Britain passes one week without coal power for first time since 1882(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Britain passes one week without coal power for first time since 1882
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/08/britain-passes-1-week-without-coal-power-for-first-time-since-1882
61 comments
That is not as crazy as it sounds. The problem with CO2 is the fact that we're burning oil that was previously safely sequestered deep below the surface, thus increasing dramatically the overal amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
The carbon from trees is part of the short term cycle, it was 'already in the environment'. The idea being of course that you burn biomass that is produced on purpose, or the byproduct of industrial activities, instead of massively cutting down trees in wild forrests. In this case, yes you're stil releasing carbon into the atmosphere, but the thing you're burning absorbed the carbon before so it's neutral.
Good filters are of course needed to prevent soot and particulates from polluting the air.
http://www.carbonneutralcommons.com/glossary/short-long-term...
The carbon from trees is part of the short term cycle, it was 'already in the environment'. The idea being of course that you burn biomass that is produced on purpose, or the byproduct of industrial activities, instead of massively cutting down trees in wild forrests. In this case, yes you're stil releasing carbon into the atmosphere, but the thing you're burning absorbed the carbon before so it's neutral.
Good filters are of course needed to prevent soot and particulates from polluting the air.
http://www.carbonneutralcommons.com/glossary/short-long-term...
It /is/ as crazy as it sounds. To make Drax seem "carbon neutral" you have to pretend that it's fine if the Carbon spends time in the form of CO2 the atmosphere, causing global warming, rather than in a bunch of mature trees because hey, it's the same carbon. But that's exactly the thing we were trying to prevent, we're not worried about running out of carbon, we're worried we're heating the planet up.
Is there reason to believe they're using old-growth trees rather than managed forests? I would guess the former are more valuable in actual wood products.
From what I can read here[0], I get the impression that turning unmanaged forests into managed forests is itself a threat to biodiversity:
> These Southeastern coastal forests in the US are home to bears, endangered red wolves, salamanders and a number of bird species as well as many endemic plants. According to a 2015 report by the National Resources Defense Council, the potential pellet sourcing area for existing and proposed pellet mills includes “critical habitat for 25 species that are federally listed as endangered or imperilled”. The area has been classified as a biodiversity hotspot, meaning that it contains an unusually high level of biodiversity (2000 endemic species in all) and that it is threatened. The threats here come from forest degradation and fragmentation, caused by urbanisation and ‘forest industries’ such as biomass.
[0]: https://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/2018/pellets-introduction/
> These Southeastern coastal forests in the US are home to bears, endangered red wolves, salamanders and a number of bird species as well as many endemic plants. According to a 2015 report by the National Resources Defense Council, the potential pellet sourcing area for existing and proposed pellet mills includes “critical habitat for 25 species that are federally listed as endangered or imperilled”. The area has been classified as a biodiversity hotspot, meaning that it contains an unusually high level of biodiversity (2000 endemic species in all) and that it is threatened. The threats here come from forest degradation and fragmentation, caused by urbanisation and ‘forest industries’ such as biomass.
[0]: https://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/2018/pellets-introduction/
Valuable to whom? What if they're old trees but not suitable for lumber products, but are perfectly fine shredded up into chips and thrown into furnaces?
Without protection everything's a useful asset to someone.
Without protection everything's a useful asset to someone.
The idea is that if you cut a tree down and burn it, the tree that grows in its place will just soak the carbon right back up again. When trees die and rot, the carbon gets released too.
there is still fossil fuel consumption for the chainsaws, transportation and so on...
I think it's safe to say it's several orders of magnitude less energy than provided by the trees chopped down, chipped or pelletized, and transported, though.
The other side of this is that Britain reduces is coal imports by more than 80% in less than 5 years! The UK wins twice - first, by cleaner air, second by a more favorable balance of payments.
https://ourworldindata.org/death-uk-coal
https://ourworldindata.org/death-uk-coal
well, they are burning wood pellets instead, so they are still importing millions of shitons of organic material.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/uk-now-burning-33-of-worlds-wood...
http://biomassmagazine.com/articles/13866/uk-wood-pellet-imp...
