Claverton Statement

From Energy-Experts

There is a wide range of expertise and experience in this group and no really unanimity - there are pro wind and anti wind, and pro nuclear and anti nuclear. Most agree that general energy policy is useless.

However a significant proportion believe that a high conservation, renewable energy future is possible, economic, and desirable. By no means do all of the group agree with everything below, but a large proportion of the experts do.

Claverton summary - Short two page summary of views (of those who contributed)

April 2008 press release

Short statement - This is a 2000 word document to go in Professor David Elliott's Newsletter Renew, which deals with Renewable Energy: It is a shortened and condensed version (thanks to a Herculean effort by Phil Harris) of the Claverton Briefing.

Contents 1 Claverton Statement notes 2 The Claverton Energy Group 3 Executive Summary 4 1 UK and International 5 2 Policies for the UK (and rest of Europe) 6 3 Proposed Global Policies: 7 4 Technological Dead Ends

Claverton Statement notes

(These notes 1 - 9 are addressed to collaborators and will not appear in the final version)

Note 1 - This may not ultimately mention the Claverton* Energy Group at all – depending on member’s sensitivities and how everyone feels the final thing has turned out – it might just be attributed to the named panels of experts who feel comfortable with it and who will put their names to it.

Note 2 – this is still a first Attempt – a substrate for everyone to modify. Please feel free to modify providing you can back up with factual and referenced arguments. Don’t just give random uncosted unsized opinions. By all means send your email round on Yahoo, but it would be much better if you inserted your text on the Wiki.

Note 3 - use the discussion tab (see top) to explain your thinking to us for the reasoning behind any modification.

Note 4 - please use the Notify Me tab so that you will be sent a copy of this as it changes showing you what has been cut and what has been added.

Note 5 - feel free to insert any relevant hard core facts or references and to correct any of the numbers.

Note 6 - This will finally be edited by a journalist expert (He's a Senior Press Officer in top a major corporation) to improve the writing style

Note 7 - The Briefing will be summarised by the same journalist in a short 1000 word version for submitting to the press as an article. Utility Week have already agreed for example to publish it.

Note 8 - a press release written by the same journalist will also be produced)

Note 9 - This Note needs a lot more references and hard numbers in the final version – at present this is merely a broad brush start. Please put them in if you already have them to hand.

Quigg notes

The Claverton Energy Group

An Energy Information Routing Group* for professionals and experts interested in the energy world covering: technology, resources, policy, modelling, futurology, economics, politics, generation technologies, conservation and conservation, renewables, combined heat and power CHP, transmission grids, nuclear, solar. Climate change and peak oil are taken as givens. Members share, swap and / or sell information, technology, jobs, ideas, policies etc with an underlying view that we are headed for difficult times on the Energy Front. There is no group policy as such - merely an ongoing debate. Some members are highly placed running large base load power stations at executive level, others are involved in the upper levels of energy utilities e.g. National Grid, Centrica, Civil Service and other National Transmission systems etc. Also academics at Professorial level, engineers, managers, consultants, biologist, economists, architects reflecting a wide range of expertise and knowledge. There is a Wiki which has bios of member's experience and knowledge. (Make sure yours is on there if you are a member) Some members are producing this Claverton Energy Briefing Note which is intended to be a coherent policy statement written in layman's terms but backed up by sound technical references, covering UK, Europe and the World. Inevitably it is merely a snapshot of current evolving thinking. Not all members accept all the points, but all points have been thoroughly debated and at least "pressure tested". Any member may edit it. By these means the Relevance Paradox can be overcome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relevance_Paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Routing_Group*

Introduction The Claverton Energy Group consists of more than one hundred energy professionals who are concerned about competing claims for energy technologies in the UK. It has been in nascent existence as a small group of experts for over 25 years, as a larger informal group on the Internet for 5 years and as a much larger group of over 150, with the present name, since February 2007, when a well attended 2 day conference took place at the kindly loaned Claverton, Bath, Headquarters of Wessex Water. There is however no formal connection of the Group with Wessex Water.

A further well attended conference occurred in November 2007 - again at Wessex Water.

The focus of the Group is a rational analysis of the part that CO2 displacement and supplies of renewable energy can play in giving the UK, Europe and the World a sound energy future. We are concerned to highlight the economic, security and GHG emission benefits of the technologies that we have studied.

The Group is also concerned about the background of constraints on future supplies of fossil fuel (commonly given the shorthand title 'Peak Oil'). Recently, supplies of oil and coal in particular are subject to a variety of delivery problems and price increases in the face of competitive demand. Also, rates of depletion of many existing reserves of oil run far ahead of global rates of discovery and some reserve coal inventories have been revised dramatically lower. We are especially very concerned about the position of the UK if the availability of fossil energy supplies continues to worsen and the appropriate power stations are not constructed in due time.

In the nearer term, much of renewables energy supply will come from wind. The integration of wind and other renewables into the UK system is addressed by a sub group of Claverton Group members in an Earthscan book on 'Intermittency', published and now available October 2007. The view that is emerging from the Group is that we need to promote a coherent package of CO2 displacement measures particularly renewables that have low CO2 footprints together with other low CO2 technologies such as piped heat for the main end use products heat and electricity. An opportunity exists for renewables to be integrated into a radically revised system of interactive demand management and improved end-use CO2 reduction technologies. These technologies can be rapidly introduced and will also serve to increase the level of energy security.

In the transport sector, the Group think that electricity could minimise CO2 emissions in the public transport sector and dominate this sector, while biofuels could play a small but important role in road transport where in any case further improvements in improving conversion of fuels to power in this sector are essential. We are aware of serious constraints on large scale supply of liquid biofuels. More attention needs to be paid to the development of fuel cells suitable for methane and other gases that can have a renewable biomass source. Resource and cost constraints have been identified for electric battery vehicles, except in niche markets. Overall public transport modes and rail freight will need to expand dramatically as a fraction of all transport. Although we see a future for fuel cells using methane, we do not see how a hydrogen economy based on electrolysis of water to produce hydrogen will assist in reducing CO2 emissions while a consequent increase in demand for electricity is likely to be met by coal fired power plant, thus giving the hydrogen a high carbon dioxide footprint.

Readers will note a different emphasis in different sections on solutions. In the same way as the Group has already provided invaluable information exchange among members, resulting in experts in their own narrow field learning more about other options, the aim of this Briefing Note is to act both as a catalyst for further action and development within the Group and to stimulate interaction with the wider world of journalism and politics engaged in evaluating and influencing policy. The role of Judgment and experience: On any technical issue, even simple ones, there is often no clear answer from analysis as to which is the best solution. Judgement and experience have to come into play to make soundly based judgements. We feel that due to the highly qualified and experienced nature of most of our members, and the robust pressure testing of ideas, and the fact we have no significant affiliations we are better placed than most to give unbiased judgment. This report represents the collective judgement of the group, though by no means all members agree with all conclusions, some disagreeing quite strongly with particular ones.

Bullet Points Summary:

1. An area of the north sea some 70x70 miles square could in theory supply all of the Uk's electricity requirements. We should press ahead with a major expansion of offshore wind farm deployment , with ambitious targets- e.g 30% by 2020, 50% by 2030.

2. In parallel a crash construction programme of tidal lagoons and tidal current generation, and wave energy generation, again all using proven technologies, must be begun now thus enabling us with about 15 years to have a further 20% contribution to electricity requirements.

3. A barrage is not recommended on the grounds of cost and environmental impact compared to tidal lagoons.

4. Electrical interconnection with European electricity grids should be increased from approx 2GW to approx 8 GW. Increasing the size and distribution of the grid would help to smooth the natural variation of wind power and reduce price volatility of the power market. Further increase above 8 GW would enable UK with the best wind regime in the world to export wind power to Europe to replace lost North Sea revenues.

5. Electricity tariffs should be developed to support system balancing, including electronic communication with all consumers’ meters and dynamic pricing encouraging price responsive electricity demand. Likewise the electricity market needs to be re-organised to remove the excessive and economically unjustified built in penalty to renewable and local power sources In particular the German model of REFIT tariffs needs to be introduced.

6. In order to utilize wind power peaks new types of electricity demand should be developed, such as charging battery powered vehicles, charging large scale flow batteries, electric heating of district heating water and heat pumps.

7. District combined heat and power schemes run on natural gas, coal, biomass and waste heat should be installed to heat 80% of UK cities and households which will cut significantly the demand for fossil fuel thereby increasing our security and is the cheapest interim carbon dioxide removal method.

8. House thermal performance should be drastically improved, so that heating demand (one of the largest sectors) can be reduced by 30% from present levels. Likewise appliance efficiency can be readily dramatically improved. Both these offer by far the largest, quickest and most cost effective methods of cutting carbon and energy insecurity.

9. Fuel costs should be increased via carbon tax with consumers given hypothecated income tax reductions which encourage low carbon technologies and lifestyles and a shift towards electric vehicles.

10. The EU should establish Europe-wide initiatives such as the provision of a large scale concentrating solar power plant (CSP) in the North African Deserts and the building of highly efficient long-distance High Voltage DC power (HVDC) lines. Whilst this is unlikely to have any benefit to the UK, our local offshore wind power being much cheaper, it could certainly form a component of European renewable power. It is of greater importance to other countries such as China, USA and India, and it is no use UK going green if the rest of the world doesn’t and here the UK can gain by setting an example. The provision of CSP in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, USA which vast desert areas would do much to reduce global

11. In the long term (50 years) there is ample off shore areas to generate many times our current total energy consumption, ie fuel and electricity and this will increasingly be used for personal electrical powered transport and as a major source of UK wealth via export of surplus.

12. Technologies such as Fusion and Fission are, in the quite near future - 2015 unlikely to make any difference to the quite catastrophic effects of both climate change and the likely shortage, electrical power plant, of cheap liquid fossil fuels.

13. It should be clearly understood that massive expansion of wind power, and nuclear power are fundamentally incompatible. It is nonsense to propose both.

14. It is unlikely that technologies such as fuel cells and hydrogen will have a significant part to play in the near future - 10 - 20 years and so the major effort should be expended on the areas outlined in this document which are feasible and economic.

15. Energy policy as regards the points in this paper, are effectively driven by the needs of a) the large electricity generators b) the oil and gas companies c) the house builders d) the large civil engineering groups. These organisations have only short term commercial interests and thus energy policy should be taken out of their hands and placed with an independent, open policy making body, which is based on technical understanding - this is how Scandinavian government have produced rationale and effective energy policies starting with the oil crisis of the 70s.

