‘leccy tariff and gets electrons delivered 100% of the time?
If you are referring to my comment, for clarification, the article I posted, to be sure, simply quotes some facts from UK govt. Energy Statistics confirming that renewable power accounted for 29.3% of UK electricity generation in 2017, with more than half of that coming from wind power.
That 29.3% cost how much compared to simply running on gas?
The intermittency cost is how much?
Do you think 100% renewable is achievable?
Do you believe that electricity provision should be a high reliability utility or an occasional treat?
TomO.. The relative cost to the UK taxpayer of the recent additions of renewables capacity depends on whether you factor in the externalities of generation from fossil fuels, and what assumptions for future prices rises you use – in any case there is a strong public preference for a shift to renewables and the majority of people are happy to pay more for environmentally friendly energy and security of supply. However there is a fair case to be made that the UK has overpaid for renewables because we were early movers and some subsidies have been overly generous – but this resulted in the desired policy outcome of a rapid deployment of these technologies. In Chile, from where I have recently returned having developed hydro and biogás capacity, there are no subsidies available and renewables must compete head to head in the market place. Despite this new renewables energy capacity (mainly solar, wind and small hydro) have seen massive capacity increases. Because these technologies despatch electricity at zero marginal cost, they have deplaced considerable thermal capacity (at expensive marginal cost) and have resulted in a reduction of the overall cost of energy – that is the true effect of renewable energy addition in a purely free market. Regarding whether a 100% renewable energy system is achievable; I would say that the dramatic reduction in the cost of solar and wind power (energy tenders closing at <USD40/MWh in diverse geographies around the world) was dificult to anticpate only 2-3 year ago. We live in a world of rapid technological change and disruptive technological advance, with alterations to the status quo becoming the norm and old ways of thinking fading out – I would not like to bet that a 100% renewable system was not either technically posible or an economically preferable form of electricity generation within 20 years – otherwise we´ll be using gas to a greater or less extent to plug the gaps. btw I live in Winsley and would be interested to chat about the Avon mill Project – I run an operational hydro project in north wales.
Mr Bensted appears to have a vested interest in pushing “Renewables”.
Not especially Mr Osborn.. I simply enjoy a good debate with the senior generation.. open minded and trying to avoid being set in my ways!
Hey Jonathan,
Try living in South Australia, the “renewables capital of the world”, also the blackout capital of the developed world. It subsists by sucking coal power via Victoria and cranking up gas turbines most of the time, with diesel turbines in reserve. Its wind turbines were becalmed again recently for the umpteenth time and its Tesla battery is a running joke.
SA only draws 6% of the total Australian power demand and its renewables can’t even keep that amount supplied. The state is propped up by its coal-powered neighbours as far away as Queensland. Pathetic renewables.
Certainly an interesting case study.. a very different situation to the UK or Chilean grids where technically things are working relatively well.
In SA undoubtedly there some shortcomings to the system conception and design – I don’t think that necessarily leads to the conclusion that renewables are useless and pathetic in all circumstances and situations..!
J.Bensted
” in any case there is a strong public preference for a shift to renewables and the majority of people are happy to pay more for environmentally friendly energy”
Only in your mind. Most people are ignorant of the fact of how much its costing them. Hell some people I’ve talked to think wind power is free !
Only ones benefiting are land owners, companies & Crown Estates
Biggest transference of wealth, (for zero gain) from the poor to the wealthy in History
Now if only a platform was given on MSM to fully inform the public, the perception would be entirely different, but its not ..debate is closed down & reporting one sided, so the propaganda continues……… and the rich get richer and Britain’s energy security becomes even more precarious.
Jonathan
horses for courses – I’d wager that most of the time the nearest utility pole for all those Chilean schemes is an insane distance away so growing your own is a no-brainer. Having the Andes in your back yard helps too. I’m familiar with N. American off grid implementations – hell – who wants to drag bowsers of diesel around if you don’t have to?
I’ve been constructing solar systems for remote 24/7/365 instruments for a few decades and am familiar with both cell and battery technology and try hard to keep abreast of tech developments.
Curious about the $40/MWh wind – got any details? Wind makes sense in windy remote places – the Falkland Islands etc.
As far as Avoncliff hydro scheme is concerned – it’s a dead duck at present – sunk by an Environment Agency official’s criminal antics and a long, drawn out and spiteful 8 year cover up that resulted in the very deliberate awarding of a licence that couldn’t be used.
We submitted a viable and approved scheme in 2010 – even got a draft licence to operate – officials had other plans….
Jonny, were you counting DRAX woodchip in your renewable figure?
