Why the UK's Power Grid is Sidelining Clean-Energy Battery Storage (ft.com) 95
The administrators of Great Britain's power grid admit that it's often unable to use energy-storage batteries due to old computer systems and an old network with "not enough cables", according to the Financial Times — though the system operator says they're making progress after upgrading their system last December:
The company has plans to lower the rate at which batteries are sidelined to single figures by early next year [said Craig Dyke, from National Grid's electricity system operator], calling current levels "higher than where we want them to be". Dyke's comments came in response to a letter from four leading battery storage groups which said National Grid's "electricity system operator" or ESO division was making the country's power costlier and dirtier by failing to use their technology properly. "Consumers are paying more, clean renewable energy is being wasted, and fossil fuel generation is being used instead," they said... depriving them of revenue and undermining investor confidence.
While the U.K. has the world's second-largest offshore wind market, the article notes that when the system operator can't send its power where it's needed, "the ESO pays wind farms in one place to switch off... and can also need to pay gas-fired power plants in another area to turn on. These payments add up to hundreds of millions of pounds each year, and the costs are passed on to household and business energy bills."
"Use of battery storage abroad has soared in places such as California, where batteries soak up solar power during the day and regularly supply a fifth of the state's power in the evening..."
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader AmiMoJo for sharing the article.
While the U.K. has the world's second-largest offshore wind market, the article notes that when the system operator can't send its power where it's needed, "the ESO pays wind farms in one place to switch off... and can also need to pay gas-fired power plants in another area to turn on. These payments add up to hundreds of millions of pounds each year, and the costs are passed on to household and business energy bills."
"Use of battery storage abroad has soared in places such as California, where batteries soak up solar power during the day and regularly supply a fifth of the state's power in the evening..."
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader AmiMoJo for sharing the article.
Re: (Score:2)
Hint: look into pumped hydro, best last time I checked.
We have this in Scotland, but it isn't going to be possible for it to be used in the flatter parts of the UK. Other mechanisms will be necessary.
Re:Battery storage is a waste (Score:5, Insightful)
A water tower is no use for energy storage, except in the sense that they were designed for which is to regulate pressure. It doesn't store enough water. That's why pumped hydro uses geological features--you don't have to pay for the mountain.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A water tower feeds the poupation with water.
It cant be used to generate the leccy, no volume.
Who would build them anyway? No need for a water tower even for supply to households in the UK.
Re: (Score:1)
In short it was a scam to pump profits to connected concerns.
everyone else get fucked.....at best
20000 gallon pond in my backyard? (Score:2)
A battery box does fit however.
All storage systems lose energy charging (Score:5, Informative)
Batteries are no worse than hydro and a lot more convenient. You can only install hydro if the geography and geology allow it, batteries can be installed pretty much anywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you forget to take your pills this morning?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
who simply repeats the non-sense woke narrative du jour
You heard it hear first guys, apparently batteries a "woke narrative" now. Is it only the batteries with female connectors on it, or are you also afraid of batteries with black anodes?
You are welcomed on my lawn nevertheless!
Mate I will stay off your lawn to keep minimum safe distance from your crazy arse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> batteries can be installed pretty much anywhere
Except in the UK where pretty much anywhere is hard to find. All land is owned, most of it is farmland and we barely have enough of that.
The only land thus is out at sea, with the turbines.
Re:Battery storage is a waste (Score:5, Informative)
Pumped hydro round-trip efficiency is 70-80% ($106 and $200 per kilowatt-hour)
Battery round-trip efficiency is about 80-90% (lithium-ion) ($393 and $581)
Battery round-trip efficiency is about 50-60% (iron-oxygen) ($40 to $60)
Problem with pumped hydro is that there are not many places where you can build it and it requires a lot of space. If these are not a problem, it is a good alternative.
