Archive for national grid
Using standby generators for short term reserve. (emails published with permission of authors from Quigg Associates and National Grid)
Charles,
I was delighted to see you last week. The topic I mentioned, using standby generators for short term reserve is one in which I am not currently involved but it does strike me as a useful technique for reducing CO2 emissions. There are a few ‘fleets’ of standby generators arranged to quote the National Grid for this service but the short term nature of the contracts offered are I think a deterrent to the potential which could be exploited. I was involved with the Wessex Water operation which was heading towards 20MW when I left. This, together with some sewage gas generation has now been changed into a separate company. Another successful operation is run by Alastair Martin@flexitricity.com. Read More→
Popularity: 4% [?]
National Grid’s views on 36% wind in UK power generation mix
Posted by: | CommentsDear all,
Regarding the concerns expressed in this dialogue (on the claverton mailing list – ed) regarding the intermittency of wind and the risk to the transmission network of having a large percentage of wind generation on the network.
The National Grid has in the last year established what it calls its “Gone Green” scenario, which is its vision for the energy mix required for 2020 in order to meet the UK’s renewables targets. The key headlines of this scenario are: Read More→
Popularity: 6% [?]
Wikipedia article on estimating costs of transmission upgrade to deal with renewables
Posted by: | CommentsBelow is an extract from the excellent Wikipedia’s article on National Grid which references Bernard Quigg’s paper at the last Claverton Conference.
Can anyone help on this – it seems to me that the Costs of Transmission derived from Bernard’s’ paper are too high when compared to the method derived from Triad charges, Is this because Bernard is including generator connection charges which it could be argued are the costs of connecting the generator, not transmission. Any thoughts? Read More→
Popularity: 8% [?]
UK National Grid talking about wind in the future, when there is a high penetration
Posted by: | CommentsSlide 14 of the presentation labelled future system operation at :
http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Electricity/Balancing/operationalforum/2009/
- presented to all and sundry at the Operational Forum (open to all
comers) by National Grid at the Ardencote Manor 2 weeks ago, may interest.
The following three slides after that are also interesting, as is slide
31 – and in the context of slide 31 see
http://uk.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS132487+26-Jan-2009+BW20090126?symbol=NG.L” rel=”nofollow”>
….”The two companies will also be sharing technical information and analysis of the potential economic and performance benefits of fast-response flywheel regulation and wind-related ramp mitigation, in both the U.S. and the United Kingdom”
Popularity: 5% [?]
Blackouts could hit Britain by 2015, says National Grid chief
Posted by: | CommentsReported in The Daily Telegraph by Jon Swaine 22 Dec 2008, Steve Holliday, National Grid chief executive, said that Britain faces a severe shortage in power generation due to crumbling coal and nuclear plants being taken out of service and that the Government needs to cause the investment of Pounds 100 billion in new power plant.
This is the legacy of the deluded economic “thinking” of the Thatcher era which instituted the not widely admired market for electricity which was supposed to use market signals of supply and demand to cause an optimal delivery of the cheapest sources of power.
The nebulous market concept, beloved of economists was supposed to replace the collected wisdom and expertise of highly trained and experienced planning engineers and their years of technical and engineering knowledge with the simple interplay of market forces.
It doesn’t take much thought to see that markets, whilst maybe good for soft drinks and cans of beans, cannot deliver optimal solutions in the area of electricity supply – it is in the interests of participants to ensure there is always incipient shortage of generation assets since this puts the price up due to scarcity. Why would a participant want to build a plant if it knows it will lower the price of its output, and that its competitors (in name only) might build the same plant and cause a yet further lowering of price? The timing mismatch of build cycles and market cycles will always create a discontinuity – ie the likelihood of blackouts unless managed by intelligent central planning.
The same stupid over application of this discredited market theory is now expected (by people imbued with the same kind of thinking which produced the credit crunch) to deliver the urgently needed solutions to global warming and peak oil – instead it is pretty obvious to many people that a rational choice needs to be made (the “picking of winners” so detested by economists) and imposed by governments rather than left to the irrational caprice of markets.
Popularity: 4% [?]
