WUWT reader “auto” send in this tip:
“A record £4.8m was paid to wind farm operators in the space of one day, for switching off turbines when it became too windy.
More than 60 farms — most in Scotland — were compensated after electricity supply outstripped demand on October 8. The bonanza far exceeded the previous reported record of £3.1m, sparking fresh criticism of the Scottish government’s headlong rush towards green energy.
In exceptionally windy conditions, the National Grid cannot cope with the extra energy turbines produce, so firms receive “constraint payments” to shut down. Although most wind power comes from Scotland, households across Britain are funding the payments through their electricity bills.”
Source: The Times
They couldnt possible pump the extra power into the grid and tell us to turn up the heating eh?
Oh no, they just shaft us for more cash. What a joke, what a scam.
If the grid can’t cope with the energy generated when the wind blows we do not need anymore wind capacity.
So no more wind power should be built in the UK.
Goldilocks also ruined everyone’s porridge looking for the one that was just right so she could steal it.
The new spin cycle of life is 1) chase windmills for green energy, 2) charge for extra costs to extend transmission lines to those windmills, 3) maintain substantial back up capacity, 4) keep doing all the above because it pays well and the costs are distributed efficiently to someone else, 5) seek carbon taxes to offset high costs to favored rate payer groups along with other social spending enhancement and other vote buying and control efforts. It makes perfect sense from a backroom political control point of view, at least when mixed with ongoing dishonesty and standard cover up of policy mistakes mentality.
Ever since we’ve had distributed electricity the Grid has had to be balanced: supply must be matched by demand. But it’s not always possible to forecast them. So the Grid has a number of balancing mechanisms. Some are applicable when the demand is higher than expected such as calling for more generators to come on-line or asking big users to shut down demands. It has to pay for the measures. Some balancing measures are needed when the demand is lower than expected: one measure is to ask producers to reduce or constrain production. They get paid for this to compensate for loss of income. Now given a choice who would you choose to pay the constraint payments to? The most expensive producer or the cheapest? Me, all things being equal I would go for the cheapest. Which is one reason why renewables get proportionally more constraint payments than conventional plant. Note that all operators, coal, gas, nuclear and renewable may get constraint payments.
We’re in the first few days of colder weather here in UK. I’m in a semi-rural corner of the Midlands and the temperature outside is a degree above freezing, so it’s not exactly midwinter conditions.
Nevertheless, at 2015 hrs electricity demand is 45GW, just on the line of amber conditions (it was higher at 1730). This is being supplied by
CCGT 21.71 GW (It maxes out on the scale at 27.5 GW)
Nuclear 5.78 GW
Coal 5.72 GW (was 6.72GW earlier)
Wind 5.13 GW (up from 4.7 GW at 1730, but still only half the contribution allowed for on its scale)
Biomass 3.02 GW
P/Hydro 1.49 GW
Hydro 0.49 GW
Dutch ICT 1.06 GW
Solar is at zero, of course.
Heaven help us in January/February.