Subject to Contract:

A significant finders fee, which could be as much 10s of £thousands, (subject to contract, site suitability etc) when and if building is commenced, and with significant interim payments as various hurdles (planning, connection etc) are passed, is offered for information leading to the identification of sites suitable for power plants fuelled / driven by / utilising: Read More→

Popularity: 3% [?]

A significant finders fee, which could ultimately be in the region of £k10’s (subject to contract etc) with significant interim payments -  is offered for information and help,  leading to the siting of small diesel power plants ideally up to 25 MW.

The principals have access to capital and fuel and seek sites distributed over the UK.

The following general characteristics, are typical:

  • These are 1.6 MW diesel sets fitted inside a standard lorry type container.
  • These would only operate for about 50 hours per year.
  • Noise and smoke are minimal.
  • Should be within 5 km of a 33 kV substation if greenfield / brownfield site
  • -Or-
  • Should be on an in use, or dis used industrial facility with up to 25 MW of connection. In this case operation of the generators will have no effect on the operation 0f the site but will give an operational site back up / standby power.
  • Sites available for 10 years.

Finders Fees

Clearly the appropriate legal agreement(s) will need to be in place before information is divulged and this will include as minimum, a Non-Disclosure and Non-Circumvention agreement to protect the interest of any “finder”.

These sites could be brought into use in months rather than years, so  we envisage a series of escalating stage payments – a first small payment on the clients acceptance of a nominated site as realistic, a further larger payment on first meetings of principals, a and a final  large sum – could be £ks when an agreement to take over the land and site the plant is concluded.  This could be alternatively a small permanent income stream etc, all the foregoing subject to contract and negotiation.

The entire arrangement is, of course, subject to contract – and it will be a contract between the finders and the principals. Neither this website owner,  nor Claverton will be involved and neither of us is making any offer or holding out any terms. We are simply passing on the information.

Further information from:

Bewislaker(the at symbol)gmail(dot)com

Popularity: 2% [?]

Managing Variability – A report to WWF-UK, RSPB, Greenpeace UK and Friends of the Earth EWNI

SUMMARY
In order to comply with legislation from the European Union, the UK’s renewable energy target (to
produce 15% of final energy consumption from renewable sources by 2020) may require between 35
and 40% of our electricity to come from renewable energy sources by 2020. After 2020, a higher
proportion may be needed. A significant amount of this renewable electricity is likely to come from
wind, and the variability of this power needs to be managed. Although aspects of the management of
wind variability can be controversial, utilities the world over generally agree that there is no
fundamental technical reason why high proportions of wind energy cannot be assimilated into the
system. There is a large body of literature on the topic and the steady growth of wind power,
worldwide, indicates that it is seen as a robust choice for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
An understanding of the impacts of the variable sources of renewable energy must take into account
the wider issues associated with managing electricity systems. Modern integrated networks are
designed to cope with ‘shocks’ such as the sudden loss of large thermal power stations and with
uncertainties in consumer demand. As the tools to deal with these are already available the key
question is the extent to which the introduction of large amounts of wind energy will increase the
overall uncertainty in matching supply and demand.
This extra uncertainty means that additional short-term reserves are needed to guarantee the security
of the system. The extra cost of these reserves — with wind providing 20% of electricity consumption
– is unlikely to be more than £1.20/MWh on electricity bills (a little over 1% on domestic bills). With
40% of electricity provided by wind, the corresponding figure would be £2.8/MWh.
The costs of additional reserves are one component of ‘the costs of wind variability’. A second is the
backup cost and the third is ‘constraint costs’. No special backup provisions need to be made for wind
energy. All generating plants make use of a common pool of backup plant that is typically around
20% of the peak demand on the electricity network. When wind is introduced, system operators do
not rely on the rated power of all the installed wind farms being available at the times of peak
demand, but a lower amount – roughly 30% of the rated capacity at low penetration levels, falling to
about 15% at high penetration levels. This lower ‘capacity credit’ gives rise to a modest ‘backup
cost’. ‘Constraint costs’ arise when the output from the wind turbines exceeds the demand on the
electricity network. They are unlikely to arise until wind energy is contributing around 25% of
electricity requirements.
Overall, it is concluded that the additional costs associated with variability – with wind power
providing up to about 40% of all electricity, are quite small. If wind provides 22% of electricity by
2020 (as modelling for Government suggests), variability costs would increase the domestic
electricity price by about 2%. Further increases in the level of wind penetration beyond that point are
feasible and do not rely on the introduction of new technology.
There are numerous technical innovations at various stages of development that can mitigate the costs
associated with variability. Improved methods of wind prediction are under development worldwide
and could potentially reduce the costs of additional reserve by around 30%. Most other mitigation
measures reduce the costs of managing the electricity network as a whole. ‘Smart grids’, for example,
cover a range of technologies that may reduce the costs of short-term reserves; additional
interconnections with continental Europe, including ‘Supergrids’ also deliver system-wide benefits
and aid the assimilation of variable renewables. Electric cars hold out the prospect of reduced
emissions for the transport network as a whole and could act as a form of storage for the electricity
network — for which the electricity generator would not have to pay.