Executive Summary

Introduction

1. The urgent challenge facing the UK is to devise a flexible forward looking strategy for energy delivery and consumption that is sustainable for the indefinite future. Our need is to use available resources to achieve a maximum reduction in GHG emissions per £ invested (in terms of £ per tonne of CO2-equiv. GHG saved) and to prepare for a future when oil and natural gas are progressively becoming scarcer and prone to political interference. This requires a combination of innovation and deep understanding of how to make what looks attractive in theory also possible in practice, also experience of technological progress abroad.

2. We believe the issues of Climate Change, energy security, Peak Oil are so pressing and urgent that radical measures are necessary and that present government policies are woefully inadequate. In particular we are extremely concerned that there is a real chance of power shortages in the UK from around 2015 unless rapid investment in the appropriate technology is carried out urgently. This is primarily due to an foolish reliance on imported gas which may be in short supply, and the closure of obsolete coal fired power stations.

2. We need to examine critically the current and future mechanisms by which we produce, convert, distribute and consume all energy carriers, including heat, electricity and fuels.

3. As Stern and others have pointed out, we need to begin to act now; even though the future will bring new and, we hope, better technologies we cannot afford to wait until they arrive as we have no time to wait; we already have proven technologies that if we began to apply now would bring no “regret” whatever the future holds and if better ones do not fulfill there promise, we can carry on with the ones to hand now. Energy efficiency is a prime example. It more than competes with fossil fuels at today's - even yesterday's - prices. Wind power is another proven supply technology which could, (but we are not suggesting it should), provide all our energy needs. Energy Efficiency

4. Most investment in energy efficiency is significantly cheaper than investment in extra energy supply to achieve the same level of service and comfort. This is particularly true, given that we start with a housing stock of extremely poor energy efficiency. Somewhat incredibly, the UK is still constructing new dwellings which keep the heat in less well than Swedish homes built before the Second World War. It is urgent to improve the thermal standard of new buildings and to set realistic mandatory, not "aspirational" or optional targets.

5. The UK has spent very little money on energy efficiency/buildings research since 1980 and this should be remedied, since buildings are the largest consumers of primary energy in the UK.

6. On existing buildings, a 25 year programme commencing now would be capable of cutting building energy use to 30% (that is a 70% reduction) of its present value and yield some further rise in thermal comfort. Witness Germany's recent experience in bringing existing buildings up to the Passivhaus Standard and beyond with 90+% reductions in GHG emissions for space heating. We take it for granted that in the UK, as in Germany, historic listed buildings would be treated sensitively. New technologies such as vacuum panels offer to reduce insulation thicknesses dramatically. This work needs to be optimised with respect to step 8.

7. Improvements in the energy efficiency of electrical domestic appliances, office equipment, lighting and ventilation pumps and fans offer potentially huge returns. The recent emergence of A++ appliances is the tip of an iceberg; even greater savings are possible if the technologies are pursued further and manufacturers are incentivised accordingly. Costs so far to improve "cold" appliances have been low to negligible, yet typical consumption has dropped from 400 to 150 kWh/yr.

8. Techniques such as “smart metering” offer the potential for automatic load balancing, meaning that inherently variable sources such as wind power can nevertheless be used in a reliable and secure manner and reduce the inefficient use of inefficient part loaded spinning reserve plant Combined Heat and Power and District Heating - CHP/DH.

9. The current level of heat loss or rejection to cooling towers and cooling water from non-renewable and nuclear energy power stations offers huge scope for efficiency savings through the widespread use of a District Heating via buried insulated heating pipes, as widely practised in Scandinavia, and greater use of Combined Heat and Power (CHP). Roughly speaking the amount of such reject heat is equal to the import of gas used for heating buildings, and it is immediately apparent that utilising all this reject heat would greatly reduce our gas imports by 17% (check we have Paul Frederick's figures in) improving energy security at a stroke and cutting GHG emissions dramatically.

10. Based on Danish "best practice" technology and their heat planning process, we estimate that around 80% of UK buildings are built at densities that justify investment in District Heating, along with conversion of existing power generation to CHP. A programme of such conversions will quickly lead to GHG reductions as well as enhanced comfort and well being.

11. One way to accelerate this would be to compel all new thermal power generators, for all fuels, to be connected to heat mains, delivering low cost heat for space and water heating.

12. The use of small multiple gas engined CHP stations at every Low Voltage substation would represent an extremely rapid and cheap way of installing such CHP which also meshes well with the control of a large input of renewables.

13. The provision of such District Heating networks offers the potential for future use of wind or other renewable generated power (biomass, and surprisingly solar heat) to provide energy for heating.

14. Micro CHP in certain buildings remote from heat grids will also have a significant role to play.

Transport

14. Transport is the other largest sector of energy use in the UK and also the most difficult to replace the convenience of liquid fossil fuels. The UK has the highest per capita private mileage of any European country yet paradoxically the lowest car ownership. Whilst continentals glide to work or shop in sleek modern trams, Britains spend their commuting journeys in cramped unreliable public transport, or traffic jams. Major investment in electrified public transport such as trains, trams and trolley buses offers an effective way of easing traffic congestion and emissions in our towns and cities by encouraging transport that avoids the wasted time and emissions from inefficient use of ever larger private cars. It is also a way of reducing oil dependence since the motive power can come from renewable sources fed by overhead wire.

15. Centralised distribution and consequent unsustainable levels of transport of commodities and goods should be reconfigured in favour of local sourcing, wherever possible. Closer integration of workplace and homes also helps to reduce our intrinsic need for travel.

16. The collections of foodstuffs from modern supermarkets in private cars is a major driver of fuel use, and could be replaced by an integrated home delivery system, based on fleets of modern battery powered vehicles, powered by renewable energy, akin to the once ubiquitous milk float whose continued existence and development should be encouraged. Goods for these delivery vehicles could be ordered on line.

17. We see no evidence that the fuel cell car and the hydrogen economy can be introduced in sufficient time, and the many technological hurdles overcome, to be a viable alternative to the internal combustion engine and liquid fossil fuels. Therefore we should plan for the inevitable fleet of smaller, lower range battery powered cars. This will require a different infrastructure of public charging points payment protocols, and battery exchange stations. These changes need to be planned for now. These will also greatly assist a grid based largely on fluctuating renewables, since the storage capacity of parked cars would be some 3 - 4 times the peak demand on the nationla grid.

Renewable Energy

18. Indigenous renewable energy of all kinds not only reduces reliance on external imports of fossil fuels, thereby combining energy security and CO2 reduction, it does not suffer from the controversy associated with and dangers of other low carbon technology such as Carbon Capture and Storage, or Nuclear Power.

18b, Furthermore Britain has so much potential that once more we could export energy to our neighbours.

19. Carbon Capture and Storage and Nuclear Power both suffer from severe practical limitations as to the rate at which they can be expanded and will therefore only have a limited impact global warming or increase our energy security. Even if UK replaces all our nuclear power stations, we will still be importing more gas than we are now and make only a 4% difference on our total carbon emissions. It is simply not a solution for the UK or the world. The fact that China has opted to build large numbers of coal fired plant, in effect a free market choice undermines the argument that nuclear power is cheap and abundant.

20. Nuclear power in fact makes the transition to a high renewables content grid more difficult because nuclear is inflexible, whereas more flexible plant will be required with a large renewables penetration to cover for the occasionla long, windles period.

21. Wind energy is one of the most tried and tested forms of renewable energy in the World and the UK (next to biomass for cooking in the poor countries), and hence one of the most easily introduced and financed and is growing at the rate of 24% cumulatively worldwide. (Hydro is the largest, at 18% of global electricity)

22. Our discussions, and we have various transmission system experts on board, show that it is perfectly possible to generate close to all of the UK's present power requirement from renewables, with only a low percentage coming from fossil fuels (or possibly biofuels) during extreme low wind periods. Exactly how this is the case, despite the fact that the wind is of a variable nature, frequently stops, and wind turbines only produce on average 1/3 the peak output is gone into in great detail in Appendix 7.2 Those who dispute this perhaps surprising fact either do not understand how modern power grids work or are being dishonest.

23. However we do not propose a 100% wind power future, but merely emphasise it here to counter the misunderstanding displayed by technically unqualified and often mischievous persons. It has been stated categorically by no less a person than Tony Blair, that there is simply no alternative to nuclear power and this is demonstrably false. Our present electric power requirement, about 360 TWh per year could come, with the same level of reliability and security as now, from an area of only about 70 miles x 70 miles off our coasts. The much larger quantities of primary fuels, used for transport and heating could also come from an area about 150 miles by 150 miles, and again there is ample room for this offshore of the UK.

24. Instead we propose a massive expansion of not only wind power because it is presently available but also other technologies such as: tidal lagoons, hydro and the use of biogas (the latter available in relatively small but significant quantities). For various technical reasons, this technological mix will form a more economic mix than than wind power alone and the elements are already proven worldwide The massive Niagara Falls pumped storage system which is effectively a tidal lagoon of 3 GW output was built in 1908. There is room in the UK to duplicate the 2 GW Dinorwig pumped storage scheme. (If all suitable wastes are digested, ie food waste, crop waste, agricultural wastes, this is sufficient to yield a steady output of 3.3 GW, which is about 9% of the UK average electrical power production rate)

25. Wave power and tidal stream power is also under development and as and when it becomes available it is expected to economically provide a significant percentage of power.

26. There is limited scope for the production of biomass from e.g. forest wastes and dedicated crops such as Miscanthus and short rotation coppice willow and these would be better used in CHP plant or as transport fuels, which in the long term will be used to keep the national grid stable as supplies from intermittent renewables increases - as is already the case in Denmark. In general we find no reason to contest the estimates in the recent defra (http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/energy/renewablefuel/pdf/ukbiomassstrategy-0507.pdf) report that suggests ~ 6% of total UK energy could come from biomass, and that biomass is more likely to contribute to heating and local power generation via CHP, than to liquid fuels. An additional 1M dry tons of wood for biomass (someone convert this to electirc percentage as others ise it is meaningles) could be sourced from better forestry management. Up to 17% of UK arable land could be devoted to perennial biomass crops.

