ENERGY MATTERS

[Stanley]

News that my £200 Winter Fuel Payment is on its way to me on the same day I had a delivery of coal to top up the stockpile. Things could be worse!

[Tizer]

`Huawei reveals quick-charge battery' (BBC News)
"Chinese tech giant Huawei has unveiled two prototype removable lithium-ion batteries that can recharge in minutes, using a bespoke charger. The lower capacity battery charged by 68% in two minutes - but is not big enough to run a smartphone for long. The higher capacity one charged by 48% in five minutes and could provide up to 10 hours of talk time, the firm said." LINK

An extra benefit from such batteries could be that people wouldn't, as now, leave their phones connected to the charger and mains power when not in use and therefore not waste so much energy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On a different topic...
`What's so smart about smart meters?'
An article by the BBC's `Technology of Business editor'. LINK

[Pluggy]

Just watched an interesting programme on BBC 4, which is entirely relevant : http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... -lights-on

A series of programmes about what goes on inside SSE, The demise of coal power stations and the rise of wind power. and the diminishing reserves between what we use and what we generate.

Highly recommended.

[Stanley]

I'll watch that tonight Pluggy....
As for smart meters, what's puzzling me is that even though BG get my meter reading every half hour they still seem to be working on the old regime of levelling out our energy payments by charging for less than what we are using in winter and more in summer. Not quite true that you can't see what individual units are using, the display gives you enough information to get a good idea of which are the guzzlers if you take the trouble to look at it. The major surprise to me has been how frugal the shed is compared with anything used for heat like the hob or the microwave.
See THIS for the latest phase of the mismanagement of national energy supplies. In ten years, 'perhaps before', all coal fired power stations will be closed. Amber Rudd our energy secretary says that they will be replaced in the short term by gas-fired power stations but doesn't say anything about the fact that the energy industry says that building new gas fired facilities isn't viable at the moment because of the imbalance between the price of wind and solar energy and what they need to make building new power stations economical. It looks as though the only way Ms Rudd can achieve her targets is to pay some sort of subsidy or perhaps guarantee a higher price (who pays that?).
Another thing that is being glossed over is the security of supply this winter and even more so in 2016 because any new gas fired power stations can't possibly be on line before 2017 even if they were commissioned now. The big question is, are we being told the truth about capacity? Worth reading Old Sparky in Private Eye this week, he's usually quite accurate and he says that we are on a knife edge and that included in the calculations of sustainability are emergency high cost sources of imported power already contracted for at eye-watering rates. He says there have already been voltage drops and load shedding by getting those firms equipped for it to switch to internal diesel powered generators. Given the atrocious record of all governments in this matter who do you believe. It is within the bounds of experience that the official statements are at best optimistic or even worse, deliberately misleading. The coming weekend could be a big test.
I know I have been a Jeremiah on the subject of power cuts for many years now but I am convinced that they are coming. My advice is to do what you can to make sure you are as well prepared as possible..... If and when the cuts happen there won't be a candle or a pack of paraffin available anywhere.....

[plaques]

the energy industry says that building new gas fired facilities isn't viable

it reminds me of the coal industry prior to nationalization. The mine owners failure to invest resulted in the output dropping to a point where it was affecting industrial development. You can say they where running the mines into the ground. Exactly the same scenario is happening with the power industry. The privatized companies stand back and hold the country to ransom and virtually demand a subsidy before they will do anything. What happened to all this promised competition that privatization was going to bring? Of course the present government will do anything to avoid nationalization even though its staring them in the face. The new deal on the nuclear powerstation is a perfect example of privatize at any cost.

[Tizer]

In Stanley's BBC link I note: "Ms Rudd also said investment in nuclear power is vital to the government's policy. She believes that plans for new nuclear power stations, including at Wylfa in Wales and Moorside in Cumbria, could eventually provide almost a third of the low carbon electricity the UK needs." Earlier this morning I found that BBC report myself and read it. I'm sure it that bit ended thus: "...could eventually provide almost a third of the low carbon electricity the UK needs by 2025." At the time, I thought it was a ridiculous claim - how could they manage that by 2025? Hinckley still hasn't started being built, never mind the other plants. It looks like someone pointed that out to the BBC this morning! (When I looked now, the top of the web page had: "Last edited 31 minutes ago".)

