Bishop Hill Powering the Nation
Oct 10, 2012 DECC Energy: biofuels Old coal and nuclear power stations are coming to the end of their lives. We face a race against time to ensure our energy security. We need to secure £110billion of investment in a secure, diverse and low carbon power mix. It is a huge challenge, but an equally huge opportunity, with the Coalition’s reforms to the electricity market having the potential to support a quarter of a million jobs, many of these highly skilled. New nuclear, gas-fired power stations, carbon capture and storage and renewable energy will bring new investment to all parts of the country, developing supply chains which won’t just serve the UK market, but the global market too. [Block quote added 7.45pm, 11.10.12]
From Powering the Nation, article by Energy Minister John Hayes for DECC
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/housemag/housemag.aspx
A number of unanswered questions within that paragraph, such as why don't we prevent the closure of the older power stations until we are sure we can manage without them.? Where is £110 billion coming from? What reforms to the energy market- smart meters? No thanks. A quarter of a million jobs- ever heard of Bastiat? CCS?- it doesn't work.....and so on.
[Update: figure on last paragraph corrected to £110 billion, 5.00pm]
Reader Comments (64)
Bish: I think you mean £110 billion in the last paragraph.
I've heard figures of £200 billion befor 2020, including all the new grid connections for wind.
[Thanks, Philip, corrected now.]
They've been digging underneath the DECC and have discovered a rich seam of unrefined Handwavium. It's powering everything they do.
Old coal stations will have to be closed because of the EU Large Combustion Plant Directive.
"Old coal and nuclear power stations are coming to the end of their lives"
Which, as Richard points out, isn't quite the same thing as running out of EU mandated hours. This means that the problem can be removed (at least temporarily) with the stroke of a pen. Interesting times...
John Hayes is a Potato Headed Oaf
Sorry but it just had to be said.
Why must millions of the Hoi Polloi take orders
from a Potato Headed Oaf like John Hayes ???
My original parable of the broken window from Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas (1850):
Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper, James Goodfellow, when his careless son has happened to break a pane of glass? If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation—"It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?"
Now, this form of condolence contains an entire theory, which it will be well to show up in this simple case, seeing that it is precisely the same as that which, unhappily, regulates the greater part of our economical institutions.
Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier's trade—that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs—I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen.
But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! Your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen."
It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented.
Reforms to the electricity market? What reforms? They are asking us to hope that:
- carbon capture and storage will eventually work - if such technology will ever work
- renewable energy will bring new investment to all parts of the country - hahaha good one! I think this means new subsidies!
- developing supply chains which won’t just serve the UK market - how?
Also saying that the nebulous reforms have the potential to support a quarter of a million jobs - isn't very convincing.
Furthermore, the expectation is that the earth will warm further throughout this century. What happens if in fact it gets colder in the next decade or so?
"I am determined that we continue to base our policy on the best available evidence"
Crikey.
Frédéric Bastiat
Thank you for the good story ^.^
On a point of fact can I ask if anyone is aware of any country where CCS has actually been installed?
Come on, lets be honest with our selves here. The politicians will say "look...we only have 5 minutes left before we run out of power and the only hope we have is to roll out more windmills and mirrors".
Its a manufactured emergency...the kind needed to railroad through changes that no one who actually earns money in the private sector wants but because politicians are insulated against cost increases (since everything is paid for them) these changes will come whether we want them or not.
As Dr North says, the real problem here is that politicians have lost the fear of the people. Politicians make unpopular changes because there are no consequences for them.
Mailman
@James P
It would take more than a stroke of a pen. All derogations have been exhausted. This would require a major political battle in Brussels. Leaving the EU would not solve this problem: The directive also applies to EFTA, and it is the transposition of a UN-ECE treaty.
Richard Tol
Might we reach a point where there is a choice between ignoring the directive or power cuts? What would be the implications of ignoring the directive?
@Philip R
I would expect that a UK court would order the closure of the plants.
"I would expect that a UK court would order the closure of the plants."
Now that would make for one(some) very unpopular judges when the power cuts arrive shortly after (and give politicians a get out clause).
Meanwhile in Germany, and no doubt coming here soon:
It would take more than a stroke of a pen. All derogations have been exhausted. This would require a major political battle in Brussels. Leaving the EU would not solve this problem: The directive also applies to EFTA, and it is the transposition of a UN-ECE treaty.
