Energy Markets and Net Zero

[Deleted]

Times Article from 9Mar. Onshore wind (which Ed mentions) is almost certainly back on the table 

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/relaxing-rules-wind-farms-could-ease-gas-crisis-russia-ukraine-x6wm7m6px

[Deleted]

An example of a country (RoI) highly dependent on pipeline nat.gas from a different polity (UK) who are meeting a backlash to their plans for 'Energy independence'

notherenotanywhere.com/lng-and-the-fracking-cycle/

Of course UK should not threaten to turn off the gas taps to RoI but the point here is the difficulties that those countries/blocs who are belatedly looking to use LNG imports for their gas demands are going to find when a 'plan' hits the environmental backlash.

Could look at Netherlands as well. Still an estimated 450billion m3 of gas in Groningen gas field and due to current contracts Germany forced Netherlands to slightly up their production last year (and might do this year)[1] but the Dutch want to close that field down for environmental reasons (earthquakes and anti fossil fuels). It is possible that Romania and a few other nations increase their production to offset the end of Dutch gas but 'net zero' (within MoE) is going to be the likely indigenous change within EU as a whole.

[1] "Germany ‘putting citizens at risk by extra gas order from Groningen field’"
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-putting-citizens-at-risk-by-extra-gas-order-from-groningen-field-gjg3b7x7c

Germany seems determined to shut down all their remaining nuclear plants due to the German anti-nuclear policy and perhaps 'expects' other nations to do all the work on achieving the 'very optimistic' EC targets.

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Article in the Telegraph about the Rolls Royce SMRs - Rolls say that with help, they can have their modular reactors delivering power to the grid by 2030. But the counter to that is that by then, renewables and storage will be a lot cheaper.

However they argue “nuclear is a better bet for making hydrogen too, because the electrolysers needed to strip water molecules of their hydrogen atoms need to be run continuously to be at their most efficient, and nuclear can provide power day and night.”

and…

“…nuclear has another advantage in that the energy starts off as heat, allowing for more options with storage when a power bank is needed, Matthews says. Nuclear power stations can be built with extra generation capacity to make use of extra heat stored in rocks or as molten salt, making up for gaps in renewable production.

The heat can also be used in new processes to make hydrogen from water that do not require expensive catalysts, further cutting costs.”

[Deleted]

Mar 12, 2022 17:01:21 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Article in the Telegraph about the Rolls Royce SMRs - Rolls say that with help, they can have their modular reactors delivering power to the grid by 2030. But the counter to that is that by then, renewables and storage will be a lot cheaper.

However they argue “nuclear is a better bet for making hydrogen too, because the electrolysers needed to strip water molecules of their hydrogen atoms need to be run continuously to be at their most efficient, and nuclear can provide power day and night.”

and…

“…nuclear has another advantage in that the energy starts off as heat, allowing for more options with storage when a power bank is needed, Matthews says. Nuclear power stations can be built with extra generation capacity to make use of extra heat stored in rocks or as molten salt, making up for gaps in renewable production.

The heat can also be used in new processes to make hydrogen from water that do not require expensive catalysts, further cutting costs.”

SMRs and AMRs are now being grouped as ANTs

www.gov.uk/government/publications/advanced-nuclear-technologies/advanced-nuclear-technologies

Agree the points you post from Telegraph but I feel the need to 'clarify': "electrolysers needed to strip water molecules of their hydrogen atoms need to be run continuously to be at their most efficient"

That is certainly a 'current' problem with the occasional brief period where we have excess wind power - it is simply not economic to build gigastacks that run so infrequently.

There will, in the near future, likely be longer periods when the economics for 'green hydrogen' start to work and/or more batteries and/or filling up of the Norwegian 'bath tubs' via interconnectors and their pumped hydro. In terms of which you 'fill'/switch on first then it would likely be
1/ UK pumped hydro (very limited and unlikely to increase much). Very rapid switch on/off and to used mainly for intraday balancing
2/ Batteries (both commercial and individual demand such as BEVs). Useful for intraday and intraweek balancing (eg you don't have to fully charge a BEV every day)
3/ Green/Yellow/Pink hydrogen** (which might occasionally over ride #1+2 if it helps keep it on for a more economic period of production). I wouldn't call it 'dedicated' supply but could well have some wind/solar/nuclear that combined is going to clearly be in excess supply for a prolonged period. Also some wind farm projects that might be totally dedicated and re-use gas pipelines (see previous posts on UKPR)
4/ Filling up Norwegian bath tubs
5/ Hydrogen exports (from #3) once our own storage (yet to be built) reaches a level to cope with seasonal demands (plus a min. 'strategic reserve')

If it is 100% 'market driven' then might be some conflicts and very volatile pricing but National Grid (NG) understand the issues (including such potential problems as 'panic charging' if folks get worried about a prolonged period of low wind in 4+ very cold dark Winter). The other 'conflict' might be between #3-5 and relates to how much capacity of each we build. As with nat.gas now then if we export during times of plenty we need to be sure we can import in times of need. All NG scenarios assume we get to a position of 'net exporter' in the future so we should be OK but we'll be a net exporter in the Summer and want energy back in the Winter (as we do now with nat.gas).