27. We doubt that bioethanol derived from sugar beet or wheat produces significantly more energy than is consumed in its production. Whilst other sources of biofuels may be developed it is clear from land use considerations, and the poor state of world food supplies, that they are unlikely to replace significant amounts of liquid fossil fuels.

28. Improved digestion processes can convert putrescible household waste into useful outputs - pipeline-quality gas, liquid fertiliser and soil conditioner. The favourable costs of such processes should also encourage UK progress on waste sorting at source and recycling. Nevertheless, the total available is small. Top end estimates indicate that if every putrescible waste were digested, then a mere 16% of the UK transport fuels could be so produced, or (ie not both) 8% of UK power production. This would be best reserved for heavy transport which would be hard to replace with battery powered vehicles.

29. Danish experience shows that large solar collectors produce heat at 15-20% of the cost of heat from solar collectors on house roofs and is perhaps surprisingly, economic. This argues for making faster progress on a heat distribution infrastructure, point 9, since this can use any source of low-grade heat in the long term. Large solar heating plants can also use seasonal heat storage.

30. CSP (Concentrating Solar Power ) involves nothing more than the standard steam turbine power station we are all familiar with, but with the fuel burning boiler augmented by a computer controlled mirror field to direct heat to the boiler. The solar heat can be reliably stored in proven technology (molten salt for example) to enable such stations to generate electricity even at night at full power. The boiler can be fired during the very occasional periods of no sun in the desert using fossil fuels. Whilst the costs of CSP which have produced reliable quantities of electricity for over 20 years in e.g. North America, Spain, are uncertain at the present time, detailed studies indicate they will become competitive with mass production. Thus the large scale development of CSP in North Africa in particular has great potential to provide the EU with renewable energy. This would help the UK if it is a member of a coherent European energy transmission network, with greater use of HVDC lines (see later). By providing investment in these N African Countries CSP could go some way to counteract the tensions between us and promote local economic development.

31. The potential benefits of this technology are so massive and far reaching, in their ability to bring power and investment to the hot desert regions of the world, the UK should be using its international muscle to ensure at least one large example of this technology is built to ensure it is there if we need it. There will be no financial regret since they definitely work - unlike say nuclear fusion - its is simply the costs that are uncertain. Other benefits include desalinated water and shade for agriculture.

HVDC - High Voltage Direct Current Transmission

32. This is a key technology for the widespread improvement of the efficiency and robustness of large power grids, be they conventional, nuclear or renewables. The key point is that modern versions enable power to be transmitted economically over 1000s of km, with losses of about 3% per 100 km. Its use enables large continent wide groups of power stations to back each other up, leading to lower levels of expensive and inefficient reserve plant. the key benefit with regards to renewables is that it would for example allow a large fleet of wind plant in the UK to export surpluses during windy periods to the rest of Europe, and to import it back during periods of low wind. This is precisely similar to what happened when the National Grid was established when there were 400 small local power stations. With the advent of the national grid, if one of these stations were down, then it simply borrowed power from its neighbours. Incidentally the national grid was one of the key reasons the Luftwaffe could not knock out power in London. HVDC would allow us to have 100% renewable with absolute reliability.

Other Technology

33.

34. The UK should consider carefully any further fission power stations. Energy can be made available more quickly, in greater quantities and at less cost using energy efficiency, renewables and CHP as outlined herein without the attendant risks and controversy. The present government plans to replace all nuclear power stations will only make a 4% difference to overall CO2 emissions and is therefore a pitifully inadequate response to climate change and energy security issues. If nuclear power is gone ahead with then a greater number needs to be built, and they should at lest be combined heat and power.

35.Fuel cells and hydrogen should have only a low priority. The numerous technical and cost hurdles, and the low overall efficiency, means they are unlikely to make any significant impact to personal vehicle transport in the time available and alternatives are already available such as batteries and bio gas. Many commentators believe that the fuel cell and hydrogen economy agenad is no more than a fig leaf to hidethe motor and oil industries relectance to discontinue the huge profits to be made form extracting and selling te reemaining oil, and selling the expensive maintenance needed for the internal combustion engine. Neverthelss fuel cells will no doubt fill useful niche markets and in the long term my become a very useful way of utilising hydrogen. However this is so far off, that for them to be considered at present is merely a distraction from the imlementation of actually proven technologies.

Finance

36. In order to encourage the necessary investment in proven technology and infrastructure the Government should aim to adopt proven financial methodology and Germany’s success in creating such a high installed capacity compared to the UK appears to us to be due to their use of Renewable Energy Feed in Tariffs (REFIT). Germany and Scandinavia have about 10 times the per capita renewables that we do, and regard our claim to be leaders in combating climate change as both laughable and delusional. 18 other European countries have adopted, or are about to adopt, such tariffs. (See 7.4.2 for enlargement on FIT tarrifs)

37. The ROC system should be retained for existing schemes supported or planned to be supported by ROCs. But should be phased out and a system of guaranteed Renewable Energy Feed in Tariffs introduced for all new investment.

38. We make no judgment on the respective merits of carbon taxes, carbon credits and personal carbon allowances. But in our view neither alone could bring about the necessary investment in time. However, any financial mechanism, whether conventional or not, which is capable of deploying investment rapidly should be given urgent consideration.

Energy Policy - how have we got into this dangerous situation?

39. We are almost unanimous that the Energy Policy of the UK has over the years been woefully inadequate, and has been largely one of leaving it to the market. However it is also clear that the large players in the Energy Business have top level access to Ministers and Civil Servants, and that Energy Policy has in fact been largely dictated by the large industries to suit there commercial purposes. This is why we have the worst insulated houses in Europe, the least Combined Heat and Power, the highest levels of fuel poverty, and pitiful levels of investment in efficiency, and the most profitable Energy Utilities, since it is simply not in the interests of the big Energy players to cut energy consumption.

40. Therefore, just as the UK Monetary Policy Committee has successfully operated independently from government we recommend that an independent body of experts should be established to develop and maintain a coherent and up-to-date UK energy policy. This should have technical representatives nominated by the major parties serving a main Board, again with political nominees. It should be transparent and not dominated by the big utility players.

41. We are astonished at the ability of companies such as Exxon Mobil to regularly wine and dine senior civil servants who make energy policy, and the fact that for example the Ex Minister of Energy Brian Wilson can walk into a job as a non exec Director of AMEC a subsidiary of BNFL. This kind of undue influence over crucial national policy must be stopped and policy making put on a more independant, rational technical level.

1 UK and International

Clearly it is futile if the UK alone implements emission cuts and other counties do not. The UK has significant international bargaining power and this should be used appropriately and we can demonstrate suitable technologies to other countries. Therefore we address both UK and global issues since UK energy policy cannot be disentangled from global energy and security realities:

2 Policies for the UK (and rest of Europe)

2.2 Electricity 2.2.1 Wind power 2.2.1.1 Wind power plus retained fossil fuel stations

Wind power is presently the only commercially available candidate for mass introduction in Europe, and despite the fact that it is not always windy at any one site, any one site only operates on average at 30% of its maximum output, and has to totally shut down in high and low winds, it can nevertheless, with the appropriate measures outlined below and in the appendices, provide 90% of our present electrical power (UK annual electricity demand XXX TWh). It could, in principal, be extended to cover all other fuel shortfalls simply by investment in enough extra turbines. The UK has, in fact, the best wind regime in the world and instead of being a net energy importer could rapidly move to being a net exporter of renewable energy

To generate the entire UK annual demand for electricity would require 40,000 x 5 MW turbines in a total area of about 70 miles by 70 miles. Spread around the coast there is ample room for this as it would only utilise 10% (can someone check please DA) of shallow, off shore areas

However a concomitant increase in certain well proven measures covered in the Appendix 1would be needed to complement mass wind power implementation, to ensure that the continuously varying wind power output could provide secure electricity supplies.

Whilst there are other renewables cheaper than wind, - land fill gas, sewage gas, these are limited in extent and are almost fully developed in the UK.

2.2.1.2 Retained existing fossil fuel powered stations During these times of insufficient wind, or indeed excessive or over rapidly changing winds causing wind turbine shut down, the retained and paid for fossil stations would be used. Their use in these circumstances would mean they only produce about 5% of the annual electricity used. Contrary to assertions, the cost of keeping these stations idle is very low – the major cost of running to today’s power stations is the fuel cost – typically 90% at today’s fuel prices.

2.2.1.3 Wind turbines – not the only solution in the long term This is a solution to providing all our electrical power in a 90% renewable manner, and we cite it here to show unequivocally that other more dangerous and controversial methods are not the only solution to climate change and energy security as has been stated. But this is an extreme case, and a much more economic solution can come from a mixture of other renewable power sources and techniques.

We have emphasised the wind contribution because it is proven and affordable technology and such a programme could be begun immediately. As other technologies already at the demonstration stage, or still coming down in cost become available, these can be substitute for all or part of the wind programme without the original investment being lost. But we cannot afford to wait until these upcoming technologies are proven before concerted action begins.

Clear signals should be given to the wind industry to begin increasing the manufacturing base – already there is an 18 month waiting time for new wind turbines and factory capacity needs to be expanded by the giving of such clear signals.

2.2.1.3.1 Other Renewable technology – PV, tidal, tidal stream. Here are collective assessment of the potential UK non wind Resources All potential UK Tidal barrages- 17% of curent UK electricity Tidal lagoons 8% of (current) UK electricity Tidal currents 15% (above is not additive) Wave energy 15% (could be more if we can go further out to sea- 25% max?)

How quickly we can exploit these depends on funding and the electricity prices you can accept. The Carbon Trust says that basically on current levels of support, we’d only get 3% of Uk electricity from wave and tidal by 2020! 20% eventually. The DTI/FES say 5GW by 2025. Which assumes they have to compete at 2.5p/kWh. We believe we need a 15GW by 2020 target for wave and tidal currents, plus a lagoon programme . This seems possible, if we accept higher prices initially as per a REFIT system Quote from Professor D.Elliott (d) 'Sustainable Energy' Palgrave 2007 forthcoming ( Aug): The energy review by the UK Cabinet Office's Performance and Innovation Unit in 2003 put the total UK theoretical wave and tidal current resource at 700 TWh p.a. That is nearly twice current UK electricity consumption. However not all of this could be extracted in practice. In 2004, the DTI/Carbon Trusts' Renewables Innovation Review, put the UK's total practical wave resource at around 70 TWh of energy per annum, about 20% of UK electricity requirements, while the practical tidal current resource was put at around 31 Twh p.a., about 10% of UK electricity requirements. Subsequent studies by the Carbon Trust, taking economic constraints into account, refined these estimates, with the offshore wave figure being put at 50 TWh, plus 27.8 TWh for near shore and 0.2 TWh for shoreline wave, and the tidal figure at 18 TWh p.a. Overall the Carbon Trust claimed that the UK might ultimately expect to obtain up to around 20% of its electricity from wave and tidal currents (Carbon Trust, 2006). Whether this is the ultimate limit, given for example the very large wave resource available if devices can be located in the deep sea areas off the UK coast, and how rapidly the resource could be exploited, is unclear.

