Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 20, 2023 17:11:46 GMT
Regarding installation of heat pumps, Poland has another advantage with the solar panels: “Solar panels work well hand in hand with heat pumps, which require electricity for around 20pc of their use. “These people have free electricity they can use for heat pumps,” says Nowak. The combination has also made life easier for installers – they have an existing client base of solar panel users who they can market heat pumps to.“ P.s. sorry I didn’t get around to replying to your earlier posts Trev, been a big busy, but shall reply soonish! Poland gets more sun that most of UK (but less wind*) and is a little further South so that helps them a bit for sure. These days though you really want to ensure you have your own battery for solar solutions and still have grid access as can't rely on the sun in Winter when your most likely to need heating.  Poland isn't my polity and it does look like they have quite a few specific factors that are making 'transition' to heat pumps a bit easier for them - but that doesn't excuse the crap roll-out in UK. Historically UK did move much quicker away from coal than a lot of places and the 'intention' was to use nat.gas as a 'bridge' to further reduction in CO2 emissions but we failed to look at what came after nat.gas so stopped building nuclear, banned onshore wind farms, turned down 'tidal lagoons', etc. I do appreciate the electricity grid capability issue and why we can't just get everyone onto heat pumps and BEVs tomorrow but NG do finally seem to have realised they need to invest a lot more ££ in upgrading our grid (as do other countries) and so we need to look at the reasons why uptake is so low in UK and up our game. * I'm not giving out personal advice but you can get 'at home' wind+battery solutions that, for many parts of UK, would provide more 'energy security' (time off-grid). I'm certainly not 'anti-solar' and wind+solar hybrids would suit a lot of places as well. The kind of community based wind turbines that leftieliberal posted info on are particularly well suited to many areas in UK - I hope we see a lot more of those. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Feb 20, 2023 17:23:31 GMT
Mr PoppyRead the other day in the Telegraph about another thing holding back the grid: “The ‘perverse’ queueing rule holding back Britain’s push for power Bureaucracy and delays are hampering attempts to kickstart a green energy revolution” ... ”Kona is just one of many hundreds of companies currently sitting in a queue to be connected to the grid. According to the National Grid, around 50 connection applications are being lodged per month – or roughly 600 per year. A decade ago, the Grid could expect up to 50 a year. The huge increase reflects the changing times: In future, the nation’s power is expected to come from a more diverse mix of sources, spread out across the country. New sources span everything from solar and wind farms to pumped hydro storage and battery sites like Kona’s. Overall, generators are currently seeking connections for 176 gigawatts worth of new power – more than double what is already available today. ... However, the backlog of applications means they must wait years, and sometimes more than a decade, to hook up these new projects to the grid. One energy company, Exagen, was told it would have to wait until 2036 for a project, according to the Financial Times. ... The problem, say critics, is that applications are currently considered on a “first come, first serve” basis. It means that projects that are nowhere near fruition can obstruct others that are on the cusp of construction. In many cases, Willis says energy companies “pay and spray” applications – effectively spreading their bets by seeking connections at several different sites across the country in the hopes that at least some will be progressed. Because of the sluggish system, connection requests are seen as valuable and companies are reluctant to give them up and be sent to the back of the queue.”
|
|
|
|
Post by lens on Feb 20, 2023 17:58:15 GMT
But if the primary source of energy is coal, the question is how to get that energy to the home. Coal deliveries to the home and burning in a fireplace (as I remember from childhood) are at best inconvenient - so why not burn it in a powerstation and send the energy to households as electricity? Accept such, and heat pumps become an obvious next step - a household then only needing about 1/3 to a 1/4 as much electricity for heating usage. But in the UK we have been spoilt with having much gas as our primary energy source, which changes the equation - either send the energy (as gas) directly to the home, or if you use it to produce electricity it *must* be less efficient and dearer - you'll get less than a kWh of electricity per kWh of gas, plus the generation plant costs. People will pay the higher price for being able to power lighting, TVs and other such appliances - but not for pure heating. Accept an imperative to move to renewables, and it changes again - the primary energy source then becomes electricity (whether from wind or solar), and it then becomes more efficient to use the electricity in the home where possible. Convert such electricity to gas and the basic price per kWh of gas must then be more than per kWh of electricity. Unfortunately, industries in this country have big vested interests in gas, including boiler manufacturers, and don't want to see their nice established market positions eroded. Heat pumps have been expensive, they benefit from insulation or else they are not as effective, and then you have the load on the grid. As I cited recently, our gas grid handles seven times as much energy as the leccy grid during winter peaks. With heat pumps you wouldn’t need to match that, but you still need quite some upgrades. Poland has gotten around these issues by: But you don't address the current situation with coal? Do they deliver the coal to homes, or use it in power stations and then "deliver" the coal energy from the coal as electricity? Because if the latter, then any move to heat pumps certainly doesn't require a grid upgrade - exactly the opposite. Compared to a home in that situation currently getting it's heat from electricity and resistive heating, installation of a heat pump will greatly lower the amount of electricity needed. I find the solar panel reasoning a little odd. (And having had such on my house for over 10 years now.) The generation figures over the last two months have only been a fraction (<10%) of what they are in summer. When a heat pump is going to be of most advantage (ie winter!) it's precisely when solar panel output is at it's lowest. My installation may be relatively small, but in winter they only cover a fraction of current electricity usage - there would certainly be none spare to go towards heating, be it resivetive or via a heat pump. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Feb 20, 2023 18:15:45 GMT