Huh, I’m rather pre-occupied with my own business in these difficult times – Aren’t there ANY Professional Engineers and other learned guys in places of influence and power who know all this, read these comments, and yet do nothing about it: seems to me these blogs are full of Wyse guys repeating and illustrating examples – all hot air but stuff “we” already know something about. Stop-start cars, etc – only the intelligent hardware & software there prevents battery going flat – so burns more hydrocarbons, ……. It’s COLD and raining outside – unusually COLD for this time of year, so I’m indoors doing stuff I don’t like doing …. just saying!
The problem … is that public funds – the communal kitty is funding the renewables scam and the politicians and public servants involved are – as we repeatedly have seen are predominantly either profoundly disinterested in the engineering or profoundly compromised – those few who can do the arithmetic and have an informed, evidenced pragmatic view of how to proceed are excluded – and occasionally simply shouted down.
100% renewables is a delusion unless one wants to go all Pol Pot. The renewables business would simply wink out of existence if public subsidy stopped.
I’m a professional engineer but I don’t work in the power industry. Despite that I have a good understanding of how power grids work. I belong to the IET but on every forum I find I’m banging my head against a brick wall as this debate is dominated by political/religious green types none of whom can cope with school level physics. None seem to think making the effort to understand is worthwhile.
This blog post (and the comments) is a fairly good analysis of the auction price reductions in solar & wind in recent years http://euanmearns.com/a-review-of-recent-solar-wind-auction-prices/ Wind is dropping in LCOE mainly due to increases in turbine sizes and economies of scale. Similarly solar can be installed at give away prices now that the manufacturing infrastructure is in place due to massive capacity increases in China – resulting in jaw dropppingly low LCOE, particularly in areas with high solar irradiation. Acknowledging these phenomena tend to make one slightly more bullish about the potential for energy storage which is following a similar cost reduction learning curve – but in a place like Chile, solar can already be combined with pumped hydro storage to provide cost competitive despachable energy..
Jonathan
Like I said it’s a horses for courses thing. The German experience and projections aren’t exactly confidence inspiring wrt to renewables. Electricity utility is central to a developed country’s infrastructure and renewables simply are not and are unlikely to achieve the levels of dispatchability required in a developed human society at a *sustainable* cost – as the Germans have found out – no matter how much taxpayer money one throws at the matter.
I might be better disposed towards renewables if some meaningful large scale trials were out there – but afaics that hasn’t happened and the proponents of universal renewables keep asking for (or simply stealing) more and more of our money to construct a solar road towards the mirage of “sustainability” – largely ignoring lessons learned about energy since the industrial revolution and rather too often ignoring simple physical reality as in the case of “solar roads”…
Solar is a dud in northern hemisphere winters.
Jonathan,
the U.K. is not Chile and looking at solar realistically it is obvious that it performs poorly in the U.K.. Winter is the killer, especially as demand is at it’s highest.
The figure for renewable generation includes the consistent biomass generation of Drax which by any stretch of the imagination should not be classified as renewable.
You talk of switching off gas generation when the wind is strong, most gas is combined cycled and steam turbines need to be kept at operational temperature and spinning at 3000 rpm to be ready for any demand required. They cannot be switched off and on at a whim.
” In Chile, from where I have recently returned “
Hols?
More likely, a ‘Fact finding mission, done for; either an NGO, HMG or affluent green nerd/ student or in combo?
Chile – hmm, lots of deep valleys and very high mountains in Chile, hardly a close match compared with the topography and lack of suitable sites for (prospective) holding reservoirs – even if the nimbys would allow them………………….to the UK – now, is it?
” Wind is dropping in LCOE mainly due to increases in turbine sizes and economies of scale. Similarly solar can be installed at give away prices now that the manufacturing infrastructure is in place due to massive capacity increases in China – resulting in jaw dropppingly low LCOE, particularly in areas with high solar irradiation. “
Only a loon would push that lie, the bottom has fallen out of the Chinese solar panel production, companies going to go t*ts up: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/new-solar-installations-to-contract-by-24-this-year/
” simply quotes some facts from UK govt. Energy Statistics”
Government and “Facts” – oh really. Government and ‘Facts’ it is, a very loose association, read statistical jiggerypokery – actually. However it is true to observe, that, gullibility, crediting government stats and life inexperience are in very close association.
“30% of energy demand in 2018 delivered by renewables technologies”
Ah but only sometimes and 30% rarely if ever is actually achieved – is it, and at what cost? It is all of it, a quite stunning waste of money, for what amounts to ‘if the wind blows’ – can you not get that through your cranium and all the bodging to make up the shortfall; batteries to even out the intermittancy – it is ocean going bonkers isn’t it?