Re:Battery storage is a waste (Score:5, Informative)
>> Battery round-trip efficiency is about 80-90% (lithium-ion) ($393 and $581)
> This sounds fake to me, can you provide any link/reference?
https://atb.nrel.gov/electrici... [nrel.gov]
"(Mongird et al., 2020) identified 86% as a representative round-trip efficiency"
Re: (Score:2)
ORLY? Toyota has a range of BEVs [wikipedia.org] already, built on a dedicated BEV platform (i.e. not just adaptations of ICE models).
Re: (Score:2)
It comforts me that Mr. Toyota seems to think as I do, at least, maybe I ain't that crazy :)
There is no Mr Toyota. The founder's name was Toyoda, as is the current chairman. Leaving aside that Toyota invested a fuckton into battery R&D, and that they have EVs on the market, I'm curious what you think stores the energy in their hybrids. Hopes and dreams? Concentrated anger against windfarms?
Re:Battery storage is a waste (Score:5, Informative)
There are benefits to both.
Batteries can react really fast, in a fraction of a cycle. Very handy for dealing with sudden loads and local brown-out issues.
Pumped storage has spinning mass which helps with frequency stability. You can just have the spinning mass on its own of course, which Ireland is using now.
Re:Battery storage is a waste (Score:5, Informative)
> Uh, sure. Except - when was the last time the grid actually needed that sub-minute kick that "only batteries" can provide?
Sorry, I am not familiar with the US energy grid, but at least in the EU, there is a need for different kinds of reserve energies. 1. phase needs to step in within 30 seconds, second phase within 5 minutes and third within 15 minutes. Fast response is needed when there is a sudden, unexpected failure.
https://clouglobal.com/power-g... [clouglobal.com]
You wanted real world examples. The ones from Australia come to my mind where power plants suddenly went offline.
https://www.ecowatch.com/tesla... [ecowatch.com]
Of course you don't have to have this kind of a feature. You could instead just cut electricity from some of the users to balance the grid. So this is more of a "nice to have" feature.
Re: Battery storage is a waste (Score:3)
In the modern age of wind and solar that need for a rapid response has really increased. Once you get enough wind or solar on a local section of a grid it can be difficult even for more traditional fossil peaking resources to ramp fast enough to meet renewable resources synchronized fluctuations.
There are new generations of iron-air and similar batteries just starting to get real tests that would be far more suited to moving solar power from 12pm to 9pm, but given the lag time on this kind of technology I w
Re: Battery storage is a waste (Score:5, Informative)
Wind and solar are not the reason why you need rapid response, at least not on the level of grid scale batteries. It's true that some wind and solar farms do add batteries to smooth their output, but we are talking about events where a transmission line goes down or a breaker trips and you lose a gigawatt or more instantly.
Solar and wind output variation is on the scale of megawatts, even of large farms, and the change happens over tens of seconds at the very fastest. Remember that turbines are spinning and clouds take time to travel over a farm.
A gigawatt deficit instantly is enough to cause severe voltage sag. A grid scale battery can react in milliseconds to correct it. That reduces wear on spinning generation, and prevents voltage problems severe enough to e.g. crash computers and other equipment.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
GP is correct. Solar has no spinning reserve without battery, so the higher percentage of its use will increase the need for batteries. Wind can get by with slower response sources, but with high concentrations of wind faster response is needed to maintain stability when wind variability is high.
Like many things there are different ways to solve a problem, but batteries' ability to both source and sink power quickly makes them extremely useful to the grid.
Re: Battery storage is a waste (Score:5, Interesting)
Are you not familiar with TV pickup?
The grids in the UK, and also in Ireland, regularly needs to deal with many (or even almost every household) turning on 3kW electric kettles almost simultaneously. Half time of sporting events. Quick, put the kettle on.
Ad breaks in popular TV shows.
Quick, put the kettle on.
Shocking News!
Quick, put the kettle on.
Millions of houses suddenly demanding an extra 3 kilowatts all coordinated by the News, or a major sporting event. Sure, that's largely predictable, but also, not perfectly.
