All MPs should be able to read and understand this to get a dose of reality. Wind and solar are “gas-savers” as we have no alternative generators large enough to balance the Grid. SMRs are base load generators aren’t they?
Whilst all MP's should be able to read and understand David's analyses it's not clear to me they would take any notice. David McKay was chief scientist to DECC between 2009 and 2014, immediately following the 2008 climate change act. It's not apparent that anyone in the HoC or HoL has bothered to read his book, or if they have that they are paying any heed to his work.
My personal view is the only way we can begin to approach net zero is for a rapid, and massive investment in nuclear fusion. Developments such as the Hitachi-TerraPower Atrium reactor and integrated thermal energy storage will allow for both base load and demand following. See - https://www.terrapower.com/our-work/natriumpower/ Coupled with a rapid rollout of SMR's we could be in a. position of not needing to resort to any future wind and solar developments. Those existing ones can wither once they come to the end of their lives.
Is it possible to roll out nuclear in a timely fashion. It's certainly possible. In France they went from very low levels of nuclear penetration in the energy market (<10%) to in excess of 70% in little over a decade. All it takes is the political will and planning.
As I see it, the major obstacle is the irrational fear that much of the public has over nuclear power.
Yes, and I think you meant fission. I am working on my next article on what I think we should do. It bears a striking resemblance to the plan you outlined.
Imagine that we'd been faffing around for the last several hundred years struggling to cope with unreliable, intermittent energy supplies that killed vast numbers of birds and marine mammals, hugely resource intensive generating devices requiring megatons of excavation and processing of minerals producing huge quantities of pollution, hideously expensive, environmentally destructive batteries and someone discovered that merely by drilling a hole in the ground they could extract abundant, energy rich liquids and gases that were easy to manage and distribute and as a useful side effect the utilisation of which released a gas that greatly enhanced the growth of plants and especially crops...
It's even worse than you suggest. The latest DESNZ plan was hurriedly pushed into being because the government was subjected to judicial review over failure to produce a net zero consistent plan. It is full of fudge in every dimension, not just the gross underestimates of demand. Renewables capacity is going to have wonderful capacity factors. Offshore wind will attain 63.3% from AR5 wind farms - a 50% improvement on the existing fleet that struggles to stay over 40%, while onshore wind will go from 27% to 42.7%. There is absolutely no understanding of the implications for curtailment and the effects of its intermittency on attempts to harvest it for green hydrogen, or on the grid investment required.
There is complete lack of realism about costs. The AR5 auction sets a ceiling price of £44/MWh in 2012 prices for offshore wind. With the current 1.3375 CFD inflation factor, that puts a ceiling on bids at £58.85/MWh in today's money - and the terms are harsh, with no period at higher market prices allowed, and no compensation any time market prices go negative, forcing curtailment on the windiest days. The Irish have just auctioned for 3GW of offshore capacity starting at €86.05/MWh - about £75/MWh - with compensation for curtailment and indexation. As Alan Brown of the SNP remarked during the Energy Bill debate the government could well see a repeat of the Spanish auction in October, which attracted no bids at all. With the Generator Levy creaming off above £75/MWh there is little incentive for AR4 wind farms that bid at silly CFD prices to get the right to build - their CFDs currently pay £45.37/MWh. The consequence is going to be delay and capacity shortage.
A little aside on the Hornsdale Power Reserve: the batteries seem to suffer notable performance degradation after about 3 years. The battery was "expanded" in 2020 after its performance dropped sharply, and it is struggling to maintain a 75% round trip efficiency again. Battery replacement looks like being a high cost item. UK pumped storage achieved 75.5% round trip over the past year - and is of course far less capital intensive. Dinorwig had a major overhaul after almost 40 years of operation.
Yes, I am eagerly awaiting the AR5 results. The consultation on extra bungs for developers based on non-price factors might be enough to tempt some to come forward.
I am struggling to see why or how the Government is maintaining this charade.
All MPs should be able to read and understand this to get a dose of reality. Wind and solar are “gas-savers” as we have no alternative generators large enough to balance the Grid. SMRs are base load generators aren’t they?
Whilst all MP's should be able to read and understand David's analyses it's not clear to me they would take any notice. David McKay was chief scientist to DECC between 2009 and 2014, immediately following the 2008 climate change act. It's not apparent that anyone in the HoC or HoL has bothered to read his book, or if they have that they are paying any heed to his work.
