[Misc] Are your electricity bills too high? Get ready for a real WTF moment.......

[Eric the meek]

Every now and again, you read an article which takes your breath away. The following is according to a Bloomberg report.

'Britain’s outdated electricity network has a growing problem: On blustery days, too much wind power risks overloading the system, and the grid operator must respond by paying some firms not to generate. This “curtailment” costs consumers hundreds of millions of pounds each year.

Adding to that expense, some wind farm operators exaggerate how much energy they say they intend to produce, which boosts the payments they receive for turning off, according to nine people — traders, academics and market experts — most of whom agreed to discuss this controversial behavior only on condition of anonymity.

In effect, they said, the grid has paid some wind farms not to generate power that they wouldn’t have produced anyway.'

This has been going on at the same time as a cost of living crisis, with many families struggling to pay their rapidly rising energy bills, some having to choose between heating and eating etc.

 

[Weststander]

I’ll park this thread until the far more important transfer window is over. Football is our religion.

 

[HillBarnTillIDie]

Im sure a few years back there was a story that…
In Ireland, as a incentive for the use / change over to renewable fuels, the government paid huge grants to people using bio fuel (those little wooden pellets).
The payment was calculated on the quantity of fuel exhausted, meaning many farmers turned outbuildings into massive wood burning facilities, churning through tons and tons, to get the massive payouts. People made millions.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

I’ll park this thread until the far more important transfer window is over. Football is our religion.

Yeah, we're all about the football here. No time for any of this other nonsense.

 

[BrianB]

Im sure a few years back there was a story that…
In Ireland, as a incentive for the use / change over to renewable fuels, the government paid huge grants to people using bio fuel (those little wooden pellets).
The payment was calculated on the quantity of fuel exhausted, meaning many farmers turned outbuildings into massive wood burning facilities, churning through tons and tons, to get the massive payouts. People made millions.

True, in Northern Ireland the price was fixed on the cost of fuel ( wood pellets ) at the start of the project , as the scheme was extended the cost of fuel dropped below the subsidised payments it meant that the more fuel burnt the more profit /money earnt ...
Could and should have been properly prosecuted but may have brought the NI government down , ( they don't need much help ) .

 

[Hamilton]

Every now and again, you read an article which takes your breath away. The following is according to a Bloomberg report.

'Britain’s outdated electricity network has a growing problem: On blustery days, too much wind power risks overloading the system, and the grid operator must respond by paying some firms not to generate. This “curtailment” costs consumers hundreds of millions of pounds each year.

Adding to that expense, some wind farm operators exaggerate how much energy they say they intend to produce, which boosts the payments they receive for turning off, according to nine people — traders, academics and market experts — most of whom agreed to discuss this controversial behavior only on condition of anonymity.

In effect, they said, the grid has paid some wind farms not to generate power that they wouldn’t have produced anyway.'

This has been going on at the same time as a cost of living crisis, with many families struggling to pay their rapidly rising energy bills, some having to choose between heating and eating etc.

Link to the article please? Be good to see the source for this and get an idea of who these nine people are.

 

[Hamilton]

There’s more here.

UK Regulator Probes Wind Power Overstatement

The UK energy regulator Ofgem is investigating the behavior of wind farms that have been overstating how much power they will produce.

www.bloomberg.com

 

[Hamilton]

And looks like the BBC picked up on it a month ago.

Wasted wind power adds £40 to household energy costs, says think tank - BBC News

When it is very windy the grid cannot handle the extra power generated, says Carbon Tracker.

www.bbc.co.uk

Adds £40 to the average bill. Or just over 10p a day.

 

[Eric the meek]

Link to the article please? Be good to see the source for this and get an idea of who these nine people are.

And looks like the BBC picked up on it a month ago.

Wasted wind power adds £40 to household energy costs, says think tank - BBC News

When it is very windy the grid cannot handle the extra power generated, says Carbon Tracker.

www.bbc.co.uk

Adds £40 to the average bill. Or just over 10p a day.

And £150 by 2026, and £180 by 2030.

 

[zefarelly]

We survived the hurricane in '87.

according to our 'dry-hump-ometer'' we use more electric than even that wind could generate.

I don't like to think about it tbh.

 

[Eric the meek]

@Hamilton, thanks for posting the relevant links. No excuses, but I'm still on the deck over this.

No doubt I'm naive, but I expect better behaviour from people.

 

[Garyoldfan]

There’s a documentary on the demise of Enron and the California energy crisis that helped drive up utility prices. Amazing what these scumbags were getting away with. Sounds like things don’t change.

 

[Eric the meek]

Why are we paying wind farm operators not to switch their turbines on, on windy days?

Why are we allowing wind farm operators not to switch their turbines on, and then exaggerate the power they would have produced, in order to get even more free money?

This country is a f***ing madhouse.

 

[Hamilton]

The good news is that capitalists see there’s money to be made in clean power. That means it will be a success.

The bad news is that it’s the infrastructure that’s not in place to ensure we capitalise on all the wind power we produce when we produce it.

 

[beorhthelm]

Why are we paying wind farm operators not to switch their turbines on, on windy days?

Why are we allowing wind farm operators not to switch their turbines on, and then exaggerate the power they would have produced, in order to get even more free money?