One particular sporting event caused a 2.8 gigawatt increase in demand. And because kettles are only on for a few minutes these are short demands. The grid has to be ready for them.
Re: (Score:2)
There are benefits to both.
Batteries can react really fast, in a fraction of a cycle. Very handy for dealing with sudden loads and local brown-out issues.
Pumped storage has spinning mass which helps with frequency stability. You can just have the spinning mass on its own of course, which Ireland is using now.
Capacitors could do that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
> Capacitors could do that:
No, they could not. Capacitors can smooth DC ripple; what is needed is AC frequency stabilization.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Reacts to the needs of the electric grid in less than 0.1 seconds"
That's not fast enough.
That's probably fast enough to respond to large and sudden changes in demand, but not good enough to avoid surges or brownouts that can trip safety devices or damage machinery. 0.1 seconds is nearly 7 full cycles at 60hz and 5 cycles at 50Hz. You need less-than-one-cycle reaction times swing from providing to absorbing megawatts of power to fully suppress the transients.
When the grid is stabilized by massive rotating m
Re: (Score:2)
Electronics just ain't good enough yet. For now the only way to fully replace things like turbines is with flywheels that serve the same function...
When the first grid-tie inverters were developed they shut down as soon as they were connected to the grid because they were programmed with the standards provided by the utility company which they were not themselves meeting.
Re: (Score:2)
That's sounds apocryphal. Regardless, if the frequency does go sufficiently out of whack you'd want the inverters to stop outputting because obviously something is wrong.
Also that doesn't mean the inverters are, or ever were, good enough to provide grid stabilization.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:3)
Batteries can react really fast, in a fraction of a cycle. Very handy for dealing with sudden loads and local brown-out issues.
Pumped storage has spinning mass which helps with frequency stability.
That's not how that works. You don't need mass to help frequency stability. You need the ability to push and pull current onto the grid. In traditional large spiny things it just so happens to be that they do this via EMF, but there's no reason you can't do that purely electrically without any mechanical force.
In fact batteries by virtue of how fast they can act (literally in tiny fractions of a cycle) provide far better frequency stability on a grid than any traditional plant we have used for frequency con
Re: (Score:2)
Pumped storage has spinning mass which helps with frequency stability
Why don't you seem to think that inverters which can kick in within a fraction of a cycle help frequency stability? That first massive battery they built in Australia was primarily for grid stability.
Re: (Score:2)
There are a variety of reasons, some or all of which can be overcome with suitable electronics, but spinning mass is a proven and reliable solution.
For example, phase differences. You don't need to try to keep inverters separated by hundreds or thousands of kilometres in phase, you can just use a big spinning mass that naturally takes care of the problem.
Batteries are great for short term stability issues at a relatively "local" level, local as in a section of the grid. They are also good for smoothing outp
Battery storage is a waste - wrong cost measure (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And the maintenance costs on *any* utility? I mean, like Thames Water? The odds are better that publicly-owned utilities will get maintenance then privately owned. See: PG&E, and Norfolk Southern RR, and...
Re: (Score:2)
> look into pumped hydro, best last time I checked.
We have that, had it for decades. Hard to find places to build it. You aint building one in Norfolk :D
What a waste... (Score:3, Insightful)
Slow SlashDotWeekend?
> can't send its power where it's needed,
Power isn't "sent". There is a demand for power and power is transmitted. Battiers are on of the sources where stored power can be retriieved.
What DO those high paid "storage managers" do? They turn on and off things to avoid overloading the grid (see above), causing power plant starvation, etc. They don't actually control PRODUCTION of power, or DISTRIBUTION of power, other than a really gross (as in not-fine) adjustment of how the power that exists addresses the nees of the power that is needed.
Are bats bad? No, not at all. They're a stored power source that helps meet periods where demand exceeds PRODUCTION. We can fix production but that creates a SUPPY that in times of non-need goes to waste (but could charge bats).
