Wind curtailment Monitor

[Cells]

20 grand to turn an average house into a passive or near passive house would be a good deal vs a heat pump + additional transmission + distribution + storage + generation + upkeep of all that

If its ~20 grand the country should pursue that over heat pumps and give the heat pump incentives for PH conversion

[spread-tee]

But that's not what I said is it, are you just a time waster?

[Joeboy]

But that's not what I said is it, are you just a time waster?

I've already had a mail about him. User name, previous history from other places. He's managed to use his two chances on his first day posting here. Next bit that seems off we'll just go back to.400 members. I don't have time for fuds if indeed fud he be.

If he's within the generous boundaries of Camelot 'normal'.he'll take a moment to say hello. It doesn't take much to be polite and adhere to the simple social mores.

For those dropping in from GBF and other places, welcome onboard. We have a simple three strike policy. We truly value manners and helpfulness. For those searching for an ongoing soapbox, this isn't going to be it.

All the best.

[Joeboy]

I don't buy this "one week in thirty years" argument, as I said earlier we already have the gas infrastructure in place to cope with freak events.
We know we must burn less stuff, so we electrify heating at a sensible rate but design hybrid heating systems to run HP and Gassers in parallel.
Sure insulation is great too, but forget PH for mass housing, the biggy is existing housing which will be here for a hundred years or so. !5 million leaky old houses could easily swallow up 20 grand each, makes the cost of transmission look cheap.

Realistically though these ideas are twenty and more year projects and bear in mind the GOVT crated close to 400Bn to fund the covid pandemic so the funds could be there given the will. More problematic is the workforce and raw materials.

Absolutely on the gas network. I don't like it as my daily go to but if its once in a blue moon it makes sense to me and I'm happy to pay a daily standing charge to help maintain that network.

[nowty]

I mean the only thing you can argue against is the cost of transmission. If you think its cheap it would be easy to prove with a couple of transmission projects and their cost

Here is the Germany HVDC North to South link I spoke about. Its called the Sued Link. 700km North to South just started building. €10B cost for 4GW

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/ge ... transition

Obviously a half truth type disinformation person, hardly worth arguing with but,

Not much info in that article, lets say its,
50 year lifetime, its mostly a cable.
50% capacity factor.
That’s 50years x 365days x 24hrs x 2GW(50%) = 876,000 GWh = 876,000,000,000 kWh.
10B Euros / 876,000,000,000 kWh = 1.14 Euro cents per kWh.
You can argue about the lifetime, capacity factor, interest rates or whatever but its still feck all per kWh.

I doubt its only going to used once in a generation cold snap.

[John_S]

I mean the only thing you can argue against is the cost of transmission. If you think its cheap it would be easy to prove with a couple of transmission projects and their cost

And I will. You have forgotten to factor in distance. Or alternatively, you have deliberately omitted it.

For instance, Teesside to London is half the distance of the North Sea or the Baltic to Munich.

Ignoring simple facts exposes the weakness of your chain of thought. Enough said.

[Cells]

I mean the only thing you can argue against is the cost of transmission. If you think its cheap it would be easy to prove with a couple of transmission projects and their cost

And I will. You have forgotten to factor in distance. Or alternatively, you have deliberately omitted it.

For instance, Teesside to London is half the distance of the North Sea or the Baltic to Munich.

Ignoring simple facts exposes the weakness of your chain of thought. Enough said.

Going by this, Scotland alone is planned to have over 65GW of RE capacity by 2040 but approx 9GW of demand. That means you'll need a way to store (for reasonably long periods not just a handful of hours) or transmit ~54 GW south and less than 10GW exists today

Edinburgh to London is ~560km in a stright line but you are unlikely to go perfectly in a stright line so maybe ~650km

Using the €2.5B/GW for a similar distance you'd need €112.5B to build the additional ~45GW of transmission just for the Scotland to S-England transfer

The most likely outcome is we simply won't build 65GW of wind farms in Scotland to try and avoid this transmission cost not to mention the locals that don't particularly like converter stations in their pretty towns like the aquind interconnector that has had delay after delay

Most likely we will do more onshore wind with the de facto ban in England lifted to ease future grid issues. And more Offshore nearer the south rather than 600km up in Scotland

https://www.nationalgrideso.com/researc ... %20England

[Cells]

https://www.nationalgrideso.com/documen ... 6/download

This is a quick 5 mins read of the future plans by what would/should be considered a credible source and it includes assumed curtailment levels ranging from 1 TWh to 41 TWh in its 4 future versions

To be honest it's just guesswork at the moment

For instance how many of you truly think the UK is going to become a vast eletricity exporter? All 4 versions have huge electricity net exports and very little imports. This allone seems a ridiculous as it suggest the many UK to Europe interconnectors will be used almost exclusively one way to export

[Joeboy]

Oh well, back to the 400 it is then.

That was a distinctly strange little episode that left me feeling mildly creeped out.

May he find what he needs elsewhere.

[dan_b]

Was he/ they an Ai ? Very odd phrasing and didn’t really answer to replies just kept posting quite repetitive stuff. ChatGPT generated output perhaps?