From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
This is really an excellent summary of the looming energy horror story, coming our way soon:
Looking for a light read? Perhaps a fairy tale to settle the kids before bed?
If so, I highly recommend the publications page of the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). You will find endless exciting tales about the near future. Stories of a high-tech world, in which humanity has “Built Back Greener” and enjoys prosperous existence in equilibrium with a revitalised natural world.
But perhaps fantasy is not your thing. Maybe you’d prefer something scary — a horror story to make your hair stand on end. Never fear — BEIS has you covered. As a fellow spookophile, I encourage you to scroll past the utopian titles, right to the bottom. Here we find the department’s “generation capacity” estimates.
Generation capacity is the amount of electricity our country can generate or import if supplied with sufficient fuel.
As with most horror stories, the setting will initially appear rosy. Aided by the world’s biggest offshore wind market, the amount of clean electricity the UK can generate is expected to soar ever upwards — hinting at a carbonless world just around the corner. Indeed, journals spanning from the Guardian to the Spectator have run glossy graphics to this effect.
But things are not as they seem. Look at the estimates of National Grid’s Energy Systems Operator (ESO) and you’ll begin to feel goosebumps. These projections “de-rate” energy generators based on how reliable they are (generators rarely run at 100 per cent efficiency). Applying this method nearly halves generation capacity — from 115 gigawatts to 62. At this level, supply is barely keeping level with demand.
Full story here.
I have been of course been writing about this for years, but I had not come across the BEIS projections, which are mentioned above. BEIS describe these “baseline projections”:
And here are those projections:
The tables run from 2019 to 2040, but I have only shown the 2030 to 2035 period for clarity.
The tables specifically note that these capacities are not de-rated. Although “renewables” includes a small amount of biomass, maybe 5 GW, the vast bulk will be wind and solar.
In reality then, by 2030 we will only have about 45 GW of dispatchable capacity. This also needs to be de-rated, as it is not reasonable to have all of that capacity online 100% of the time. Traditionally, a figure of 85% has been used, so as to provide a safety margin. That of course means we can only count on 38 GW.
Quite why the BEIS thinks that we can guarantee to have 17 GW available from imports is a mystery, not least given Europe’s own energy crisis.
By 2035 demand will have risen considerably from current levels, if cars and heat are decarbonised as planned, likely peaking at near to 80 GW.
As the article explains, this kind of make-believe has been self generating within official circles, with the green blob in BEIS fudging the figures, using accounting tricks and even making stuff up, and ministers justifying their policies by reference to the Committee on Climate Change.
Reality may well be worse than even the BEIS projections allow. All of that gas generation will need to be with carbon capture, in order to meet the carbon targets. Most of our existing CCGT capacity will therefore have to be scrapped. BEIS therefore are projecting 22 GW of new build gas generation by 2035, but since 2012 only 4.4 GW has been added.
It is not clear why any investor would spend billions building gas plants, if they are all going to be banned long before 2050.
I’ll leave the summing up to The Critic:
There is no silver bullet to kill this monster, but disaster may be avoided if we’re prepared to acknowledge it exists. Blackouts remain unlikely if electricity demand is constrained, which means the government must abandon its plans for the grid to go green by 2035, along with the aim to switch to electric cars and heat pumps. Coal stations will need to keep burning, and mothballed generators may require re-recommissioning. Whilst it is too late to build the necessary plants in the next few years, the government can save future pain by loosening restrictions on new gas-fired power plants. It should also be prepared to finance new projects directly (60% of the bill for Hinkley C is borrowing costs, due to the government’s refusal to provide direct funding).
Above all, the Government must tackle the perverse incentives which lead it to walk blindly into this mess. The CCC must be abolished, or at least matched by another quango responsible for scrutinizing climate policy’s impact on energy security. CCC members who might have misled the public should be investigated. Legal requirements to meet impossible climate targets must also go — if the department can meet targets, that’s good, but its priority has to be to keep the lights on. Finally, civil servant pay caps must be removed to promote continuity in departments.
This tale speaks to a deep dysfunctionality at the heart of the system. Keeping the lights on is a basic function of modern government, and we are close to critical failure. The next PM’s first task must be to exorcise vested interests and create clear lines of accountability. If the eco-blob cannot be tamed, the future of the country looks dark.
Thanks to the article and to your post for pointing out the nonsense in the ‘capacity’ numbers. However de-rating based on ‘average’ availability does not help in understanding how much energy is available at times of need. Just thinking about peak demand periods such as when a huge still cold pool of air sits over the UK and Europe in the coldest & darkest period in December to February for a period of 2 or 3 weeks and you will see that the renewables will be rated at near zero MWs and we will be solely reliant on everything non-renewable. We will have people freezing in the dark all because of the Lysenkoism like distortions in science, engineering and economics that are pushing this green utopian globalist socialist agenda. The results will be the same as the Soviet Lysenkoism though… millions of people whose lives are poorer, less prosperous and less lengthy than they otherwise would be.
I work in the heart of the GB energy industry doing projects in the last decade for the System Operator, BEIS and EU on market design and regulation/legislation development. I’ve been doing this for 25 years. I also hold a degree in Meterology and worked in atmospheric sciences before this and looking at how the various politically biased and controlled agencies, companies and departments operate there.
I can say that both the science of studying the Earth systems and energy systems are all corrupt in the sense that predefined political objectives drive both the process, the means of handling data and even to the extent of which data is selectively used to create the evidence for the action that will be taken. The tail wags the dog in all these areas and the rich and powerful get their way at the expense of truth, freedom and rights of the others they trample over.