But hey, it's SlashdotWeekend.
Re: (Score:3)
To be fair, the UK grid, like most of Western Europe, is very stable. Power outages are rare and only happen due to physical damage to the network, e.g. severe storms or construction accidents.
We don't have issues like in the US where the grid operator and the generators are to blame for problems.
Re: (Score:1)
Do you live in the UK or another part of Western EU? Have you stayed/visited enough parts of the US to justify your take on the topic or you only rely on reports you get? If so, who provides the reports?
My experience is that the US grid is on average at least as reliable as the EU one.
Re: (Score:1)
To be fair, the UK grid, like most of Western Europe, is very stable. Power outages are rare and only happen due to physical damage to the network, e.g. severe storms or construction accidents.
We don't have issues like in the US where the grid operator and the generators are to blame for problems.
One of the first problems is trying to compare the UK grid to the US grid.
When it is a flex to proclaim the superiority of all things Europe and Brexitland, where do you get your reports regarding the failed/failing US power grid?
Re: (Score:3)
Well there is the Texas grid, which I accept is a basket case even by US standards. Then there was Enron...
Looking at historic data though, it does seem that issues related to grid stability (rather than extreme weather or sabotage) are more common in the US.
Re: (Score:3)
Well there is the Texas grid, which I accept is a basket case even by US standards. Then there was Enron...
Looking at historic data though, it does seem that issues related to grid stability (rather than extreme weather or sabotage) are more common in the US.
The Texas grid, as it's name implies is not part of the American grid, but a product of kooks - the Jesus grid or some other tomfoolery. While they shivered and some died in the dark, the states nearby enjoyed uninterrupted electricity.
Ah yes - Enron. Criminal activity.
Our grid is huge and despite the propaganda, works pretty well. The difference is probably because if there is a power outage in the USA, it is held up as the failure of our ideology, which is the very base of your Enron/Texas grid as
Re: (Score:2)
How big do you think the UK is? Because a million without power is a very small fraction...
That event was due to weather, as I recall. For most people here, power cuts are something that happen once every few decades, if that. The last one here was in the early 2000s and was due to some water people accidentally tripping a breaker that affected around 10 houses. Mine was only half affected - electricity stayed on, but the internet went down as it took out the street cabinet that I was connected to.
Re: (Score:1)
How big do you think the UK is?
The size of a few small postage stamps, with a population matching California + Texas. And hopefully for Ireland the UK gets smaller still soon.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem in this case is that they don't have enough capacity in the long-distance transmission lines to be able to move power from the places where there is too much renewable generation (e.g. wind turbines) to the places where there is high demand.
Re: (Score:3)
Power isn't "sent". There is a demand for power and power is transmitted.
transÂmit /tranzËmit,tran(t)sËmit/
verb
verb: transmit; 3rd person present: transmits; past tense: transmitted; past participle: transmitted; gerund or present participle: transmitting
cause (something) to pass on from one place or person to another.
"knowledge is transmitted from teacher to student"
broadcast or send out (an electrical signal or a radio or television program).
"the p
Privatisation (Score:4, Insightful)
This is what happens when you privatise basic utlities that are a monopoly. As they have no competition they become more interested in servicing dividend payments and maintaining share price via ever higher charges than improving the the infrastructure they're responsible for. Water companies are another example of this failed model.
Re: (Score:2)
I will admit that my favorite utilities have always been cooperatives.
Re:Privatisation (Score:4, Funny)
In british english privatiSe is spelt with an 'S' dickhead. If your dialect spells it with a Z thats not my problem.
Re: (Score:2)
I suggest you do a search on "Thames Water".
Re: (Score:3)
It is more complicated that just privitisation.
One solution to the problem they are noting is to put a battery next to where the wind power onshores. And another battery next to the nearby cities.
Now, as well as having storage for when wind supply varies, you can reduce the requirement on the grid connection; with a big enough batteries at either end, it only needs to cope with the average supply and average demand (which, with luck, are the same), not the peak demand and peak supply.