My personal view is the only way we can begin to approach net zero is for a rapid, and massive investment in nuclear fusion. Developments such as the Hitachi-TerraPower Atrium reactor and integrated thermal energy storage will allow for both base load and demand following. See - https://www.terrapower.com/our-work/natriumpower/ Coupled with a rapid rollout of SMR's we could be in a. position of not needing to resort to any future wind and solar developments. Those existing ones can wither once they come to the end of their lives.
Is it possible to roll out nuclear in a timely fashion. It's certainly possible. In France they went from very low levels of nuclear penetration in the energy market (<10%) to in excess of 70% in little over a decade. All it takes is the political will and planning.
As I see it, the major obstacle is the irrational fear that much of the public has over nuclear power.
That should be Natrium reactor. How I hate spell checkers!
Yes, and I think you meant fission. I am working on my next article on what I think we should do. It bears a striking resemblance to the plan you outlined.
Yes, absolutely fission. Brain fog there! I think fusion is still some way off, and may always be some way off.
Imagine that we'd been faffing around for the last several hundred years struggling to cope with unreliable, intermittent energy supplies that killed vast numbers of birds and marine mammals, hugely resource intensive generating devices requiring megatons of excavation and processing of minerals producing huge quantities of pollution, hideously expensive, environmentally destructive batteries and someone discovered that merely by drilling a hole in the ground they could extract abundant, energy rich liquids and gases that were easy to manage and distribute and as a useful side effect the utilisation of which released a gas that greatly enhanced the growth of plants and especially crops...
They'd make a fortune!
It's even worse than you suggest. The latest DESNZ plan was hurriedly pushed into being because the government was subjected to judicial review over failure to produce a net zero consistent plan. It is full of fudge in every dimension, not just the gross underestimates of demand. Renewables capacity is going to have wonderful capacity factors. Offshore wind will attain 63.3% from AR5 wind farms - a 50% improvement on the existing fleet that struggles to stay over 40%, while onshore wind will go from 27% to 42.7%. There is absolutely no understanding of the implications for curtailment and the effects of its intermittency on attempts to harvest it for green hydrogen, or on the grid investment required.
There is complete lack of realism about costs. The AR5 auction sets a ceiling price of £44/MWh in 2012 prices for offshore wind. With the current 1.3375 CFD inflation factor, that puts a ceiling on bids at £58.85/MWh in today's money - and the terms are harsh, with no period at higher market prices allowed, and no compensation any time market prices go negative, forcing curtailment on the windiest days. The Irish have just auctioned for 3GW of offshore capacity starting at €86.05/MWh - about £75/MWh - with compensation for curtailment and indexation. As Alan Brown of the SNP remarked during the Energy Bill debate the government could well see a repeat of the Spanish auction in October, which attracted no bids at all. With the Generator Levy creaming off above £75/MWh there is little incentive for AR4 wind farms that bid at silly CFD prices to get the right to build - their CFDs currently pay £45.37/MWh. The consequence is going to be delay and capacity shortage.
A little aside on the Hornsdale Power Reserve: the batteries seem to suffer notable performance degradation after about 3 years. The battery was "expanded" in 2020 after its performance dropped sharply, and it is struggling to maintain a 75% round trip efficiency again. Battery replacement looks like being a high cost item. UK pumped storage achieved 75.5% round trip over the past year - and is of course far less capital intensive. Dinorwig had a major overhaul after almost 40 years of operation.
https://i0.wp.com/wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Hornsdale-Performance-1683419034.5253.png
Yes, I am eagerly awaiting the AR5 results. The consultation on extra bungs for developers based on non-price factors might be enough to tempt some to come forward.
I am struggling to see why or how the Government is maintaining this charade.
'How Nuclear Enabled Hydrogen (NEH) Will Save The Planet' has all the answers:
https://colinmegson.substack.com/p/how-nuclear-enabled-hydrogen-neh
And for a fossil fuel-free UK, the cost is ½ as much as what is saved:
https://colinmegson.substack.com/p/the-cost-of-powering-the-uk-with
'How Nuclear Enabled Hydrogen (NEH) Will Save The Planet' has all the answers:
https://colinmegson.substack.com/p/how-nuclear-enabled-hydrogen-neh
And for a fossil fuel-free UK, the cost is ½ as much as what is saved:
https://colinmegson.substack.com/p/the-cost-of-powering-the-uk-with