[Stanley]

Well done Tiz, I hadn't picked that up but when I saw Wylfa and Moorside mentioned I thought it was funny, not heard of them as being imminent or even decided on. An example of smoke and mirrors and it makes you wonder how they thought they could get away with it.
I'm afraid Ms Rudd shows all the signs of not understanding the gravity of the situation. I watched that BBC4 programme on Ferrybridge last night and everything I saw confirms my worst fears. Apart from the fact it is now closed, the way it was being managed due to government policies on carbon virtually ensured its eventual demise. These stations were designed to run 24x7 to provide base load only interrupted by breakdown or scheduled outages for maintenance, as such they were, over the years, brilliant and did the job they were designed for. (Unless the cooling towers blew down, I sat on the hard shoulder of what was then the A1 and watched it happen) As soon as the profit motive was introduced under privatisation the imperative was dividend payments and as one worker commented, those profits would have gone back into the CEGB and used for development of the generating capacity.
All the informed energy specialists are singing from the same hymn sheet. The national energy policy is a joke and can't possibly ensure continuity of supply. What spin will they put on it when the cuts come? Due to the weather? No matter which way you look at it it's a disgrace.

[Stanley]

Cold enough to force the CH in at low level even though the stove is working well....

[Tizer]

Coal is back in the news, with a mad rush to ramp up production and mostly to support energy generation in India and China for their rapidly increasing populations. These are not coal mines as we knew them in the past, they are gigantic quarries. For example, the Carmichael project to be built by India's Adani Mining in Queensland is "worth some A$16bn ($12bn; £8bn) and will dig up and transport about 60 million tonnes of coal a year for export, mostly to India. The mine will cover an area seven times the size of Sydney Harbour." LINK In Alaska, PacRim Coal expects to produce around 12 million tonnes of coal per annum for export to China from a planned new opencast mine covering 35 square miles, making it more productive than the biggest mine in Russia. Shipping it to China makes economic sense, given that Alaska is closer than Australia, currently China's biggest supplier. LINK India is planning to open a major new coal mine every month until 2020 and has not yet set a future cap on emissions, as it chooses to prioritise economic growth. LINK

Meanwhile, work slowly progresses on carbon capture and storage. I came across this document which gives a summary of the present state of affairs in its `Quick Facts': LINK Perhaps instead of mining the coal they should be gasifying it in situ using `Pre-Combustion Carbon Capture' as described in the document.

[Tripps]

This doesn't look good for Carbon capture

Ch 4 showed a couple of days ago that India was opening a new open cast coal mine every month, and would continue do so, for many years into the future. They also were said to have refused to set any limits on carbon emissions. The scenes at the 'mines' were shocking.

[Tizer]

Wow, Tripps, thanks for posting that, I hadn't seen it in the news - the last few days have been `a good time for publishing bad news'. It's shocking. In fact it's a double shock. Abandoning carbon capture and storage development is a terrible decision but I'm also worried by the Government's choice of an alternative - small nuclear reactors LINK . If it goes down this path we'll have mini nuclear reactors all over the place and mobile ones too, being trucked about from place to place. Can you imagine the safety and security problems that will cause? Radioactive materials spread everywhere, how do you control and monitor them? And what about the radioactive waste that will need to be collected and shifted about? All this at a time of heightened terrorist activity. The mind boggles. You know I'm not against nuclear energy generation as long as it's properly controlled, but this is different.

As for the carbon capture decision, Dr Jenifer Baxter, Head of Energy and Environment at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, said in response to the UK Government cancelling its Carbon Capture competition:
“This is very disappointing news. There have been concerns about the initial costs of this technology, but we will only be able to properly assess the viability of UK Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) upon the successful delivery of a demonstration project. Demonstration projects are a recognised requirement for full commercialisation of all large technologies, without such, new energy management technologies will remain in the shadows.

“If we are serious about building a clean and secure energy sector we need a diverse energy system, and CCS is central to this. In addition to the potential this technology has in making coal-fired generation low carbon, there is great promise for this technology to be used to retrofit gas-fired power stations in the future as well.

“The Government has outlined plans for the winding-down of coal-fired generation. With just one nuclear reactor currently being planned, the UK looks set to experience a new dash for gas. Without CCS technology this will mean we are locking ourselves into relying on unabated fossil fuel power for generations to come.”
Press release from the Institution of Mechanical Engineers: LINK

[Stanley]

Underground coal gasification has been talked about for as long as I can remember but nothing has ever materialised. The abandonment of CCS is so horribly short-sighted and wrong that one wonders what sort of brains and forward planning could even contemplate it. I voiced my concerns about Amber Rudd not long ago, she is obviously being run as a puppet by George Osborne. Apart from any other considerations like climate change, the implications for industry are staggering. They can have no confidence in security of supply as the experts say that even a dash for gas can't save us from power cuts, only one small plant is being built at the moment....