This winter lots of people will suffer, lots of people will needlessly die and all because we have ideologically controlled media, civil service, government, big business and accademia… it is the definition of economic faciscm – the UN and WEF controlling everything, everywhere. All companies, departments and citizens walking in lock-step with tight regulation over what is said, published, gets funding and gets produced.
Well at least for this winter I hope to protect my family somewhat. I have lots of fire wood, LNG gas tanks and portable heaters and am aquiring a petrol generator.
It is because you persist in believing that sort of rot, that things have come to this.
Were it not for your over-weaning nanny state, free markets would undoubtedly supply all the energy desired, at a small fraction of what is being paid. And the poor would be so much better served, by the way.
It is only massive government interference that allows this present tragedy. Adam Smith spins in his grave faster than a pulsar.
On energy costs alone, the so-called Conservative party is finished. The poor and middle class are in trouble this winter. After the next election, hased on the news reports I see, they will be lucky to retain any seats.
I will give one example. EV’s will be compulsory in the UK in the near future. Our new Australian PM has promised to do the same in Australia. I give the following US meme, translated, and expanded tor Australia.
Electric car 350 kW fast charging stations powered by diesel are popping up in the USA in rural areas. Again, Australia will copy.
The 350 kW diesel generator uses 54 Litres and hour, and it takes 3 hours to fully fast charge a car to go 320 km. That’s 162 litres for 320 km!!!. That’s around 50 Litres per 100 kilometers fuel efficiency for EVs as rated by EV manufacturers. For comparison, my V8 Landcruiser LC gets 10 L/100kms.
Now, advocates will comment that eventually charging stations will go solar. It’s free energy, right? For a 350 Watt panel, that is approximately 1000 panels required covering a total area of one hectare, that only works properly at midday. Assuming there is a car charging at any time for 12 hours, assuming 100% rated efficiency, that means the panels have to produce 4,200 KwHrs of energy a day. To charge batteries for night use, double it (I know, too conservative, should be three times). That’s 2000 panels on 2 hectares to charge 8 equivalent cars a day on a fast charger.
To store enough energy for 12 hours, in the case of a cloudy day or night usage, one charger will need a battery backup. Based on the industrial sized Tesla PowerPack, assuming 100% efficiency, one charger will need 18 to 19 batteries, weighing a total of 36 tons, covering an area of only 50 square meters plus safety margin, plus another 2 Square meters for a 1.1 ton Tesla inverter. That’s an additional standard house block.
Each charging station will still need a diesel backup for when the sun doesn’t shine (e.g., when it’s cloudy), or the normally reliable solar system breaks.
One of these will be needed every 200 kilometers.
Now US scientists and Tesla have promised 15 minute fast charging. This has always been possible, it just shortens the battery life and causes a heat problem. Now, imagine a decent road house on a busy highway, charging say 20 cars at once. I make that 15 Megawatt hours, excluding heavy transports.
This is what the UK conservatives say must happen, within a few years. Th figures above may vary based on assumptions. However, I think they are indicative. Personally, I think the problem is the near total lack of science/maths/engineering graduates in the political class.
“To store enough energy for 12 hours, in the case of a cloudy day or night usage, one charger will need a battery backup. Based on the industrial sized Tesla PowerPack, assuming 100% efficiency, one charger will need 18 to 19 batteries, weighing a total of 36 tons, covering an area of only 50 square meters plus safety margin, plus another 2 Square meters for a 1.1 ton Tesla inverter. That’s an additional standard house block.”
And later private ownership of even an EV will be banned, maybe rental EV available for people who can afford the cost and have a permit to drive outside a given district area and others will be EV taxi cabs or electric trams and buses, trains for work purposes and other permitted activities, subject to committee approval, maybe?
How it could be workable in Australia, outside of the cities and suburbs, I do not understand.
But a reminder about the long talked about high speed railway system and not too distant future now provincial cities along the railway network with one million plus populations now planned for the future. And cities with confined high-rise apartments and no doubt permits required for travelling including commuting to major city places of employment. Former PM Turnbull’s wife was on the committee for future housing, etc.
Consider the increased immigration numbers now being planned based on the labour, skilled labour highlighted, shortage today, but really reintroduction of the high migrants intake before COVID-19.
Paranoid fantasy…
Giff, I suggest you read the policy documents re long term planning, particularly some of the US and UK sourced documents.
“Keeping the lights on is a basic function of modern government” – Well, there’s your problem right there. If you’ve ever been to even a local school board meeting, you’d know that.
This is all nuts. The UK has a long history of building nuclear reactors, ask the Royal Navy. One way, maybe, around all the green blocking is for the UK to build their equivalant of the TVA. Build floating nuke power plants and then moor then at government facilities that can then be connected to the grid. The Russians have a couple.If it’s government owned on goverment property it could be immune to local politics, and declared a National Security Asset. Same thing could be done in Oz and the US. A good place would be Hawaii. How many working reactors are in Pearl Harbor on any day: a bunch.
The cost of nuclear is the problem: new Sizewell reactor estimated at £30 billion… and then there’s the finance: raising the 80% of that not to be financed by the UK govt, now the Chinese aren’t allowed to be involved, in a manner which allows for a return and without, preferably, the inflated guaranteed electricity price granted to Hinkley.
Assembly line modular reactors are very affordable, and putting them on floating platforms makes is so they go there they’re needed. And don’t give me “They’ll be too BIG”, go look at todays cruise ships and bulk carriers. Oh, go look up the Tennessee Valley Authority, you Brits could do the same thing with new nukes.
When we are all living in huts, lit by tallow lamps, and eating insects on a par with Africa, the globalists can say, with pride “There, we have achieved equality!”