How Much Wind Power Would We Need For Backup Storage?
By Paul Homewood
Returning to my post on this story the other day, you will recall that the Royal Society reckon we will need 100 TWh of storage in 2050, to cover for variations in wind and solar power.
Obviously this rules out any significant contribution from batteries and there are only so many pumped storage systems we can build. So unless we go hell for leather and build lots of nuclear plants, that leaves just hydrogen as a possible solution.
But producing hydrogen via electrolysis, and then burning it in a generator, would mean we would need about 500 TWh input into the process. As you may recall from an earlier analysis, electrolysers typically work at about 52% efficiency, and the thermal generator at 40%. So you need 5 units of power input for every unit generated.
That would mean you would need about 130 GW of offshore wind capacity, dedicated just for hydrogen production. This is a huge amount, nearly ten times the UK’s current capacity.
In theory the surplus of wind power at times during the year should offset the times of deficit, on an hour-to-hour or day-to-day basis. But, depending on just how much wind capacity you have, that won’t be able to supply enough to cover the long periods of Dunkelflaute, when winds are low for weeks on end.
Indeed, given the 5 to 1 factor, you would not even have enough surplus during the year to meet those day-to-day deficits.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Without a viable way to permanently lock up CO2 (which is extremely unlikely), Net Zero = End of Fossil fuels = End of modern society = total collapse of the economy = revolution and slaughter of the elites who are pushing it.
slaughter of the elites who are pushing it (Net Zero)……… This would increasingly appear to be the only option available to us
Local Abattoir doesn’t meet EU requirements for that particular animal. Maybe bypass that route by finding suitable Yokes & Harness (they seem to like leathers n chain) to harness their willingness.
Yep, sounds good to me. Where do I sign up? How soon can we get started?
Yessss!
My thoughts exactly.
Unfortunately for life on Earth, nature has a very efficient way of locking up CO2 permanently. Look at all the chalk and limestone deposits, trillions of tons, and ocean sediments are continuing to feed this production (which seems to be forgotten!) Thank goodness something somewhere is maintaining the current (still low) levels of atmospheric CO2 !!
Has anybody in government or in the CCC or other Qangos read Professor Sir David MacKay’s excellent book ‘Sustainable Energy – without the hot air’? I don’t suppose they would understand it anyway.
Incomprehensible, Phillip, to those with copper-bottomed incentives (financial and based on power over the plebs), to not understand it.
Wilful ignorance reigns.
Interconnectors – the last resort of the desperate?
During 2021 interconnectors provided 28TWh of electricity to the UK, which equates to 10% of total demand, whilst in 2009 this figure was 7TWh.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_high-voltage_transmission_links_in_the_United_Kingdom
I think the interconnector project arises from the EU’s Single Energy Market and its desire to tie the grids in their Empire together.
Storage is finite. Outages are unbounded.
‘Storage’ is a trick to get people to believe renewables are viable sources of energy. They aren’t . . . and not just because of intermittency – which should be enough. Available power/energy density is too low. You’d have to cover France with windmills to get enough power for UK.
I reveal no secrets. Your government is INTENTIONALLY working to destroy your energy supply. Your government is INTENTIONALLY working to destroy your wealth, via forced adoption of heat pumps and EVs.
What makes them different from Ju 88s?
The destruction is more comprehensive and better targeted?
The last battle on British soil ‘The Battle of Graveney Marsh’ 1940 (ignoring the Iranian Embassy Siege in 1980) involved the crew of a downed Ju 88 and the London Irish Rifles. No fatalities and drinks at ‘Sportsman’ afterwards waiting for RMP.
Wiki but accurate enough. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Graveney_Marsh
Graveney soon to be host to a much more dangerous foe, a 700MWh BESS (450 tons of TNT equivalent when it goes up (2 miles out of Faversham.
I loved the line after the “Battle” The prisoners were taken to the Sportsman Inn and given pints of beer.”
How times change, now it would be Premier Cru Claret and a twelve course tasting menu http://thesportsmanseasalter.co.uk/tasting.php
Back in the late 60’s some mates of mine pitched up in tents at the back of the Sportsman for the whole summerhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caravan_(band)
Yes, Sportsman quite posh now, London Irish Rifles might not get a booking. There is a memorial plaque there.
a treatment of the enemy not dissimilar to how the RNLI, border control and coastguard deal with all those young men in the dinghies
London Irish Rifles acting under Geneva Convention and buying a beer from the pub where they were billeted did no harm whilst waiting for RMPs and cost us nothing. RNLI and Border Patrol are constrained by Laws of Sea that require assistance to those in distress however that came about. The dinghy people are relying on correct conduct and taking a risk with the hope of landing in Eldorado. It costs us a great deal when they succeed and means a nice profit for the traffickers. The issue is with politicians and courts who refuse to apply the Refugee Convention correctly to people who have passed through multiple safe countries and who are, in most cases, simply economic migrants to whom we owe nothing (apart from not letting them drown).