Heat pumps have been expensive, they benefit from insulation or else they are not as effective, and then you have the load on the grid. As I cited recently, our gas grid handles seven times as much energy as the leccy grid during winter peaks. With heat pumps you wouldn’t need to match that, but you still need quite some upgrades. Poland has gotten around these issues by: But you don't address the current situation with coal? Do they deliver the coal to homes, or use it in power stations and then "deliver" the coal energy from the coal as electricity? Because if the latter, then any move to heat pumps certainly doesn't require a grid upgrade - exactly the opposite. Compared to a home in that situation currently getting it's heat from electricity and resistive heating, installation of a heat pump will greatly lower the amount of electricity needed. I find the solar panel reasoning a little odd. (And having had such on my house for over 10 years now.) The generation figures over the last two months have only been a fraction (<10%) of what they are in summer. When a heat pump is going to be of most advantage (ie winter!) it's precisely when solar panel output is at it's lowest. My installation may be relatively small, but in winter they only cover a fraction of current electricity usage - there would certainly be none spare to go towards heating, be it resivetive or via a heat pump. Well I’ve seen a stat saying that nearly half of homes in Poland are heated by solid fuels, which doesn’t just mean coal of course. Though regarding the grid I also had in mind the comparison with our own situation and the question as to what we would need to do to make heat pumps more attractive: how much extra subsidies, extra grid, more solar, insulation, whatever... Regarding Solar, don’t know the details about how effective it is; the article just says “...a household who cut their monthly bills by 90pc by installing both” |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 20, 2023 18:59:56 GMT
Mr Poppy Read the other day in the Telegraph about another thing holding back the grid: Polite request to post links if you mention specific points. However, I did track down the Telegraph article who it seems used an FT piece:
Renewables groups sound alarm over UK grid connection delayswww.ft.com/content/bc200569-cb85-4842-a59a-f04d342805fcI'm not making excuses but measures are being taken to trim the queue and speed things up (as the article highlights). It's a bit like the 'passport' application delay. Few people wanted a passport for ages and then loads of people asked at the same time and it took time to 'staff up', etc. More to be done for sure and without wishing to 'pick on anyone' then if anyone brings a solar project expecting to dump electricity on the grid at times when the grid doesn't need it then they shouldn't (and don't) get priority. I'm aware some folks were miffed when the Feed-In-Tariff approach changed and I have already commented on the need for people to pair solar to their own battery* (and that would apply to 'larger' projects as well). Intermittency is tricky as despite what some people might think, the weather is not that predictable - although for solar we're pretty confident about the seasonal issue at least, as the journey we make around the sun every year is very predictable and it's hence dark a lot of the time in UK during Winter** * TBC but the additional point I made about still hooking up to the grid might need to be reconsidered as well. If too many people 'rely' on the grid when the sun isn't shining and their battery has run out then.. "problemo". IMO those types should pay more for access and certainly not benefit from 'capped' prices but we're heading off down a tangent. ** Space Based Solar Power (SBSP) might be something for the future but that wouldn't be putting rows and rows of solar panels in fields. The 'Earth' side hook-up would be much smaller m2 and totally different kit. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 20, 2023 19:54:24 GMT
PS to above. I tried to track down the '2036' claim which I think is a typo from 2026* that has been repeated across different newspapers relying on the same source - although 2026 is still not an acceptable period of delay for a 'serious' well thought out component. Anyway, Exagen have a longer piece on their own website that goes into a little more depth about how we got into the problem and they offer 4 suggestions for how we can speed up getting out of the problem of:
Grid congestion in UK developmentexagen.co.uk/news/grid-congestion-in-uk-development/I note they worked out that you need to ensure you add batteries to any solar project these days, and/or battery only projects might find the queue isn't very long as 'storage' projects are part of the solution rather than 'grid level' solar only, which is part of the problem.  * Unless it was one of their (possible final?) 'solar only' projects in which case 2036 might have been the date they were given - with an expectation that they wouldn't then proceed with any more 'solar sans battery' projects. Given the list isn't public then I can't be sure but there certainly isn't 'one' and only one queue, although if they stated that they'd be inundated with 'what queue am I in' and all kinds of accusations of favouritism etc (hence not sure about Exagen's desire to have the queue list made public.. well not quite yet anyway). PS Although IMO we're now getting a bit carried away with all the 'very short term' storage projects that have been approved and need the focus to shift to medium-long term storage (pretty sure I've covered that already ) |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 20, 2023 22:56:23 GMT
Somewhat lacking the urgency of the 'Vaccine Taskforce' and not IMO of the calibre of Kate Bingham so I hope this doesn't just turn out to be years of 'consultation' (aka 'dither+delay') - the huge number of representatives gives me cause for concern.
