Energy infrastructure

Markcheese

A lot of the towers for turbines in ireland are coming on from spain ,

Most of the blades we're using are manufactured in europe , a majority of the gearing, brearings and motors and also european

That doesnt mean they're carbon free , obviously.

No generation or transmission is ,

And as is often said its system that count .. not an individual component

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120552801#Comment_120552801

https://www.newscientist.com/lastword/mg24332461-400-what-is-the-carbon-payback-period-for-a-wind-turbine/

In 2006, turbine manufacturer Vestas studied the carbon payback period for various turbines. This took into account extraction and manufacturing of raw materials, production of the turbines, their transport, erection, operation, maintenance, dismantling and disposal, and the same for their foundation and the transmission grid. The figure was between seven and nine months, depending on the type of turbine. Other analyses have come up with similar figures.

Modern turbines and processes are more efficient, they're longer lasting and more recyclable than back then.

Birdnuts

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120556791#Comment_120556791

Its doesn't take account of actual output(as opposed to capacity factor of turbine) or the carbon sensitivity of sites eg. amount of peat excavated and ongoing damage to surrounding habitat,carbon leakage etc. in terms of drainage, silt loss, back up by conventional peaking plants etc. Its a just some general guff published by a deeply embedded vested interest

MightyMunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120557018#Comment_120557018

Have you done an analysis on how long a coal, oil or gas plant has to run to offset the construction emissions? Is it more than 9 months?

Birdnuts

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120557667#Comment_120557667

Tis a pity all are needed to back up wind isn't it?? - plus they are generally not shoe horned and sprawled across sensitive sites like peatlands etc. and produce consistant power

Sam Russell

Consistent power is the problem for coal and nuclear. It takes too long to start and stop them, so not a lot of use to back up wind or solar.

Gas works well, and hydrogen and bio-gas are renewable versions of it, so there is some hope of zero carbon without fossil fuels.

Is uranium a fossil fuel?

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120562001#Comment_120562001

Meeting variation in demand during the day is the problem for nuclear and to a lesser extent coal. In the USA there've been cases where nuclear power plants had to pay the grid to take their power rather than throttling down.

Coal is a fossil fuel. In addition to electricity it's used for heating and coke (coaking coal) is used to reduce about 2.5 billion tonnes of iron ore. We've way more than 3 years of global energy demand left of the stuff. The same is true of gas and oil.

Energy to fuel covers a wide range of technologies that produce storable fuels. As volumes increase costs will come down like they have in other technologies. For example keeping low mileage cars on the road with them would probably use less energy than replacing them with EV's.

Winter demand is 1GW more than summer so insulation would reduce much of this, not sure about how the economics stack up with cost of peaking plant and storage.

[rant]

AFAIAA apart from some French nuclear plants that have a limited ability to change output over several hours most power reactors are essentially steady output. Those French plants are less efficient as it was compromise.

Uranium isn't a fossil fuel. At 10% and falling of global electricity production there's 90 years of economic uranium reserves left. Or since it provides 3% of global energy demand there's 3 years left. We've been breeding plutonium in reactors since 1944 and still haven't got a breeder cycle working. Thorium is way more difficulty as you need to capture twice the % of neutrons, a task more difficult than doubling the Carnot efficiency of other thermal generators which we've done in the same time. Uranium ore can be detected by the presence of radium or by gamma rays which can be picked up by low flying aircraft. Most of the remaining ores are low grade and encased in granite so recovery costs rise exponentially and difficulty will increase.

[/rant]

Sam Russell

I had a smart meter (electric) installed recently.

What use is it? Can I monitor my use by instant, by hour, by time period?

Can I reduce my bill by some use of it?

About 30% of my electricity is 'vampire' power - that is stuff that is on all the time. How is it possible to identify such use and reduce it?

As a simple tip - a phone charger that weighs more that a 13 A plug (generally it has a transformer inside) uses a lot more than one that does not.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120565001#Comment_120565001

https://www.electricireland.ie/smart-meters

About 30% of my electricity is 'vampire' power - that is stuff that is on all the time. How is it possible to identify such use and reduce it?

Get a socket based monitor and plug your bits in to see how much they draw in standby and during normal use. Loads of different options out there for this and they are cheap

https://amzn.eu/d/bThjbE8

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120565001#Comment_120565001

If you have a transformer based phone charger, you are going to need to replace the phone too. Transformer usb chargers basically do not exist.

You can get half hour interval data from ESB Networks, you have to ask for it and they take weeks to start providing it.

Sam Russell

My point about the smart meter is that it is advertised as some wonderous asset to allow control over one's electricity bills, but there is no apparent information to achieve that in reallity.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120565580#Comment_120565580

Did not see this. I will check it out.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120565730#Comment_120565730

If you get a smart meter plan from your provider, which I currently could not recommend, they will provide the interval data immediately. But you will need to make major changes to your power usage to save money on those plans.

