Comment Re: No obvious parallels (Score 1) 23
All the old paper work was replaced by obtuse workflows and new paper work.
All the old paper work was replaced by obtuse workflows and new paper work.
Despite the snark, I’ll treat this as though it’s good faith and describe the actions needed to lower energy prices for consumers in the UK:
1. Reform or buy out a chunk of the 35 GW RO fleet
2. Rebalance levies and system charges so cheap wholesale prices can actually flow through
3. Make time-of-use pricing the default, not an opt-in
4. Accelerate flexible storage and demand response by creating some carefully targeted contracts for availability
5. Re-tune the CfD regime so consumers capture falling build costs faster
6. Make retail suppliers actually pass through wholesale savings
7. Reform gas marginal price setting for electricity by creating (1) a clean power pool for CfD + subsidised-renewable generation, or (2)
split-market pricing (infra-marginal renewables in one market, marginal thermal in another) or (3) better locational signals + storage incentives so gas sets the price for fewer hours
It’s a complex market and the devil is in the details, all while populists are shouting loudly. It’s not easy and the government is not very sure-footed to put it politely. But the issues are not about the inherent characteristics of the power plants, they’re about price signals and investments.
>"The majority of the people you show it you will download it and do a full nuke-and-pave"
Doubtful. Although it might be a significant minority.
>"then wonder why this new 'Windows' can't run their favorite programs".
Like a browser? Because for a huge chunk of home users, that is all they really use now.
Why do we need to build enough storage to avoid a 1-in-37 year Dunkelflaute through storage alone? We don’t ever just use storage, we use a whole bunch of mechanisms including demand shifting, interconnectors, demand reduction, dispatchable low carbon (eg CCS gas, biomass), firm renewables, overbuild, curtailment-to-fuel, and gas peakers. If we use gas peakers once in 37 years instead of several times a year, we are still going to be way ahead of where we are today
You’ve not accurately described how the UK covers mismatches between supply and demand in its energy market. What matters is not matching each GW of wind with a GW of dispatchable backup, because that focuses on matching suppy not demand. If we do a wind overbuild of 3x demand, we don’t need 3x of dispatchable backup.
What matters is to ensure there’s enough supply to meet demand even when wind output is low. The dispatchable element of that is achieved through gas peakers, pumped hydro, BESS (1GW in 2020, 7GW in 2025, 127 GW in pipeline with 77.9 GW / 162.5 GWh approved thus far), interconnectors, merchant sales of demand cuts (peak shifting, which consumers love when they are able to access it, as they can cut their bills substantially by just running washing machines overnight etc), and several other mechanisms.
The UK has always had excellent availability all the way through the transition. It’s not surprising you focus on this, because the US does not. But that’s really just table stakes in the civilised world. We can and do focus on more than just that.
The UK has about three *billion* trees. Sit back down, you nobber.
I agree with most of that, but it's worth pointing out that this is really a time-limited blip.
Today, about 60% of renewables capacity (35GW) and a higher percentage of generation comes from renewables sites operating under pre-CfD support schemes or merchant projects. While later rounds of CfD include huge projects, those aren't yet fully online.
What the government should do, in my opinion, is buy those contracts out and shift them to some sort of capped mechanism, because this problem only goes away once all generation is switched. I think there's a place for spot pricing in the UK mix, eg to encourage investment in storage (which is what happens today, and working more or less as intended from 2020 to 2025 when deployed capacity increased five-fold and the pipeline of projects is huge). But even there, the projects would actually now benefit from switching away to PPAs or CfDs or some mechanism that has less volatility on both the upside and the downside. That would be in the interests of investors and consumers and the government. But it would take an adroit government to get it right. Sadly, we've not got one of those. I miss the days when we did. It's been sodding decades.
it's not the tax revenues. It's that marginal cost encourages investment in cheaper energy. However, that's not been true for a long time, because CfDs mean that most renewables producers don't see the benefits of high gas prices. It's only the operators of the oldest renewables projects (pre-CfDs) who make bank. I think that's stupid and we should just buy them out. It would be cheaper.
If you want to get into the nitty gritty, it's worth talking to ChatGPT about this. Energy markets have some unique characteristics that make pricing more complex. I really dislike the current system and I'm sure we can do better, but it's not easy.
If a thing's worth having, it's worth cheating for. -- W.C. Fields