UK unveils next step to drive national energy consumption down by 15%www.energylivenews.com/2023/02/20/uk-unveils-next-step-to-drive-national-energy-consumption-down-by-15/Money no longer grows on Magic Trees (ie we can't use Green QE, at least not in a simples way) but the most fundamental need is to consider 'demand reduction' as an investment and a way to increase standard of living by reducing the cost of living. The change hence has to start at the top - with the 'fiscal rules' and more 'carrot+stick' incentives. There are ££billions available to invest as we 'unshackle' ourselves from EU rules on pensions, insurance and banking but 'crowding in' needs HMG to start the crowd moving. Reeves has a 'vague' plan with mostly uncosted ££s (given Energy prices and hence windfall taxes probably aren't going to be as high after GE'24) but I'd rather not wait almost two more years for us to finally take 'demand reduction' more seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by lens on Feb 21, 2023 0:10:49 GMT
I find the solar panel reasoning a little odd. (And having had such on my house for over 10 years now.) The generation figures over the last two months have only been a fraction (<10%) of what they are in summer. When a heat pump is going to be of most advantage (ie winter!) it's precisely when solar panel output is at it's lowest. My installation may be relatively small, but in winter they only cover a fraction of current electricity usage - there would certainly be none spare to go towards heating, be it resivetive or via a heat pump. Regarding Solar, don’t know the details about how effective it is; the article just says “...a household who cut their monthly bills by 90pc by installing both” Well, you've forced me to dig out my records (and I find I had the installation 15 years ago..... time flies) and directly compare generation figures from June 2022 and January 2023. The June figure is over 10x the January one. And bear in mind that heating is by far greatest in winter - solar generation far greater in summer. Solar panels may indeed be worthwhile, but I'd argue that the primary household savings are likely to come from offsetting electricity used from the grid in the summer months (so mostly non-heating) - not from the winter. Solar generation may be a good thing - but I don't see how it ties in with heat pumps, makes them more viable? Re about 50% using solid fuel from heating, then the question remains about the other 50%? Do they use gas - or primarily electricity generated from coal? If the latter, well, that's 50% of the population as prime candidates for replacement with heat pumps. But will the other 50% find it cheaper to stay with solid fuel....... |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 21, 2023 9:14:46 GMT
"The Polish approach has been somewhat holistic. Funding is also widely available for solar panels. “Nearly all are using photovoltaic panels as well,” says Maćkowiak Pandera. She noted a household who cut their monthly bills by 90pc by installing both.“ 90% off Summer bills would certainly be achievable just with solar+smallish battery Poland is more Southerly than UK and does get more sun but they do still get a Winter. If the 90% is 'annual' reduction then it is possible* but some details are missing: 1/ Did they also upgrade their home's insulation? 2/ Do they have a 'Feed-In-Tariff' for their excess Summer solar (ie the Summer revenue reduces the Winter cost)? 3/ Have they taken other 'demand reduction' measures (eg only heat the house to 18C, which could be 4C lower than before) 4/ Use some 'other' heating (eg a wood burner, using their own 'renewable' sources of wood, that is used for the 'heavy lifting' on the really cold days) (5/ the 90% is reduction in kWhs, rather that in Zlotys - although I'm not sure what the Polish govt has done to limit price rises) (6/ They don't drive a BEV, or at least don't charge it at home) Combine all of the above and 90% annual savings would probably be achievable for someone in Southern Poland. * 90% reduction in kWhs would almost be possible in S/E England, but very unlikely in rest of UK due to the low hours of Winter Sun (maps etc all previously provided). Add some wind turbines and additional batteries to 'all of the above' and you could get to 90% in more of UK and close to 100% in some areas (although I do appreciate 'wood burners' should not be used in more densely populated areas). Fully 'off-grid' is very difficult to achieve without some 'rationing' and trying to get the final 2-3% is a bit daft if you're already hooked up to the grid and the lecky price is 'capped' for the few times you do need the national grid. BEVs make it a lot harder but some people who bought those expected to get fairly regular -ve prices for their 'lecky' (helping out everyone else by reducing the need for curtailment fees to shut wind farms down during periods of 'excess supply')... should start to happen again later this year when France get their nuclear fleet fully back online and we connect up more wind farms, etc. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 21, 2023 10:35:23 GMT
Quite a bit of variance within UK* for sure but just FWIW then: Using: globalsolaratlas.info/map?Put in specific locations and you can get reports (download the .pdf) monthly data. Picking January (coldest month) then Manchester: 884Wh/m2 Krakow: 1,348Wh/m2 So Southern Poland gets 152% more 'Winter Sun' than Manchester * Somewhere like NW Scotland (57.186879°,-005.273438°) doesn't appear to get any sun in January (or not enough to trigger a reading) where as somewhere like Folkestone (55.860618°,-004.249793°) is fairly close to Poland's numbers at 1,260Wh/m2 PS OK, Krakow's numbers aren't that great either (not my polity so didn't realise they're pretty cloudy in Winter there as well) so add 7/ to above: install a LOT of solar panels (and note that if they benefit from #2 then that will be a double bubble Brucie bonus) PPS if you happen to know anyone living just outside Turin, Italy (45.044419°,007.527008°) then they get 3,357Wh/m2 in January (on average accordingly to the source given, although some people have been getting a bit more than that I hear - although it was a bit sunnier than usual this year) |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Feb 22, 2023 9:42:45 GMT
Various comments:
Grid connections - I can't see Trevor's FT link, but delays in getting connected until 2036 wouldn't strike me as a typo. We've just abandoned what would have been a huge community generation project (would I think have been the biggest capacity community power project in the UK to date) because we were placed in a queue for the grid connection with a target finalisation date of 2034 earliest, and that was subject to smooth planning and funding decisions, which could easily add another 4 years. It's an infrastructure project that has been discussed since 2009.