** There will also, in the future, likely be long periods (eg much of the Summer) when new nuclear can make 'pink hydrogen'. Also 'yellow' hydrogen from solar (which is likely to be a much bigger part of the solution in countries with a lot more sunshine hours than UK but will help with the obvious seasonal issue of solar having a much larger role in UK)

[Deleted]

Global map of sunshine hours showing there are a lot of countries who can and should make more extensive use of solar (especially given the limited capacity to create new solar panels and where most of them come from!)

www.researchgate.net/figure/ANNUAL-SUNSHINE-HOURS-MAP-OF-THE-WORLD_fig21_316308189

[lens]

Mar 13, 2022 16:30:50 GMT @tw said:

Agree the points you post from Telegraph but I feel the need to 'clarify': "electrolysers needed to strip water molecules of their hydrogen atoms need to be run continuously to be at their most efficient"

That is certainly a 'current' problem with the occasional brief period where we have excess wind power - it is simply not economic to build gigastacks that run so infrequently.

But that presupposes a future situation with so much "excess" that..... it can no longer be considered truly excess! A point will come where the economics will dictate "why build any more wind farms if so much of the time we'll be virtually giving the output away?"

The whole situation regarding green hydrogen production boils down to two main cost factors - electricity cost and cost of utilisation of capital plant. You have to trade one off against the other, and all that is certain is that it's not possible to have sensible plant utilisation *AND* only use very cheap "excess" electricity.

This is not to say there won't be a situation in future where it becomes viable to build a wind farm DEDICATED to hydrogen production - and I expect to see such in future. But we're no longer talking about "excess" being used. Apart from the plant utilisation issue, hydrogen is likely to face increasing competition from other technologies in a desire to use this "excess" - pumped hydro to an extent, grid scale batteries etc, and maybe the most influential may increasingly be smart metering to modify demand automatically when there would otherwise be an excess. This is already being seen with plans to automatically bias electric car charging to when there would otherwise be such an excess.

On a larger scale, there may increasingly be more inter-grid connections - sell your excess to another country willing to buy it.

The other question is that if dedicated renewable generation and hydrogen production happens, what is the hydrogen used for? First choice must be to displace dirty hydrogen that industry currently uses. Using it for power generation is unlikely to be sensible due to the round trip inefficiencies, and it's hardly sensible to even use it in a modified gas grid for similar reasons. For home heating, then even without considering heat pumps, it's more efficient to just use each kilowatt of electricity produced directly for home heating - using a kWh to produce and distribute the energy as hydrogen involves far more of the energy being wasted.

[Deleted]

Mar 14, 2022 1:01:10 GMT lens said:

Mar 13, 2022 16:30:50 GMT @tw said:

Agree the points you post from Telegraph but I feel the need to 'clarify': "electrolysers needed to strip water molecules of their hydrogen atoms need to be run continuously to be at their most efficient"

That is certainly a 'current' problem with the occasional brief period where we have excess wind power - it is simply not economic to build gigastacks that run so infrequently.

But that presupposes a future situation with so much "excess" that..... it can no longer be considered truly excess! A point will come where the economics will dictate "why build any more wind farms if so much of the time we'll be virtually giving the output away?"

?!?!

Do you understand the difference between fixed and variable costs or are you just trying to be pedantic?

PS However, it is certainly possible that 'A point will come where the economics will dictate "why build any more wind farms"'. We are a very, very, very long way from that point currently but as we scale up wind farms then the 'economics' for green hydrogen will start to work at scale (the substantive point you seem to ignore).

All scenarios from NG point to UK becoming an exporter of energy in the distant future. I can certainly see how we could become a net exporter of hydrogen (green (wind) and perhaps a small amount of pink (nuclear) if you want to split out the likely sources) and compete in the regional (pipelines) or global (via ships) hydrogen market (from maybe late 2030s). The lowest cost producers would likely be 'yellow' hydrogen producers (see map of sunshine hours posted previously as that relates to the 'security' aspect of who some countries might become dependent upon[1] now that 'Energy security' has finally become an issue folks care about).

So maybe one day in say mid 2040s then we stop building new[2] wind farms as the economics to do so no longer work (ie there is genuine 'excess' over and above all domestic needs (including seasonal storage and a strategic reserve) and all profitable trade. A very nice 'problem' to have.. one day.. in the distant future. 

