• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Energy

mac

Member
Joined
15 Dec 2010
Messages
514
Just been looking online at energy production and we keep getting told not to be using fossil fuel but 10 minutes ago 64% of our energy was produced by fossil fuel 61.2 %gas and 2.8% coal compared to 6.6% renewable 1.7% solar and 3.3% wind
To me it's impossible to change everything over to renewable and even if possible we can't rely on it
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

40C

Member
Joined
1 Apr 2015
Messages
27
Our umpteen thousand wind turbines were only producing 100 Megawatts total earlier today.
 

Merle Haggard

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2019
Messages
1,979
Location
Northampton
Just been looking online at energy production and we keep getting told not to be using fossil fuel but 10 minutes ago 64% of our energy was produced by fossil fuel 61.2 %gas and 2.8% coal compared to 6.6% renewable 1.7% solar and 3.3% wind
To me it's impossible to change everything over to renewable and even if possible we can't rely on it

One summer's day a few years ago there was publicity proudly saying that no fossil fuels were being used in the U.K. to generate electricity and as evidence a screenshot of the dials apparently proving this. When I went on to the web and found the same information I discovered that there was another dial to the right that for some reason didn't appear on the publicity. It was indicating electricity coming through the inter-connecter, and was against the 'max' stop. Could well have been from fossil fuels possibly including from lignite. But, truthfully, not generated in the U.K..

The environment correspondent on Radio 4 around the same time said that, because it was very sunny and very windy, electricity from renewables were at the highest level ever, so high that electric generation exceeded demand. He then went on to say that the use of appliances drawing high currents should be encouraged if this happened in the future. The example of a high current consuming appliance he gave was a Tumble Dryer. And the seemed to be serious. Think about it,..
 

mac

Member
Joined
15 Dec 2010
Messages
514
Our umpteen thousand wind turbines were only producing 100 Megawatts total earlier today.
Didn't they say a few days ago that permission to build more was going to be easier to get
 

dakta

Member
Joined
18 Jun 2008
Messages
577
IMO not so much about learning more about accepting - it's no real surprise wind etc fluctuates so much and until we *accept* that it's going to take a backbone of say, nuclear supply (run continuous near full tilt) we ain't going to be changing too much.

Wind does have it's moments and I've seen it contribute massively but again, it's opportunistic and will remain so.
 

mac

Member
Joined
15 Dec 2010
Messages
514
In April I travelled in Italy and never saw any wind turbines apart from odd ones and I never saw any fields full of solar panels but we have to have them but we don't have sun
 

Ted633

Member
Joined
15 Mar 2018
Messages
276
Just been looking online at energy production and we keep getting told not to be using fossil fuel but 10 minutes ago 64% of our energy was produced by fossil fuel 61.2 %gas and 2.8% coal compared to 6.6% renewable 1.7% solar and 3.3% wind
To me it's impossible to change everything over to renewable and even if possible we can't rely on it
Current weather is not really great for the wind turbines at the moment! Investment in nuclear, with support from renewable sources (with a bit of gas on standby) is probably the 'greenest' way to go without putting the grid at risk.
One summer's day a few years ago there was publicity proudly saying that no fossil fuels were being used in the U.K. to generate electricity and as evidence a screenshot of the dials apparently proving this. When I went on to the web and found the same information I discovered that there was another dial to the right that for some reason didn't appear on the publicity. It was indicating electricity coming through the inter-connecter, and was against the 'max' stop. Could well have been from fossil fuels possibly including from lignite. But, truthfully, not generated in the U.K..

The environment correspondent on Radio 4 around the same time said that, because it was very sunny and very windy, electricity from renewables were at the highest level ever, so high that electric generation exceeded demand. He then went on to say that the use of appliances drawing high currents should be encouraged if this happened in the future. The example of a high current consuming appliance he gave was a Tumble Dryer. And the seemed to be serious. Think about it,..
My bold. That interconnector would probably have been from France, which would most likely mean nuclear energy

In April I travelled in Italy and never saw any wind turbines apart from odd ones and I never saw any fields full of solar panels but we have to have them but we don't have sun
Because Italy rely heavily on oil and gas for electricity production. Don't know how proactive they are being with renewables.
 

mac

Member
Joined
15 Dec 2010
Messages
514
Maybe then we should forget about renewable energy and be like Italy because we still need fossil fuel for when the wind doesn't blow
 

simonw

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2009
Messages
800
In April I travelled in Italy and never saw any wind turbines apart from odd ones and I never saw any fields full of solar panels but we have to have them but we don't have sun
Just because you didn't see it, doesn't mean it's not there.