For Backup Storage …. 1. Picture this: Night storage heaters recharge overnight + Midday boost. When do you NEED heat? First thing in morning is activity time for Breakfast and then AWAY to work / school. Heater cools down. Evening come home and cook meals relax/Homework Heaters cooling down. Huh all back to front, just giving background heat to an EMPTY home. And if you are housebound maybe OK but it’s Bedtime after Dinner – is that healthy?
2. Batteries to be recharged for work next day. ( Motorised tools incl EVs) and the rest.
3. Conversion of Windpower to other media …. inefficiencies at every turn: Wear n tear of mechanical and electric components which will have to be replaced at cost. ( Var. costs) But unnecessary.
4. General Electricity backup . And the SMART ( Not so ) Meter rollout so that “they” can monitor my irregular use of power by the minute / hour in a working “home” environment which has a surprisingly constant consumption per MONTH . this Micro managing of MY Economy will not do me any favours.
What I couldn’t do / use=consume YESTERDAY because of “storm” outages may well HAVE to be done today/tomorrow or just some time next week or so ( Playing catch-up)… But then again those City Morons really don’t have a clue: “Digital Voice – 999 in power cuts:- In rural areas , where power outages are most common , telephone lines more often than not , are not underground, they are also overhead, if the economics of providing the electricity supply requires it to be delivered overhead , then the same economic circumstances usually dictate that the phone/internet supply will also be overhead, if your power is overhead but your ‘phone’ supply is underground, that’s not the norm , but is irrelevant anyway ” – Huh That comment IS a load of Rubbish in so far as the Highlands ( & Islands) of Scotland is concerned ( when did I last notice overhead Telephone lines anywhere alongside any roads? ).
Paul, you should rename this website ‘No Politicians Can Understand This Content’
👍
Firstly please note I am playing Devil’s advocate on this one.
The “decarbonisation” problem surrounds an obsession with “electrification” of all energy uses which is absurd. Electricity is notoriously difficult and expensive to store and does not realistically scale.
In the UK a very large proportion of energy is required as heat either for space or water heating which makes using the most expensive form of energy, electricity, rather silly.
A solar PV panel is very inefficient in converting solar insolation into electricity (75%). Typical Typical UK insolation is 1,000kWh per square metre of horizontal area per annum. A 10m x 6m footprint building will likely receive 60,000kWh p.a.
If only 40 sq.m. of that area could be utilised @ just 60% “harvesting” efficiency, it would still represent 24,000kWh which is double typical domestic annual space and hot water heating requirement.
The issue is then how to store heat. This is, in reality, much easier than storing electricity and is scaleable.
There are three basic ways. 1. Sensible heat storage (heat up a medium and insulate it for later use) as per this example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_Landing_Solar_Community
2. Latent heat storage using the compact storage of phase change from solid to liquid or liquid to gas as per this example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_sulfate#Heat_storage
3. Most efficient and concentrated is thermo-chemical storage where heat applied to a product reduces it to two separate products, recombination of these two reforms back to the first product and releases heat. This process is repeatable very many times. Summer solar heat in, winter heating out.
https://www.e-hub.org/thermochemical-storage-ECN.html
There are very minimal storage losses even over extended periods and the “boiler” equivalent heating system is on a par with a gas boiler.
Yes this latter process is in its infancy and has had minimal investment so far but it does make a hell of a lot more sense than trying to get meaningful heating energy in winter from solar during a wind lull.
This example supports your output figures (ball park anyway), 3300kWh from 26m2 in London. How efficient is the energy storage/output cycle?
1. Victorian townhouse in London
Geographic location and sunlight: This Central London townhouse receives about 1,100kWh/m^2 annually in insolation.
Solar panel efficiency: The residence utilises monocrystalline panels with an efficiency of 22%.
Size and number of solar panels: Given the average insolation, a 4kW system requires around 16 panels (each with an approximate capacity of 250W and size of 1.6m^2). This setup could potentially generate about 968kWh per kW annually, which would amount to around 3,872kWh for the entire system.
Angle and orientation: The panels aren’t south-facing. But a proper tilt assures about 85% efficiency, which would mean approximately 3,291kWh yearly.
Energy storage and consumption: This setup meets the average UK home’s energy consumption. An energy storage system is essential so that excess power generated during daylight hours can be used when it’s overcast or dark.
but spot the usual lie ‘This setup meets the average UK home’s energy consumption’. Only if there’s no heating or BEV! My little house uses 10,000kWh of gas and 1000kWh of electricity. I do have an 1100W electric outboard(!).
Exactly so Paul. It is obvious to those of us who actually understand this stuff.
But the decisions are made by people with Oxford PPEs which means they know nothing at all a about energy.