Problem is, the nationa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I think it is all a bit more complicated than that. They privatised the market here in Belgium. Plenty of players, government forcing high investments to make the grid more dynamic. Penalties for consumers that have a too high peak power consumption. Still plenty of trouble keeping the grid up though. All in a day's work.
An AC Power grid is quite a complicated thing. There is a lot of switching sources to keep it all running and generating power at the right frequency. and turbine generators have to be tightly controlled to avoid loss of load overspin. Batteries are actually a godsend when plumbed into the grid. Someone mentioned them acting as a sort of capacitor. But even if not used to store renewable power, they make a nice method of power response/balancing.
Not to mention the next step of making wind and solar into
Re: (Score:2)
This is what happens when you privatize basic utilities that are a monopoly. As they have no competition they become more interested in servicing dividend payments and maintaining share price via ever higher charges than improving the the infrastructure they're responsible for. Water companies are another example of this failed model.
A common sentiment, and one with zero evidence. The effects of privatization on the energy industry is actually fairly well studied, as we have examples of extremely poorly performing publicly owned utilities being made private (entire nations, municipal utilities, the works) and vice versa where formerly private utilities were bought out or nationalized. There actually isn't any clear pattern of success or failure, nor is there any consistent data indicating private vs public ownership performs vastly bett
Re: (Score:1)
I think the big mistake is not so much privatizing a public utility as privatizing a well functioning public utility for ideological reasons. If a public utility is doing a good job, don't sell them off just because you have a generalized desire to shrink the public sector. Very often, that ideological commitment to shrinking the public sector just happens to be funded by the people who want to buy the newly privatized business for less than it's worth. In the same vein, focus your desire to nationalize
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically, it was the EU in a series of directives beginning in 1966 that dictated that energy markets had to be liberalised ostensibly to increase competition and benefit consumers. It worked well for a while, until it didn't.
And with good reason (Score:1)
Battery storage will never scale up to anything more than a few hours' storage to smooth out demand peaks. Even covering a few days of low renewable generation isn't feasible. Case in point, the UK already has Europe's largest grid battery storage facility. It cost £75 million and holds a 98 MWh, enough to power the UK for a few seconds.
The best way of managing a surplus or deficit of wind energy is via interconnection with other markets, and the UK has a number of those with more in the planning stag
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Battery storage will never scale up to anything more than a few hours' storage to smooth out demand peaks. Even covering a few days of low renewable generation isn't feasible. Case in point, the UK already has Europe's largest grid battery storage facility. It cost £75 million and holds a 98 MWh, enough to power the UK for a few seconds.
The best way of managing a surplus or deficit of wind energy is via interconnection with other markets, and the UK has a number of those with more in the planning stages.
Not that long ago battery storage wasn't even supposed to be able to do that. Now batteries "...regularly supply a fifth of the state's [California's] power in the evening...". You must be one of those people whose advice can be used as a reliable barometer for what not to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Battery storage will never scale up to anything more than a few hours' storage to smooth out demand peaks. Even covering a few days of low renewable generation isn't feasible. Case in point, the UK already has Europe's largest grid battery storage facility. It cost £75 million and holds a 98 MWh, enough to power the UK for a few seconds.
The best way of managing a surplus or deficit of wind energy is via interconnection with other markets, and the UK has a number of those with more in the planning stages.
Thanks for that, I can clearly see you see clearly :)
Re: (Score:3)
The question is how much storage do we need? It would be expensive to power the UK for days on end while all renewable power is switched off, just using batteries alone. But, we don't need that. Wind and solar do not behave like that anyway, but in addition we have nuclear (with HPC coming onstream soon), plus pumped and unpumped hydro.
Add in a couple of percentage of tidal. Repurpose the nat gas facilities into green hydrogen for seasonal storage, with some seasonal thermal storage for the few places we ca
Re: (Score:2)
And, yes, as you note, that is before interconnect. The UK has multiple GW interconnect already and more coming.
