Energy infrastructure

It is not about the supplier but the cost impact of different supplier mixes. Wind out and gas in will change the wholesale cost dramatically.

Think about how bills are generated currently -

dumb meter - monthly usage is sent to the supplier, bill is generated from this - there is no way that wholesale pricing can be applied here.

smart meter - usage recorded automatically and this can be done against the time of the usage so peak and off-peak pricing is possible. Wholesale pricing would require that the smart meter has up to date wholesale pricing to identify both usage and cost on an hourly basis.This would then be sent back to the supplier to generate the bill. I come from the telecoms industry and this is equivalent of your mobile phone identifying the calls you make both on the length of the call and the number you are calling then sending these details back to the network for the operator to bill you - it would never happen.

The complexity of introducing wholesale pricing for consumers is huge.

Could you elaborate why this would never happen? I'm interested on what would be the blocking point as I don't see see a technological impedement per se (without working in the field so quite possible I'm missing an important detail). The technology could also be used to help with load balancing helping people to automate certain high energy tasks when power is cheap and plentiful (car charging, washers, dryers etc etc) but that's a tangent to the current subject.

That's what I figured so I don't understand why it would, in theory, be unable to transmit data back (or simply store it for later reading) regarding usage at a certain time for billing. Whether this is preferable for the customer is another question of course.

Octopus Energy in the UK have dynamic pricing. Can't find the video now but will look for it later. Search Octopus Agile and Octopus Go.

Electric Vehicle Man has a video where he used Octopus for an EV flexi tariff or something. He would input he wants X kWh into the EV and the internet connected Octopus switch would activate his charge point during the cheapest rates, generally during the night. Electricity sold on the Day Ahead Market gives utility companies ~23 hours to update their backend and implement their smart switches.

Ok my mistake, this is being done at present - Octopus is doing it as an experiment. They are not however using the current wholesale rate but a forecast for the next day.

AgileOctopus prices are calculated automatically in the evening based on the next day’s wholesale price forecast (read our Agile pricing formula here). Tonnes of different factors from the weather, to politics, to huge global crises like COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine, can affect the wholesale price of energy.

But it is complex

Customers on Agile Octopus are early adopters of the next generation of smart energy. Right at the forefront of time-of-use, dynamic pricing, Agile is in fact, a bit of an experiment to see if customer habits can be shifted based on fluctuating prices – a surefire way to our low-carbon future. But Agile has never never been done before, and that’s because of the complexities involved in energy pricing.

It can be a lot longer than few days - try 6 weeks straight in Autumn 2021

Here you go:

6 weeks straight of no wind in Ireland. And if you think interconnectors are some marvelous saving your bacon solution, they are not, because these weather systems are generally large and effect the whole of Europe, so all the wind reliant countries on the continent, and the UK/Scotland, will have none to spare either, Everyone will be begging the French to allow them to suck on their reliable nuclear teats.

I'm still amazed at all the fans of renewables who haven't watched that whole video and absorbed the enormity of the problem they think renewables are such a viable solution for. The ESBs master plan is to have 21 Twh of hydrogen storage, and for a country that pisses itself regularly at the thought of nuclear energy, the irony is profound, because that's 1260 Hiroshima atomic bombs worth of energy.

That's 21 Twh using an energy storage medium with an apalling round trip efficiency of 18-46%, so realistically probably 32% outside a lab. It's not made clear in the video, but it's probably reasonable to assume that 21 Twh is how much energy is needed from the storage, so the actual energy content of the stored H will have to be greater. With H gas turbines likely to have an efficiency of no more than 64%, that means actual H storage of 29 Twh - 1715 Hiroshima bombs worth.

You tout low wind as some sort of gotcha victory. As of right now, wind is providing 12% of demand. That is not a win or saving grace. Ireland is emitting 302g of CO2 per Kwh. In France, they are emitting 23g - 92.4% less.

5 GW of solar produces about 550 mw of power in this country. It's utterly pointless and uneconomic, which is why commercial solar wouldn't exist in most of europe without subsidies. Calling it 'commercial' is a misnomer.

You need to look at that video again and pay closer attention. She specifically stated solar does naff all in winter and your belief that it will satisfy demand during a dunkelfloute is a fantasy. She also said interconnectors aren't a solution or help because large dunkelflaute events tend to cover all of Europe, so no one would have energy to spare to provide us with.

30 GW of offshore - that's going to cost €86 billion to construct and another €26 billion in maintainance - so €116 billion all up. And during a dunkelflaute it's going to generate next to nothing, something the ESB are aware of hence the massive hydrogen storage they are forecasting.

I'll make prediction: By 2040, not even half the projected OSW needed to be constructed to meet targets will have been built.

Having some wind - 12% of demand at the moment - is of no real consequence and doesn't meaningfully alter the scale of the problem that is a grid capable of generating 88% of demand from H that only has a 64% efficiency when using gas urbines.

Your solution seems to be to just keep throwing endless amounts of hypothetical money at the problem and increasing capacity as if it's nearly free to provide and there's some magic money tree somewhere to supply it.

The ESB master plan is unaffordable, and I think they know it, which is why they never even mention costs, let alone provide estimates. Another pridiction is that doubling our onshore wind generation won't happen either, as all the less truoublesome sites have already been used. There will therefore be insurmountable legal and regulatory problems if any attempt is made to achieve it.

Let's be honest - enthusing about nuclear is really just a form of crypto-climate change denialism. It's not to be taken seriously. It's a refuge "cause" for those cranks that have been wrong about absolutely everything to do with climate change and energy de-carbonization over the last few decades. It provides them with some kind of mental comfort blanket rather than directly face the fact that they were wrong about climate-change and wrong about the growth of solar and wind generation. It's a political/identity politics thing for them, thus no amount of facts will trigger any sort of self-reflection.

Such a lazy and inaccurate analysis when you compare emmissions from the German Grid versus the French one

Nuclear is the only way to avoid the massive price swings that will undoubtedly be downfoisted onto the consumer using smart meters. By the time all those wind and solar farms and expensive interconnectors are built fusion might be ready

I've said previously on the thread I've no issue with nuclear in principle. Just not in Ireland. And re the interconnector.. You failed to mention that France will be getting all our excess wind generation... It's not a one way street.

It's beyond me how anyone can talk about cost and then plug nuclear in the same comment. 🤣

The price swings all balance out. You'll have negative prices when there's lots of renewables generating. Also, that last comment is borderline deranged 😃

Offshore wind in a irish context is looking pretty damn expensive compared to some of the north sea fields ,

The turbines and towers arent manufactured here , the installation is done by ship by multinationals with international crews ,

So it'd be worth investigating why this is expensive and seeing what can realistically be done to reduce the strike price .

1 ,theres plenty of competition so its not likely to be price gouging

2, scale ,none of the recently licensed projects were huge multi gigawatt size project - scale counts

3, timing , you cant really compare a contract from 4 or 5 years ago with a contract today - intrest rates have sky-rocketed and look like staying high , fuel the same ,steel and components , demand for specialist equipment, wages blah blah , it may change in a few years but not today

4, planning and design costs , theyre ridiculously high in Ireland, the level of permission delays , legal delays , ect ect skyrockets the risk , and the cost , if you have to design and plan 7 or 8 project to build 1, that cost has to be borne ..

That last one is the one the Government can do something about , streamlined permissions, better guidance about where and what is acceptable to build , and whats not .. reduces risk and costs