 

oldman

Member
Joined
26 Nov 2013
Messages
1,027
Don't know how proactive they are being with renewables.
In general they have been slower than some countries further north at around 35% of electricity. They have a lot of long-established hydro power, now being affected by dry weather. Wind and solar farms are particularly found in the south, including Sicily.
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,625
Location
Elginshire
In April I travelled in Italy and never saw any wind turbines apart from odd ones and I never saw any fields full of solar panels but we have to have them but we don't have sun
We don't have sun? I must be imagining the current conditions, then.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,071
Location
UK
Irrespective of the claims about climate change, the fact is fossil fuels are going to run out - and get increasingly more expensive as time goes on. The cartel nature also means that it's profitable to just cut production and bump up the pricing. What's not to like about paying less to source oil, then being able to charge more - and nobody can do SFA about it.

I am pretty sure the UK gets sun. I know people who have got solar panels and they definitely see energy generation from it. I'm also quite sure I can see the sun right now. Plus, shock, solar panels can still generate energy (albeit way less) without bright sun.

More and more people are investing in solutions to go off-grid, or partially off-grid, and become more self sufficient. Solar panels and a battery are great for this, and energy companies are indeed going to use smart meters to encourage people to use large appliances at certain times which may not be the traditional 0000-0700 or whatever. It may be in the middle of the day.

If you have a smart appliance, it may be possible to trigger itself to operate when told to and you just need to load the washing machine/dishwasher and set it to a specific mode.

But the oil lobbyists don't want you to be self-sufficient, obviously. The likes of BP know you're going to eventually get an EV, so they want to build a network of fast chargers that will charge you 80p or more per kilowatt hour, even when there will be times that electricity may be near zero, or even negative! Can't be passing on those savings to you and me, oh no.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,730
Location
Redcar
I've never understood why getting free of the influence of states like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, etc etc isn't sufficient motivation on its own for us to want to get as far away from fossil fuels as possible.

That it helps deal with Climate Change is just a bonus as far as I'm concerned.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,071
Location
UK
Saudi Arabia has loads of money and they give a lot of it to people who in turn fight for us to stay friends with them. Now they know that oil won't last forever, they're also spending a lot - like a crazy lot - on things like buying football players for what is likely to one day become a rival to FIFA, setting up rival associations for golf and other sports to take those over, and trying to do much like China, which used its money during the good economic times to give loans to struggling countries (and then later taking ownership of various industries when they couldn't pay) and buying up businesses happy to take the money.

Russia was also a great source of income for many, but is obviously out of favour right now. Iran needs to probably play the game a bit more to get more 'acceptance' and I am not sure about the others.
 

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,138
I've never understood why getting free of the influence of states like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, etc etc isn't sufficient motivation on its own for us to want to get as far away from fossil fuels as possible.

That it helps deal with Climate Change is just a bonus as far as I'm concerned.

But we also have oil reserves in the North Sea, so we don't need to be totally reliant on foreign sources. Plus, of course, fracking. There is still coal available - surely with modern technology, we can make coal power stations cleaner.

We do need to be self reliant in energy, and the obvious solution is a mix of nuclear (maybe the small reactors Rolls Royce are developing - make them successful, and that would be a good export to help our balance of payments), gas, oil, coal and renewables. We need such a mix for when renewables are not available.

I've also heard proposals for a massive solar panel 'farm' in north Africa, with an interconnector straight to the UK, but that would still be subect to foreign interference, e.g. if there was a coup.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,730
Location
Redcar
But we also have oil reserves in the North Sea, so we don't need to be totally reliant on foreign sources.
Sure, but those reserves continue to decline and Governments appear wedded to selling into the open market meaning no real benefit to us in terms of energy prices even if we're slightly more secure.
Plus, of course, fracking.
No thanks, it might work in the more remote parts of Canada/USA but I think it's wholly unsuitable for the more cramped UK.
There is still coal available - surely with modern technology, we can make coal power stations cleaner.
As far as I'm aware "clean coal" is a pipe dream. You can deal with some of the worst aspects such as sulfur dioxide emissions which cause acid rain but fundamentally compared to renewables or nuclear (or even gas) it's filthy. From extraction to burning.