Is it better or worse than coal?
https://www.carbonbrief.org/uk-now-burning-33-of-worlds-wood...
http://biomassmagazine.com/articles/13866/uk-wood-pellet-imp...
Is it better or worse than coal?
I love these fake feel good stories. In other words, britain offloaded energy intensive manufacturing and its coal burning to china, india, etc.
Just like how ireland "recycles" most of its plastic by shipping them to china.
https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-plastic-waste-3786393-Jan2...
And of course how norway is doing wonders by buying electric cars and investing in "clean" energy using the money they got by selling oil.
I just can't stand the self-aggrandizing bullshit from northern european countries.
Just like how ireland "recycles" most of its plastic by shipping them to china.
https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-plastic-waste-3786393-Jan2...
And of course how norway is doing wonders by buying electric cars and investing in "clean" energy using the money they got by selling oil.
I just can't stand the self-aggrandizing bullshit from northern european countries.
This is an amazing milestone. Imagine what renewable energy can do for us in 5 years.
[deleted]
There's a real-time view of what is powering the UK national grid at [1]. Currently gas (~40%), wind (~22%), and nuclear (~18%), plus various interconnectors (who may be using coal?)
[1] https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
[1] https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
That's a very useful site!
Clicking the little France icon top left switches to the French equivalent. At the moment ~92% nuclear and ~11% hydro!
What really depresses me is looking at the Australian electricity generation mix:
https://www.energymatters.com.au/energy-efficiency/australia...
There is a ridiculously high amount of black and brown coal here.
Clicking the little France icon top left switches to the French equivalent. At the moment ~92% nuclear and ~11% hydro!
What really depresses me is looking at the Australian electricity generation mix:
https://www.energymatters.com.au/energy-efficiency/australia...
There is a ridiculously high amount of black and brown coal here.
Check out https://www.electricitymap.org to see a real time electrical generation/consumption mix map of the world, including past 24 hour historical data per grid operator.
Great Britain: https://www.electricitymap.org/?page=country&solar=false&rem...
No affiliation, just a huge fan of the folks at Tomorrow who put it together. If you don't see your local geography supported, contributing a scraper is possible via their Github repo [1].
[1] https://github.com/tmrowco/electricitymap-contrib#adding-a-n...
Great Britain: https://www.electricitymap.org/?page=country&solar=false&rem...
No affiliation, just a huge fan of the folks at Tomorrow who put it together. If you don't see your local geography supported, contributing a scraper is possible via their Github repo [1].
[1] https://github.com/tmrowco/electricitymap-contrib#adding-a-n...
Wow that really is depressing.
Why doesn't Australia use the massive potential of Solar? They must have million square miles to spare which has year-round (very strong) sunlight?
Even at relatively low yields, it would be huge.
Edit: just realised it's 0200 there and it's a live graph! It looks like solar made up almost 10% in 2018 - most of this is small-scale rooftop systems.
Why doesn't Australia use the massive potential of Solar? They must have million square miles to spare which has year-round (very strong) sunlight?
Even at relatively low yields, it would be huge.
Edit: just realised it's 0200 there and it's a live graph! It looks like solar made up almost 10% in 2018 - most of this is small-scale rooftop systems.
It's probably related to the fact that they're the top exporter and a top-5 producer of coal. The "Market" means you use what's cheap, and coal must be very cheap to purchase (and burn) there.
Further, setting up solar panel infrastructure is high up-front capital expense, and the Australian banks that might finance such expenditures are notoriously risk averse, and likely have plenty of assets tied up in the coal industry, so they'd have no interest in disrupting it. Toss in the idea that cheap coal probably equals cheap electricity, whereas solar would be relatively expensive (most countries get with now-mature solar industries circumvent this by subsidizing nascent solar generators).
