Generation capacity and power storage requirements, based on actual 2020 and 2021 data. I am not in the modelling business; I prefer to stick close to reality.
Thanks for your interesting & insightful analysis.
"If we are going to replace gas heating with electrically driven heat pumps, we are going to increase electrical power demand. If we are going to ban fossil-fuelled vehicles and go fully electric ...."
Whilst EVs' energy demands are relatively uniform throughout the year, space-heating demand is only over the heating season - *roughly* 6 months. So even if switching gas demand to electricity demand only doubles (non-gas generated) electricity demand over the year, it 'probably/possibly' quadruples (non-gas generated) electricity demand for the heating season which is *already* the time of peak electricity demand.
Space-heating demand is challenging to time-shift.
The *prime* advantage of the (heating) energy source that is expected to be shifted to electricity is that Britain has ~30,000,000MWh of natural gas storage, plus approx 4,000MWh of natural gas in Linepack. (The latter vs NetZero storage of energy in electricity cables.)
Feb 14, 2022·edited Feb 14, 2022Liked by Chris Bond
Hi Chris
I haven't read your article in detail yet, but just want to enquire if you're familiar with Sustainable Energy Without The Hot Air by the late David MacKay (online at withouthotair.com) or the works of the (also late) Roger Andrews on Euan Mearns' 'Energy Matters' blog? You seem to be following in the same honourable path as those folks in preferring arithmetic to rhetoric and trying to make energy issues comprehensible to the lay person.
It did jump out at me that your figure of 20GWh storage is very much lower than MacKay's estimate of 1,200GWh for a wind-powered UK, which itself was on the optimistic side compared to the Energy Research Partnership UK's 2015 "Managing Flexibility Whilst Decarbonising
In 2012 Hughes noted how load factors declined rapidly over time with wind turbines so the R&M needed would also be immense. Another factor to consider is the location of wind farms. Your first farm is in the best possible location the next less less optimal and so on. Not all farms are created equal. So intermittency likely will increase. Battery storage degrades over time, pump storage does not. If anything I think your rather optimistic. I'd be interested to know your thoughts on carbon capture. Removing 1ppm of CO2 every year, fighting new emissions and Daltons Law.
This is a useful methodology, but we will not end up relying on wind and battery storage alone. A more plausible generation mix is:
* More nuclear for base load demand - net zero is not until 2050, so plenty of time to increase capacity.
* Pump storage and batteries for daily demand fluctuations only. As proved here it makes no sense to use these to store and release energy longer term.
* Balance long term supply and demand changes, by capturing hydrogen using electrolysis when there is over supply. Burn this alongside biomass when the wind is not blowing.
Chris thank you for a very logical, brief but also devastating analysis !
I wouldn't want to add too much detail to the piece, because that would detract from its impact.
Perhaps a footnote about the efficiency of battery storage. In the article you assume 100% efficiency, whereas I suspect when transmission loss (8%) and charging loss (converting from AC to DC then back again on discharge), you are looking at loosing about 20-30% of the energy. This significantly increases the amount to be generated and the amount of storage capacity needed.
Hi Chris. I'd be interested in your reactions to this new Aurora Energy report on the role of storage in GB electricity. It's a bit difficult to compare because you focused on MWh and they talk more in terms of MW capacity, but I *think* that they foresee a lower need for storage than you did. Here's a link to an Aurora's tweet thread about the report: https://twitter.com/UKenergywonk/status/1494377493821853697
I see you mention import/export but I think it needs more consideration. Currently Norway buy our wind power and turn off their hydro power to let the reservoirs refill, and then reverse the flow of electricity when there is no wind. Economics drive this as wind power is very cheap when it’s generating in excess. Also, as a thought experiment could you combine this with an increase in nuclear base load, I.e if we had another 3000MW of nuclear. And finally what about getting most of the way there? Say 80% carbon free? I imagine these scenarios would make the problem far more tractable.
Why 'decarbonise' anyway? CO2 is a harmless trace gas essential for all life on Earth. Everyone is getting their knickers in a twist over a non problem. But it's a non problem govts can tax.
Thanks Chris - a nice analysis and you've succeeded in keeping it easy-to-follow.
It seems likely that the path to decarbonisation will also involve significant electrification of transport, space heating and industry. It would be interesting to know how the result of that affects the seasonality of demand. I suspect for the UK winter space heating is a huge seasonal demand and will make long term storage needs look more challenging still.
Perhaps a more practical solution for the UK may turn-out to be fossil power with CCS running seasonally, with storage more just for short term fluctuations in wind and sun. There is probably a lot more ability to use modulation of demand to deal with short term fluctuations (e.g. slowing-down people's home electric car charging for the peak power demand whilst folk cook dinner).
I look forward to your analyses delving into these aspects!
Throw in the Costs of converting to EV's + Heat Pump acquisition and heating costs + Industrial Heat... + Aviation (for which there is no electrically generated synthetic liquid fuel in the pipeline) and the "Renewable" energy requirements increase 8 to 10 fold.
Why only give these huge factors a terse nod?
They blow a bad plan CLEAR OUT OF THE WATER.
You also gave Capacity for Peak Demand coverage little notice. Peaks require ~ Double the Average Demand requirements.
Go back and finish the job. I thought you were an engineer.
Thanks for your interesting & insightful analysis.
"If we are going to replace gas heating with electrically driven heat pumps, we are going to increase electrical power demand. If we are going to ban fossil-fuelled vehicles and go fully electric ...."
