Undersea interconnectors can’t be quickly repaired or replaced if damaged: In 2021 one of the cables between France and the UK was damaged, and at that time repairs were expected to take 2 years to complete (I don’t know if that turned out to be accurate).
Also, we know there is multi year variability in wind patterns, therefore even if everything were fine today there’s no guarantee there won’t be blackouts in 5, 10 or 20 years.
As the photo in that Sky report shows, the damage was in one of the two 50%-capacity i.e. 1GW capacity substations on land in the UK. The *cable* in that instance was undamaged. I've just looked back in my Gridwatch data and see that IFA power flows were below 1GW at the beginning of 2003, first rising to greater than 1GW on 2023-01-07 at 22:35:39 - I assume when they were recommissioning.
Re: the Royal Society report.
I included some comments on that report in my "Dunkelflaute? Duunkelcobblers!" post, please see
The spectre of power failure is haunting Europe because the meteorologists never warned us about wind droughts called Dunkelkfautes in Europe that sailors at sea and millers on land must have known about for centuries.
Around the Western world subsidised and mandated wind and solar power is displacing conventional power in the electricity supply. Consequently most of the grids in the west are moving towards a tipping point where the lights will flicker at nights when the wind is low.
The root of the problem is the failure of the meteorologists to give warning of wind droughts and the failure of energy planners to check the wind supply.
Consider the ABC of intermittent energy generated by wind and sun.
A. Input to the grid must continuously match the demand.
B. The continuity of RE is broken on nights with little or no wind.
C. There is no feasible or affordable large-scale storage to bridge the gaps.
So the green transition is impossible with current storage technology.
The rate of progress towards the tipping point will be accelerated by the surge of demand due to AI.
In Australia the transition to unreliable wind and solar power has hit the wall because we have reached the point where we can’t afford to lose any more coal capacity or the lights will flicker every night when the wind is low!
Britain, Germany and South Australia have passed the tipping point and entered a red zone, keeping the lights on precariously with imports and deindustrialization to reduce demand.
The meteorologists and energy policy planners in Europe missed the Dunkelflautes that must have been known to mariners and millers for centuries!
Demand urgent high-level inquiries to find out why the meteorologists failed in their professional duties and how energy planners managed to get away with out checking the wind supply. Imagine embarking on a major irrigation project without forensic investigation of the water supply including historical rainfall figures.
Briefing notes from The Energy Realists of Australia
Meteorologists (and sailors and millers) have always known about the possibility of being becalmed. Meteorologists can forecast a lull with a fair degree of accuracy, at least within a few days of it starting.
What they and energy system 'planners' cannot do is *influence / change* the progress or duration of a lull by one iota.
The GB's Climate Change Committee seems to have developed its 'plan' for decarbonisation of our grid assuming that energy storage technology would just come along when needed.
But it hasn't, in anything like the immense quantity necessary nor as cheaply as required... = your point C. Perhaps that's the same in Aus; it certainly seems to be the case in Germany.
So far, relatively few people understand your ABC, and quite a few people seem to think if they just *believe* hard enough, an all-renewable energy grid is just around the corner. Yes, if you happen to be Norway, or Iceland, you can be all-renewable *and* have a decent standard of living. For most of the rest of the planet, not so much.
Being charitable, HMGov are too inept to be *deliberately* sabotaging energy security.
They simply have their dream of net zero, and aren't capable of seeing/acknowledging looming downsides.
Although, you would have thought they'd notice how many subsea cables have been damaged by dragging anchors recently, not to mention the Nordstream pipelines sabotage.
But with proper incentives, only two intermittent technologies with short range interconnection would never be chosen. Nuclear and geothermal and LD north south interconnection would be in the mix. Something is definitely amiss in the incentive structure.
Hello Thomas, I assume by "proper incentives" you mean bigger subsidies. I don't agree with providing ever bigger subsidies: that is the route to our collective economic ruin.
If you consider interconnections across Europe as "short range" I hope you have shares in copper.
Nuclear is definitely long-proven technology, but Germany disagrees. Geothermal is great for Iceland (population ~ 300,000, highly volcanic) but largely uneconomic for most of the rest of us.
I'm not sure what you mean by "LD".
Everywhere south has very similar day/night times so Solar is up & down on much the same rhythm.
LD was Long distance. We are not there yet, but LD transmission from South and West ought to be in the mix. Yes, geothermal still has some obstacles to overcome. Time will tell. But in the medium term my guess abut what proper incentives would result in is a lot more nuclear.
Undersea interconnectors can’t be quickly repaired or replaced if damaged: In 2021 one of the cables between France and the UK was damaged, and at that time repairs were expected to take 2 years to complete (I don’t know if that turned out to be accurate).
https://news.sky.com/story/fire-damaged-power-link-will-not-be-fully-restored-for-two-years-says-national-grid-12434131
Also, we know there is multi year variability in wind patterns, therefore even if everything were fine today there’s no guarantee there won’t be blackouts in 5, 10 or 20 years.
https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2023-9-28-a-semi-competent-report-on-energy-storage-from-britains-royal-society
Thank you for your comments, Tian.
Re: the IFA interconnector damage.