[Tizer]

Don't worry, they'll put a mini nuclear reactor in your workshop!

Having worked in chemical laboratories where the smallest amount of radioactive material is rigorously controlled and monitored I can't see how we can have lots of mini reactors throughout the UK. As Stanley says about the CCS decision: "... one wonders what sort of brains and forward planning could even contemplate it."

[Stanley]

The problem is that energy, like transport, education and health is being run by committees of politicians. Men who by definition do not fully understand what they are deciding on. Further, they know the price but not the value of things. Lastly their chief concern is their careers and position. All these services should be managed as social goods but that, like principles, is a very old fashioned and outdated concept. Buy shares in candle making companies.....

[Pluggy]

My daughter and grand daughter moving out has been doing my energy consumption good. Before they moved out (end of July) I was paying £93 a month (Gas & Electric), it was reduced to £82 in September, with the last reading I just gave them its being reduced again to £69. The tariff is the same.

The mild back end might have had an input into that as well...

[Stanley]

You are beginning to enjoy the benefits of kids leaving home Pluggy. Being a singleton is why my usage is so low. Nobody is turning the thermostat up, leaving lights on or having long hot showers. Every time I see the advert of the poor bloke trying to reduce his bills but being subverted by his kids I reflect on the fact that it would be hell for me.... Take the handle off the hot water tap in the kitchen for a month as an experiment and look at the difference that makes!

[Pluggy]

I can't see the missus being impressed by me taking the handle off the hot water tap......

[Marilyn]

The hot water tap stays where it is, Stanley...
If Febby removes my hot water tap, I remove certain "privileges"
( Pluggy understands. Happy wife, happy life)

The kids leaving home reduced our food/phone/gas/leccy bills dramatically...

[Stanley]

There you are then, a good example of having ultimate control in the house! Seriously, it's quite amazing how much gas it burns because with modern systems you have to warm the boiler element and all the pipe down to the tap. As an alternative, try getting into the habit of boiling the electric kettle when a small amount of hot water is needed. Theoretically it's more expensive but if you did the sums I suspect it's cheaper than warming the boiler and the pipes....

[Big Kev]

[quote="Stanley" but iďf you did the sums I suspect it's cheaper than warming the boiler and the pipes....[/quote]
Depends how far your tap is from the boiler...

[PanBiker]

I can't actually understand why anyone who has the wherewithal to pay their bills would actually elect to operate a 19C kitchen in preference to the advantages and convenience of modern plumbing. You would probably save a lot more by upgrading all your lights to LED. I'll keep the convenience and modern expectation of hot water in the kitchen and use one of Stanley's favorite sayings, there are no pockets in shrouds.

[Marilyn]

Correct...there are no pockets in a shroud.
But, when you think of it, there is a fair bit of unused space within a coffin, and you could pack quite a bit in.

[Stanley]

Easy to understand, I have better things to spend my money on than superfluous hot water. No inconvenience for me as I have always been used to just a cold water tap. I'd rather spend my money on coal for an open fire than gas so I keep the gas bill as low as possible. I can promise you I am not deprived! I love my Morso stove.... Not everyone's cup of tea I know, carrying coal in and ashes out but it suits me fine and after all that's all that matters..... Hot water going down waste pipes is anathema to me.....
Chacun a son gout.....
Latest reports in Private Eye 'Old Sparky ' column (And whoever it is they seem generally to be accurate) Says that the spare capacity has fallen even further to 1%. Even worse, measures are having to be taken now to contract for imported energy for winter 2016 when the spare capacity is predicted to be in negative figures. Guess what, the prices being agreed to are eye-watering because the foreign suppliers know they have us over a barrel. We are suffering the consequences of over twenty years of mismanagement of energy policy. As for the predicted 'saviours', nuclear and gas, except for one new gas station under construction and vastly over budget, none of them are agreed..... Buy shares in candle factories!

[Stanley]

THIS is worth reading.....

[Tizer]

That's a good article, clear and easy to absorb. A chief oil analyst today is quoted as saying that the big oil companies like Shell and BP cannot survive if the oil price falls below $30...and it's already down at $36. They're frantically selling off all they can to make savings but are getting worried, very worried.