The author
David Milborrow is an energy consultant with 31 years experience in renewable energy. He
was first involved in aerodynamic research at the research laboratories of the Central
Electricity Generating Board before moving to their headquarters in 1984. From then until
1992 he was associated with policy development, including plans for some of the UK’s first
wind farms.
His association with variability issues goes back to 1988, when he managed a study for the
CEGB that was one of ten carried out under the auspices of the European Commission. After
privatisation — and becoming an independent consultant in 1992 — he completed further
studies on the topic for a number of clients including the Canadian Wind Energy Association,
Sustainable Energy Ireland, the Carbon Trust and the UK DTI. He also lectures on the topic at
three universities.
He retains an interest in aerodynamic and engineering issues and has also carried out a number
of studies on the economics of renewable energy sources, and comparisons with those of the
thermal sources of electricity generation. He is, or has been, an adviser to a number of bodies
including the European Commission, the DTI, and the Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council. He is technical adviser to the journal WindPower Monthly and to the
British Wind Energy Association.

Popularity: 1% [?]

This note argues that environmentalists will have to recognise that part (and a small price) of the price we pay for creating significant additional capacity of intermittent / variable renewables is the continued existence of coal fired plant, operating at a very low capacity factor.

(And of course it will make us less vulnerable to Vladimir Putin. The fact that we get little gas from Russia does not reduce his ability to screw up our supply. Part of the deal would be that the coal stations should keep significant coal stocks on hand.

Arguably it would be perfectly acceptable to keep this old and polluting coal maintained and ready to run for the few weeks per year of anticyclone (when clearly there would not be enough wind in a very high wind generation scenarios.

Thus there is no need  to de commission these old stations.

It matters not a jot that they are polluting for a few weeks per year, because clearly by having a massive wind component of generation, in the extreme case, you would have reduced the annual output of filth by these stations by a factor of say 3 weeks / 41 weeks (say) ie 1/13th in this  high wind scenario.

Hence, the cost of back up to a very large penetration of wind is going to be very low – since you are relying on plant that would otherwise have been closed.

No one in the Claverton group, has  as yet come up with any evidence or calculations to refute this line of argument.

People who used to run power stations agree with this point of view, and have pointed out that investment decisions will be taken by the owners soon as to whether or not to let them go to rack and ruin – ie do no or little maintenance so that when they are forced to close they are  economic write offs.

Thus it is argued, the situations  needs a clear signal from the government that these old plant will be rewarded with some form of capacity payment otherwise we will lose perfectly usable plant.

If we build enough wind, which we can do if we have some central planning and targets we can meet our carbon targets and have security of supply.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Carbon-free shipping. (Ed. – ammonia makes a very good aviation fuel)

Ammonia (NH3) could be used as a carbon free fuel for shipping. It could be made from atmospheric nitrogen combined with renewable energy derived hydrogen. Ammonia’s hydrogen could react with oxygen to power engines, turbines or fuel cells, emitting N and H2O. Oxygen pre-separation might be considered, instead of air, if it could raise energy conversion efficiency enough to warrant its use

Wikipedia’s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia describes ammonia.