[1] I very much hope UK does not go down that route. It is possible, even likely, that N.Africa and the Middle East become major exporters of 'yellow' hydrogen (via pipelines into mainland Europe and ships to rWorld) and/or solar electricity exports and some folks are pushing that for UK:
electrek.co/2021/09/27/the-worlds-longest-subsea-cable-will-send-clean-energy-from-morocco-to-the-uk/

[2] At a slightly earlier date it is possible we move to only upgrading existing wind farms with more productive blades and turbines as it is more economic to upgrade existing wind farms to higher output levels than to build new ones. Again a very nice 'problem' to have and of course we'll likely start doing a lot of 'upgrading' along the way.

[Deleted]

Just to clarify my view before it is misrepresented.

I think it is a fantastic idea for likes of Morocco to develop enormous Solar and Wind farms and be in a position to export that either as electricity or as hydrogen. It makes a lot more sense at a regional/global level for somewhere like Morocco to have massive solar farms than building them in UK (and within UK then some places are clearly worse choices than others[1]). Given there is limited supply capacity for solar panels[2] then build those massive solar farms in places like Morocco rather than in far worse locations that would only have 30-50% of the generation capacity (with a 'mismatch' on seasonal needs) and have limited space (eg in UK we're building them on greenbelt and agricultural land, where as in N.Africa they can be built in the desert on land that has very little alternative use potential) 

So my issue is the 'Kwarteng-Truss' view that places too much emphasis on reliance of a diversity of imports rather than 'Generate it in Britain'.

[1] EG www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/huge-glasgow-solar-farm-could-22067811

Given Glasgow only gets about 1,000hrs of sunshine per year and the sunshine it does get is highly seasonal then it is a much worse location than elsewhere in UK (some areas get over 1,600hrs per year) or elsewhere in rWorld (where some areas get over 3,000hrs per year)

www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/map-sunshine-duration-in-the-united-kingdom-19812010--372954412890147978/

[2] There is also limited supply capacity for manufacturing and laying undersea cables (although I very much support building more of that capacity in UK, it will take time to have more cable and cable laying capacity available). Finally there is limited capacity to build huge batteries in the near future and I'd rather those are built+located in UK myself.

[Deleted]

The proper maps to use for 'Photovoltaic Electricity Potential' can be found at:

UK: solargis.com/maps-and-gis-data/download/united-kingdom

World: solargis.com/maps-and-gis-data/download/world

[Deleted]

and perhaps the best link for comparing solar energy between countries is:

globalsolaratlas.info/global-pv-potential-study

GB scores very low on 'seasonality index' (and that is obviously completely mismatched to our energy demand seasonality as we heat our homes in the Winter and have lower demand in Summer) as well as being 2nd to last on 'potential' (kWh/m2) with only RoI worse than UK.
cdn.buttercms.com/rgFhYVwHQxuKIY8IjcSo

The study doesn't (IMO) do a great job of considering the alternative use of land, where IMO, the UK would again score very low (ie we don't have much 'spare' land and what land we do have 'spare' has significant alternative value for agriculture, housing or recreational use). Hence RoI would (IMO) move up one spot to place UK in last place in the 'league table' once you consider the land use aspect.

NB That does not mean I'm 'anti-solar', just that UK is the worst place in the World to build massive solar farms to tackle Global climate change and move globally to 'Net Zero'. Very different for wind and tidal where we're very near the top of the global league tables. 
globalwindatlas.info

PS Seasonality for wind? It is a bit windier in the Winter (ie that does match demand). Also from below link then we can see the unpredictable nature of wind. (see: 'Average wind speed and deviations from the long term mean (ET 7.2)') then you can see that for 11/12 months of 2021 and Jan'22 wind speeds have been below average (but still very good on a 'global' comparison)
www.gov.uk/government/statistics/energy-trends-section-7-weather

Alternate land use is obviously not an issue for offshore wind farms (although fishing folk might object) but a bit of an issue for onshore, even though the best locations are sparsely populated and being 'in the air' then you can still use the land underneath. 

[lens]

Mar 14, 2022 8:49:36 GMT @tw said:

Mar 14, 2022 1:01:10 GMT lens said:

But that presupposes a future situation with so much "excess" that..... it can no longer be considered truly excess! A point will come where the economics will dictate "why build any more wind farms if so much of the time we'll be virtually giving the output away?"

?!?!

Do you understand the difference between fixed and variable costs or are you just trying to be pedantic?

tw - I'm actually in agreement with much of the detail you say, my concern is over often heard glib statements along the lines of "oh, the hydrogen can be made from excess cheap or free electricity that would otherwise go to waste". It's a great PR line from the industry, and designed to make the masses think how wonderful, cheap, and green the hydrogen industry (in general) must be.

The problem is as stated - it hangs on a premise that expensive electrolysis kit is standing idle most of the time waiting for these periods. A hopeless waste of capital. But strangely that's a detail the industry is much less keen to mention. You may understand the whole picture - many don't, they just hear the rosy story from the PR department.