Failing to meet the requirements of an EU Directive would result in the Commission taking action which would almost certainly be in the form of a financial penalty ref the debacle over the CAP Farm Payments system.
The UN-ECE treaty is I think a red herring since nation states can and do resile from treaties.
However this is hardly an unforseen crisis, watching the development, or rather non-development of UK Energy Policy over the last 20 years has been much more like observing a very slow motion car crash
"I would expect that a UK court would order the closure of the plants."
I might expect a Brussels court to do that, but I find it hard to believe that a UK judge would. In fact, a court hearing might be just the thing to concentrate the politicians' minds. Last thing they would want, I imagine.
"I would expect that a UK court would order the closure of the plants."
Just to clarify, a directive requires each country to make a local law;
In December 2010, the directive on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) (Recast), was published in the Official Journal and requires transposition into UK law no later than 6 January 2013. [DEFRA]
This took the form of regulations, made under the Pollution
Prevention and Control Act 1999.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/2325/contents/made
Failure to comply with those regulations could lead to a prosecution in an English court. Although it is difficult to see what the penalties are, presume withdrawal of a permit.
Failure to implement the directive fully would lead to a case in the European Court of Justice which deals with treaty obligations.
However I'm at a loss to see what this has to do with CO2. Aren't these regs purely Sox and Nox?
Reforms to the electricity market? What reforms?
Their plans include a reduction in usage as we all wrapped our homes in a thick woolly jumper, except that does not work with housing stock the age it is in the UK.
Richard Tol
Leaving the EU is the ONLY solution, at least for those who are not gutless dupes of the EU.
Cameron suggests renegotiating our relationship with the EU, personally I do not think we need to do that. however if we did then we would have a much stronger hand to play if we were outside looking in.
Make sure you buy a diesel generator and some deep discharge automotive batteries and an inverter before 2014. Eventually the government/EU/UN will make this arrangement an economic proposition.
"David Cameron backs referendum on Europe"
But not until after the "next election"
Why Wait?
Do it Now !!!!!!!
Guardian
Daily Mail
Telegraph
Independent
Many More Examples
WE WANT REFERENDUM NOW !!!!!!!
Let us disobey the EU Directives, and if the EU Judges intercede
the Britain should tear up the so called Treaty of Maastricht and all the
rest immediately. What are they going to do about that in the EU ?
Answer - The EU will do precisely Nothing, because they are already
virtually bankrupt. The Pound Sterling will be the only stable currency
among the Former EU countries. Britain will become the only conduit
for former EU countries to import from abroad, because NOBODY will
want the bankrupt EU Banker's Treasury Bonds.
Quite right Frédéric !
The peasants have no electricity?
Then let them use Gas !
Not so trite a suggestion since EU large power station directives
don't apply to small scale personal power plants, like these here ......
Microturbine capital costs range from $700/kW for larger units to approximately $1,100/kW for smaller ones. These costs include all hardware, associated manuals, software, and initial training. The addition of a heat recovery system adds between $75 - $350/kW. Site preparation and installation costs vary significantly from location-to-location but generally add 30-70% to the total capital cost. Microturbine manufacturers are targeting a future capital cost below $650/kW. This appears to be feasible given the market expands and sales volumes increase.
California Electricity Commission Examples
Just one example but search the web for "Microturbine Generator"
3:48 PM | ConfusedPhoton "What happens if in fact it gets colder in the next decade or so?
Which has about the same chance as warmer or no change I would guess.
http://www.thegwpf.org/an-updated-hadcrut4-and-some-surprises/
And on this they want to bet the farm.
Here we go again.
'In the United Kingdom, the Monarch, the Privy Council, or the Prime Minister can make emergency regulations under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 if there is a serious threat to human welfare, the environment, or in case of war or terrorism. These regulations last for seven days unless confirmed otherwise by Parliament. A state of emergency was last invoked in 1974 by Prime Minister Edward Heath in response to increasing industrial action.' (The 3-Day Week to conserve energy).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_emergency#United_Kingdom
The peasants have no electricity?
Then let them use Gas !
Not so trite a suggestion since EU large power station directives
don't apply to small scale community power plants, like these here ......