This country is a f***ing madhouse.

i believe it's becaue they are contracted to produce, so they get paid when the production is available. when the wind is too strong there is excess supply, combined with insufficent demand, they get paid anyway. and they turn off the turbines. there's nothing new about this, no secret. some game the system, not entirely unsurprising if there is money to be made. we want wind power, put mechanisms in place to ensure its profitable, someone finds a sneeky bonus.

what we need is some power sink that can store excesses. no one wants to pay the investment for that presently. batteries or better hydrogen stores on windfarm or existin power station sites would probably work.

 

[Eric the meek]

i believe it's becaue they are contracted to produce, so they get paid when the production is available. when the wind is too strong there is excess supply, combined with insufficent demand, they get paid anyway. and they turn off the turbines. there's nothing new about this, no secret. some game the system, not entirely unsurprising if there is money to be made. we want wind power, put mechanisms in place to ensure its profitable, someone finds a sneeky bonus.

what we need is some power sink that can store excesses. no one wants to pay the investment for that presently. batteries or better hydrogen stores on windfarm or existin power station sites would probably work.

It sounds a bit more than a sneaky bonus....

However, you could be right. What you say makes sense. The only trouble is, it is the end consumer who foots the bill for the sneaky bonus.

I appreciate that the whole enterprise needs to make a profit with a decent contingency margin, to allow for still days and variances in demand. But, and without knowing about the feasibility and cost effectiveness, I would have thought that some form of power storage would be preferable to not harnessing excess supply and compensating wind farm operators through their contracts.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Government and regulators asleep on the job. Again

We pay politicians to put procedures in place to make sure our money isn't wasted in this way

 

[Guy Fawkes]

All renewable power sources have issues connected to them, and the speed at which we are turning to them is creating additional problems, including the network capacity / storage issues, through to danger to animal / marine life that current and proposed solutions pose

Examples include:
* Marine mining for materials required for batteries (needed by the millions of electric cars that will be needed to replace ice vehicles, storing power generated by solar and wind, etc)
- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49759626 (there was a better article on the BBC site before but i've lost the link to it)
"It's widely accepted that whatever is in the path of the mining machines will be destroyed - there's no argument about that.
But what's uncertain is how far the damage will reach, in particular the size of the plumes of silt and sand churned up and the distance they will travel, potentially endangering marine life far beyond the mining site."

* Some new solar and wind sites are waiting up to 10 to 15 years to be connected because of a lack of capacity in the system
- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65500339

* The issue of storing power generated until it's required, how / where and building that capacity when compared to traditional forms of power generation we currently use which is already in a manageable form that allows easier storage (oil, gas, coal, etc)

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421517304925

The trouble is also the narrative has been that the need to switch is so urgent that it ha to be done almost overnight (never realistic) and so we end up with people who are left anxious due to the fear that has been built up by (for example) the media, etc over climate change and this then affects people's mental health. We also then see people like the Just stop oil protesters who think we can switch so no more oil is needed when that (and new) supply is needed to meet demand until new networks and power sources can be built and better solutions to major issues (like storing power until needed - ie, most power generated by solar will likely be needed once it's dark, especially in winter, rather than it being generated as and when it's actually needed as most traditional sources allow)

The danger is we try to go too fast and do a lot of significant damage to the environment in the name of being environmentally friendly and having people pushing for this to go too fast as the narrative is that it has to all be implemented yesterday to save the planet

 

[abc]

Every now and again, you read an article which takes your breath away. The following is according to a Bloomberg report.

'Britain’s outdated electricity network has a growing problem: On blustery days, too much wind power risks overloading the system, and the grid operator must respond by paying some firms not to generate. This “curtailment” costs consumers hundreds of millions of pounds each year.

Adding to that expense, some wind farm operators exaggerate how much energy they say they intend to produce, which boosts the payments they receive for turning off, according to nine people — traders, academics and market experts — most of whom agreed to discuss this controversial behavior only on condition of anonymity.

In effect, they said, the grid has paid some wind farms not to generate power that they wouldn’t have produced anyway.'

This has been going on at the same time as a cost of living crisis, with many families struggling to pay their rapidly rising energy bills, some having to choose between heating and eating etc.

Not really news. It is widely known and recognised that the national grid is not fit for now, let alone the future. But of course this requires enormous investment that will not win votes and we never have serious politicians that will make the ‘difficult decisions’ (one of my most despised phrases used in politics) for the long term benefit of the country.

 

[beorhthelm]

It sounds a bit more than a sneaky bonus....

However, you could be right. What you say makes sense. The only trouble is, it is the end consumer who foots the bill for the sneaky bonus.

I appreciate that the whole enterprise needs to make a profit with a decent contingency margin, to allow for still days and variances in demand. But, and without knowing about the feasibility and cost effectiveness, I would have thought that some form of power storage would be preferable to not harnessing excess supply and compensating wind farm operators through their contracts.

we dont pay directly for that sneaky bonus, we'll pay the same kWh/p. it's absorbed with all the other inefficencies and subsidies, someone else int he system got a little less revenue. the storage is another cost and the incentives aren't there - why store when you can switch off? so another manipulation to the market is needed to invest in some otherwise ineffcient system. or go the other way, if you had no guarantee production revenue then wind/solar would be incentivised to build storage and supply on demand.