That's a killer recipe for maintaining the status quo.
Further, setting up solar panel infrastructure is high up-front capital expense, and the Australian banks that might finance such expenditures are notoriously risk averse, and likely have plenty of assets tied up in the coal industry, so they'd have no interest in disrupting it. Toss in the idea that cheap coal probably equals cheap electricity, whereas solar would be relatively expensive (most countries get with now-mature solar industries circumvent this by subsidizing nascent solar generators).
That's a killer recipe for maintaining the status quo.
Possibly also relevant, the political scene in Australia is so very depressing. It’s broken at a state and national level and this is reflected in their rolling leadership changes.
Coal might be cheap, but power prices are at a record high. As others have said, Australia has major politician and social failings in progress.
Australian here: believe me, we would love to move to renewable and generally more sustainable energy sources. However our current government has this obsession with coal.
This has lead to stunts such as an MP saying “coal is good for Australians”, and bringing a lump of coal to parliament. The current conservative government desperately trying to approve the Adani coal mine despite the consistently falling price and demand for coal and the fact that they would need to seriously damage the Great Barrier Reef to build it. Another MP wearing a hi-vis vest of a coal mine into parliament, the current government spouting all sorts of lies about “clean coal” and how “nobody really cares about climate change”.
This has lead to stunts such as an MP saying “coal is good for Australians”, and bringing a lump of coal to parliament. The current conservative government desperately trying to approve the Adani coal mine despite the consistently falling price and demand for coal and the fact that they would need to seriously damage the Great Barrier Reef to build it. Another MP wearing a hi-vis vest of a coal mine into parliament, the current government spouting all sorts of lies about “clean coal” and how “nobody really cares about climate change”.
This is a super interesting in depth article on the current state of climate policy, energy systems etc in Australia: https://www.carbonbrief.org/the-carbon-brief-profile-austral...
I highly recommend carbonbrief in general
I highly recommend carbonbrief in general
Mostly it's because of renewables integration difficulties. Look at the grid problems South Australia has experienced in recent years: cheap solar has caused coal generators to go out of business, with the result that periods of low solar and high load (like a hot summer night) can trigger blackouts. This problem needs to be solved before we can increase renewables generation.
That’s not really the case. With dispatchables, curtailment, frequency correction from battery storage, etc. these aren’t really a problem until you get to more like 85-90% renewables across the whole grid. By then hopefully we’ll have enough pumped hydro to deal with shortfalls, and of course there will always be some gas backup just in case.
Renewables haven’t actually been the cause of any of our recent blackouts. Even back in the big storm a few years ago when they were blamed by conservative politicians and journalists, the actual reports came back showing it was more to do with the wind downing critical transmission lines, one of the interconnectors being out of service, grid management issues, etc. - that a bunch of wind turbines tripped due to safety settings was basically meaningless given all the actual problems.
More recently, coal and gas plant failures have been much more of a problem, like in the recent Victoria when over a GW of fossil fuel generation was out of service. It would been a lot worse without solar and hydro, as well as unexpectedly good wind conditions that took up a lot of the shortfall.
Renewables haven’t actually been the cause of any of our recent blackouts. Even back in the big storm a few years ago when they were blamed by conservative politicians and journalists, the actual reports came back showing it was more to do with the wind downing critical transmission lines, one of the interconnectors being out of service, grid management issues, etc. - that a bunch of wind turbines tripped due to safety settings was basically meaningless given all the actual problems.
More recently, coal and gas plant failures have been much more of a problem, like in the recent Victoria when over a GW of fossil fuel generation was out of service. It would been a lot worse without solar and hydro, as well as unexpectedly good wind conditions that took up a lot of the shortfall.
I'd say it's mostly about vested interests. Mining is a huge industry in Australia. Big business have politicians in their pocket.
To some extent it's also about jobs. Where I grew up, in the Hunter Valley, coal mining is a major employer. The export boom in commodities fueled the economy and lifestyle of tens of thousands. Shut down that industry a lot of people are going to hurt financially. Politicians just won't do it.