Here we go again, a self-reinforcing set of arguments that are, apparently, unchallengeable within Whitehall and that we are now obliged to accept as a kind of holy writ despite their being based on precisely no factual evidence at all.
3:48 PM | ConfusedPhoton: "What happens if in fact it gets colder in the next decade or so?"
A very good question.
http://www.thegwpf.org/an-updated-hadcrut4-and-some-surprises/
A number of comments went on to the spam filter- now released from their incarceration.
Habibullo Abdussamatov's conclusions, writing in 2009
'Over the past decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature drop (Fig. 7, 11). Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006 many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural warming.
The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005, while the value of the TSI by July - September of last year had already declined by 0.47 W/m2 (Fig. 1).
For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around the maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise. Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas emissions by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse effect should be put off at least 150 years.
Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop, but not catastrophic global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social, demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop, which will directly affect the national interests of almost all countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably weaken the crisis.'
http://www.gao.spb.ru/english/astrometr/abduss_nkj_2009.pdf
Why do we have to close all our coal stations by 2015 while at present Germany is building new coal stations?
I have a feeling in my waters that we are being fed male cow excrement.
@David Schofield
Indeed. The old coal stations are to be closed to comply with SOx and NOx regulations.
@Ken
New coal plants come with filters and scrubbers. It does not pay to put these on old coal stations, because refurbishment is very expensive and the time to earn back the investment is too short.
Voltaire famously stated: "The history of human opinions is scarcely other than the history of human errors". As the deceased US Senator Moynihan stated: " You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts". His more recent fellow countryman Warren Buffet put it perfectly; "A public opinion poll is no substitute for thought"
Fortunately, we have a legal framework which reflects the factual approach and not that of public opinion. Indeed we are in-debt to the United Nations and its Aarhus Convention on human and environmental rights or to give it its long name; Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. This recognises that the environment belongs to the people and not the State and its bureaucracy, so the public have to be provided with procedural rights.
Procedural rights which are not about consultation, followed by the ignoring of those contributions which do not suit, but active engagement in the decision making. Rights which are enforced by access to legal procedures, which are fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive.
As Ireland had not ratified the Aarhus Convention, it was left to me to bring formal proceedings against the EU at the UNECE Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee in relation to the failures of the Irish renewable energy programme to comply with the Convention.
In August 2012, the Committee ruled that the EU in the 27 Member States had by-passed the necessary procedures of environmental assessment and democratic accountability in relation to their 20% renewable energy by 2020 programme. This is not only a breach of the EU's international treaty arrangements, but also of binding Community law.
In relation to wind farms, which would be better termed 'subsidy farms', the planning system which approved them is not legally compliant. Neither is the policy at EU and Member State level, as it by-passed the necessary procedures required under the Convention.
Finally if one considers the EU's State Aid Guidelines for Environmental Protection, which was used to finance these wind farms and provide them with preferential access to the grid, these were not complied with either, as the environmental protection benefit was never quantified or alternatives to achieved it assessed.
This renewable programme is going to rightly come up against increased resistance, not only from the public, but from a society which cannot afford it and will become rapidly incensed when it is properly informed of the horrendous costs (financial and environmental) and absolutely negligible environmental benefits associated with it. Not to mention the false claims and legal non-compliances associated with it to date. There is only one place the programme is going, into the Courts and with that the claims for damages made good in relation to the Francovich Judgement and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Lisbon Treaty.
See Decision at end of webpage:
http://www.unece.org/env/pp/compliance/Compliancecommittee/54TableEU.html
Alternatively at:
http://tinyurl.com/9kbgtyv
Documentation submitted on 24.09.2012:
http://www.unece.org/env/pp/compliance/compliancecommittee/68tableeuuk.html
Alternatively at:
http://tinyurl.com/8sfe9te
Dung - re CCS.
I think there is a project running at a refinery in Norway called Mongstad. I guess they have more interest than most because they can use the gas for re-injection.
Mike H thanks :)
Pat Swords
The EU got us into this mess in the first place; sticking to carbon reduction when the rest of the world is concentrating on economic growth. Leaving the EU will adequately solve the problem so we do not need the Aarhus Convention but the best of luck to you anyway.
Breathe the dream!
CCS - The epitome of a "pipe dream"!