Where I also agree with you is that wind energy is likely to continue getting cheaper, and the viability of a *dedicated* wind farm/electrolysis plant will get better and better. (Especially if encouraged by government.) If so, I see a scenario opposite to the "make hydrogen from excess electricity" one developing - something along the lines that the wind farm is NORMALLY committed to hydrogen production, but in the event of a looming grid shortfall could stop hydrogen production and instead sell the power to the grid. You wouldn't make hydrogen from an excess - you'd STOP making it a small part of the time to balance grid demand.

To answer directly your question, then the capital cost of constructing large electrolysis equipment is fixed - how much of that you account per kg of hydrogen is variable depending on the average time per day it's in operation. I'd say that's a far from pedantic point and crucial to the economics.

[Deleted]

Food or bio-fuel?

Cutting biofuels can help avoid global food shock from Ukraine war
The US and Europe can compensate for the loss of Ukraine’s grain exports by scrapping biofuel mandates, helping to avoid a food price shock

Read more: www.newscientist.com/article/2312151-cutting-biofuels-can-help-avoid-global-food-shock-from-ukraine-war/#ixzz7NbBgjaUD

[Deleted]

Mar 15, 2022 10:32:04 GMT lens said:

Mar 14, 2022 8:49:36 GMT @tw said:

?!?!

Do you understand the difference between fixed and variable costs or are you just trying to be pedantic?

1. tw - I'm actually in agreement with much of the detail you say

2. Where I also agree with you is that wind energy is likely to continue getting cheaper

1. That is twice now that you've argued some pedantry on what I mean by 'excess' but glad to have cleared some of that up.

2. Did I say that?

In 'Relative terms' then out of very mild curiosity what do you think the current 'price' for wind energy is (£X MWh) and on what basis is that price derived at WRT to a 'Levelised Cost of Electricity' (LCOE) comparison to an 'always on' or 'on demand' source (hopefully you can appreciate the relevance).

Please ensure to provide sources and cover the relevant govt 'incentives' and what is 'missing' in a CfD price for your 'relative' comparison to be a genuine 'like for like' comparison. Extend that out to issues of 'energy security' if you like (eg my friends at Xlinks[1] in Billericay will be able to undercut the price of floating[2] wind farm CfDs and provide a far more reliable and predictable supply, but I'd personally have issues with a purely 'market' based approach and reliance on imports either for UK-only solution or a more holistic global solution)

In 'Absolute terms' then the price is very likely to go up in the future[3] for various reasons - which I'm happy to discuss once you answer the above.  
 
[1] See info from y'day or for more specific info on that project:
xlinks.co/morocco-uk-power-project/

[2] Pretty sure they could come in under fixed bottom CfD prices as well (even without adjusting for reliability and predictability) but we're starting to run out of those locations. Floating wind farm prices will likely drop quite quickly in the not to distant future but the industry is still ironing out some issues for the best way to deliver those projects at scale (and as with all these projects then there are local/global supply chain constraints on how much can be delivered over what time period)

[3] Maybe not the immediate future if you want to use the most recent auction for supply that won't be available for a few years yet. Some folks struggle with the concept of lead times. Please ensure to mention what you think 'current' means in terms of 'current' price.

[lens]

Mar 15, 2022 13:29:40 GMT @tw said:

Mar 15, 2022 10:32:04 GMT lens said:

1. tw - I'm actually in agreement with much of the detail you say

2. Where I also agree with you is that wind energy is likely to continue getting cheaper

1. That is twice now that you've argued some pedantry on what I mean by 'excess' but glad to have cleared some of that up.

It's not what you or I may mean by "excess" - it's what people advocating such an approach mean. It's normally used to refer to electricity which could be generated from a renewable, but is constrained (or sold extremely cheaply, even given away). If you want just one reference (google hydrogen from excess electricity" and you'll find many) - www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/09/use-excess-wind-and-solar-power-to-produce-hydrogen-report 

Quote: "Green energy would be boosted if excess electricity from wind and solar farms was used to produce hydrogen for use in heating and other parts of the energy system, according to engineers.
.....

National Grid has warned that at times this summer there will be more electricity being generated than needed; when demand is low, solar output is high and some inflexible power stations are hard to turn off."

And as I've now tried several times to explain, such an approach, which sounds so sensible as such phrased, falls apart when it is realised that it would need electrolyser capacity sitting idle most of the time waiting for such periods when there is "more electricity being generated than needed". 

Unless and until electrolysis equipment becomes a fraction of it's current price (likewise staff to run and maintain it), and until periods of "excess" become long enough, it's not going to happen. (Though hydrogen production being shut down to supply short peaks of grid demand might.)