My dishwasher, washer and dryer all have timer control so I could run them during the cheapest power bands if I wanted to; but the very cheap times are so limited and the peak band so punishingly expensive that I will stick with a 24h tariff. Gas heating, water heating and hob don't give as much room for manoeuvre anyway.

Sam Russell

I suspect the smart meter offers little for the customer, and will be used to increase overall cost.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120565889#Comment_120565889

If you:

A: were incredibly unaware of your power usage to the point of ignorance (this is directed at the people who talk about how much money the smart meter saved them)

B: can move nearly all your consumption away from the peak hours

You may think you've made a good saving. But a day/night non smart meter would save most people even more.

And if you are already in control of usage and cannot move consumption, you'll be hammered financially

A common case where people identify the smart meter as saving them money is realising they have a faulty appliance like a fridge running at full whack 24/7 - plug in usage meters would catch this for you too.

My interval data shows that I use about 180w constant. I can account for most of that between cable modem, router, smart home kit, NAS and fridge/freezer to that point that I'm not going to try seek out the rest. It also shows that my main use is 60 degree washes for towels, and the oven - the high rated dishwasher and heat pump dryer use bugger all for what they do.

But 180w for, primarily, home tech does add up and most people ignore that usage

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120565889#Comment_120565889

It's just a meter for measuring power used

It has no impact on the amount of power you consume outside of offering you additional plan options and built in monitoring (which you can achieve with other options).

But at the end of the day, it's just a meter for measuring power used a meter, nothing more.

If you are on night rate on the old meter and have it swapped for a smart meter but don't change plans or usage then there is no impact as a result of changing the meter type

bk

If you have an EV, then the EV smart meter plan that gives you a very low rate for 3 hours at night (also time the dishwasher/washing machine for then) could save you money, but for most people it probably isn’t worth switching and might actually end up costing more.

In time, I think the companies may get more innovative with smart meters and offer more competitive plans, plus in home monitoring would be nice, but it is still early days.

They can also be more beneficial in that no more estimated bills, all bills are based on real readings. This can avoid bill shock.

A few notes:

• If they switch you to a smart meter, you don’t have to switch to a smart meter plan, you can stay with your existing plan.
• BUT, once you switch to a smart meter plan, you can’t switch back to a non smart meter plan later.

jackofalltrades

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120565889#Comment_120565889

All the smart meter rollout so far has done is to make Day/Night plans more expensive, so terrible Smart plan don't look so bad in comparison.

D/N plans used to be great value, but any time Energy companies offered a good D/N deal they were flooded with requests to rip out smart meters and put in older D/N meters. Making the Smart meter rollout look like a shambles. So they no longer offer good deals on them.

If there was more innovation in the electricity market and the CRU weren't so useless, smart plans might actually be good.

Energy companies are even giving away electricity for free rather than providing a better deal for their customers.🙄

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2023/0502/1380365-energy-cloud-enterprise/

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120565889#Comment_120565889

Correct, which is exactly why I rang them and told them I didn't want one and to not install one, after they sent me a letter to say they were about to do just that.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120562001#Comment_120562001

Lol - consistent power being touted as a 'problem'. Couldn't make this up.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120577958#Comment_120577958

Well, it is not consistent power that is the problem at all.

If that were so, then there would not be a problem as the generators and grid could cope. Rivers do not burst their banks because of 'consistent' flow but because the flow exceeds the capacity. It is the rapid change in demand at peak times that causes the problem because the capacity to generate maxes out.

Someone not seeing that excess demand over supply at peak times as a problem - couldn't make it up.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120578085#Comment_120578085

Intermittent power production and delivery is the problem, which is why it is so exorbitantly expensive and challenging to try and turn it into a consistent power supply, which is what is actually needed and desired.

The genius Irish solution, as proposed by the ESB is Hydrogen, and lots of it, but the UK, which has orders of magnitude greater engineering resources and prowess than Ireland, has looked at hydrogen and found it doesn't stack up as a complete solution:

In our view multiple changes will be needed to the way we obtain, use and store energy if we are to reach Net Zero emissions by 2050. Hydrogen will have its place in this portfolio. But we do not believe that it will be the panacea to our problems that might sometimes be inferred from the hopes placed on it.

Essential questions remain to be answered as to how in future large quantities of hydrogen can be produced, distributed, and used in ways that are compatible with Net Zero and cost efficiency.

In the words of one of the witnesses to our inquiry, hydrogen is likely to be a “big niche” where it will play a major role in certain sectors of the economy, and be a “huge growth story” over the next 30 years, but “it will not be everything”.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmselect/cmsctech/99/summary.html

The plan for hydrogen in Ireland is not that it will be a big niche, but that it will be almost everything. Renewables in Ireland essentially mean wind, solar being a bad 10-15% joke. Onshore wind here, has a capacity factor of 28.3%, Offshore might achieve about 48%. These are very low numbers when you need reliable electricity supply 100% of the time. The idea that hydrogen can or will make up the difference is a breathtaking leap of uncosted faith.