Heat pumps and PV in Poland - always nervous about talk of linking PV to winter heating demand, for obvious reasons. In the Polish discussion, using the PVGIS-SARAH2 database with standard crystalline silicon panels at a fixed 35 degree angle and due south orientation, for each kW of installed capacity you get daily total average production of 1.14/0.84/1.07/1.66 kWh per day Nov/Dec/Jan/Feb. Multiply that by around 4 for a standard small domestic PV system, so somewhere between 3.5 - 6.5kWh per day (calculations based on a site in Warsaw).
If you have a heatpump with a COP of 3.0, that means you would get between c 9 - 20kWh of heating output from the PV system, if 100% of the output went into the heat pump. However, the greatest heat demand is at night/early morning, so for any meaningful contribution from a PV system you would need either a buffer tank with the heat pump system, which is feasible in larger houses, at added install cost, and would also dictate a wet heat system rather than the more common air to air heat pumps found on the continent, or you would have to look at batteries. That means a further quite significant loss of efficiency between PV to heatpump.
What is interesting though is that Trevor is right in that there is more winter PV potential in Poland than in many parts of the UK, but I think it's still difficult to frame this effectively in the context of winter heating provision.
|
|
|
|
Post by lens on Feb 22, 2023 12:33:34 GMT
Put in specific locations and you can get reports (download the .pdf) monthly data. Picking January (coldest month) then Manchester: 884Wh/m2 Krakow: 1,348Wh/m2 So Southern Poland gets 152% more 'Winter Sun' than Manchester Hardly a fair comparison! Krakow is in the very south of Poland, near the Czech border - Manchester to the north of England! Far better to compare London (51.51deg N) with Warsaw (52.23deg N), and overall very comparable latitudes between Poland and England. Re @alecs figures, then I can quote real figures from my own PV system. (Latitude 51.6 deg N) Mine is relatively small, but scaled up to be the equivalent of a typical domestic 15 panel system, then for January just gone, a 15 panel system would have generated 39.3kWh. This compared to an (actual) electricity consumption for January of about 700kWh, and (for heating, hot water for 5/6 people - but cooking on electric) of about 4-5,000kWh equivalent for gas. Now I'm NOT downplaying the importance and benefits of either solar or heat pumps - quite the opposite. But the point that having PV installed is a help for heat pumps is ridiculous. PV is mainly of benefit in the summer - heat pumps in the winter. (And more likely in the evening than daytime at that.) They BOTH are of benefit - but at different times of the year. (And in terms of grid capacity, then that monthly gas consumption of around 4-5,000kWh wouldn't translate into that much extra electricity consumption - the gas boiler is less than 100% efficient, and a heat pump would magnify the energy input. I'd guess around 1,000 to 1,500 kWh during January?) |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 22, 2023 15:26:48 GMT
Bruegel article on the €billions cost to EU+UK+Norway govts due to the Energy Crisis. A collective sigh of relief that prices have come down massively and the ongoing costs will be much, much smaller. Not sure if other countries will be in a position to remove all their 'help' soon and, as previously mentioned, I hope no-one reverts back to thinking we can 'dither+delay' on the need to move to Net Zero. We just had a VERY expensive lesson. National fiscal policy responses to the energy crisiswww.bruegel.org/dataset/national-policies-shield-consumers-rising-energy-prices |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 22, 2023 16:15:32 GMT
Put in specific locations and you can get reports (download the .pdf) monthly data. Picking January (coldest month) then Manchester: 884Wh/m2 Krakow: 1,348Wh/m2 So Southern Poland gets 152% more 'Winter Sun' than Manchester Hardly a fair comparison! Krakow is in the very south of Poland, near the Czech border - Manchester to the north of England! Far better to compare London (51.51deg N) with Warsaw (52.23deg N), and overall very comparable latitudes between Poland and England. Re @alecs figures, then I can quote real figures from my own PV system. (Latitude 51.6 deg N) Mine is relatively small, but scaled up to be the equivalent of a typical domestic 15 panel system, then for January just gone, a 15 panel system would have generated 39.3kWh. This compared to an (actual) electricity consumption for January of about 700kWh, and (for heating, hot water for 5/6 people - but cooking on electric) of about 4-5,000kWh equivalent for gas. Now I'm NOT downplaying the importance and benefits of either solar or heat pumps - quite the opposite. But the point that having PV installed is a help for heat pumps is ridiculous. PV is mainly of benefit in the summer - heat pumps in the winter. (And more likely in the evening than daytime at that.) They BOTH are of benefit - but at different times of the year. (And in terms of grid capacity, then that monthly gas consumption of around 4-5,000kWh wouldn't translate into that much extra electricity consumption - the gas boiler is less than 100% efficient, and a heat pump would magnify the energy input. I'd guess around 1,000 to 1,500 kWh during January?) Not sure why you seem to have been unable to read my post in full but do you want some time to edit the above before