As the photo in that Sky report shows, the damage was in one of the two 50%-capacity i.e. 1GW capacity substations on land in the UK. The *cable* in that instance was undamaged. I've just looked back in my Gridwatch data and see that IFA power flows were below 1GW at the beginning of 2003, first rising to greater than 1GW on 2023-01-07 at 22:35:39 - I assume when they were recommissioning.
Re: the Royal Society report.
I included some comments on that report in my "Dunkelflaute? Duunkelcobblers!" post, please see
https://open.substack.com/pub/chrisbond/p/dunkelflaute-dunkelcobblers?r=om40y&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
- particularly my Table 1.
I doubt that trying to store 'renewable' energy for years or even decades is the best use of funds.
The spectre of power failure is haunting Europe because the meteorologists never warned us about wind droughts called Dunkelkfautes in Europe that sailors at sea and millers on land must have known about for centuries.
https://www.flickerpower.com/images/The_endless_wind_drought_crippling_renewables___The_Spectator_Australia.pdf
A warning from The Energy Realists of Australia
Around the Western world subsidised and mandated wind and solar power is displacing conventional power in the electricity supply. Consequently most of the grids in the west are moving towards a tipping point where the lights will flicker at nights when the wind is low.
The root of the problem is the failure of the meteorologists to give warning of wind droughts and the failure of energy planners to check the wind supply.
Consider the ABC of intermittent energy generated by wind and sun.
A. Input to the grid must continuously match the demand.
B. The continuity of RE is broken on nights with little or no wind.
C. There is no feasible or affordable large-scale storage to bridge the gaps.
So the green transition is impossible with current storage technology.
The rate of progress towards the tipping point will be accelerated by the surge of demand due to AI.
In Australia the transition to unreliable wind and solar power has hit the wall because we have reached the point where we can’t afford to lose any more coal capacity or the lights will flicker every night when the wind is low!
https://newcatallaxy.blog/2023/07/11/approaching-the-tipping-point/
Britain, Germany and South Australia have passed the tipping point and entered a red zone, keeping the lights on precariously with imports and deindustrialization to reduce demand.
The meteorologists and energy policy planners in Europe missed the Dunkelflautes that must have been known to mariners and millers for centuries!
https://www.flickerpower.com/images/The_endless_wind_drought_crippling_renewables___The_Spectator_Australia.pdf
https://quadrant.org.au/news-opinions/climate-change/no-gusts-no-glory/
Demand urgent high-level inquiries to find out why the meteorologists failed in their professional duties and how energy planners managed to get away with out checking the wind supply. Imagine embarking on a major irrigation project without forensic investigation of the water supply including historical rainfall figures.
Briefing notes from The Energy Realists of Australia
https://www.flickerpower.com/index.php/search/categories/general/list-of-briefing-notes
Thank you, Rafe, but a quibble.
Meteorologists (and sailors and millers) have always known about the possibility of being becalmed. Meteorologists can forecast a lull with a fair degree of accuracy, at least within a few days of it starting.
What they and energy system 'planners' cannot do is *influence / change* the progress or duration of a lull by one iota.
The GB's Climate Change Committee seems to have developed its 'plan' for decarbonisation of our grid assuming that energy storage technology would just come along when needed.
But it hasn't, in anything like the immense quantity necessary nor as cheaply as required... = your point C. Perhaps that's the same in Aus; it certainly seems to be the case in Germany.
So far, relatively few people understand your ABC, and quite a few people seem to think if they just *believe* hard enough, an all-renewable energy grid is just around the corner. Yes, if you happen to be Norway, or Iceland, you can be all-renewable *and* have a decent standard of living. For most of the rest of the planet, not so much.
The UK govt are so obviously sabotaging our energy security on the alter of net stupid.
Thank you, Mark.
Being charitable, HMGov are too inept to be *deliberately* sabotaging energy security.
They simply have their dream of net zero, and aren't capable of seeing/acknowledging looming downsides.
Although, you would have thought they'd notice how many subsea cables have been damaged by dragging anchors recently, not to mention the Nordstream pipelines sabotage.
But with proper incentives, only two intermittent technologies with short range interconnection would never be chosen. Nuclear and geothermal and LD north south interconnection would be in the mix. Something is definitely amiss in the incentive structure.
Hello Thomas, I assume by "proper incentives" you mean bigger subsidies. I don't agree with providing ever bigger subsidies: that is the route to our collective economic ruin.
If you consider interconnections across Europe as "short range" I hope you have shares in copper.
Nuclear is definitely long-proven technology, but Germany disagrees. Geothermal is great for Iceland (population ~ 300,000, highly volcanic) but largely uneconomic for most of the rest of us.
I'm not sure what you mean by "LD".
Everywhere south has very similar day/night times so Solar is up & down on much the same rhythm.
"incentive structure" = subsidies again.
LD was Long distance. We are not there yet, but LD transmission from South and West ought to be in the mix. Yes, geothermal still has some obstacles to overcome. Time will tell. But in the medium term my guess abut what proper incentives would result in is a lot more nuclear.
I was vague! By proper incentives I mean taxing net emissions (= excise tax on first sale of carbon containing fuels in proportion to carbon content)