Whereas, for a fraction of the cost the country can have RELIABLE, baseload – unvarying, new clean coal could do the job amply.
” I simply enjoy a good debate with the senior generation.. open minded and trying to avoid being set in my ways!”
In your own words, a very assuming, arrogant bod’ – it cannot be denied.
“Open minded” crikey when anything other is the truth of it – eh, “open minded” indeed, if you were truly open minded, you’d have realized the truth of it – the green agenda, a unilateral suicide note: It will wreak economic calamity on the nation.
As the Germans well know and in the aftermath of the energiewende disaster, that; you can’t run car factories, shipbuiding, chemical processing, foundries, manufacturing production lines – even for biscuits on intermittent – variable electrical generation. Unless, you require to impoverish the country – then the green agenda is perfect.
Germany threw it out, Japan is building new coal, even Turnbull in Australia has realized it, only Britain thanks to dolts like you, trips and stumbling, goes down the stupid channel to ‘fossil fuel free’ and our competitors rub their hands in glee, cheering us on – “bye, bye Britain!!”
Maybe you should get a job with the Trump administration on energy policy Iain? Hols in Chile, I wish.. I spent 9 years there developing and building capacity in hydro and biogas sectors. Two operational plants to show for it; a 16MW LFG waste-to-energy facility and a 5.76MW run of river hydro – both now producing stable non intermittent power at near zero marginal cost. Have a great day.
Are you a paid lobbyist for wind energy?
You certainly sound like one.
If you are not you would be wise to listen and reflect on some of the very real problems with renewables stated here.
Now answer one question. Strip out all the subsidies, direct and indirect and explain to us that wind energy is commercially viable.
I’m all ears.
That very uninspired, attempted wrist slap, has made my day.
As far as I am concerned his comment on “Trump” without the honorific President says it all and his twitter account confirms it.
Neither of them wind turbines or solar, both deliverable and suitable where conditions permit.
One can only form reliable opinions on the basis of the accuracy of the available information and objective analysis.. Undeniably, wind has not been commercially viable with traditional forms of generation in European markets to date and has relied on policy support which is a clearly a great cause of consternation amongst many members of this group – and perhaps rightly so since UK plc has become less competetive as result (notwithstanding reasoned arguments for the externalities of fossil fuels) – I am no particular defender of UK govt policy. However, meanwhile, the facts are that emerging markets are incorporating wind capacity at much lower LCOE. I can cite personal (painful!) experience of wind projects bidding at sub USD 50/MWh and undercutting bids from alternative technologies all over Latjn America.. In particular my hydro and biogas projects in Chile! – so to say I have a vested interest in wind is rather amusing and way off the mark! I apologise for not contributing to the echo-chamber but perhaps we can all learn something from one another´s experiences, character assasinations aside!
Mr Bensted, we enjoy debate with anyone, but especially those promoting renewable energy where it is not appropriate or efficient.
I can see from your various profiles that you are a very learned person.
Some on here may not be as learned as you but we have the benifit to be sufficiently educated to understand basic costs, statistics and can read the UK National grid status for ourselves.
Plus we have the excellent analysis of both Paul and also Euan Mearns & Roger Andrews of Energy Matters.
None of us are particularly financially against Wind & Solar as long as no Market Bias of any kind is involved and absolutely no subsidies either for build or running costs.
Environmentally is another question all together, both on commercial quantities are a blight on the Landscape and will be Environmental disasters if their disposal is not handled very well.
Plus their longevity is very poor compared to FF production & Nuclear Generators.
Mr Osborn, Thanks for your comment. I am pleased to hear that you are technology agnostic, open minded and open to new ways of solving problems – and we surely agree that a modern industrial and efficient economy relies on the competitiveness of its energy supplies with all externalities included in the equation. Since your position is self-proclaimed objective and consistent, I can only presume that you have been equally fierce in your condemnation of G20 govt. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry- which have also been very substantial over the years (according to some estimates, currently 4 times what is spent on renewables!) – notwithstanding their arguably vastly more unfavourable environmental impact?
There are no ff subsidies in the UK, and over the years ff have paid over tens of billions in excess taxes
I was just waiting for such a rubbish statement from you about FF subsidies.
That has been debunked so many times it tells everyone on here exactly where you are coming from.
Thank you for your input.
For the sake of argument, let’s assume your thorough debunking of FF subsidy claims is true. I still don’t see how it can be denied that significant externalities are not included in the cost of FF.. But of course I am sure you won’t accept that argument either since burning coal makes the sky blue. Good evening to you!
Externalities?
The availability of plentiful, cheap energy provided by fossil fuels has been immeasurably beneficial for mankind.