I reply (and if not then I can go with my preferred option of putting you back on blocked notifications) I'll help you out by highlighting (with colour coding: blue = low (and Jan'23 was pretty decent sunshine* if you live in England at 51.6 deg N), red = you seriously need to get your house insulted and/or turn down the heat and/or see if your neighbours are tapping into your supply for a 'grow-op' or something**) a few things you should check against 'typical' (and note for PV in Poland I did say a LOT, along with lots of other 'and' components that you seem to have ignored). Also, of course the 'anecdote' of one household in Poland is... well, an anecdote. Very unlikely to be 'typical' (unless all the other things I mentioned are met). * 51.6 deg N line being about 125%ish of average by looks of it but I haven't checked Poland blog.metoffice.gov.uk/2023/02/01/january-a-month-of-two-halves-for-uk-weather/** Jan is an 'above average' month but see: "Ofgem estimates the typical household in Britain uses 2,900 kWh of electricity and 12,000 kWh of gas in a year. " (noting the 'typical' house in Britain could do a lot better at insulation and other forms of 'demand reduction' - both things I mentioned the Polish 'anecdote' would also have needed to do) PS I am glad you do now appreciate there are 'seasons' in UK (and Poland) and that Winter is quite long. Of course there are other options for how we could provide 'renewable' heating to UK/Polish homes... PPS Very simples '4 seasons' way to get to 'Net Zero' (100% reduction) in lecky bills IF you can 'outsource' your seasonal (ie long-term) storage issues (eg a very generous FIT with a LOT of solar panel for 'excess' Summer solar and a 'cap' price for when you need the lecky back in Winter) Do all the 1-7 points I mentioned then: Winter (Dec-Jan-Feb): Bills reduced by a lot Spring+Autumn: net zero Summer (Jun-Jul-Aug): Get paid enough for the lecky you dump onto the grid to cover your Winter bills Note if lots of people do that then someone needs to provide the 'outsourced' seasonal storage and if you're in a country that isn't that great for solar and pretty far from the equator then you're going to need a LOT of inter-seasonal storage - obviously. I'm no fan of large scale solar in UK (in case that unclear) and even the 'mom+pop' stuff on roofs has issues (ie the reason FITs for households were scrapped and why grid level 'solar-only' projects are/should be 'back of the queue' for most of UK) |
|
|
|
Post by lens on Feb 22, 2023 19:45:09 GMT
Hardly a fair comparison! Krakow is in the very south of Poland, near the Czech border - Manchester to the north of England! Far better to compare London (51.51deg N) with Warsaw (52.23deg N), and overall very comparable latitudes between Poland and England. Re @alecs figures, then I can quote real figures from my own PV system. (Latitude 51.6 deg N) Mine is relatively small, but scaled up to be the equivalent of a typical domestic 15 panel system, then for January just gone, a 15 panel system would have generated 39.3kWh. This compared to an (actual) electricity consumption for January of about 700kWh, and (for heating, hot water for 5/6 people - but cooking on electric) of about 4-5,000kWh equivalent for gas. Now I'm NOT downplaying the importance and benefits of either solar or heat pumps - quite the opposite. But the point that having PV installed is a help for heat pumps is ridiculous. PV is mainly of benefit in the summer - heat pumps in the winter. (And more likely in the evening than daytime at that.) They BOTH are of benefit - but at different times of the year. (And in terms of grid capacity, then that monthly gas consumption of around 4-5,000kWh wouldn't translate into that much extra electricity consumption - the gas boiler is less than 100% efficient, and a heat pump would magnify the energy input. I'd guess around 1,000 to 1,500 kWh during January?) Not sure why you seem to have been unable to read my post in full but do you want some time to edit the above before I reply (and if not then I can go with my preferred option of putting you back on blocked notifications) I'll help you out by highlighting (with colour coding: blue = low (and Jan'23 was pretty decent sunshine* if you live in England at 51.6 deg N), red = you seriously need to get your house insulted and/or turn down the heat and/or see if your neighbours are tapping into your supply for a 'grow-op' or something**) a few things you should check against 'typical' (and note for PV in Poland I did say a LOT, along with lots of other 'and' components that you seem to have ignored). I assure you I read your previous post in full, and no - I don't want to edit my previous post. Though there is one qualification re the generation - the panels are on a west facing roof, so the generation is somewhat lower than in the case of the usually assumed south facing. (Though the original figures don't show a huge difference - it would probably be more like 50kWh for the month if south facing.) My house has a "complicated" roof profile, which together with chimneys (and shadowing) meant the partial west option was either that - or nothing. And hence why it's smaller than 15 panels. I had it fitted just before the first reduction in FIT which is the only reason it was at all viable - even so, after 15 years it's only just about breaking even. But my reason was fitting wasn't simply financial - I was very keen to see the technology first hand. Since then the FIT has gone down (it was only ever