Whilst EVs' energy demands are relatively uniform throughout the year, space-heating demand is only over the heating season - *roughly* 6 months. So even if switching gas demand to electricity demand only doubles (non-gas generated) electricity demand over the year, it 'probably/possibly' quadruples (non-gas generated) electricity demand for the heating season which is *already* the time of peak electricity demand.
Space-heating demand is challenging to time-shift.
The *prime* advantage of the (heating) energy source that is expected to be shifted to electricity is that Britain has ~30,000,000MWh of natural gas storage, plus approx 4,000MWh of natural gas in Linepack. (The latter vs NetZero storage of energy in electricity cables.)
https://mip-prd-web.azurewebsites.net/DailySummaryReport
https://mip-prd-web.azurewebsites.net
What about integrating car battery storage into the grid as a buffer, and also reducing load peaks where this is possible - freezers etc.
Hi Chris
I haven't read your article in detail yet, but just want to enquire if you're familiar with Sustainable Energy Without The Hot Air by the late David MacKay (online at withouthotair.com) or the works of the (also late) Roger Andrews on Euan Mearns' 'Energy Matters' blog? You seem to be following in the same honourable path as those folks in preferring arithmetic to rhetoric and trying to make energy issues comprehensible to the lay person.
It did jump out at me that your figure of 20GWh storage is very much lower than MacKay's estimate of 1,200GWh for a wind-powered UK, which itself was on the optimistic side compared to the Energy Research Partnership UK's 2015 "Managing Flexibility Whilst Decarbonising
the GB Electricity System" https://erpuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ERP-FlexMan-Exec-Summary.pdf which I think found a need for up to 8,000 GWh of storage.
But of course to achieve even your estimate would be ludicrous with batteries, as you indicate.
In 2012 Hughes noted how load factors declined rapidly over time with wind turbines so the R&M needed would also be immense. Another factor to consider is the location of wind farms. Your first farm is in the best possible location the next less less optimal and so on. Not all farms are created equal. So intermittency likely will increase. Battery storage degrades over time, pump storage does not. If anything I think your rather optimistic. I'd be interested to know your thoughts on carbon capture. Removing 1ppm of CO2 every year, fighting new emissions and Daltons Law.
This is a useful methodology, but we will not end up relying on wind and battery storage alone. A more plausible generation mix is:
* More nuclear for base load demand - net zero is not until 2050, so plenty of time to increase capacity.
* Pump storage and batteries for daily demand fluctuations only. As proved here it makes no sense to use these to store and release energy longer term.
* Balance long term supply and demand changes, by capturing hydrogen using electrolysis when there is over supply. Burn this alongside biomass when the wind is not blowing.
Chris thank you for a very logical, brief but also devastating analysis !
I wouldn't want to add too much detail to the piece, because that would detract from its impact.
Perhaps a footnote about the efficiency of battery storage. In the article you assume 100% efficiency, whereas I suspect when transmission loss (8%) and charging loss (converting from AC to DC then back again on discharge), you are looking at loosing about 20-30% of the energy. This significantly increases the amount to be generated and the amount of storage capacity needed.
Hi Chris. I'd be interested in your reactions to this new Aurora Energy report on the role of storage in GB electricity. It's a bit difficult to compare because you focused on MWh and they talk more in terms of MW capacity, but I *think* that they foresee a lower need for storage than you did. Here's a link to an Aurora's tweet thread about the report: https://twitter.com/UKenergywonk/status/1494377493821853697
Thank you.
I see you mention import/export but I think it needs more consideration. Currently Norway buy our wind power and turn off their hydro power to let the reservoirs refill, and then reverse the flow of electricity when there is no wind. Economics drive this as wind power is very cheap when it’s generating in excess. Also, as a thought experiment could you combine this with an increase in nuclear base load, I.e if we had another 3000MW of nuclear. And finally what about getting most of the way there? Say 80% carbon free? I imagine these scenarios would make the problem far more tractable.
Why 'decarbonise' anyway? CO2 is a harmless trace gas essential for all life on Earth. Everyone is getting their knickers in a twist over a non problem. But it's a non problem govts can tax.
Thanks Chris - a nice analysis and you've succeeded in keeping it easy-to-follow.
It seems likely that the path to decarbonisation will also involve significant electrification of transport, space heating and industry. It would be interesting to know how the result of that affects the seasonality of demand. I suspect for the UK winter space heating is a huge seasonal demand and will make long term storage needs look more challenging still.
Perhaps a more practical solution for the UK may turn-out to be fossil power with CCS running seasonally, with storage more just for short term fluctuations in wind and sun. There is probably a lot more ability to use modulation of demand to deal with short term fluctuations (e.g. slowing-down people's home electric car charging for the peak power demand whilst folk cook dinner).
I look forward to your analyses delving into these aspects!
Richard
Excellent. Any chance you could do a supplemental article that compares costs of wind + storage against nuclear?
Throw in the Costs of converting to EV's + Heat Pump acquisition and heating costs + Industrial Heat... + Aviation (for which there is no electrically generated synthetic liquid fuel in the pipeline) and the "Renewable" energy requirements increase 8 to 10 fold.
Why only give these huge factors a terse nod?
They blow a bad plan CLEAR OUT OF THE WATER.
You also gave Capacity for Peak Demand coverage little notice. Peaks require ~ Double the Average Demand requirements.
Go back and finish the job. I thought you were an engineer.