Energy prices.

[fizzy]

Energy security strategy: How would moving to renewables save us money on fuel bills?

It's now cheaper to produce energy from wind than gas. As the government announces its energy security strategy, how might speeding up the change to net zero save us all money? And what's holding us back?

news.sky.com

Burning £10 notes is cheaper than gas at the moment
Having said that the price per therm has plummeted lately in the UK on the spot market.
The US and Canada can supply far more from shale it just takes time to ramp up.
I predict gas prices will plummet when Putin croaks!

 

[daleyd]

From 2020, when gas was still cheap...

 

[JMS1972]

View attachment 347957

From 2020, when gas was still cheap...

I'm guessing Q4 is the one quarter where renewables don't cut it?

Unfortunately we use energy all year round....

 

[R Kraft]

Burning £10 notes is cheaper than gas at the moment
Having said that the price per therm has plummeted lately in the UK on the spot market.
The US and Canada can supply far more from shale it just takes time to ramp up.
I predict gas prices will plummet when Putin croaks!

I don't think the states will provide more oil or gas.
The companies are under constant attack to drive them out of business.

 

[fizzy]

View attachment 347957

From 2020, when gas was still cheap...

Norway, Sweden and Denmark have masses of hydro power so not a fair example at all. Hydro not mentioned in the table.
Have you read about how the windfarms haven't started their fixed price contracts so they are making a fortune out of high prices.

 

[fizzy]

I don't think the states will provide more oil or gas.
The companies are under constant attack to drive them out of business.

They are already ramping up and we are taking as much gas as our network can handle. We are exporting it to Europe but our pipelines are at max capacity or we could do more. Pembroke and our other terminals are maxed out.

 

[daleyd]

I'm guessing Q4 is the one quarter where renewables don't cut it?

Unfortunately we use energy all year round....

Not really, its when the report was written....

 

[daleyd]

Norway, Sweden and Denmark have masses of hydro power so not a fair example at all. Hydro not mentioned in the table.
Have you read about how the windfarms haven't started their fixed price contracts so they are making a fortune out of high prices.

Norway and Sweden have hydro power - (Norway a lot, Sweden not quite so much, but still significant) But Denmark doesn't.

The point wasn't really to include that bit, though it's an interesting aside - rather to dispute the claim that renewables can't compete on cost, which doesn't seem to tally up with the table provided.

 

[DAPPH]

I am actually a big fan of hydrogen power.
I would be all in favour of wind power IF we could store it.
Hydrogen seems the perfect solution but the efficiency is awful. You say even if only 40% effective which I suspect is about right. Sadly the wind companies will not get paid only 40%. They can't afford to build windfarms if they aren't getting top whack for the electric.
Which basically means we are paying 100% for only 40% of the leccy!

100 % for for 40 % sounds like normal business practice .
On our business enterprise training programme we were told most factory gate goods are usually 600% more by the time the punters buy them . People still purchased and so it will be with electricity unless we go back to living in trees & caves.

 

[DAPPH]

Burning £10 notes is cheaper than gas at the moment
Having said that the price per therm has plummeted lately in the UK on the spot market.
The US and Canada can supply far more from shale it just takes time to ramp up.
I predict gas prices will plummet when Putin croaks!

Not if the swivel eyes , Greta and her pals get their way .

 

[500e]

Wind is cheap till it stops for a day or a week, then it is Expensive, and is it cheap long term.
Know a Co that put up a middling size unit, blades lasted 5 years before the leading edge was eroded enough to cut the output I think I was told 15% and that was 10 years ago.
All these ideas have +- points but the world has had 100+ years honing them, to try and push the change in 10/15 years seems to me a route to Kayos

 

[DAPPH]

Read about a 20 mtr diameter merry go round wind turbine turbine 6 or so months ago , it's about 4 mtrs tall , sites on a hill , towers or tall buildings, even in the slightest of baby breath breezes they still generate reasonably well .

Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines Promise Higher Efficiency - ASME

Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines Promise Higher Efficiency, when arranged properly vertical-axis turbines have the potential to outshine horizontal turbines.

www.asme.org

 

[Morrisman]

Wind is cheap till it stops for a day or a week, then it is Expensive, and is it cheap long term.
Know a Co that put up a middling size unit, blades lasted 5 years before the leading edge was eroded enough to cut the output I think I was told 15% and that was 10 years ago.
All these ideas have +- points but the world has had 100+ years honing them, to try and push the change in 10/15 years seems to me a route to Kayos

Be interesting to see the 'cradle to grave' financial cost and environmental impact of one of the big windmills, including decommissioning and correct disposal of the parts.
And even more interesting to see if they actually ever pay for themselves, in both respects.

 

[fizzy]

Read about a 20 mtr diameter merry go round wind turbine turbine 6 or so months ago , it's about 4 mtrs tall , sites on a hill , towers or tall buildings, even in the slightest of baby breath breezes they still generate reasonably well .

Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines Promise Higher Efficiency - ASME

Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines Promise Higher Efficiency, when arranged properly vertical-axis turbines have the potential to outshine horizontal turbines.

www.asme.org

They trialled a vertical turbine at the old Burry Port power station in the 80s. They never really caught on.

 

[500e]

There are a lot of home build ones
There is or was a smallish one at J25 M5

 

[julianthegypsy]

I saw vertical axis windmills at reading university in about 1978 and was impressed. The ones generally seen are tall and thin, but these had the blades about ten feet apart, two blades. They were mounted just off centre too, on a pivot, with a spring between them so they would self regulate in high winds. I never understood why they put brakes on wind turbines, all you have to do is feather the blades or point them away from the wind and problem solved.

 

[bricol]

I just remember those steel windmill pavement shop signs that seemed to be everywhere at one point, just waiting to mangle some unsuspecting toddler, OAP . . . which might be why I hardly ever see one anymore.

Signs that is . . .

 

[DAPPH]

Even windmills whilst doing what you say ,had staking chains / ropes to stop canted blades from turning when it was not needed as the wind will still push the blades round , a discovered safety device I suppose

 

[daleyd]

Be interesting to see the 'cradle to grave' financial cost and environmental impact of one of the big windmills, including decommissioning and correct disposal of the parts.
And even more interesting to see if they actually ever pay for themselves, in both respects.

I think there was a myth that they wouldn’t that has been well and truly debunked - I seem to recall it was a comment by an academic on the subject that was taken completely out of context and got plastered all over social media. He was making a point about badly sited/planned wind projects that may never save the energy expended in manufacture and build but that if they are planned properly they easily exceed this many times over (the end bit was left out and it was latched onto by the baying masses)

General consensus seems to be that they become carbon “neutral” after anything from 6 months to a couple of years and are financially paid back over a similar period (maybe slightly longer for financial payback depending which one you use). There are loads of studies out there about this, if you search “life cycle analysis”.

 

[Gareth J]

I think there was a myth that they wouldn’t that has been well and truly debunked - I seem to recall it was a comment by an academic on the subject that was taken completely out of context and got plastered all over social media. He was making a point about badly sited/planned wind projects that may never save the energy expended in manufacture and build but that if they are planned properly they easily exceed this many times over (the end bit was left out and it was latched onto by the baying masses)

General consensus seems to be that they become carbon “neutral” after anything from 6 months to a couple of years and are financially paid back over a similar period (maybe slightly longer for financial payback depending which one you use). There are loads of studies out there about this, if you search “life cycle analysis”.

Steel embodied energy is about 5000Kwh/ ton. Concrete is about 250/ton
(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy)

So, our little turbine spits out just under 10,000kWh/year.

Even if you said none of the steel was recyclable (clearly it is) there can't more than a few years of total embodied energy to pay back.