A PPE is a degree in Politics, Philosophy and Economics. Taking these in turn a momentary glance at Parliament clearly illustrates that they know nothing about Politics! The fundamental of Philosophy is Truth, Rhetoric and Logic, when did you ever hear any one from Whitehall ever tell the whole truth (watch the Covid and PO enquiries!!!), make a speech they wrote and not use a head-up prompt. Economics is about ensuring that the country is in independent financial security and safely ensuring its people have reliable long term incomes around which they can plan their lives, when did Whitehall deliver that at any time since 1945?
Given those catastrophic failures from “one of the best Universities in the world” what chance do we have of them getting the energy policy for the next two hundred years right when all they can do is close down what we still have?
PPE degree at Oxford is a means to create someone whose confidence exceeds competence; sometimes described as a chancer or a confidence trickster.
Again, we equate Net Zero with electricity generation. Pointless. What about international shipping, international aviation, international motor transport (and don’t talk about EVs, try 12 wheel artics). Nobody, like nobody, will pay any attention to silly little UK’s silly little decarbonisation efforts or its silly posturing as some sort of a. ‘Leader’ in global climate control. Or its portentous statements after each failed COP with its ludicrous expressions of progress and optimism followed by ludicrous economic damage and the scorn of Asian nations . Makes me sick at heart
‘How Much Wind Power Would We Need For Backup Storage?’
Sorry, but it’s all completely FAKE! Plastic banana, good-time rock ‘n roll.
‘Backup’ is a usage. It is not a property of ‘storage.’ You create storage. You might use it for ‘backup.’
BUT . . . NO PRIVATE BUILDER OF STORAGE is going to use it for backup. They are going to use it to arbitrage the variability of electricity pricing.
‘Backup storage,’ to be backup, would have to be built and controlled as backup. There is no viable business model for that. So it has to be built and operated by government. So you will get all sorts of bats#|+ decisions over how it is managed.
Do we release it now? Or does a politico release a week before an election to lower prices? Biden released oil from the US’ SOR for political reasons.
Any discussion of backup storage by the government should be dismissed out of hand. It’s vaporware.
Correct. I’m taking a detailed look hour by hour at last year’s generation and demand and day ahead electricity prices. In the summer, with gas prices much lower because of easing of the crisis and no need for costly imported LNG, prices were much lower than they had been. However, the contribution from wind was quite limited, partly offset by summer solar. The result was that prices oscillated daily in a relatively narrow range between say £70 and £90/MWh, with the low in the middle of the day and peaks after dawn in the morning rush and again in the evening as sunset approached. However, the price range was not big enough to provide a decent margin for pumped storage which more or less stopped operating.
Meanwhile when I looked at the income from the big Australian grid batteries in South Australia and Victoria recently, I noticed it had flatlined. Competition has eroded revenues, so investors will start to shy away unless fresh subsidies are organised.
Speaking of which, the current review of CFDs for AR7 threatens to do just that, with special terms for co-located storage under development.
“…..the Royal Society reckon we will need 100 TWh of storage in 2050, to cover for variations in wind and solar power.”
But what then do we do with it?
H2 has the lowest volumetric energy density of any substance. It’s so low, that at the same pressure a volume of hydrogen has only 30% of the energy content that natural gas has.
Britain currently has (only) 3,130mcm of underground natural gas storage capacity that’d hold ~34.43TWh via natural gas. Trying to store hydrogen would reduce that energy capacity by 70% to just over 10TWh.
Click to access 2023%20Gas%20Storage%20Report1673878197123.pdf
Then, as if by magic, the Uni of Aberdeen yesterday published:
“Study of decommissioned onshore gas field highlights hydrogen storage concerns
A study exploring the potential of a decommissioned gas field in Scotland as a major hydrogen store has highlighted concerns over potential leaks and recommended that it shouldn’t be used.
…. Hydrogen has been proposed as a possible green energy vector in the transition, but it forms a small, nimble molecule and is very difficult to contain.
It can be stored safely in subsurface geological sites, but so far these have largely been limited to man-made hermetically sealed soluble caverns in halite (rock salt) deposits.”
https://www.abdn.ac.uk/news/22733/#:~:text=The%20site%20near%20Dalkeith%20in,meet%20national%20net%20zero%20ambitions.
Readers will recall I produced a chart showing what storage requirements would have been for 2021 using either hydrogen or much more efficient pumped hydro (effectively the same as batteries, but much lower cost) with a wind supplied grid.
https://www.datawrapper.de/_/ZmrQw/
2021 was a low demand year because of covid restrictions (only about 270TWh), although it was also not a good year for renewables. As the chart shows, the hydrogen route would have needed around 50TWh of hydrogen storage, which would have had to start the year partly filled, with supply coming from a total of 154GW of wind.
100 GW here, another 100 GW there….but who’s counting? We’re saving a planet here, Mack, so get on this train before it leaves the station.