Hydrogen for ammonia synthesis should be obtained by electrolysis, rather than from methane. Apart from avoiding carbon dioxide emission, electrolytic hydrogen could avoid natural gas impurities which might harm fuel cells.

Compared with land-transport, ships should offer more space for ammonia safety features. With ammonia gas being lighter than air, leakage could be guided to high outlet vents. Storage tanks could be double walled with ammonia leak detectors between walls. Anhydrous ammonia could be stored under pressure as a liquid. It might be worth investigating strong ammonia aqueous solutions.

Ammonia powered shipping schemes could expedite domestic renewable energy deployment by mopping up surplus renewable energy generation at times of renewable energy over-supply, using planned redundant ammonia production and storage capacity. Stored ammonia could generate electricity when renewable energy supplies are low. Increased ammonia demand at overseas ports could encourage worldwide renewable energy deployment.

Peter Ravine

Popularity: 2% [?]

The report is at:
http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Markets/WhlMkts/Discovery/Documents1/Project_Discove
ry_FebConDoc_FINAL.pdf

News articles at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8494899.stm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-
bills/7144386/British-households-risk-unaffordable-energy-bills-Ofgem-
warns.html


http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/sse-says-customers-using-less-gas-electricity-reuters_molt-20a544628846.html

A little interpretation:

Quote: “There is a need for unprecedented levels of investment to be
sustained over many years in difficult financial conditions and against a
background of increased risk and uncertainty.”

To translate, “the fat cats and their shareholders have been taking far too
many bonuses rather than spending their money on the infrastructure required
to handle North Sea depletion.”

Quote: “Short term price signals at times of system stress do not fully
reflect the value that customers place on supply security which may mean
that the incentives to make additional peak energy supplies available and to
invest in peaking capacity are not strong enough.”

Or, “we’re stuffed and we’re panicking that the public are going to blame us
and string up up from an unlit street light”.

Quote: “A minimum carbon price, which would provide long term certainty for
investors and should bring forward low carbon investment, features in three
of
the packages.”

Or, “OK, we admit that nuclear needs subsidies, and valuing carbon is the
only
way we can think of paying for the new nuclear build”.

Quote: “Interdependence with international markets exposes GB to a range of
additional risks that may undermine GB security of supply.”

Or, “we have to import our energy now and people might not want to sell it
to
us”.

Quote: “The higher cost of gas and electricity may mean that increasing
numbers of consumers are not able to afford adequate levels of energy to
meet
their requirements and that the competitiveness of industry and business is
affected.”

Or, “even if energy is available we probably won’t be able to afford it
because
everyone else will be trying to buy it due to the plateau in production”.

Quote: “We welcome responses to this consultation by 31 March 2010.”

Or, “We’re absolutely bricking it and we hope that we can load the blame
onto
someone else by getting them to suggest an alternative.”

Popularity: 1% [?]

Dave

We have been asked to find speakers for a show  in the China Power Conference 2010. Can you suggest two -three persons from Africa and Middle East in Generating sets industry to speak about the gen-set industry? Thanks!

It will cover the airplane tickets fee and hotel fee for them.

Regards,

Neb Saric

Sales Director, Power Division

Global Media Publishing Limited

Direct Tel: +44 (0) 1403 220763

Direct Fax: +44 (0) 1403 220764

To Register for IP&EE or Electrex: www.gmp.uk.com/ipee

www.gmp.uk.com/power

PS. Don’t forget to book your stand at “Independent Power & Energy Europe” NEC Birmingham 8–10 June 2010

Publishers of Worldwide Independent Power, American Independent Power, Independent Power Asia, annual Worldwide Gen-Set and Cogeneration Directory & annual Year Planner. Organisers of Independent Power & Energy Europe & Electrex.

Use contact form for Claverton to respond

Popularity: 1% [?]

Categories : Diesels
Comments (0)