Sabine Hossenfelder took a look at hydrogen and has some big doubts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zklo4Z1SqkE

BKtje

That video, while very interesting, is talking purely about Hydrogen for the transport industry and I believe most semi knowledgeable people realise this is a non starter for the many reasons that were brought up. I would imagine that the ESB is targeting Hydrogen for grid storage which of course also has many problems but I believe is more realistic (in my non expert opinion).

Intermittent power production is less of an issue for grid storage as you can generate it when there is excess and use it when demand for electricity is higher. It would still mean careful management of power during long spells of low renewable power generation when hydrogen "stockpiles" would run low. The more interconnected the grid is with other countries (who may or may not also be using hydrogen as a "stockpile") would minimise the risk during longer low wind / solar times. Countries where nuclear is not frowned upon could also leverage this as an even greater export possibility to guarantee energy to a country for x time during these periods either by having access generation or by storing Hydrogen themselves (similar to how Ireland's gas reserves are in the UK). If the mass storage problem of hydrogen can be solved, this could be a big money maker for Ireland to guarantee electricity supply when needed elsewhere in Europe with the vast quantities of high wind areas available for generation. Whether there is the will to cover the country's offshore areas with turbines is another issue however.

It is clear that a large overcapacity of wind and solar would be required to allow you to create these stockpiles. For the transport industry, just use the electricity generated to power the vehicles and forget about Hydrogen with our current technological capabilities.

Sam Russell

No-one sensible is suggesting Hydrogen is a panacea for energy production in a zero carbon era.

Wind and solar, together with interconnectors will be the heavy lifters - particularly off-shore wind. Now in winter, there will be a serious problem with stationary high pressure over Ireland that could stay for a week or so. Of course, biogas, with hydrogen supplement would help the interconnectors, but storage would have run out by then.

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120579487#Comment_120579487

No one sensible is actually addressing the problem of stationary high pressure over Ireland in winter for a couple of weeks at a time- that’s why we will be dependent on gas until someone comes up with a better idea- which at the moment is not in place on any grid in the world.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120579834#Comment_120579834

Mitigation of that scenario would be getting insulation levels up to a BER of A in the majority of houses and commercial buildings as a blocking high pressure in winter will cause a cold snap of some severity, and a complete absence of wind - even at sea. Sunshine would only be available for a few hours and at a low level.

Let us hope that we have a good set of connectors available to bridge the gap. However, if we had sufficient in storage, bio-gas supplemented with hydrogen gas would be a solution for such a case.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120579487#Comment_120579487

"No-one sensible..." The ESB is, and by association, the Irish government is also. The entirety of Ireland's strategy for net zero by 2050 is predicated on vast amounts of hydrogen generation and storage, and for it to be used in transport. It's all here in the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xwxc31zhL8Y

Interconnectors are a sop for the weak minded - which is explained in that video and another of Sabine Hossenfelder's I could cite. Both sources reference the fact that high pressure induced dunkelflaute conditions lasting near 60 days, as happened recently, generally do not just affect Ireland, but most, or all, of western Europe. The more the region becomes dependent on renewables, being mostly wind, the more pointless interconnectors become, because it is a nonsense to assume that the other end of the connector will have energy to spare.

Interconnectors work best when you don't need them.

Ireland is betting the farm on hydrogen - there is no plan B.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120579834#Comment_120579834

We have until 2050 to reduce emissions to zero. We can use natural gas to transition over to hydrogen or other technologies if something better comes along.

Both the UK and the Netherlands setup storage in disused gas fields comparable to our annual demand. Doing the same here with hydrogen in Kinsale, Corrib and other underground storage would mean taking a hit on energy density and dismal round trip efficiency of 40%. It would still leave us with MONTHS of storage, faster, cheaper and more flexible than a nuclear power plant.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120580248#Comment_120580248

Nuclear power is cheaper than the two most recent large scale UK offshore wind farms, without even factoring in the cost of the whole hydrogen side of things.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120580342#Comment_120580342

Hinkley-C Current strike price 106.12£/MWh (2026-ish, it keeps getting delayed) and it's price is index linked for twice as long and lots of hidden subsidies and government money

The thing about renewables, as technology and techniques improve it keeps getting cheaper in real terms.

Hornsea 1 - Current strike price 164.96£/MWh (in operation)

Hornsea 2 - Current strike price 83.94£/MWh (next year)

Hornsea 3 - Current strike price 45.37£/MWh (due 2028, possibly before Hinkley-C is fully commissioned based on the other EPR's)

When the wind is blowing nuclear is 130% more expensive. Even with a hydrogen having a pretty poor 40% round trip efficiency, nuclear would be just 6% cheaper than storing wind as hydrogen and burning it. And that's only during the dark calm days and ignoring other renewables, storage and interconnector options, and we are still allowed to use some gas until 2050.