Re: (Score:2)
Wind and solar do not behave like that
They absolutely do. Solar output drops to almost nothing in the UK winter, my own panels are testament to that. As for wind, the entire British Isles can suffer from becalment for weeks at a time. The Germans even have a word for it: Dunkelflaute. No amount of storage, whether battery, hydro or whatever is going to see the grid through such a period.
Re: And with good reason (Score:2)
Guaranteed supply contracts. Contracts that extend for weeks or even months to reserve alternate sources in the event yours is down. It's done all the time for traditional generation. Like when it's a drought year and your hydro reservoir is empty. You pay someone to be there, just in case. For wind/solar, there's no reason that can't be gas turbines and/or nuclear. Just pay them to maintain their systems on standby.
And by "pay", I mean the solar/wind generators pay. After all, it's their unreliability we
Re: (Score:2)
Every time renewables is discussed, someone pops up and says "dunkelflaute".
Yes, it's a known issue. It doesn't cause a complete loss of wind power, it rarely covers the whole on the UK onshore and offshore and it is well known in advance.
First, the problem gets less as wind power gets more widespread. As floating wind comes to Scotland (which currently has little offshore) the problem will reduce significantly.
For the rest, batteries will cover short duration drops, interconnect will cover longer duration.
Re: (Score:2)
Good points, also worth mentioning that the UK has a large number of CCGT power plants which can be spun up quickly to cover any shortfalls from renewables.
I downloaded the data for the UK's total power output for the past year in response to leathered post, using the same data I can see that:
When wind is generating 10GW+, CCGT averages 5.82GW
When wind is generating between 5GW and 10GW, CCGT averages 7.15GW
When wind is generating less than 5GW, CCGT averages 10.59GW
So the two are complementary. Wind is pre
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. And in the ten or fifteen years that it will take to build out enough renewables that we can start thinking about how to balance the grid without that gas, the technology will probably have advanced enough that we won't need to think about it too much; the answers are being developed and will be there.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not so sure. I downloaded the raw data for the last year re power from https://www.gridwatch.templar.... [templar.co.uk]
What would you describe as "total becalment"?
Wind 1.711GW or lower (5% of total power generated)
6.2% of the time
Wind 2.5% of total power generated or lower
1.55% of the time
Wind 1% of total power generated or lower
0.26% of the time
The longest consecutive time that wind power dropped below 1% in the last year was for 7 hours between 1930 24/02/2024 and 0240 25/02/2024. So the actual data doesn't support
Re: (Score:2)
I tried raising the threshold for "becalment" to wind power being under 5% of total power generated (1.711GW) in an attempt to further test your theory.
Wind power below 1.711GW (5% of total)
04/05/24 2035 - 11/05/24 00:55
For 55.8% of those 6 days and 4 hours, the power contributed by wind was below 1.711GW (5% of total)
The average power generated during that period was 1.762GW (5.15% of total power generated).
I cherry-picked the absolute worst data for the past 12 months, and that was the best I could come u
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. If you overlay this with solar, you will find some correlation but some of the wind lows will have been during summer. And, as we build more spread out wind farms, further to sea, those numbers will drop because the weather patterns get less correlated.
We already produce 3GW of biogas (from sewage, agricultural waste and landfill). Instead of using that, store it and use that for on-demand power. It's enough.
Re: (Score:2)
> and a functional government.
We haven't had one of those for at least 5 years, maybe more like 8-10. It's unclear if we have one now, but at least they're talking up a good job. They may be more focussed on fiddling with things they shouldn't touch, rather than this though - we'll see.
Re: (Score:2)
I think iron-air battery will be so cost effective that the only upper limit is from the technology, which is 3 days. Of course making enough batteries to last for 3 days to cover all electricity usage on the USA would be a massive project, required hundreds of thousands of factories, which makes it unlikely to happen, but it would still be possible, if we just wanted to do it.