I'll leave it to everyone else to decide whether I'm being "pedantic" or have a valid (albeit general) point.

[jib]

Could this work?

www.independent.co.uk/tech/geothermal-energy-renewables-quaise-hole-b2036201.html

[Deleted]

Mar 15, 2022 16:44:30 GMT lens said:

Mar 15, 2022 13:29:40 GMT @tw said:

1. That is twice now that you've argued some pedantry on what I mean by 'excess' but glad to have cleared some of that up.

It's not what you or I may mean by "excess" - it's what people advocating such an approach mean.

Indeed. The only people who matter are:

A/ Those who might build electrolysers
B/ Govts, assuming they intervene in a 'market based' outcome via pricing formulas, tax, etc
C/ National Grids who need to plan ahead

With there clearly being an interaction between those three players. You could add D/ various industry groups or other energy market players who might not directly be part of A/ but who would have an interest in the 'holistic' approach.

I personally don't have an issue with the Guardian piece but you can take your pedantry issues up with the Guardian if you want. 

I note you've avoided answering the question on cost (£X MWh). I'll leave it to everyone else (maybe the 6 people who might read this, none of whom are likely in groups A-D) to speculate why you've avoided answering that question 

[Deleted]

Mar 15, 2022 17:42:22 GMT jib said:

Could this work?

www.independent.co.uk/tech/geothermal-energy-renewables-quaise-hole-b2036201.html

There are lots of good, developmental ideas around and likely to be lots of 'pilot' projects to test those ideas out (UK HMG are chucking a lot of R&D money at various pilot projects). So my guess at an answer is a definite 'maybe' and I hope someone funds those kinds of projects. Below is the link to the company's website which gives an indication of the timeline and scaleability (eg: "2026 First Super Hot Enhanced Geothermal System rated to 100 MW of thermal energy from a handful of wells"). From there then who knows but that is fairly small and not immediate - there is a 'cost' in waiting (as we're now experiencing the expensive way)

www.quaise.energy

Geothermal already plays a role in some countries (eg Iceland) so it's not 'new' tech but Quaise Energy look to be taking it to a much deeper level for more universal potential. Good luck to them. UK and every other country need a plan based on 'proven' tech but given we're not going to deliver everything at once then the plan can certainly be adapted if/when some new or reimagined tech provides a better option as part of the solution. 

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Mar 15, 2022 17:42:22 GMT jib said:

Could this work?

www.independent.co.uk/tech/geothermal-energy-renewables-quaise-hole-b2036201.html

interesting idea, and it indirectly harnesses the power of Thorium, since the energy released from the decay of Thorium is one of the things heating the Earth’s interior.

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Mar 13, 2022 16:30:50 GMT @tw said:

** There will also, in the future, likely be long periods (eg much of the Summer) when new nuclear can make 'pink hydrogen'. Also 'yellow' hydrogen from solar (which is likely to be a much bigger part of the solution in countries with a lot more sunshine hours than UK but will help with the obvious seasonal issue of solar having a much larger role in UK)

Didn’t know they called it Pink hydrogen. I’m still not sure about using hydrogen as an energy store for leccy, since it isn’t as efficient as batteries and you need electrolysers, compressors and tanks for storage, and either fuel cells or turbines, as opposed to just storing it in batteries with maybe 98% efficiency?

(Though of course, as I know you are aware, if one looks beyond energy storage however, the hydrogen has a number of other uses. Fertiliser, industrial processes etc.)

[Deleted]

Mar 15, 2022 20:00:18 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Mar 13, 2022 16:30:50 GMT @tw said:

** There will also, in the future, likely be long periods (eg much of the Summer) when new nuclear can make 'pink hydrogen'. Also 'yellow' hydrogen from solar 

1. Didn’t know they called it Pink hydrogen.

2. I’m still not sure about using hydrogen as an energy store for leccy, since it isn’t as efficient as batteries and you need electrolysers, compressors and tanks for storage, and either fuel cells or turbines, as opposed to just storing it in batteries with maybe 98% efficiency?

(Though of course, as I know you are aware, if one looks beyond energy storage however, the hydrogen has a number of other uses. Fertiliser, industrial processes etc.)

1. There is a whole spectrum of colours for hydrogen out there. Nasty 'brown' stuff from lignite (slightly less nasty if attached to carbon capture) through to the nice stuff 
www.nationalgrid.com/stories/energy-explained/hydrogen-colour-spectrum

2. Nor am I and we're a long way from needing to get overly worried about that today. On hydrogen storage though then you can repurpose salt caverns that were used for seasonal nat.gas storage and we're not short of salt cavern storage potential (where as batteries need materials that are in scarce supply and hence better suited to shorter term storage options such as intraday/week).
ukccsrc.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/John-Williams_CCS-and-Hydrogen.pdf 

As you point out hydrogen has lots of current uses (some of which are being satisfied by 'blue' hydrogen - which is somewhere in the middle of the nasty-nice spectrum of colours). In the future hydrogen might be blended with nat.gas for boilers (at least for a transition period) or be 100% for hydrogen boilers. That in itself would require some significant storage for the 'seasonal' issue.