MikeH and Green sand
It is going to cost somewhere between £650M and £1Billion to add the CCS to a 250MW rated power plant IF it works, at this hour I can not do the math but it seems that like all green projects this would dig deeper into our pockets.
Phillip Bratby -
in your reuters' germany article u will see one of the companies upping the price is IFM fund australia.
that is Industry Funds Management, in charge of a lot of people's retirement funds.
Industry Funds Management: Board
Garry Weaven is Chair of Industry Funds Management, a global fund manager owned by a number of Australian superannuation (pension) funds, and of Pacific Hydro, a leading Australian renewable energy company with extensive operations in Australia and South America. He is also a Director of Members Equity Bank and was a foundation Board member of Melbourne’s Docklands Authority as well as its successor, VicUrban. Garry was appointed to the Federal Government’s Superannuation Advisory Committee in 2008 and to the Australian Securities & Investments Commission’s External Advisory Panel in 2009.
Garry’s involvement in superannuation and funds management follows a successful career in the Australian union movement, which culminated in him being elected Assistant Secretary of the ACTU in 1986…
http://www.industryfundsmanagement.com/about/ifm-board-members/
Industry Funds Management: Portfolio
Acquisition date: 2010
Location: Germany
Description: Electricity transmission and distribution
50Hertz is one of the four transmission system operators in Germany and owns and operates the electricity grid in the states of Thuringia, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Brandenburg, Berlin, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, and Hamburg, totalling approximately 109,000 km². The company transports power to more than 18 million people and companies.
http://www.industryfundsmanagement.eu/ifm-infrastructure-funds/current-portfolio/
could be trouble on the way if the German people get really angry!
Dung
The cost of adding CCS to anything is exactly the same as the cost of maintaining an offshore wind turbine - nobody knows!
It is The Elephant in the room, everybody knows it's there but nobody wants it on the move. Inevitably it will stir and create an all mighty mess. Make yourself ready!
Dung
"The EU got us into this mess in the first place"
Neit Comrade! We chose to join, we have spurned many, many, chances to recant. Now we have some that are daft enough to think that our future lies in being wedded to the biggest economic failure the planet has ever seen?
Que? Can't leave Europe they are our largest market! But, but why supply a market that cannot pay?
Meanwhile, a laugh fest for connoisseurs of Schadenfreude.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/energy-turnaround-in-germany-plagued-by-worrying-lack-of-progress-a-860481.html
and
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-offshore-wind-offensive-plagued-by-problems-a-852728.html
But, when you’ve finished laughing, just remember that thanks to Little Eddie Milipede, BuffHuhne and Jolly Ed Daveylamp, this is a road that we are destined to travel.
What could go wrong???
Meanwhile, the Climate keeps on a-doing, whatta Climate’s gotta do.
Wind farm fans will also enjoy:-
http://notrickszone.com/2012/10/10/governor-jim-jones-shumlin-leads-vermont-to-environmental-mass-suicide/
The video is really worth watching. Obvious pro-solar agit prop, but as Pierre Gosselin points out:-
“And like the followers of Jim Jones, many Vermonters believed, and they all lined up behind the Jim Jones Shumlin’s wind energy movement – cheering on the army of wind turbine builders that would soon invade the state and disfigure it permanently – thinking it would bring them salvation. Today they are shocked and horrified. They now realise the punch is spiked with death.
The video above interviews an entire series of opponents, many are kooky environmentalists, some openly admitting they had been duped by the windpower pipe-dream (e.g. see 7:45 mark). They were all conned by Al Gore’s AIT film. They were all suckered by the “consensus” science that never was. They were manipulated by the media and politicians. And in a state of panic, they all thought something had to be done quickly.
Although many have since woken up to the true horror of the wind energy punch brewed by Shumlin, most are still convinced of man-made climate change. This is because they have been too lazy (or too damn stupid) to actually take a look at the hard data of historical climate.”
This is what greenie lunacy inexorably leads to. (And BIG BIG profits for the subsidy farmers. Like Samantha Cameron’s Dad and Nick Clegg’s missus.)