It's a case of short term electoral thinking at the expense of the environmental future.
To some extent it's also about jobs. Where I grew up, in the Hunter Valley, coal mining is a major employer. The export boom in commodities fueled the economy and lifestyle of tens of thousands. Shut down that industry a lot of people are going to hurt financially. Politicians just won't do it.
It's a case of short term electoral thinking at the expense of the environmental future.
Cheap solar did not cause the south Australian power outages.
A poorly maintained grid and a storm bringing down some infrastructure, and then the government steadfastly refusing to bring a power station online in peak demand were the causes of the power outages; renewables had nothing to do with it.
A poorly maintained grid and a storm bringing down some infrastructure, and then the government steadfastly refusing to bring a power station online in peak demand were the causes of the power outages; renewables had nothing to do with it.
There are loads of great resources that display this data.
https://www.electricitymap.org/ provides a global map view.
https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/people/alex.rogers/gridcarbon/ has apps that calculate the carbon intensity.
https://carbonintensity.org.uk/ is my current favourite. It's an API that provides GB data broken down regionally and with a forecast powered by ML.
I wrote more here: https://unop.uk/your-planet-needs-you/
If you want to get involved start here: https://climateaction.tech/
https://www.electricitymap.org/ provides a global map view.
https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/people/alex.rogers/gridcarbon/ has apps that calculate the carbon intensity.
https://carbonintensity.org.uk/ is my current favourite. It's an API that provides GB data broken down regionally and with a forecast powered by ML.
I wrote more here: https://unop.uk/your-planet-needs-you/
If you want to get involved start here: https://climateaction.tech/
If you look at Electricity Map [1], you can see a real time view, as well as the inter-connectors.
As I write this, the UK is importing 3% from Belgium, 4% from France and 3% from the Netherlands. Belgium and France aren't burning coal, but I think the Netherlands is. 1% of Belgium's electricity is also imported from the Netherlands.
1. https://www.electricitymap.org/?page=country&solar=false&rem...
As I write this, the UK is importing 3% from Belgium, 4% from France and 3% from the Netherlands. Belgium and France aren't burning coal, but I think the Netherlands is. 1% of Belgium's electricity is also imported from the Netherlands.
1. https://www.electricitymap.org/?page=country&solar=false&rem...
Don't forget to mouse over the dials for a handy explanation of the data.
An interesting relation in the production of wind vs burning gas. You can easily see how gas is used to fill in when the wind is not blowing.
Gas is often used for load balancing, even before renewables became more widespread. Some types of gas generator plants can be spun up to full capacity in a matter of minutes. Nuclear on the other hand is the opposite. It takes considerable time to spin up or down but is great at providing a very high, very steady baseload.
> Nuclear on the other hand is the opposite. It takes considerable time to spin up or down but is great at providing a very high, very steady baseload.
Not correct. Nuclear power is pilotable, even if not as much. It's used as a base load because it's more profitable.
Not correct. Nuclear power is pilotable, even if not as much. It's used as a base load because it's more profitable.
Just read up a little bit and didn't know how controllable the output of a reactor is. I guess I was thinking more about spinning up from zero.
[deleted]
It is possible but since the fuel costs are insignificant compared to the construction cost of the plant there are no savings to be gained by shutting the plant down. Generating less electricity means slower amortization.
Also, that's nuclear as built. Pilotable nuclear reactors can be built, otherwise nuclear-powered ships couldn't accelerate.
Do you know where the night demand comes from? I expected to see a bigger drop at night
UK has some tariffs with a cheaper electric charge at night called Economy 7. This is used to heat storage heaters for properties without gas central heating.
Industrial load will also play a factor, as will lighting homes during the dark hours.
Industrial load will also play a factor, as will lighting homes during the dark hours.