To make this happen, more money should be pushed into developing these non wind renewables, which will almost certainly come along. This is a case where the government, like many other European governments, needs to pick winners and not leave it simply to market forces. Put simply, the market places zero value on energy security in 2100. £20 billion discounted away at 8%/yr is worth

2.2.1.3.2 Severn Barrage This oft quoted scheme appears to have the worst rate of return for any means of utilising the tide range of the Severn Estuary. It will at best contribute 8 % of UK demand, so is a huge diversion of resources from more economic schemes such as tidal stream, tidal lagoon etc. Its value as a flood control measure and/or river crossing means it should continue to be assessed. There is probably a better case for this project as a infrastructure scheme to encourage the economic development of the south west and south Wales. A crossing significantly downstream of the present ones and using the barrage to locate 24 hour deep water port might double the return on capital.

2.2.2 Biomass Overall, biomass is no silver bullet, but that which is available can provide useful contributions to niche markets.

2.2.2.1 Sewage and other putrescible wastes A limited amount of biomass energy (perhaps 0.5 GW) from fermentation of wastes i.e. sewage and wastes from domestic refuse, and food factory wastes is available for power generation and possibly vehicle fuels in e.g. sewage gas and landfill sites and the combustion or pyrolysis of refuse. Already assessed in Switzerland as capable of producing up to 5% of current energy consumption, and a higher fraction of its gas.

2.2.2.2 Woody biomass Biomass power is available from up to 1 M tons wood and other forestry wastes annually. This is best used by being burned in wood fuelled CHP stations again as per Scandinavia. The quantities are not large but nevertheless worth pursuing. Woody material could also be converted to biofuels using 2nd generation processes, such fuels are most attractive in rural areas to back up active solar systems.

2.2.2.3 Other combustible refuse and wastes Urban wastes (not putrescible as mentioned earlier) such as newspaper, packaging, etc can really only be disposed of in pyrolysis or combustion plant and could provide x% of UK Power [they're digestible too in moderation]

2.2.2.4 Biomass Crops Perennial crops such as Miscanthus and coppice can be extremely productive (10 T dry weight/hectare or more). Energy inputs are minimal post planting. Further, with appropriate planning, such biofuels crops could facilitate sewage and animal waste handling by using nitrogen to stimulate plant productivity. More research is needed to improve the efficiency of conversion of such crops to useful chemical products and to liquid fuels. Nevertheless, even if much of the land now needed for agriculture was used for biomass crops , insufficient energy could be produced for complete substitution of fossil fuels, and there would be a shortfall in food production (unless there was also a reduction in meat consumption, as in e.g. a move to a more Mediterranean diet). These biomass crops have the additional benefit of promoting the accumulation of fixed carbon in the soil. See eprida.com for a particularly significant way of doing this.

In this context, it is worth noting that instead of growing biomass and burning it, it might be better to use it as a raw material. Biomass e.g. wood, fibres, has numerous uses such as furniture, construction, windows and other building materials, where it competes very favourably in most cases to more more energy-intensive plastic and metals. Wood-based thermal insulation materials can sequestrate large amounts of carbon, if they are used instead of man-made mineral fibres and plastic foams.

It would be better to encourage the use of biomass in these primary purposes, and then at the end of its life biomass can often be re-cycled into further uses e.g. fibre board, chipboard and cardboard. Only then when the recycling limit has been reached should it be burned to produce power. Hence a series of incentives are needed to encourage the primary use of biomass for higher-value consumer products whereever possible instead of energy hungry alternatives such as plastic, steel, aluminium, concrete.

2.2.2.5 Imported Biomass

A certain amount of biomass residues is already imported – nut and seed husks, olive stones etc, and these are burnt in UK power stations producing about 1 GW. Again there are strictly limited world wide quantities of these materials. It can be anticipated that there will be growing imports of sugar or bioethanol from Brazil and palm oil from the tropics, but insufficient to replace current fossil fuel usage for transport. However, small imports could be significant, were there to be a major improvement in the energy efficiency of liquid-fuelled transport.

2.2.3 Combined heat and power or CHP

Conventional power stations reject 50 % to 70% of the input fuel to a cooling medium as cooling towers of river or sea water.In fact the amount of heat wasted is roughly equal to the amount of gas imported and used to heat UK buildings.

Much as the waste heat from a car engines is used to heat the car (we don’t have a separate fuel consuming boiler for this) the waste heat from power stations can be readily used to heat buildings.

2.2.3.1 Combined heat and power stations

In this case steam is taken from the end of the steam turbine and used to heat water which is passed in insulated pipes and distributed to dwellings. The entire city of Stockholm was retrofitted with this kind of CHP in the 70s even though it meant tunnelling much of the way through solid granite for this.

This technology is widely practiced in Scandinavia, Germany, Austria and even one or two American cities. (That’s the steaming manholes seen in gritty New York movies pipes.

Clearly this method needs large pipes – they can be up to 2 m in diameter and 100 km in length, feeding hot water to progressively smaller pipes. Insulation keeps the losses to about 10% on an annual basis. The losses from large pipes are very small indeed, contrary to conventional wisdom.

2.2.3.2 Combined heat and power using gas engines

This is very similar except many more smaller engines are installed closer to the load. Again heat is distributed using buried insulated pipes, but clearly much of the large pipes are not needed. ) The entire town of Heidenheim in West Germany is heated using natural gas and large gas engines and many smaller Scandinavian towns.

2.2.3.3 CHP Recommendation

No new heat only power station ( ie not CHP) should be permitted in the UK. CHP should be retrofitted to all major UK cities using existing power stations where practicable.

This could be done very rapidly using gas engines to initiate the network to be later connected to the heat from large power stations.

All new blocks of flats and row houses in the same development should utilise gas CHP immediately.

2.2.3.4 Example on the effect of reducing generating capacity by switch to CHP rather than heat only. Since a large part of the output of our present electricity –only stations, inefficiently generated, is used for space heating, if all UK power were to come from nuclear stations, then 20 would be required. If the waste heat from all nuclear power stations were to be applied to district heating then only 5 would be required.

The same applies to fossil fuelled power stations of course.

2.2.4 Coal fired power stations and carbon capture and storage. CCS The technology is not at all without risk and is very expensive. It does not make sense to pursue such a path when it is not at all certain it will even work in the long term – 10 or even 100s of years, when a future large release from the reservoirs could be catastrophic and alternatives exist already, and there are proven no risk alternatives. Nevertheless, we feel the present situation is so dangerous in terms of energy shortage and climate change, that this should be applied to any new coal fired station, and at least one, simply to gain experience.

However we do not think it is a long term solution – it may just buy time.

2.2.5 Electricity end use efficiency

It goes without saying that this needs to be addressed as well, with minimum standards for a range of domestic appliances – lamps, motors, televisions etc. It has been shown in for example California, that if forced the utilities respond with investment in load reduction by efficiency, since this is by far the most cost effective use of scarce capital.

2.2.6 PV – photovoltaic Needs a bit – any offers?

2.2.7 HVDC High Voltage Direct Current Transmission

This is a key factor in any energy future.

The creation of the UK National grid had 4 key effects: 1 By pooling power plant, each previously islanded municipality could each close there own spinning reserve standby plant, and share fewer spinning reserve plant, amongst all participants with enormous savings in fuel.

2 These spare plant could be closed or sold, leading to large saving in capital that would have otherwise been spent in keeping them operational and maintaining them.

3 Larger more efficient power plants located at the coal field could transmit power the then unheard of distances of hundreds of miles – “coal by wire”

4 By pooling the varying loads from all UKs cities, previously islanded, the increased diversity of load meant that the new systems peaks and troughs were proportionately much reduced again leading to huge savings in capital, and spinning reserve costs, because to meet the previous individual total peaks much more plant had been needed.By subscribing to a European wide grid, these same benefits can be achieved on a European scale, with the coal by wire scenario of the past replaced by a Renewable by Wire of the future. UK is ideally placed to be the source of much of this renewable which can be exported.

Proposals by for example Airtricity integrate this Pan European Grid into a means for connecting up off shore wind farms.

2.3 Transport (something wrong with the numbering system here – I can’t correct it –this should be 2.2)

Transport is a far greater user of energy than electricity (annual UK energy used for transport YYY TWh) and we have a very high reliance on liquid fossil fuels for this purpose and there is no immediate prospect of an alternative.

Needs numbers 2.3.1 Bio fuels.

Bio-fuels i.e. bio diesel and bio ethanol, touted as an alternative to liquid fossil fuels, will not be sufficient to completely replace existing liquid fuel consumption. For example if all the UK agricultural land were to grow only bio fuels, then this would provide about 40% of our present fossil fuel demand.

In addition annual crops usually release more CO2 than they displace due to the use of energy intensive fertilisers, the energy used for transporting and processing the biomass and the potential deforestation/loss of carbon sinks.

The present need for liquid fossil fuelled cars should in large part be replaced by individual battery powered renewable electric vehicles and overhead electric powered public transport. For biofuels to make an energy-efficient contribution, efficient conversion from lignocellulose derived from perennial crops such as Miscanthus and coppice willow is essential.

There may be some small role for the use of gaseous fuels derived from bio digestion as a vehicle transport fuel, but the potential volumes are not large.

2.3.2 Personal vehicles

At the moment, these are the only alternative to liquid fossil fuels.

The EV1 electric vehicle introduced in California a decade ago had a range of 50 miles using lead acid batteries and could be charged at work.

This fits the pattern of 90% of commuting car journeys.