intended as a kick starter anyway, and seems to have done the job), but my understanding is that not only have panels come dramatically down in price, but installations can be a lot more versatile. At the time the installers said that all the panels needed to have the same aspect - or to have extra facing (say) south would complicate the invertor setup. I believe current installations may be more versatile. Likewise at the time I was told that even partial shadowing would cause a big drop in output, which again may not be the case with modern panels.) Regarding usage figures, then I can quote you my latest figures from the bill, from the period 24 Dec 2022 to 23 Jan 2023 - 739kWh for electricity, 5054kWh for gas. Perhaps a little biased high due to the Christmas period, apart from winter, but the clue to why you may be colouring them red may have little to do with my home being really badly insulated or theft from neighbours, but (slightly more boringly) that it may not fit your "typical" model. I did say "heating, hot water for 5/6 people". So yes, I am well aware the figure is higher than any "typical" figure. But then it's hardly surprising if it is larger and contains more people (all having hot showers etc) than this hypothetical "typical" property? Regarding seasonality, then I don't like to generalise - but for countries of the latitudes of Poland and England, then whilst solar has a place to play (certainly in summer) then wind has even more of a place to play in winter. And fortunately wind tends to be higher in winter - solar in summer. I also think we need to worry more about making the MAJORITY of energy supply renewable and worry less about getting to 100%. Would it really matter if the figure reached 90% overall, and 10% came from fossil fuel still? I'd argue not. The imperative is to combat climate change - not religiously meet some mathematical target. So build out renewable generation, invest in storage which will certainly even out daily fluctuations (hopefully even over several days) but not worry too much about short falls during the odd week or two per year. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 23, 2023 10:21:38 GMT
As per comment on main thread then more 'Issue Specific' info CON HMG's: Plans unveiled to decarbonise UK power system by 2035www.gov.uk/government/news/plans-unveiled-to-decarbonise-uk-power-system-by-2035Challenging but ticks all the SMART boxes. I've posted plenty of links about 'pipeline' of projects, the need to speed those up (eg new-new nuclear), etc but below shows the scale of the challenge (made harder by years of 'dither+delay') Decarbonising the UK power system: The Build Rate to 2035www.snclavalin.com/~/media/Files/S/SNC-Lavalin/download-centre/en/report/atkins-2035-build-rate-analysis-june22.pdfTo achieve the above by 2030? Well it's certainly going to have to be a 'net' number as we'll still be burning some nat.gas in CCGTs (although perhaps Starmer/Miliband intend to 'offshore' burning fossil fuels to meet 'excess demand' periods when the wind isn't blowing very much - scaling up CON's historic approach of making UK less Energy secure and reliant on others?) Even at 'net' with a lot of extra 'offshoring' then I can't see LAB hitting 2030 - although they can of course 'blame' CON for the reason why they haven't met it but then why set a target that is Unrealistic? As we approach GE'29 then folks will see that the 2030 'mission' failed and perhaps conclude that LAB are no different to CON? However, to keep CON's target now just means that LAB are no different to CON. Perhaps the only notable difference will be that LAB are more likely to focus on 'demand reduction' at a govt level, rather than hoping folks will do it themselves. NG et al also assume a big drop in total Energy demand and without going into tangents then the only other way to get close to net 'electricity' zero carbon by 2030 would be to slow down the move to BEVs (as increasing % of BEVs will almost certainly more than offset any reduction from better insulated housing). Now CON HMG did remove some incentives to switch to BEV and LAB, if anything, are more likely to reintroduce incentives that will speed up the move to BEVs - which will make 2030 even more difficult. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 23, 2023 16:44:34 GMT
Times is paywalled for some so I'll quote the SMR section from: Rolls-Royce CEO Tufan Erginbilgic sets out turnaround planwww.thetimes.co.uk/article/tufan-erginbilgic-sets-out-plans-to-turn-around-rolls-royce-ndgv0lb67"On the future of Rolls-Royce's capability to build small local nuclear reactors for the UK's energy network Erginbilgic said: "We can play a key role in the UK's aspiration for the transition to net zero. Supply security, after what we've seen in Ukraine is important. We can contribute to the UK economy in creating employment and by producing exports but it will be hard to export if the UK does not go there (first), investing in our small modular reactors.
"There needs to be a sense of urgency..."
WTF is CON HMG waiting for. RR are ready to roll out SMRs, we have the 'obvious' first batch of sites ready (as they were where previous nuclear used to be) so approve them and place the first order (eg 12 x 470MW split across 4 sites). FFS: Get on with it! |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 23, 2023 16:53:11 GMT
PS Since Poland was being discussed t'other day then note:
Industria selects Rolls-Royce SMR for use in Polish green energy projects...