The process of converting it back to electricity will almost certainly improve in efficiency but I've never disputed that it is an 'inefficient' process. Being 'inefficient' then worrying about that is a long, long, long way off (although from a vehicle manufacturing perspective then some folks have 'bet' on that already and some folks are considering it - as the lead times on various pieces of the puzzle require different major decisions at different times)

Realistically in the next few years then we need to
- complete the pilot studies into using hydrogen to blend/replace nat.gas for 'gas' boilers (2025 IIRC)
- repurpose at least the Rough storage facility for hydrogen storage
- build 5GW of (ideally green) hydrogen capacity and well before 2030 (#2 in the 10pt plan IIRC)
- continue with the faster roll out of wind (and to a lesser extent solar) farms
- decide on new-new nuclear (ANTs), which itself will likely be 'pilot' style to begin with and not a massive commitment if something better turns up (although I'm 'cautious' about too much of the kind of Xlinks project I posted earlier as IMO Energy Security needs to be taken into account)

Then as time moves on, we 'learn by doing', we continually re-evaluate the 'plan' and adjust it based on the info we learn along the way (eg hydrogen might only have a small role, might have a bigger role - TBC). That is NG's step-by-step 'plan' that is not perhaps clearly set out in the links I've provided in the past. 

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

article by Monbiot, arguing that…

“It is true that the world now faces a major food crisis. Climate breakdown has begun to bite. Heat domes and droughts in North America and storms and floods in Europe and China last year damaged harvests and drove up prices. By February, the cost of food was 20% higher than a year earlier.

Meanwhile, Ukraine and Russia produce nearly 30% of the world’s wheat exports, 15% of the maize (corn) and 75% of the sunflower oil. Altogether, they generate about 12% of the calories traded internationally.”

And therefore we need to reduce our dependency and grow more of our own. However he argues that this shouldn’t be at the expense of rewilding, which can take place on land not too suitable for crops.

Instead, he says we shouldn’t be diverting good arable land into biofuels etc.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/16/food-crisis-britain-prices-russia-ukraine-rewilding


“Between them, these energy crops demand 9% of the land used to grow cereals in England. This is an astonishingly destructive and inefficient business. About 450 hectares of land is needed to feed a biogas plant with a capacity of one megawatt. By contrast, a megawatt of wind turbine capacity requires only one-third of a hectare. When you include the impacts of soil erosion, for which maize in particular is notorious, the climate costs are likely to be worse than those of fossil gas.“

Even with growing our own crops there is still the issue of being dependent on fertiliser imports from Russian and Belarusian fertilisers.

“Even more ominously, just as European countries allowed themselves to become hooked on Russian gas and oil, they are also highly reliant on Russian and Belarusian fertilisers. About one-third of the nitrogen and two-thirds of the potassium imported by the UK and western Europe come from Russia and Belarus, and we can expect them to use this dependency…”

(However, you might utilise hydrogen made with surplus wind power energy to make our own fertilisers…)

Maybe the eco folk know if there’s ote wrong with Monbiot’s analysis… (Though I added in the bit about making our own fertiliser using surplus wind power) 

[Deleted]

Mar 16, 2022 17:59:53 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

See also my: yesterday at 10:40am: "Food or bio-fuels?"

Land is scarce (see also posts WRT to where massive solar farms should (deserts in N.Africa, etc) and should not (most of UK) be built and 'onshore' wind farms being in the air so the land below can be used)

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Mar 16, 2022 19:04:35 GMT @tw said:

Mar 16, 2022 17:59:53 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

See also my: yesterday at 10:40am: "Food or bio-fuels?"

Yes indeed, Monbiot does raise a similar question, and considers it also from the perspective of rewilding. (He also mentions our dependence on fertiliser imports but kind of leaves it there, doesn’t suggest a solution, which is why I mentioned hydrogen). Regarding wind farms in the air, that’s intriguing, how does that work?

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

@tw

“2. Nor am I and we're a long way from needing to get overly worried about that today. On hydrogen storage though then you can repurpose salt caverns that were used for seasonal nat.gas storage and we're not short of salt cavern storage potential (where as batteries need materials that are in scarce supply and hence better suited to shorter term storage options such as intraday/week).
ukccsrc.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/John-Williams_CCS-and-Hydrogen.pdf”

Yes, that’s one of the things that makes it hard to gauge. How quickly will they find alternative designs for batteries to reduce the need for scarce materials, how quickly will electrolysers fall in price etc.