With improved batteries – Lithium – Ion – the elements of which are not in global short supply mean the ranges can be increased significantly. With the provision of battery exchange stations range can be extended indefinitely. Thus the government should be encouraging the introduction of battery powered cars and the appropriate infrastructure of public charging points and battery exchange stations.The latest electric cars can apparently offer the same performance as the average high performance modern saloon for range and speed admittedly with $90,000 price tag. [1]

This will require specific and major inducements such as very significant tax breaks and specific legislative requirements laid on motor manufacturers dealers and importers. Again clear unambiguous long term signals are required.

2.3.3 Public Transport

2.3.3.1 City scale Buses and trams

On the continent, whilst per capita car ownership is far higher than UK, per capita car mileage is much lower. This is due to the deliberate providing of public transport that takes up car road space – tram ways, bike and bus lanes that cars physically cannot encroach upon thereby encouraging cars off roads for peak journeys into cities by providing a better alternative.

Thus we need a rapid programme of better buses and trams to enable people to avoid using cars except where they have no option and to use the much higher levels of public transport that would be available.

All cities should have a network of efficient modern trams and trolley buses which can all be powered by overhead electricity lines fed from renewable sources. Such public transport schemes were ubiquitous in quite small towns in UK up to the war, and are widespread and modern in European cities.

2.3.3.2 Intercity City Express Buses

A network of high speed intercity trams and trolley buses should be provided continuously plying the motorway and trunk road networks but not deviating into town centres as at present. These express networks should be serviced by a smaller fleet of shuttle buses operating from town centres to motorway and A road pick up nodes. This would halve typical intercity coach service time which presently operate from congested centre to congested centre and are seen as inconvenient and low status partly due to this.

2.3.4 Food distribution, distribution and shopping.

a large part of national transport fuel is the weekly supermarkets run. supermarkets and local shops should be encouraged to deliver produce that has been ordered on line using a continuous shuttle service using battery powered floats

To an extent these home delivery services already exist from most of the main supermarkets who use diesel vans. There still survive a fragmented network of eclectically powered milk floats and this type of technology should be used to provide an integrated Deliver service to dwellings for produce ordered on line.

At the moment, this is largely used by high income groups who are familiar with using the Internet – in France every house has had a Minitel terminal since the 80s and a similar service should be provided to all dwelling to enable all households to order on line.

2.3.5 Integration of batteries storage with National Grid

The development of tariffs and payment systems is required to encourage people to allow the use of their in-car batteries and or engines in hybrid vehicles to support the grid via the charging umbilical during windless / high wind periods For example, the load from charging electric cars can easily be turned off for a few minutes to deal with a sudden drop in wind power, this technology is already available. To give an idea of the potential scale of this effect, 20 million electric cars at 3 kW per car has a 60 GW demand which is equal to the total load on the national grid.

2.3.6 Public electric vehicle charging pointes

The mandatory provision of multiple charging points, including automatically guided plugs, including billing systems in all public parking places, with automatically guided plug-ins for recharging is required (such technologies have been designed) This will require specific regulations for e.g. local authorities to provide this investment, which will be similar in cost and difficulty with the expenditure on installing street lighting columns and parking meters.

2.3.7 Standardised public battery exchange stations

The provision of standardised public battery exchange stations to facilitate long distance journeys where the range of an all battery car may not be sufficient. This will require a legal onus to be placed on petrol station operators to co-operate along with the development of an industry standard. 2.3.8 Required expansion of National Grid and power station infrastructure to cope with potentially 20 million vehicles.

Since our biggest demand for energy is in fact for transport, NUMBERS to feed the electricity needed for the battery powered cars would need the expansion of the UK generating capacity from its present 70 GW to 3? or 4? times that amount. However there are plenty of offshore areas to accomplish that in and the grid control measures outlined will allow this to be achieved with high levels of security of supply providing we are prepared to pay for it. Whilst perfectly possible (it means the construction of more wind turbines), whether or not the country wishes to pay the price is another matter. We may simply have to travel less in cars and more on public transport.

2.4 Building Heating

Simply heating buildings is one of our largest uses of energy (annual UK energy use ZZZ TWh).

2.4.1 Thermal performance of buildings

A massive upgrade in poor thermal performance of existing domestic dwellings should be implemented. We have some of the poorest performing buildings in Europe in terms of energy usage. With the appropriate encouragement, then according to Professor Bob Lowe we can see the annual demand for heating reduced from xxxxxxxx to xxxxxxxx See later

2.4.2 CHP

AS per the section on CHP, all towns and cities on the UK gas grid should be connected either to the waste heat from an existing power station, or small local CHPs should be built. It is not generally realised the colossal number of engines already produced in the world and this can be readily achieved in a very short space of time. For example one manufacture, Caterpillar, by no means the larges produced about 80 GW of engines per years. In areas too far from cities for the CHP outlined, then micro generation should be employed, including solar heating and biofuel backup. Ground source heat pumps should contonue to be assessed.

2.4.3 Economics of energy Conservation Vs more generation

Whilst we have placed this last, it is by no means of lowest importance. Energy conservation and energy efficiency offers massive savings at very low cost. It is far better from an overall economic view point to invest in conserving electricity or heat and using it more efficiently than to invest in new generating or fuel capacity.

Numerous studies have shown this and so we advocate a very strong programme of both energy conservation and the introduction of efficiency appliances. However this is deliberately not the main thrust of our proposal.

This is because energy conservation is often seen as not very “sexy” and tends to get dismissed as a nice but unrealistic idea put forward by a mythical hair shirt brigade –

So we emphasise that the proposals we offer on the supply side would technically enable life to carry on pretty much as normal, but would entail enormous and probably unfeasible investments – exactly the same would apply if primary energy supply were to come from nuclear power or any other conventional source of course. Thus it would be far more effective to carry on both strategies – a massive and concerted conservation and efficiency programme with in tandem massive investment in the hard technical programmes outline above. The two are not alternative options.

CAN ALL THOSE WHO HAVE STATED THERE IS NOT ENOUGH ABOUT CONSERVATON PLEASE PUT SOME MORE MEAT INHERE PLEASE . THANKS DA.

3 Proposed Global Policies:

3.2 Wind

There are sufficient wind power sites worldwide, with economically high wind speeds to generate all of our present energy demand (that is electric power and fossil transport fuel) 7 times over.

An area of only 600 miles by 600 miles of correctly spaced wind turbines would produce all the worlds’ present electricity demand.

Hence full support should be given internationally to wind power.The best way the UK can help this is probably to simply install the large numbers we have talked about in the UK and to thereby establish the technology base for export abroad. Due to previous timidity in this area, we gave away our lead to the Danes and others – in the 70s Howdens’s was a major wind power player.

3.3 Concentrating Solar Power:

This is a very attractive technology and according to the German Aerospace Institute it will in principle be able to provide power at an attractive cost to Europe. However it is not at present fully developed at low enough cost levels to compete with wind. Eminent people within CEG have raised serious questions about if it ever will. However cost projections using standard industrial learning curves, which estimate how the price of something falls as the production volume increases indicate that it would be economic at reasonable levels of installed capacity. (Gerry – be more precise please) so similar levels of investment, as spent on the ITER fusion project $5b should be spent on this technology. It may not beat indigenous European wind, but it will almost certainly be applicable for use in any area near deserts. Near in this context means thousands of miles. One of its significant attraction is that it can simultaneously produced not only clean electrical power, but also desalinated water, and shade, meaning that deserts can be highly productive of food from horticulture.

This is a technology that will have widespread application in places like USA India and China where there are massive areas of unused deserts as an alternative to the use of coal fired power stations. Stations have been in operation in the Nevada desert since the 1970s

An area of only 120 miles by 120 (Gerry?) miles of correctly spaced CSP? wind turbines ??? would produce all the worlds present electricity demand and again HVDC technology can allow this to be distributed extremely remotely from the generation site. A particular attraction is that CSP can be easily coupled with molten salt heat store technology making it possible to have continuous output after dark. Furthermore fossil back up can be provided simply by firing the boiler. A highly desirable scenario would be create capacity to source 60% of demand from wind, and 60% from CSP, so that periods of inadequate renewable electricity are rare enough that the requirement for fossil fuels such as gas for electricity is cut to a minimum.

3.4 Photovoltaic

Photovoltaics are an attractive technology for remote rural locations particularly near the equator with no real summer or winter seasons, though less in European winters. It is presently much more expensive than other renewables for grid connected applicants and concentrating solar, and imposes potentially high (electricity) storage costs, since the sun does not shine at night and less in the winter.

At present, unlike wind, it is largely inappropriate for Europe on a mass scale, because the maximum outputs occurs in the summer when it is least needed, though the air conditioning load will soon rise and so this might create a market segment for it, providing costs come down.

Whereas wind could provide close to 100% renewable power, this is not the case with PV since a massive installation programme could require extremely expensive inter-seasonal storage and day night storage of electricity which concentrating solar does not require - it needs to store electricity inter day.

Very large cost reductions are being talked about for PV and if PV comes down enough in price then no doubt PV will play a large part in our energy supplies, and could well overtake wind or CSP economics so PV should be strongly supported

3.5 HVDC

All forms of Renewable power can be accessed and intercepted using modern HVDC power links many of which are posited as intercontinental links. As with the British National Grid, where the investment was repaid within a few years by the closing of inefficient power stations, and the sharing of peak capacity the ability of each country to close peaking plant and reduce spinning reserve would be a great contribution to energy efficiency and pay for the network itself.

By linking up grids thousands of miles away and in different time zones, and different unlinked climatic conditions HVDC offers a major and proven mechanisms to allow individually intermitted and varying renewables to become a source as reliable as conventional fossil powered grids.

3.5.1 Examples of HVDC grids

3.5.1.1 Inga – Shaba link

The longest example is the Inga – Shaba link in Central Africa which conveys 500 MW 1700 km from the Inga Dam to the Shaba copper fields. It has been in existence for some 20 years.

3.5.1.2 Nor – Ned link

This is a 1 GW link being built from Norway to Holland.

3.5.1.3 UK Cross channel link

A 2 GW link connecting France to UK

3.5.2 Efficiency of HVDC grids

HVDC can transmit power extremely efficiency – losses of about 3% per 1000 km are commonplace.

3.6 Other technologies

We believe the other technologies mentioned for the UK, tidal stream, tidal lagoon etc, will have various applications to a greater or lesser degree worldwide and again should be supported in the UK since they will represent major export earnings.

In this connecting it is sad to note that the latest world leading UK wave energy device is being tested in Spain because the support regime there is much better than here.