Industria is looking to deploy up to three SMRs to produce hydrogen and decarbonise regional energy infrastructure. There are additional future opportunities to replace more than 8GW of coal-fired power plants in southern Poland with SMRs throughout the 2030s.
www.rolls-royce-smr.com/press/industria-selects-rolls-royce-smr-for-use-in-polish-green-energy-projectsSo RR perhaps a bit naughty saying UK has to go first but if we did go first then it is very likely that a lot more orders would follow. MOIs are not 'firm orders' but it is also possible that RR build their main SMR factory somewhere like Poland and we're the ones who end up importing them! National governments 'involved' in big $$ orders can often pressurise a company into 'build it in X' and we need X=UK. and Czech this export market out:
Factory-built nuclear power plants could be operating in Czech Republic by early 2030swww.rolls-royce-smr.com/press/factory-built-nuclear-power-plants-could-be-operating-in-czech-republic-by-early-2030s |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Feb 23, 2023 17:26:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Feb 23, 2023 18:15:20 GMT
It's a fairly typical Grauniad article. Anyone who remembers the old Battersea power station knows that they had to have a supplementary heater on the north side of the Thames to get the temperature high enough for the radiators in the flats. There are some applications where you can use waste heat but district heating schemes have to be designed right e.g. www.clydegateway.com/regeneration_posts/district-heating/I couldn't imagine digging up most roads in London like this, there is already too much underground already: electricity, gas, telephone, cable TV, water supply, sewers and surface water drainage. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 23, 2023 18:37:50 GMT
It's a fairly typical Grauniad article. Anyone who remembers the old Battersea power station knows that they had to have a supplementary heater on the north side of the Thames to get the temperature high enough for the radiators in the flats. There are some applications where you can use waste heat but district heating schemes have to be designed right e.g. www.clydegateway.com/regeneration_posts/district-heating/I couldn't imagine digging up most roads in London like this, there is already too much underground already: electricity, gas, telephone, cable TV, water supply, sewers and surface water drainage. You've posted some articles before and 'city heating' schemes have a role to play (maybe 10-15%?), but are certainly not going to be a panacea. In London:
Waste heat from tube used to heat (some) London homeswww.newcivilengineer.com/latest/waste-heat-from-tube-used-to-heat-london-homes-09-03-2020/There is always an 'expert' pushing some 'panacea' solution (eg nuclear fusion) and/or pretending were 'bypassing'?!?!? proven tech. Nothing new about 'city heating' but it ain't a panacea. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Feb 23, 2023 19:00:36 GMT
You've posted some articles before and 'city heating' schemes have a role to play (maybe 10-15%?), but are certainly not going to be a panacea. In London:
Waste heat from tube used to heat (some) London homeswww.newcivilengineer.com/latest/waste-heat-from-tube-used-to-heat-london-homes-09-03-2020/There is always an 'expert' pushing some 'panacea' solution (eg nuclear fusion) and/or pretending were 'bypassing'?!?!? proven tech. Nothing new about 'city heating' but it ain't a panacea. There are really two things that go together on the Tube: first the waste heat, even ignoring what the trains generate, human bodies normally run at 100w each and there are millions of Tube users daily (although not all at the same time); second, they have to keep pumping water out to avoid flooding - it's usually reckoned that they have between 24 and 36 hours if the pumps stopped before the tunnels flood (and that would cause problems with the signalling). So, the idea I have seen before is to use the pumped water to take the waste heat away. Using it to heat buildings is a bonus. In this case they are using the warm air because they need to ventilate the Tube (at least the deep lines) but it's the same principle. If you like the Tube but don't live in London or nearby, the London Transport Museum run virtual tours online: www.ltmuseum.co.uk/hidden-london/virtual-tours |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 23, 2023 20:10:56 GMT
You've posted some articles before and 'city heating' schemes have a role to play (maybe 10-15%?), but are certainly not going to be a panacea. In London:
Waste heat from tube used to heat (some) London homeswww.newcivilengineer.com/latest/waste-heat-from-tube-used-to-heat-london-homes-09-03-2020/There is always an 'expert' pushing some 'panacea' solution (eg nuclear fusion) and/or pretending were 'bypassing'?!?!? proven tech. Nothing new about 'city heating' but it ain't a panacea. There are really two things that go together on the Tube: first the waste heat, even ignoring what the trains generate, human bodies normally run at 100w each and there are millions of Tube users daily (although not all at the same time); second, they have to keep pumping water out to avoid flooding - it's usually reckoned that they have between 24 and 36 hours if the pumps stopped before the tunnels flood (and that would cause problems with the signalling). So, the idea I have seen before is to use the pumped water to take the waste heat away. Using it to heat buildings is a bonus. In this case they are using the warm air because they need to ventilate the Tube (at least the deep lines) but it's the same principle. If you like the Tube but don't live in London or nearby, the London Transport Museum run virtual tours online: www.ltmuseum.co.uk/hidden-london/virtual-toursI used to use the Tube every day. 'Like' (in terms of enjoyment) I did not, especially in Summer. However, it is extremely convenient and I did like that. From Khan's accelerated pathway to 'net zero' by 2030 then I note within the various components of how to get there: "460,000 buildings connected to district heating networks by 2030"www.london.gov.uk/programmes-and-strategies/environment-and-climate-change/climate-change/zero-carbon-london/pathways-net-zero-carbon-2030Stationary energy (CO2e emissions from burning fossil fuel) is by far the largest source of emissions and there's obviously not a lot of energy intensive industry in London (other than some data centres) but also not many Carbon -ve options. 2030 seems a stretch IMO but I admire the fact he has a detailed plan and if it takes a little longer than 2030 then that is still a lot better than 2050! Bit harder for places that don't have a tube network and a densely packed population but some other towns and cities can certainly take a leaf out of Khan's book. |