Also, regarding hydrogen in the gas supply, that may be limited if higher gas prices and the zero carbon drive mean people migrate more and more to heating with leccy?

[Deleted]

Mar 16, 2022 20:31:34 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Mar 16, 2022 19:04:35 GMT @tw said:

 Regarding wind farms in the air, that’s intriguing, how does that work?

The wind blows in the air (ie above ground), so most of the land underneath can still be used

Mar 16, 2022 20:37:14 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Also, regarding hydrogen in the gas supply, that may be limited if higher gas prices and the zero carbon drive mean people migrate more and more to heating with leccy?

It might be limited to perhaps 20% during a 'transition' and reduce further as heat pumps etc ramp up. The pilot schemes run to 2025 IIRC so we'll know more then. Hydogren might end up being partially a 'bridge' role. All these 'problems' are for the future but we need to 'learn by doing' and we need to take the decisions to start building some capacity, repurposing some storage now - not a lot, just enough to start 'leaning' by doing (similar to other countries - eg faster hydrogen roll out was part of EC's plan)

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Mar 17, 2022 7:34:23 GMT @tw said:

Mar 16, 2022 20:31:34 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

 Regarding wind farms in the air, that’s intriguing, how does that work?

The wind blows in the air (ie above ground), so most of the land underneath can still be used

ah, I thought you’d come across some new tech to make them levitate or summat. Like the Aerium in Altered Carbon!

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Mar 17, 2022 7:34:23 GMT @tw said:

It might be limited to perhaps 20% during a 'transition' and reduce further as heat pumps etc ramp up. The pilot schemes run to 2025 IIRC so we'll know more then. Hydogren might end up being partially a 'bridge' role. All these 'problems' are for the future but we need to 'learn by doing' and we need to take the decisions to start building some capacity, repurposing some storage now - not a lot, just enough to start 'leaning' by doing (similar to other countries - eg faster hydrogen roll out was part of EC's plan)

Sure, I’m not arguing against trying out some hydrogen tech. Just saying there are various aspects that are hard to gauge. Similarly, alongside the downsides, there are other things that might play well for hydrogen. IIRC Christian Horner of Red Bull fame was saying he thinks hydrogen may be preferable for cars as it’s more environmentally sustainable when considering the lifetime environmental impact. Also, while batteries currently need some materials from the likes of China, hydrogen doesn’t so much. (It needs Palladium, 10% of which comes from Russia but the biggest source is South Africa I think).

I think in the current climate, hydrogen (from electrolysis) for fertiliser is becoming more compelling. 

[Deleted]

Mar 17, 2022 7:45:48 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Mar 17, 2022 7:34:23 GMT @tw said:

Sure, I’m not arguing against trying out some hydrogen tech....

Lots of 'pilot' type stuff has been going on and we're nearing the point of some 'picking winners' decisions based on what we've already learned (I hope!).

Just FWIW then see p9 of attached: "To reach our ambition of 5GW hydrogen production by 2030, around 50% of which is estimated to be used in industry" (with more details of what that means in the report)

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1059346/NZIP_Industrial_Hydrogen_Accelerator_early_engagement.pdf

(with info on broader stuff that is going on WRT to our "Net Zero Innovation Portfolio" at www.gov.uk/government/collections/net-zero-innovation-portfolio)

I think we agree that there a lots of potential uses for hydrogen - some solutions might be better served by other means (although hydrogen might have a bridge role), but we don't yet have all the info to know and we don't need to make all those decisions today.

On the topic of storage then hydrogen storage is pretty simple and IMO will have a key role in Ultra Large Scale, Ultra Long Duration Energy storage (ie TWhs for inter-seasonal balancing of 'green energy' supply and demand). At the opposite end in 'duration' is UK pumped hydro[1] and batteries and both have scalability issues, especially in the short/medium term. I do note a lot of developing tech on the battery side (eg see list of 10 techs at bottom of below link), much of which is likely due to the 'known' issues of current battery based solutions (eg limited raw materials for ultra large scale and need for very regular use[2] to pay back the capital investment)

www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/between-25-35gw-of-long-duration-energy-storage-will-be-installed-globally-by-2025-report/2-1-1103860

[1] I'd 100% agree with leftieliberal that is great, but I can't see it being given much more approval in UK. Some potential to use Norway's 'bathtubs' covered before back on UKPR.

[2] Hence folks generally consider it to be better suited to intra-day balancing (or in the case of BEVs then perhaps intra-week). Point being if you can charge and deplete a battery 100-365 times per year then the capital costs are divided by 100-365 charging cycles. For a 100TWh battery (inter season balancing) that you charge from May-Sep and draw upon from Nov-Mar then the battery options are very unlikely to be able to compete. It's horses for courses. Batteries are your 'sprinters' and hydrogen (and maybe Norway's bathtubs) are your ultra long distance runners. We'll need both!