4 Technological Dead Ends

The programmes sketched out above are technologically feasible, using already proven and applied technologies, with low risk. It is economically affordable. The technologies discussed below are none of these and we therefore see little point in pursuing them – there is certainly no case in delaying the action outlined above in the forlorn hope that some of these programmes will bear fruit in the timescales needed. Some opinion believes that many of them are promoted deliberately by vested interest as spoilers and delaying tactics.

For example George Bush’s advisers have stated "we are going to use technology to solve global warming" specifically naming Hydrogen and fusion as the solutions. But these are completely irrelevant in the timescales within which we need action. i.e. the next 10 years.

4.2 Fusion

Fusion is irrelevant, because it will be 25 years before the new French research machine ITER may or may not have been demonstrated – no one can be sure it will work; and a further 20 years before a large commercial prototype, based on lessons learned, can be built and tested which itself may or may not work. Only then (40 years) can a world wide implementation start which would clearly take a further 30 years or so, which is far too late.

4.3 Fuel cells

These are often touted as very promising, but they need a fuel which has to come from somewhere. This fuel could equally well be burnt in a modified internal combustion engine, or used as electricity. The cost of fuel cells is way beyond that of an internal combustion engine by several orders of magnitude and no breakthroughs are on the horizon. [DAVE- WHAT ABOUT CERES POWER? http://www.cerespower.com/technology/markets.htm JJ]

4.4 Hydrogen

Hydrogen as a vehicle fuel is irrelevant now because already, battery powered cars can and have been built, that with battery exchange stations can have the same range as petrol cars and are much more practical. They are reckoned overall to be half the cost of the hydrogen powered cars, and twice as efficient and are here now. Also, diesel hybrid cars that can run on biofuel, using 3.5 litres/100 km are here, and 2 litres/100 km could be easily reached if the will was there.

To be a successful component of energy strategy, hydrogen powered cars need 4 extremely unlikely occurrences within the next year so they can begin to be implemented now: 1. A cheap way of making hydrogen 2. A realistic and cheap way of storing sufficient hydrogen in cars 3. A fuel cell that is 1000 times cheaper than present commercial examples 4. A hydrogen distribution infrastructure

None of these are likely in the time frame needed – 10 years and hydrogen / fuel cells are widely viewed by many commentators as a "spoiler" technology pushed by the car and oil industry to delay the implementation of a perfectly reasonable technology i.e. battery powered cars, or very economical liquid fuelled cars, neither of which suffer from the above problems and which are already available or nearly so; i.e. battery powered cars charged from renewable sources. The claimed motivation for delay tactics is to extract as much oil as possible, and to sell the expensive maintenance and lubricating oils needed by an internal combustion engine. No doubt some hydrogen technologies, and if a storage means can be made practicable will have niche applications, but they are not a major part of the solution.

4.5 Nuclear Fission

Depending who does the sums and what assumptions and costs are included it is not at all clear that there is any significant difference in the cost of wind power and nuclear fission (no nuclear power stations have ever been built purely financed by private capital). Most official costings exclude the massive cost of nuclear insurance and the long term cost of storing the nuclear wastes for thousands of years. All official costings exclude liability insurance, since the plants are allowed to run with the inadequate amount offered by the government.

If we accept the recent Energy White paper's view that offshore wind is twice as expensive as nuclear then we might be paying a premium of say £12 billion per year (3p/kWh x 400 TWH = £12 Billion) Given we spend £15 billion on maintaining say the road transport system this does not seem a high prices to pay when all the risks are considered.

Setting aside the cost aspect in any case there is simply not enough time to build enough stations in the UK or the world to stave off global warming – indeed the governments plan is to replace our existing nuclear fleet, and this would cut national CO2 by a mere 4% which is simply not sufficient to make any difference.

Considering that it would be possible for a determined terrorist to breach the containment with the same kind or weapons being used against the coalition in Baghdad, and the subsequent nuclear release could cause the permanent evacuation of a large part of the UK with catastrophic economic consequences, why would we want to take the risk when other technologies without these risks can do the job just as well.

Coupled to that is the well known dangers of proliferation, and the fact that all the uranium has to be imported. There are doubts that there is sufficient sources of economically useable uranium around. One study by MIT shows that the economically useable Uranium would all be used up in about 10 years if any significant programme of reactors (in global warming terms) were built). The same applies to thorium.

It is not at all the case that nuclear power is zero carbon – significant quantities of fossil fuels are used in the extraction and processing of the uranium ores and as the ore quality goes down, the amount of carbon emitted goes up.

It is also the case, that due to the inflexibility of nuclear power, they cannot be readily turned up or down, it does in fact compete with fluctuating renewables such as wind power for large implementations of both the two are essentially incompatible. A very large programme of renewables as outlined will entail the usage of flexible power plant which will need to be turned up and down from time to time, albeit infrequently. The presence of nuclear power, which cannot be cycled in this way is thus antithetical to a large renewable programme. (For this reason in France, the surplus night time nuclear power is exported to Belgium and Italy to run for example street lights).

Investment in further nuclear is money that could be invested in developing the other renewables – tidal lagoon, tidal stream, PV, CSP etc.

5 Policy distortions

All governments to a greater or lesser degree are influenced (and rightly so) by the needs of large corporations who wield enormous influence. Unfortunately this has often meant that energy efficiency and CO2 reduction plans have been delayed and watered down. Therefore an independent Energy Board needs to be set up to create and oversee these policies, all discussions should be open and records released in the same way that the Bank of England has an independent rate setting Board..

7.2 Appendix 1 Load balancing methods for close to 100% wind (or other renewable) power We stated in an earlier section that close to 100% wind power is perfectly possible in the UK.

To understand how this is possible, even though: 1 Sometimes (very rarely) there is no wind at all over the whole of the UK 2 Sometimes it is too windy for wind turbines to generate 3 Sometimes the rate at which the total wind power is producing is change very rapidly.

One needs to understand a little about how Large National electricity grids and the power stations therein are operated and balanced. – for a full treatment see Appendix 6 In the UK for example, a relatively few power stations at any one time, perhaps 60? At peak, provide all the power for some 21 million consumers. As the load varies up and down every day, and summer and winter various power stations are stopped and started to meet the load.

Because some of these power stations are very large – Sizewell B is 1.2 GW – 3% of the summer load, then [2] reserve of greater than this has to be available at all times ready for the unknown and unpredictable failure of this unit whenever it is running. This reserve also covers for the sudden failure of any other smaller station and for unforeseen changes in consumer demands.

In addition a variety of other methods are used to cope with both predictable and unpredictable changes in load Summary of present National Grid control measures: - frequency response plant – responds automatically to frequency changes Spinning reserve – power stations that are not fully loaded - small gas turbine plant that can start in a few minutes - peakers - very small diesel engines which are fitted for emergency use in e.g. pumping stations and hospitals are regularly used – Standing Reserve - Large loads which can be temporarily and automatically switched off – Frequency Service - Large capacity cables to other countries - Interconnecters - Automatically and remotely switch able loads – those that will cause no problems to consumers if they are delayed or advanced in time.

When wind energy is added to an electricity network, additional measures are needed to cope with the additional uncertainty in balancing supply and demand. With this in mind we need the following programme – we do not quantify the extension, at the stage, but almost all of them to a greater or lesser degree are already part of our national system and could easily and cheaply be extended. The cheapest options to be exploited first, and the cost/benefit potential of each to be examined.

1. The geographic dispersion of wind power sites. There are ample sites around our coasts for 150 GW of capacity meaning there will always be a high probability of some generation somewhere since it is rarely simultaneously windless at all sites around the UK . 150 GW would deliver roughly the total amount of electricity used each year in the UK.

2. Retention of existing fossil power stations, which are already built and paid for to operate only as required during these relatively rare low wind periods. This is extremely cheap, since the major cost of running a power station (92%) is the fuel cost. i.e. no extra back up stations are necessary to be built merely the rent on the long spent capital on existing stations.

3. 5 The gradual phasing out of nuclear power, which is intrinsically inflexible.

4. A programme of rapid introduction of automatic load control as presently only applied to large industrial loads. These are now easily applicable to the type of large domestic heating loads mentioned above and many other domestic loads such as fridges and freezers, whose delay or advancement will cause no inconvenience to users. They are also easily applied to fluorescent lighting in offices, so long as it has dimmable electronic ballasts. In the worst emergencies, the lights will need to dim, but they will not need to go out.

The existing load shedding scheme as operated by National Grid, covers about 2 GW of large loads such as cold stores and steel works that are paid to disconnected instantly for up to 20 minutes. However What is important here is the mean diverse load perhouse – this is around 0.5 kW (≈4500 kWh/a). Still worth having, but only adds up to around 12 GW.

5. A rapid introduction programme of modern cheap High Voltage Direct Current - HVDC electrical inter-country connections to mainland Europe / Norway etc. allowing electricity to be imported during periods of low wind and exported during high wind periods. This would enhance the effectiveness of the European electricity network and, in addition, would provide safeguards if large areas of Europe were becalmed. (The longest HVDC line so far is 1700 km in Africa transmitting 560 MW built in 1980; An 800 km link is being constructed from Norway to Holland ; Links have also been planned from Norway to Yorkshire . We already have the 2 GW cross channel link, installed in anticipation of the large UK nuclear programme which did not materialise)

6. A rapid programme to introduce smart metering and smart controls which can transmit a varying price signal to encourage people to use surplus wind power i.e. during high wind periods and low loads. Devices already exist that would enable the washing say, to be done automatically overnight during higher wind periods etc.

7. Italy has already installed the latest generation of such smart metering technology in all domestic dwellings and these kind of tariffs have been available in France for years, again due to paradoxically the inflexibility of French nuclear plant.

8. There is already 2 GW (total National Grid capacity = 70 GW) of small diesel generators, some as small as 180 kWe as well as gas turbines originally purchased and used for emergency standby in e.g. hospitals, water works etc but which are also used under contract by the National Grid. They are used to assist in stabilising grid frequency and making good capacity shortfalls during major power station failure by automatically connecting to the National Grid and feeding in power.

9. Such generators in the National Grid scheme only run a few 100 hours per year, because they can be started simultaneously in seconds unlike a large power station, which can take several hours Hence their use cuts down massively the amount of spinning reserve that has to be kept on standby at a very high cost albeit they use expensive fossil diesel it is only for very short periods.