|
|
|
Post by lens on Feb 24, 2023 0:40:48 GMT
It's a fairly typical Grauniad article. Going somewhat off the topic, but regarding Guardian science articles (and especially re energy), then I'm afraid they lost a lot of credibility with the famous Blacklight story - www.theguardian.com/environment/2005/nov/04/energy.science , even if it's quite a long time ago now. (In brief they treated an almost certain scam very seriously, to the extent they helped convince potential investors to sink very large sums of money in to the scam.) Much more recently they ran a story about where I had worked, a few months after I retired. It was hardly a controversial piece, and they had been given full access, but it's difficult to understand how quite so many glaring errors worked their way into the story. And frankly just down to some very careless and shoddy journalism. I was told about it by a friend still working there who subscibes to the Guardian, and who was so appalled by the mistakes they nearly cancelled their subscription. (I stress they didn't show them or the company in a bad light, it was nothing personal, they were just appalled at the stupidity of the errors.) |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Feb 24, 2023 8:46:06 GMT
leftieliberal - waste heat is so much more than district heating schemes, although they are significantly efficient if done well. (Denmark does this very well, with over 60% of domestic properties on DHS - ens.dk/en/our-responsibilities/global-cooperation/experiences-district-heating). It's basically just about extracting any heat from waste venting, and has numerous individual uses. For example, I'm currently experimenting with a drying system that needs a bit of heat, and we've built a mobile rig that can suck in waste air from building extraction to avoid the need to use a dedicated heat source. There are lots of opportunities, but it's a simple idea that consequently tends to get overlooked because it isn't sexy enough.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 24, 2023 9:02:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Feb 24, 2023 12:21:49 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 24, 2023 13:32:00 GMT
Good to see identification of 'hotspots' and then dealing with the issues. I note "some heat networks haven’t been upgraded since they were installed more than 40 years ago" but funding is being made available for efficiency upgrades: www.gov.uk/government/news/32-million-boost-to-upgrade-existing-heat-networks-and-reduce-energy-costsWRT to NOx and H2 then it is better than burning nat.gas but the links you provided do show there is a bit of trade-off with efficiency and more work to be done. I'm certainly aware that CO2 is the only 'nasty' to reduce/eliminate. Some cities still operate lignite-fired CHP (really nasty) but one that has recently gone for an 'upgrade' is Berlin*: www.siemens-energy.com/global/en/news/magazine/2021/urban-decarbonization-berlins-new-chp-plant.htmlWe can't wait for 'perfect'. Much better is... much better. We learn by doing. As we find issues to fix and make solutions even better then we fix them. * Quite a few German cities doing the same thing. Poland just getting started as well from what I hear. H2 is better than nat.gas and nat.gas is better than coal. As mentioned before then UK moved to nat.gas (and has paid the ££ price for that recently) but then 'paused' without thinking what comes next. Just FWIW then the stats on German electricity generation and net exports for last year, something I get a bit  about given we've effectively been importing electricity generated by Germany burning coal rather than burning nat.gas in British CCGTs. It's got a lot worse this year (see NG's Jan'23 data and seeing what is happening most days in Feb then I expect very similar this month) "generation from natural gas was 1.7% higher than in 2021, generation from lignite increased by 5.4% and generation from hard coal increased by 21.4%.. Germany was again a net exporter of electricity in 2022 with a total of 26.28 TWh"www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/germanys-power-consumption-falls-2022-generation-renewables-rises.html |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 24, 2023 14:28:00 GMT
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Feb 25, 2023 22:56:07 GMT
There are really two things that go together on the Tube: first the waste heat, even ignoring what the trains generate, human bodies normally run at 100w each and there are millions of Tube users daily (although not all at the same time); second, they have to keep pumping water out to avoid flooding - it's usually reckoned that they have between 24 and 36 hours if the pumps stopped before the tunnels flood (and that would cause problems with the signalling). So, the idea I have seen before is to use the pumped water to take the waste heat away. Using it to heat buildings is a bonus. In this case they are using the warm air because they need to ventilate the Tube (at least the deep lines) but it's the same principle. If you like the Tube but don't live in London or nearby, the London Transport Museum run virtual tours online: www.ltmuseum.co.uk/hidden-london/virtual-toursI used to use the Tube every day. 'Like' (in terms of enjoyment) I did not, especially in Summer. However, it is extremely convenient and I did like that. bit of a worry with particulates… www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412019313649😶🌫️😮💨 |
|
about given we've effectively been importing electricity generated by Germany burning coal rather than burning nat.gas in British CCGTs. It's got a lot worse this year (see NG's Jan'23 data and seeing what is happening most days in Feb then I expect very similar this month)