[leftieliberal]

Mar 17, 2022 9:19:14 GMT @tw said:

Mar 17, 2022 7:45:48 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Sure, I’m not arguing against trying out some hydrogen tech....

[2] Hence folks generally consider it to be better suited to intra-day balancing (or in the case of BEVs then perhaps intra-week). Point being if you can charge and deplete a battery 100-365 times per year then the capital costs are divided by 100-365 charging cycles. For a 100TWh battery (inter season balancing) that you charge from May-Sep and draw upon from Nov-Mar then the battery options are very unlikely to be able to compete. It's horses for courses. Batteries are your 'sprinters' and hydrogen (and maybe Norway's bathtubs) are your ultra long distance runners. We'll need both!

Strathclyde Uni's research showed about 500 GWh available from new pumped storage in the Scottish hydro-electric schemes; Mackay had calculated that we would need 1200 GWh to cover a 4-day wind lull (this was back in 2008) which would occur about once a year, so you can think of pumped storage as giving up to 2 days' cover. The problem with the Norwegian 'bathtubs' is not the capacity but the connectivity. The one interconnector at present is 1.4 GW power capacity, so we would need to think of perhaps 10-20 interconnectors of this size to make a real impact. It is better to have multiple interconnectors rather than something really big (10 GW) because of the consequences of failure (e.g. the fire at the French 2 GW interconnector). There is also the argument for distributed generation near to where the electricity is consumed to reduce the power flow across the grid and hydrogen could be useful in this role (replacing gas-fired plant) as it could also be used for combined heat and power (CHP).

[Deleted]

Mar 17, 2022 12:11:41 GMT leftieliberal said:

Mar 17, 2022 9:19:14 GMT @tw said:

[2] Hence folks generally consider it to be better suited to intra-day balancing (or in the case of BEVs then perhaps intra-week). Point being if you can charge and deplete a battery 100-365 times per year then the capital costs are divided by 100-365 charging cycles. For a 100TWh battery (inter season balancing) that you charge from May-Sep and draw upon from Nov-Mar then the battery options are very unlikely to be able to compete. It's horses for courses. Batteries are your 'sprinters' and hydrogen (and maybe Norway's bathtubs) are your ultra long distance runners. We'll need both!

1. Strathclyde Uni's research showed about 500 GWh available from new pumped storage in the Scottish hydro-electric schemes; Mackay had calculated that we would need 1200 GWh to cover a 4-day wind lull (this was back in 2008) which would occur about once a year, so you can think of pumped storage as giving up to 2 days' cover.

2. The problem with the Norwegian 'bathtubs' is not the capacity but the connectivity. The one interconnector at present is 1.4 GW power capacity, so we would need to think of perhaps 10-20 interconnectors of this size to make a real impact. It is better to have multiple interconnectors rather than something really big (10 GW) because of the consequences of failure (e.g. the fire at the French 2 GW interconnector).

3. There is also the argument for distributed generation near to where the electricity is consumed to reduce the power flow across the grid and hydrogen could be useful in this role (replacing gas-fired plant) as it could also be used for combined heat and power (CHP).

1. Dinorwig can store 9GWh and due to various 'political' and broader environmental issues then I can't see much more pumped hydro being built in UK. I wish we would build more and maybe we do but it is (IMO) unrealistic to expect 500-1,200GWh. Every little piece helps so I hope a few projects do get the Green light.

2. I also doubt interconnectors will have a massive role to play. They'll certainly have a role but you highlight a key reason why they have limitations. To that I'd add the 'Energy Security' risk (we'd be refilling Norway's pumped hydro (or allowing them to build up conventional hydro) during the Summer and want it back in the Winter - putting us at the mercy of a 'foreign' source).

3. Very valid point and that to some extent applies to 'batteries' as well. The current electricity grid infrastructure is going to need to be expanded but we need to make optimal use of the 'cables' so in some cases we'll likely need to charge up batteries closer to high demand sites 'off peak' to not overload the grid infrastructure for 'peak' demand (ie the additional grid infrastructure can in many cases be site specific rather than require broader increases in transmission capacity). One very good point for batteries is they don't need lakes+dams or salt cavern locations - you can put them pretty much anywhere and at varying sizes, depending on very local needs. 

Additional: As per the Xlinks Moroccan solar(+wind) via interconnectors project or a UK tidal lagoon project then batteries can also turn a daily (sun or tide cycle) variable supply into something more akin to 'base load' by smoothing out the supply. I do hope tidal lagoons get a 'fresh' look and reckon we need to proceed with at least one very soon to benefit from 'learning by doing'. If we experience a lot more problems and cost over runs than expected then we don't build many more. If it turns out those pushing 'tidal lagoons' are pretty close on the 'money' and we experience few issues then we can build several more. Until we give them a go, we won't really know.