> The best way of managing a surplus or deficit of wind energy is via interconnection with other markets
I agree to some extend.
Re: (Score:2)
I think iron-air battery will be so cost effective that the only upper limit is from the technology, which is 3 days. Of course making enough batteries to last for 3 days to cover all electricity usage on the USA would be a massive project, required hundreds of thousands of factories, which makes it unlikely to happen, but it would still be possible, if we just wanted to do it.
> The best way of managing a surplus or deficit of wind energy is via interconnection with other markets
I agree to some extend. Problem is price difference between those markets. When you connect two markets well enough, the price on those markets will balance out. This means that it will create losers and winners. Those who are about to lose money, will most likely be against it.
I'm a fan of Nickel-Iron batteries, but we're in the same neighborhood.
Chemistry and development are the keys. Whether from old school Carbon/Zinc to the air batteries to Lithium to sodium. All pretty basic chemistry, so it's the development controlling things.
You want toughness, the ability to withstand abuse. You want low cost and durability. You want the battery banks to have storage capacity for likely outages. There are a lot of potential (hehe) candidates, so pick a few and see what shakes out.
Re: (Score:2)
I see, so one storage facility to power the entire UK. Yup, perfectly clear.
DUH!
Self-crediting? (Score:3)
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader AmiMoJo for sharing the article.
Since it also says that you posted it, did you really need to thank yourself for it too?
Re: (Score:2)
Since it also says that you posted it, did you really need to thank yourself for it too?
Users can't post anything. Only editors can. Users can submit stories, and it has been normal for editors who post their submission to the front page to thank the users submitting stories here for a couple of years now.
Also what someone submits and what text ultimately gets posted to the front page is usually not the same. I'm frankly disappointed that I need to explain this to someone with your UID, I would have thought that being at this site for so long would mean you were more involved, but clearly you'
Re: (Score:2)
Is this directed at me? I didn't write that bit. My original submission is here: https://slashdot.org/firehose.... [slashdot.org]
Co-location (Score:2)
Re: Co-location (Score:3)
Wrong battery chemistry for fixed storage. If you don't have to drive (or fly) around with them, even lead acid batteries will work.
Re: (Score:2)
Ideally, battery storage should be in close proximity to solar
It doesn't matter whether you put it near the point of production or the point of consumption, as long as it's either near one of those things or in between them. In each scenario you have the same transmission losses.
Battery storage isnâ(TM)t really a viable solution to replace solar at night to cover the base load
Right, you need wind for that. The UK has a [metric] shitload of offshore wind potential. The demand is much higher during the day, which is when the solar comes into the equation.
Why? (Score:2)
There's no money for anything.
Poor market planning (Score:2)
Write power supply contracts for guaranteed delivery. Like utilities have always done in the past. When the sys op calls you and requests X megawatts to be brought on line, you do it. Either from your primary source, your secondary reserve capacity or a contract you have with another provider to provide a reserve. Or you'll get your supply contract cancelled. No whining about "my plant is off line for maintenance"*. Or "the sun's not out". You should have arranged a backup. Or taken your name off the suppli
Free electricity every so often in the UK (Score:3)
UK resident here. I use a power company called Octopus and every couple of weeks, they send me an email saying "free power between 1-2 pm" or some other time. This isn't a joke or a scam, they actually explain it as having too much energy in the grid and they need to burn it off. Because I have a smart meter, they can simply not charge me for that time.
They also have a night-time EV charging tariff which is 7p/kWh as opposed to the 35p/kWh which is again enabled by the smart meter.
What makes me slightly surprised about this whole thing is that I had assumed that the whole grid was pretty smart. Turns out not to be the case.
Space (Score:2)
> "Use of battery storage abroad has soared in places such as California, where batteries soak up solar power during the day and regularly supply a fifth of the state's power in the evening..."
The UK is about as big as Idaho. Millions of people live there.
There aint much room to build much of anything anymore.