Upthread a commentator or two suggests that British judges will save us, the people, from overbearing Brussels. That is completely wrong-headed. It seems to me everything I see in legal smuggery and pettifogging points to judges enthusiasm for the Law itself, and their role as the interpreters of it, far outweighing any responsibility to the nation or their fellow citizen we might expect them to have. One sees this again and again in eg immigration tribunals, human rights decisions, where with crocodile tears they announce some blatantly insane, not in the public interest and often unpatriotic decision, saying that the Law 'forces' them to that conclusion. So, put no faith in these point-scoring, game-playing, clever-dicks. Simply, when our 'political elite' hahahaha are put in the tumbrils and carted off for an early shower of bullets, remember to set aside seats in the tumbrils for our 'judges' hahaha who are just as complicit in our national disaster as the Majors, Blairs and Browns and all the other clowns.
For those of you with time on your hands, National Grid Winter Outlook 2012/2013 is out.
...such as why don't we prevent the closure of the older power stations until we are sure we can manage without them.?
"Old coal and nuclear power stations are coming to the end of their lives"
Which, as Richard points out, isn't quite the same thing as running out of EU mandated hours. This means that the problem can be removed (at least temporarily) with the stroke of a pen....
Umm. Up to a point, Lord Copper...
You would need to look at each individual case for precise data, but generally power stations have 'approved lives' based on their engineering design. This is a fixed parameter, and cannot be easily altered.
To make a hypothetical and simplistic example - there are a lot of pipes in a power station, and they will wear and corrode. If a designer is asked to make a power station last for 20 years, he will design pipes of an appropriate thickness. Given design tolerances, they may be able to run for 25 years with increased inspections and other increased maintenance costs. But at 28 years you would really have to replace all the pipes - you can't just 'keep the station going with a stroke of the pen'.
In fact, replacing all the pipes would be a huge undertaking - you'd be better off building a new power station. That is why all these power stations which are 'coming to the end of their lives' really ARE going to be closed down. It will not be economically possible to keep running them.
For many years engineers have been trying to tell politicians this. The politicians have not listened.
"Make sure you buy a diesel generator and some deep discharge automotive batteries and an inverter before 2014. Eventually the government/EU/UN will make this arrangement an economic proposition"
Billy Liar 7.10pm
Why not simply a generator that produces 50Hz A.C ? You need to get a changeover switch fitted to the house consumer unit. I'm ready!
Please make time to have a look at page 61 of my link at Oct 11, 2012 at 9:55 AM
When the demand for electricity exceeds generating capacity couldn't smart meters be used to cut off power to people in constituencies with MPs who voted for the closure of our older power stations and the installation of thousands of wind turbines?
Oct 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM | Roy
Surely that is a bit hard on the peasants because the party manifestos for the general election of 2005 made no mention of a Climate Change Act which would be foisted on the nation 41 months later in October 2008, as snow fell on Westminster.
There was no mandate from the electorate for "no new coal without CCS" or even "30,000 windmills".
Why penalise innocent voters, or even those who did not vote?
It is the swines who put CCA 2008 together and those who voted for it (425 members) who should be penalised.
Surely if something is going to be "cut off" it should not be electricity to the peasants but (insert your own suggestion here).
Some of the long range forecasters, like weatherbell.com, have noted the UK and Western Europe will be having progressively colder winters. Similar progressions occur when ice ages begin with this same geographic area leading the way into the cold. Unlike the climate modeling cadre, their predictions for the near term are "spot on".
At least some in the government are confronting and discussing what may be actual solutions. However, I've yet to read about a surveyor staking out a site for a new power plant that will actually work reliably. Lead times to build them are boderline fantasy and a splash of science fiction.
The UK, due to the worship of a raft of faulty science and propaganda and outright lies and deception is now entering the cold of it's next Dark Age. I'm not sure how many layers of wool one needs to keep the bodies core temperature above freezing but one hopes it's not so many as to block movements necessary to prepare food. All in all, it's been a quite smelly period in the Isles.
Thanks for the link to the National Grid Winter Outlook, Brownedoff. And yes page 61 is especially interesting. It seems we can cope now (just) in the event of low wind generation. But that's not a surprise: despite nearly 4,000 windmills, wind still accounts for less than 5% of our energy mix. But it bodes ill for what might happen when (if) wind is supposed to contribute an average of 20% and those older coal and nuclear units have been phased out. The solution, I suppose, is a lot more CCGT plant. But is that likely to happen in time?
I seriously hope that cedarhill is wrong about his "next Dark Age".