Unless of course you think we were all better off in the 18th C
Hardly significant Jonny.
I am not a lobbyist, and I’m not paid by the wind lobby. I’m an independent developer of hydro and biogas technologies and have built projects in subsidy free, competitive markets – I consider these technologies to be more versatile and valuable that intermittent solar and wind. I’m interested in a balanced and rational arguments and viewpoints, hence why I am interested in differing view points and why I am a member of this group. I endeavour not to be dogmatic in my own views but there are clearly significant biases on all sides of the energy debate..!
Perhaps then we can start with a discussion of the costs.
Official OBR projections put the cost of subsidising renewables at £11.3 bn this year, and continuing to rise in years to come.
I don’t object to any particular form of energy, but object to subsidising it. Most people I suspect would be horrified to learn the true cost that they are paying
As I said a Vested Interest.
I googled you to see what you do, every person we have had on here praising Renewables has the same background, ie a vested interest of some kind.
For the others here is what Mr Bensted’s profiles look like
His twitter account
Very enlightening.
and this is his Linkin page
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/jonathan-bensted-4826873
and his Bloomberg description.
https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=215811969&privcapId=215670506
He has also been here very briefly before in April.
“…in a place like Chile, solar…”
burns money:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-29/stalled-chile-solar-farm-is-said-to-seek-800-million-to-restart
Construction did restart:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerro_Dominador_Solar_Thermal_Plant
We will see.
Point taken, I stand corrected – that is what was meant in any case, for the avoidance of doubt – as the article clarifies.
Jonathan
I find it astonishing that an energy expert could misrepresent electricity generation as total energy generation, and it has been the M.O. for activists operating as opinion formers on blogs, so excuse my initial response.
Chile is one of my favourite countries, spent a lot of time there and have noticed Hyrdro especially in the rainy parts down Patagonia way, but there are some new pumped storage efforts in the drier parts of Atacama, I wondered what installation you were involved with so I can look at the generation figures.
Apologies again for the shorthand – not a deliberate misrepresentation at all.. I have clarified twice (and it was clear within the article I posted) – thanks for picking me up on that. 30% of electricity generation was from renewable sources in 2017 in the UK, and that looks set to continue in 2018 and increase in the years ahead, without subsidy “distortion” in my opinión. Yes Drax biomass seems to be included, but 50% of it is “evil wind”.. You can see details of the chilean hydro here http://www.hydroventura.com/projects_central_cumpeo.htm, and happy to speak to you more this “hardly significant” contribution directly if you are interested and would appreciate it.
What do you think about all of that pollution from burning biomass at Drax then?
Or from waste to heat plants?
Are you guessing the %ages for Renewables & Wind by any chance?
As I have just downloaded the Gridwatch data for 2017.
The actual data shows as a %age of demand the following
Coal 6.6%
Nuclear 23.7%
CCGT 42.5%
Total 72.8%
Wind 11.1%
Pumped 1.0%
Hydro 1.4%
Biomass 5.1% (mostly Drax)
Solar 4%
Total 22.6%
I am not going to bother with the other inputs like interconnectors etc.
Well one thing you were right about was the increase in Wind Power in 2018 to date.
After all the investment in 2017 coming on line we now have
Coal 5.7%
Nuclear 22.4%
CCGT 43.8%
Total 71.9%
Wind 12.5%
Pumped 0.9%
Hydro 0.9%
Biomass 5.1% (mostly Drax)
Solar 4.6%
Total 24.0%
One item of interest is that the French Interconnector has changed from 2.9% in 2017 to 5% in 2018.
Wind and solar account for about 4% of UK Energy, which all needs backing up by proper dispatcable power.
I would regard that as “insignificant” particularly when it is costing every household in the country about £400 a year
Well Jonathan, knowing delightful Chile quite well I’m surprised that someone who spent the best part of a decade there would have some interest in the country, apart from the renewables propaganda.
I call BS.
Tim, I don’t understand your comment, would you clarify? Thanks.
I am somewhat puzzled that in this day and age we are still debating a subject which the maritime industry sorted out many moons ago. The principles are the same whatever technical tricks you come up with.
I can but suppose that it is that dreadful CO2 Meme that is driving it all and addling our brains.
The cost of free energy is the harvesting thereof.
Related to offshore wind power this suggests that profits are also dropping there too
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/the-offshore-wind-industrys-moment-of-reckoning?cid=other-eml-shl-mip-mck-oth-1808&hlkid=0df69addf91c4f1090e5c465e3c4b7d9&hctky=10443123&hdpid=d6e68bc5-9417-49af-af9e-aeedfca6c64e