10. This 2 GW could be increased very cheaply to 20 GW by bringing in the huge amounts of other emergency diesel back up plant that are presently not in the National Grid scheme but which have already been built and paid for and are required to be regularly tested any way.

Exactly how much of each of these technologies should be used will evolve, but it is clear there is ample scope to enable fluctuating wind to be absorbed in the UK system.

It has been estimated that in all about 5 – 10% will have to come from conventional fossil plant, and this could in principal be from woody biomass in the main

7.3 Appendix 2 Transport needs a lot of work on this one particularly. Note – this did happen in California, but lobbying from the powerful motor and oil industry over turned the requirement on the grounds that “hydrogen fuelled/fuel celled vehicles were just around the corner”

Thus the objective of road pricing - less traffic - is achieved on the continent by the very thing that road pricing implies (i.e. more public transport) making road pricing seem a pointless exercise since it only makes any sense if more public transport is provided anyway.

The absurdity of one-man buses which entail an unnecessary boarding delay, extend journey times, and give passengers a low level of security, combine to make buses unpopular and perceived as low status, should be abandoned. Bus lanes should be extended and allow exclusive access through junctions – at the moment most of these revert to normal roads at the crucial point meaning buses have to queue, where they should always have priority.

The absurdity of not allowing buses and taxis, indeed any vehicle to stop at will to pick up passengers should be abolished as this will allow the flourishing of better and cheaper public transport systems as per many Third world countries where in fact public transport is much better than here and even parts of the USA where taxi licensing is devolved to county or city governments and is sometimes much more flexible than in the UK, allowing shared taxis (much more fuel-efficient than single-occupant taxis).

To operate effectively we will need to revert to the heavily regulated bus system which worked very effectively whereby operators’ licenses were only granted if they provided a guaranteed level of service on uneconomic routes – i.e. Sundays late at night and early mornings, which purely commercial enterprises do not provide. Whilst in general we support market policies, public transport is one situation where the market alone does not work, since operators make the most profit by only operating at peak times – and it is this lack of off-peak public transport which drives car ownership.

Thus we need an all encompassing national public transport plan, with each local authority drawing up routes and frequencies for all areas. Presently poorer areas and rural areas are severely discriminated against by public transport again forcing people to own cars. These local transport Agencies could for example set minimum routes and schedules and accept 5 yearly tenders to operate them from sole licensed providers.

To offset the inconvenience of possibly an extra battery exchange which will occasionally result and shortened battery life that will result – much as National Grid presently pays private operators for effectively wearing out diesel generators prematurely. (see later)

7.4 Appendix 3 Policy mechanisms How could the above technical programme be realised?

7.4.1 Carbon taxes and carbon trading So whilst in general we support carbon trading, Personal Carbon Allowances or carbon taxes in whatever form, we believe that as lone policy instrument they will be quite ineffective increasing rapid fundamental change in the ways outlined. clear government policy needs to be established and implemented by legislation, and indeed picking winners and unfortunately in some cases limiting personal choice. Carbon trading – it has been said somewhat cynically: "The immediate task of carbon trading economics is to devise systems for trading in deck chairs. The ultimate goal is to work out how to privatise the iceberg" Perhaps a little harsh, but carbon trading whilst nice in theory is, as a lone policy instrument, unlikely to get the above programme to happen in the timescales needed - investors need firm signals they can bank on, which can only come from governments setting out specific goals and in some way forcing utilities to create them.

7.4.2 FITS versus ROCS We believe the government should immediately abandon any further extension of the ROCs system and go over to a FIT system, which has been demonstrably much more successful in other European countries. Feed-in tariffs (FITs) Feed-in tariffs (FITs) place a legal obligation on utilities to purchase electricity from producers of renewable energy at a set rate. The tariff rates are set for each viable technology, to take account of their differing generation costs. The payments are guaranteed for long periods - usually 20 years in Germany- and are reduced in planned stages to reflect expected improvements as the technologies mature. The simple guarantees that come from the FIT mean that a producer can obtain finance with much lower investment risk, and hence more cheaply.

FITs brings down costs and increases market confidence for manufacturers, suppliers, generators and investors. The costs of the system are often shared nationally, adding a small amount to monthly household bills. In Germany, their FIT system has made them world leaders in renewables, has created towards a quarter of a million jobs, saves close to lOOm tonnes of C02 annually, and has massively increased their share of RE in the energy mix, and hence their energy security.

By contrast, the expense, complexity, and investment risk of the UK's Renewables Obligation (RO) remains, despite the latest tinkering. The RO requires power suppliers to derive from renewables a specified proportion of the electricity they supply to their customers. Eligible renewable generators receive Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) for each Mwh of electricity generated. These certificates can then be soid to suppliers, in order to fulfil their obligation. Suppliers can either present enough certificates to cover the required percentage of their output, or they can pay a 'buyout' price for any shortfall. All proceeds from buyout payments are recycled to suppliers in proportion to the number of ROCs they present. The main change to the system suggested is the 'banding' of technologies, to address the differing generation costs of each (some were getting too much once they had matured, others not eneough to get stated) . It is unclear, however, whether or not this is in fact likely to improve conditions for decentralisation, and a broadening of the energy portfolio. On balance, it seems unlikely to do so, as there has been no real attempt to get at a root cause of the expense - investment risk.

This risk is introduced through the uncertainty attached to the future value of Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs). In order to finance renewable energy installations, the case must be made, as in any other such financial transaction, for what will be returned in repayments, and when. As the ROCs are tied to shifting market prices, they cannot have a definite future value. Uncertainty in investment is met with higher risk premiums, and so, for example, financing for wind farm is therefore more costly.

This is why we have 2GW of wind and Germany has 20 GW and has created 214,000 jobs . Germany is also supporting PV solar well. 7.4.3 Policy Agencies So we believe the following additional policy implementation mechanisms need to be set up. These are in the form of Agencies, and these quangos are not very popular in today’s free market model. Nevertheless we can cite recent examples where Agencies have been very effective in introducing change, with the assets ultimately being transferred to the private sector: 7.4.3.1 Examples of previous successful policy Boards: CEGB Central Electricity Generating Board This successor Board to the multiplicity of independent generating stations standardised power and created the national Grid. It embarked upon the construction of highly efficiency coal by wire modern stations on the coal fields, all of which have been sold to private industries. RCUs. Roads Construction Units. In the 1960s when the government of the day decided we needed more motorways, these government bodies were set up to enable private industry to bid for and build the motorway network. Rolled up when its task was completed. There are numerous other examples.: LTB London Transport Board LTB created a vast interconnected system for London in the 30s. This had the well known Red Buses radiating on routes outward from London, and for those days London Country high speed coaches for fast cross country routes around London

7.4.3.2 Building Energy Conservation Agency

An energy conservation Agency needs to be set up to ensure that all existing buildings are brought up to a high level of thermal performance over the next 25 years. Since the existing housing stock only turns over every 100 years, new houses are less relevant but these should of course be to high standards. For example, the German Passivhaus, which requires no separate heating system, only a plumbing coil in the ventilation ducts. It reduces space heating energy to 5-10% of a normal UK level and total energy is reduced to only 20% of a normal building.

The emphasis is on affordable measures such as enhanced insulation levels, better controls, airtightness, removal of electric heating, etc. The leading country in retrofitting its entire building stock to the thermal standards we need tomorrow is Germany, followed by others such as Austria, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark et al. A visitor to Germany sees many tower blocks and low rise homes being externally-insulated to high levels. In addition, their historic listed buildings (even medieval oak-framed public houses from the 16th C) are being retrofitted in ways which do not spoil their appearance.

This agency needs to include a department dealing with the energy efficiency of lighting, domestic electric appliances, office and laboratory equipment and ventilation and pumping systems. This needs to evaluate and promote the use of the most efficient appliances, lights, motors etc. Charged with setting standards and promoting legislation to achieve massive improvements in the efficiency of electricity use.

7.4.3.4 A Renewable Power Agency: Set up on similar lines to the old CEGB – Central Electricity Generating Board which built the old high efficiency coal fire generating capacity in a matter of 20 years after the war. This would have the government target of say 100% Renewable within 50 years, and would be charged with running a series of tenders to build wind farms, wave generation, tidal lagoons etc in specified locations. Once constructed and operating, these would be sold off to the industry. 7.4.3.5 Heat Distribution Agency As for the renewable generating Agency but to oversee the planning, construction by private tender a complete CHP and heat infrastructure for all major cities to be sold off after completion. This was recommended as long ago as 19xxx in Energy Paper…..Consultants Ersnt and Young are about to pronounce on this 7.4.3.6 Grid Interconnection Agency Charged with building sufficient interconnecters to e.g. France, Holland, Iceland, Norway to allow inter-trade of power and sharing of standby capacity. (Gerry can you give me some words on the EUMENA proposal. DA) 7.4.3.7 Grid Control Agency Charged with implementing the necessary automatic load shedding and load advancing technologies described earlier from the present industrial level down to commercial and domestic level premises. 7.4.3.8 Electric Vehicle and Infra-Structure Agency Charged with forcing the motor industry to begin the serious construction of an entire electric vehicle range, and the implementation of overhead transmission systems for trams and trolley buses, electric vehicle re-charging points, battery exchange stations and appropriate payment systems. 7.4.3.9 Public Transport Board Similar to London Transport we need similar Boards to be re-constituted both nationally and at local levels. 7.5 Appendix 6 – Details of how the UK National Grid is controlled

Control of the National Grid (UK) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). (Wot I wrote) The national grid is required to maintain stability within specified standards of frequency and voltage. Although each large interconnected grid has its own special historical and geographical peculiarities, they will all tend to use methods of control and stabilization similar to those used by the UK National Grid, to a greater or less extent.

7.6 Contents [hide] * 1 Power generation and transmission statistics* 2 Load and generation response mechanisms 2.1 Frequency Service 2.2 Reserve service or National Grid Standing Reserve 2.3 Diesel generators 2.4 Use of the Reserve Service and Frequency Service in practice* 3 Voltage Control* 4 Sources of intermittency on the UK National Grid* 5 Diesel generators 5.1 Connecting diesel generators to the National Grid 5.2 Wessex Water diesel generators 5.3 The Wessex Water diesel generator control system 5.4 Typical conversion and operating costs for a diesel generator 5.5 The number of diesels generators in the UK 5.6 Revenue earning opportunities from third parties* 6 NGT SRD computer* 7 Triads** 7.1 Potential conflicts* 8 See also* 9 References

7.7 Power generation and transmission statistics

• Total generating capacity is about 70 GW, supplied roughly equally by nuclear, coal fired and gas fired power stations.