We do need to be self reliant in energy, and the obvious solution is a mix of nuclear (maybe the small reactors Rolls Royce are developing - make them successful, and that would be a good export to help our balance of payments), gas, oil, coal and renewables. We need such a mix for when renewables are not available.
My preferred solution remains nuclear for baseload (where it excells as reactors are best when run flat out 24/7) with renewables and grid level battery storage for the peaks. Gas available for the days when it's extremely cold and demand is massive, or when the wind doesn't blow, etc. We should be ditching coal, greenwashed biomass, and oil ASAP.
I've also heard proposals for a massive solar panel 'farm' in north Africa, with an interconnector straight to the UK, but that would still be subect to foreign interference, e.g. if there was a coup.
Yes it was a very interesting and, indeed alluring, idea. But I think/hope that the attacks on Nord Stream 1 and 2 will have killed it stone dead. Reality is that undersea infrastructure is very vulnerable to attack and so being reliant on an undersea interconector for a substantial proportion of our energy is just too risky.
 

dangie

Established Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
1,247
Location
Rugeley Staffordshire
Norway is a bit hypocritical in as much as it prides itself on generating 100% of its electricity from hydro power, whilst at the same time fuelling its economy by exporting vast quantities of oil & gas.

A bit like loading the gun for others to fire……
 

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,138
My preferred solution remains nuclear for baseload (where it excells as reactors are best when run flat out 24/7) with renewables and grid level battery storage for the peaks. Gas available for the days when it's extremely cold and demand is massive, or when the wind doesn't blow, etc. We should be ditching coal, greenwashed biomass, and oil ASAP.
I agree with the first part of your statement, but not that in italics. The problem with nuclear is that it can take 20 years or more to build a nuclear power station - how long has Hinckley Point been in build? - and no one in government thinks that long ahead (and we are poorer for the lack of a long term vision). If the Rolls Royce SMR is a realistic option, lets get on with it PDQ. But I doubt if Rishi will decide anything before the next election - he is kicking so many cans down the road he is building a roadblock!
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,730
Location
Redcar
agree with the first part of your statement, but not that in italics. The problem with nuclear is that it can take 20 years or more to build a nuclear power station - how long has Hinckley Point been in build? - and no one in government thinks that long ahead (and we are poorer for the lack of a long term vision). If the Rolls Royce SMR is a realistic option, lets get on with it PDQ.
Well I did say as soon as possible, not right this second :lol:

But I agree that it's something that will take longer than might be ideal and we will be stuck with fossil fuels in our mix for longer than we might like. But that's no reason to not drive forward as quick as we can away from them. Especially as every step reduces our reliance on despotic regimes who, in some cases, are actively our enemies.

Which to circle back around is why I find it bizzare some people are of the view that we should just forget renewable and "drill baby drill". Quite apart from climate concerns, why would we want to be beholden to such nations? Either directly or indirectly.


But I doubt if Rishi will decide anything before the next election - he is kicking so many cans down the road he is building a roadblock!
On that I completely agree!
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,847
Location
Scotland
Norway is a bit hypocritical in as much as it prides itself on generating 100% of its electricity from hydro power, whilst at the same time fuelling its economy by exporting vast quantities of oil & gas.
It's not really hypocritical, in that they aren't creating new demand for fossil fuel, just supplying existing demand. Also, don't forget that there's a lot of non-energy uses for petroleum and gas.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,071
Location
UK
But we also have oil reserves in the North Sea, so we don't need to be totally reliant on foreign sources. Plus, of course, fracking. There is still coal available - surely with modern technology, we can make coal power stations cleaner.

We do need to be self reliant in energy, and the obvious solution is a mix of nuclear (maybe the small reactors Rolls Royce are developing - make them successful, and that would be a good export to help our balance of payments), gas, oil, coal and renewables. We need such a mix for when renewables are not available.

I've also heard proposals for a massive solar panel 'farm' in north Africa, with an interconnector straight to the UK, but that would still be subect to foreign interference, e.g. if there was a coup.

I don't think there's any real way to make coal clean, and carbon capture is pretty much a total scam - but something companies can use to continue burning fossil fuels and appear caring.

Having our own oil reserves doesn't mean cheaper fuel for us, as the prices are fixed. Rishi was quite keen to fool people to the contrary.

As for solar farms, I think I've seen a few discussions that point out the losses in transmission huge distances. And, yes, there's the risk of future wars cutting us off. Plus, in extreme heat, solar generation actually doesn't do that well.