The biggest industrial users - those on half hourly metering - also get discounts to move usage offpeak, and there's some tariff options that turn off or restrict those highest users during peaks. Partly so the grid don't have to keep waking up Dinorwig. :)
To save others googling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinorwig_Power_Station - cheers for the interesting read!
Wow. When notified in advance, Dinorwig can go from 0MW to 1800 MW power delivery in 16 seconds. Unprepared, looks like it takes a couple of minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McByJeX2evM
Absolutely breathtaking inside that place.
Absolutely breathtaking inside that place.
Rimmer: We can’t afford to take any chances. Jump up to red alert.
Kryten: Are you sure, sir? It does mean changing the bulb.
Kryten: Are you sure, sir? It does mean changing the bulb.
Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruachan_Power_Station
Worth a visit https://www.visitcruachan.co.uk/ and if you go by train it's discounted
Worth a visit https://www.visitcruachan.co.uk/ and if you go by train it's discounted
Seems puny compared to the twin plants on the Niagara in the USA/Canada (both are pumped-storage hydro):
2,675 MW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses_Niagara_Power_Pla...
1,997 MW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Adam_Beck_Hydroelectric_Ge...
2,675 MW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses_Niagara_Power_Pla...
1,997 MW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Adam_Beck_Hydroelectric_Ge...
You're comparing apples to oranges. They're not pumped storage stations.
Technically, they're actually both:
"Water enters the forebay via tunnels from the Niagara River controlled via the International Control Dam upstream of the natural falls. Water in the forebay is then either pumped up into the upper reservoir or immediately sent down over the escarpment downstream of the natural falls into the Robert Moses Power Station turbines."
So, it's like more like Malus pumila (Domestic Apple) to Malus sieversii (Wild Apple).
"Water enters the forebay via tunnels from the Niagara River controlled via the International Control Dam upstream of the natural falls. Water in the forebay is then either pumped up into the upper reservoir or immediately sent down over the escarpment downstream of the natural falls into the Robert Moses Power Station turbines."
So, it's like more like Malus pumila (Domestic Apple) to Malus sieversii (Wild Apple).
And lighting the outdoors, streetlights etc. One of the few things you really can see from space.
I can't find firm material on exactly what explains the night usage — I'm sure the National Grid have details on this somewhere. Even so, the price of electricity reduces at night and so industry uses it a lot during that time. A lot of people leave appliances on overnight too, like washing machines.
I expect that if solar becomes a dominant source of electricity, time-insensitive industrial uses (eg, aluminum smelting) will happily become daylight operations.
Aluminium cells can only be powered down for 4-5 hours before they become very expensive bricks. They can be (and they already are) used to smooth out grid fluctuations, but not on the scale of day to night.
In theory, could the cells reside in a high temperature resistant vacuum flask (Dewar flask)? Made from quartz perhaps?
It might need supports between the inner and outer walls, causing heat to leak, and hence multiple layers of vacuum with supports to be required for containing the heat...
It might need supports between the inner and outer walls, causing heat to leak, and hence multiple layers of vacuum with supports to be required for containing the heat...
And people on economy 7 tariffs heating storage heaters, although in the summer months that wouldn't be usual.
[deleted]
In some part, what you're seeing on the demand side is underestimated during the day, due to solar not being centrally metered, and offsetting some of the true demand. As the mouseover on the solar gauge says, you can see this in the demand drop around noon.
(who may be using coal?)
Australia and Germany?
Australia and Germany?
Also worth keeping in mind that a many coal power plants have just switched over to burning "biomass", which is a lovely sounding euphemism for burning wood, but is "green energy" and thus eligible for massive subsidies. Drax, the largest CO2 emitter in the UK, burns more wood than the UK produces, so a lot of it comes from forests being chopped down in the US.[2]
[0]: https://www.coalaction.org.uk/2018/03/protection-camp
[1]: https://friendsoftheearth.uk/climate-change/saving-druridge-...
[2]: https://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/axedrax-campaign/