• In the UK, the peak winter demand is 57GW (57,000 MW).

o N.B: This peak would be much higher if it were not suppressed by various mechanisms such as maximum demand tariffs, and the system of Triad warnings and charges.

• Annual power used in the UK is around 3.6 ×1011 kWh

o N.B: The average load factor is then (3.6 ×1011 /(8760 x 57x 106 ))x 100 = 72%

• There is generally about 1.5 GW of so called spinning reserve – this is typically a large power station paid to produce at less than full output. So, a typical power station, which might have 4 generating sets each of 660 MW, giving a total output of 2.64 GW, might only be operating at 2 GW, with the steam boiler full, but with the steam valve not fully open. At the request from National Grid control centre, or under command from the generator governor this valve can open up and deliver an extra 640 MW in 20 to 30 seconds. This requires the boiler air fans and the coal feeders to increase output accordingly. The greater the total load on the system, and / or the greater the expectation of large demand fluctuations (at the end of popular TV programmes for example) the larger the proportion of spinning reserve set by National Grid Transco (NGT).

• NGT pays to have up to 8.5 GW of additional capacity available to start immediately but not running, referred to as “warming” or "hot standby", that is ready to be used at short notice which could take half an hour to 2 hours to bring on line. Generally, there will be more of such "hot standby" capacity whenever there is a large amount of expected disturbance on the system. The cost of fuel or tonne of CO2 emitted by keeping such plant warm is tiny in comparison with the amount of fuel used to generate power, maybe equivalent to the fuel used to produce a quarter of a MW compared to a full load fuel demand for a large set of 1,800 MW. Often quoted talk about the high costs of standby spinning reserve are misleading.

• A similar amount of power stations - 8GW to 10 GW by capacity - are operable from a cold start in about 12 hours for coal burning stations, and 2 hours for gas fired stations.

• At any one time a large number of power stations are unavailable due to regular maintenance, being off-line due to a fault becoming apparent or because of sudden breakdown.

• Other stations are “mothballed” or "deep-mothballed" which means they cannot be readily called upon; even in an emergency it may take several months to de-mothball. Recently (as of Summer 2006), Fawley Power Station near Southampton has been de-mothballed to cope with anticipated power capacity shortages for winter 2006/07.

• Up to 2.25 GW of capacity can be supplied by the Frequency Response participants mentioned below – steel works, cold stores etc.

• 2.25 GW of Standing Reserve diesel generators (as per Wessex Water), small gas turbines (e.g. 22 MW operated by First Energy) which as we shall see augment the Frequency Service arrangements.

• 2 GW Fast response plant such as large open cycle gas turbines (OCGTs). OCGTs are gas turbines that are in the range 25 – 100 MW, and which can start in a few minutes (slower to start than diesel engines and marginally less reliable upon start up). Normally, these are not used for power generation since their low operating efficiency means that the cost per capacity supplied is prohibitively expensive. However, they have low capital cost, as demonstrated by the 100 MW unit at White City, London.

• The pumped storage schemes at Dinorwig and Ffestiniog can offer up to 2 GW of power within 15 seconds. (Incidentally, at the time Dinorwig was built, which was solely to cope with the inflexibility of nuclear power and the inherent unreliability / intermittency of large power stations, a further similar station was planned on Exmoor but was never built, so presumably it could still be built if the need arose. Potential sites for many other schemes are available; generally the most promising locations are in Wales and Scotland, many of them on the sites of existing high-head hydropower schemes.

• A cross channel HVC power line can bring in up to 2 GW of power from France, though this tends to be unreliable.

7.8 Load and generation response mechanisms The national grid is organized, and power stations distributed, in such a way as to cope with sudden, unforeseen and dramatic changes in either load or generation. It is designed to cope with the simultaneous or nearly simultaneous failure of 2 x 660 MW sets, which it evidently does with ease as these events happen on average at least once a month.

7.8.1 Frequency Service NGT (National Grid Transco) who operate the national grid and control the operations of power stations (but does not own them) has a number of partners who are known as NGT Frequency Service or Reserve service participants. These are large power users such as steel works, cold stores, etc. who are happy to enter into a contract to be paid to be automatically disconnected from power supplies whenever grid frequency starts to fall. An example of such a participant would be a large steel melting furnace, which may take a day to heat up using an electric arc or induction heater, and is not adversely affected if the process is delayed by 20 minutes. The same applies to a large cold store where interruption in cooling for 20 minutes can readily be accepted in the same way as the normal domestic freezer can happily be shut off for 36 hours without gaining significant temperature rise. These disconnections can obviously assist enormously if a sudden power demand is made on the grid or if there is the sudden loss of generating capacity.

This instant switch off is achieved using a relay provided by NGT mounted on the power supply to the major plant switch gear. It is set to detect the falling frequency which can occur when a large power station fails suddenly or there is a sudden rise in demand, and opens the circuit breaker to the furnace or cold store. Ancillary circuits in the factory are unaffected, such as lights and power sockets. These Frequency Service participants are contracted to stay off for up to 20 minutes. The exact setting on the relay can be remotely monitored and controlled by NGT – such as the exact frequency at which the relay disconnects the load, whether the relay is armed or not, whether the customer has temporarily exercised his right to over-ride the relay etc. These Frequency Service participants receive a fee which is of the order of more than several thousand pounds per MW per year – it is a capacity fee per MW not per MWh. 7.8.2 Reserve service or //National Grid Standing Reserve// Operating closely with NGT Frequency Response is NGT Standing Reserve. NGT Standing Reserve participants are small diesel engine owners, and Open Cycle gas turbine generator owners, who are paid to start up and connect to the grid within 20 minutes from the time Frequency Response customers are called to disconnect. These participants must be reliable and able to stay on and run for an hour or so, with a repetition rate of 20 hours. A typical Reserve Service partner would be Wessex Water one of ten water and sewerage companies in England and Wales, covering Somerset, Dorset, Wiltshire and parts of Avon. There are many other Reserve Service partners, hospitals, police headquarters etc. but Wessex Water is used as a typical example.

Wessex Water has about 550 emergency standby diesel engines, totaling 110 MW of capacity whose primary function is to power essential services such as sewage works and water supply works during power failures which happens on average a few hours each year. Of this number, about 33 units totaling 18 MW are also used in a number of non-emergency ways commercially which are called collectively Load Management, and which includes routinely feeding power into the Local Distribution System and ultimately the National Grid. These generators presently have a 4 minute start up and paralleling capability automatically from our control room, and are currently being modified to enable start ups in less than one minute. These units are quite small, 0.24 MW to 1 MW range and it may surprise people to know that these are used by the National Grid on a regular call off basis to supplement its arrangements with power station owners. Essentially this systems drastically cut the amount of expensive Spinning Reserve that would otherwise be needed. Again substantial fees can be earned simply for making these engines available, again backed up by complex contracts with specified levels of reliability, response times, frequency of use and so on. Wessex Water is only one of many such participants. See also Reserve service

7.8.3 Diesel generators Wessex Water diesels can all start and be feeding power into the grid within 4 minutes from receiving the start signal from NGT. This delay is mainly due to the time taken to dial up each set. There are currently 4 auto dialers and modems each of which have to make the calls in series. The company is presently switching to broadband where the calls will be instantaneous and the start up time will then be less than 30 seconds to full load, which is far less than any conventional power station.

(With specially modified diesel engines (all standard factory made modifications such as air pressure vessels to start the turbochargers, air start rather than battery start, jacket warming, continuous pre-lubrication, continuous slow rotation - etc.), start up and full loading can be achieved within 1 second)

7.8.4 Use of the Reserve Service and Frequency Service in practice An example illustrating how the Reserve Service and Frequency Service are used in order to cope with Intermittency / Variability is given below:

• Consider, if a 660 MW turbine generator set (the standard size of large steam turbine) trips (large power stations usually consist of 2 or 4 sets each of 660 MW).This can happen for all sorts of reasons – a coal crusher might break down, boiler tubes might fail, an alternator might start to overheat, insulation might fail on the alternator. In the event of certain failures the generating set would automatically trip out and because the grid has suddenly lost 660 MW, which on a typical day might be 1.3% of the total national grid output, then due to the immediate imbalance between supply and demand, grid frequency immediately starts to drop from the standard 50 Hz.

• As soon as this happens, the under frequency relays on Frequency Response customers begin to trip of their load as the frequency falls, ultimately to shed total load equal to 660 MW. These relays are set at a range of frequency between 48.5 and 49.5, so the 660 MW of generation that has been lost is not instantly matched by these relays shedding 660 MW of load simultaneously but progressively as the frequency drops, until exactly enough is shed to exactly match the remaining power station capacity. This will then stabilise the frequency at its now lower level – perhaps 49.3 HZ. This all happens in less than a second.

These Frequency Response participants are only contracted to have their shed loads off for up to 20 minutes.

• At the same time the NGT Control Room issues start up signals to sufficient of its Standing Reserve Service participants (that’s people like Wessex ) for 660 MW (or whatever power it is short of) which by contract have to become available within 20 minutes.

• The NGT Control Room is monitoring the situation and if sufficient Standing Reserve capacity does not come on, then it can order more until it has exactly matched what the Frequency Response relays have shed. (These relays are monitored in real time by NGTs telemetry systems)

• Due to differing circumstances on the ground, different Standing Reserve participants will have different start up times and reliabilities which again NGT monitors using telemetry. However, when sufficient Standing Reserve has become available, which would be in less than 20 minutes, the Frequency Response loads (steel furnaces, cold stores etc) are automatically re-connected by the relays again gradually so as not to destabilize the system.

• The original NGT Frequency Response relays are then re-armed by NGT.

• Up to an hour or so later, the output of the Standing Reserve diesels and gas turbines, (which are nearly all in private hands, i.e. not professional power generators as such) will have been augmented, and then replaced with new levels of large gas or coal fired power stations which together will have driven the frequency back to its correct level close to 50Hz. The diesels can then be stood down, ready for the next emergency.
• The replacement generation sources would have come from increased outputs from other power stations on spinning reserve, resulting in increased output.
• At the same time new levels of spinning reserve will have been created, which might have been stations on hot standby / warming now switched to running.
• Increased levels of stations on hot standby will also be called for.