It makes sense to spread the solar farms around (it's not like they're all connected and need to be next to each other).

Which to circle back around is why I find it bizzare some people are of the view that we should just forget renewable and "drill baby drill". Quite apart from climate concerns, why would we want to be beholden to such nations? Either directly or indirectly.

If you wanted to build a solar farm, you need to aquire the land, buy the panels, install them and all the other ancillary equipment. That's a cost to you. Sure, you will hope to make a lot of profit, but all the risk is on you - and the odds are often against you as Governments go off green energy and promote more use of fossil fuels...

...because Oil companies have vast budgets and are well known to fund organisations and pay influencers and the media, sometimes directly and other times via advertising or sponsored content.

I am not really aware of similar green-energy lobbying. Chances are even the pro-solar groups are oil companies that know they have to be seen to support green solutions, and may get grant money for such schemes, but will never go 'all in'.
 
Last edited:

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,138
If you wanted to build a solar farm, you need to aquire the land, buy the panels, install them and all the other ancillary equipment. That's a cost to you. Sure, you will hope to make a lot of profit, but all the risk is on you - and the odds are often against you as Governments go off green energy and promote more use of fossil fuels...
If you set up solar farms in the UK, are you not just removing farming land from production? We would then be swapping food dependency for energy dependency, neither of which is desirable in times of international conflict.

...because Oil companies have vast budgets and are well known to fund organisations and pay influencers and the media, sometimes directly and other times via advertising or sponsored content.

I am not really aware of similar green-energy lobbying. Chances are even the pro-solar groups are oil companies that know they have to be seen to support green solutions, and may get grant money for such schemes, but will never go 'all in'.
How has Net Zero generated such momentum if the oil giants, with their deep pockets, cannot counter the claims of Net Zero zealots? Someone must be funding Net Zero, and I would like to know who that is. Either the oil giants PR is absolutely rubbish, or Net Zero is being funded to a greater extent than the oil giants, and that doesn't just come from people rattling collection tins.
 

Merle Haggard

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2019
Messages
1,979
Location
Northampton
Norway is a bit hypocritical in as much as it prides itself on generating 100% of its electricity from hydro power, whilst at the same time fuelling its economy by exporting vast quantities of oil & gas.

A bit like loading the gun for others to fire……

A little while ago a Norway spokesman on Radio 4s Today programme made the claim that electricity generation from coal and oil should be replaced by the use of Norway's liquified natural gas exports because it was 'so green'. Not sure if he understood what 'hydrocarbon' meant, though - I've not heard of Norway's hydrogen gas reserves....

I've never understood why getting free of the influence of states like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, etc etc isn't sufficient motivation on its own for us to want to get as far away from fossil fuels as possible.

That it helps deal with Climate Change is just a bonus as far as I'm concerned.

But will not that just be replaced by states that have the natural resources essential for renewable energy - for example, rare metals, rare earths needed for battery production - and thereby have a similar power? They may, of course, be benign now but this may be changed by the power they come to enjoy.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,847
Location
Scotland
But will not that just be replaced by states that have the natural resources essential for renewable energy - for example, rare metals, rare earths needed for battery production - and thereby have a similar power?
The difference there is that, once mined and refined, it is possible to re-use those metals almost indefinitely.
 

Noddy

Member
Joined
11 Oct 2014
Messages
1,009
Location
UK
It’ll probably make the news in the next few days but 2023 is the year that renewables (Wind/Solar/Hydro) overtook fossil fuels (Gas/Coal) in the British Grid. Amazingly civilisation hasn’t collapsed!

Interesting that demand on the grid also continues to fall.

1704030682484.png
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,625
Location
Elginshire
It’ll probably make the news in the next few days but 2023 is the year that renewables (Wind/Solar/Hydro) overtook fossil fuels (Gas/Coal) in the British Grid. Amazingly civilisation hasn’t collapsed!

Interesting that demand on the grid also continues to fall.

View attachment 149394
With regard to demand falling, it seems to me that there are more incentives being offered to cut consumption. I'm still signed up with Loop and there have been quite a few "turn down and save" events so far. This year there have been a few "on the day" requests whereas previously they were announced a day or two in advance.

My supplier (EDF) also invited me to take part in its scheme, but I can't take part in both. The amount of money I will earn isn't huge but it'll be sufficient enough to finance a couple of nights in my local.
 

Top