Electric Power Generation

[Hysteresis]

I have a serious question regarding the provision of Electrical Power supply in response to demand variation.
The Grid was in days gone by to some extent self regulating, all machines being synchronised onto the National grid, As power demand went up all of the synchronised generators effectively slowed down and the station governor responded to restore the grid frequency. Similarly as demand reduced, power generation reduced. Decisions to remove generators from the grid or reintroduce generators to the grid were made by the National Grid controllers so that efficient generation was accomplished.
There were base stations, usually the Nuclear stations or the large Coal Fired Stations, which supplied the power to the grid which were never shut down (providing they were available) and other stations designated to supply the demand swings.
At least that was my understanding in my University days (I did study under Faraday though).
SO my question is this. Now we have vast quantities of Wind Turbines blighting our sceptered Isle, it seems to me that these monstrosities should be considered as part of the Base load providers, because the power driver is effectively free, and let the demand swings be taken by the fossil fuelled stations. I see Wind Turbines constantly being switched off during weather conditions conducive to them functioning but I am informed that they are switched off due to low energy demand.
Would it not be more sensible to reduce the power generated by the 'Swing Stations' rather than the the Wind Turbines.
I realise that Fossil fuel Stations run less efficiently when on reduced generation, but never the less, fossil fuel burning would be reduced.
It seems to me that the WInd Turbines should generate when ever they are available and not used for Demand swings.
Clearly I am misunderstanding the control of power supply and demand swings, but I am at loss to know what my misunderstanding is.
Can anyone with knowledge of the power demand control educate me.

 

[Bosswhite]

Wind Turbines in this Country are basically a con, and are there for Land Owners/Manufacturers to get a Government Subsidy.
They will never recoup the original outlay on Fossil Fuels spent on building/installing them.
A typical case of the Emperors New Clothes !

 

[Jackrae]

Not the answer you're looking for but it might be something to do with the price that the "grid" has to pay for the wind generated energy.

There are possibly subsidies over-and-above the tariff rate - that the turbine guys get for the power generated - a bit like the ridiculous sums domestic power generators (PV owners) get for the power they generate. It beggars belief that some are being paid up to four times the price for each KW generated that the consumer actually pays for each KW consumed.

In other words, although there could be wind energy available for use on the grid, there could well be financial reasons why the "grid' chooses not to buy it.

 

[tony1851]

When it's freezing cold in winter due to high pressure over the country, there's no wind, so the turbines don't work anyway - just at the time when we need the power the most.

 

[Hysteresis]

Not the answer you're looking for but it might be something to do with the price that the "grid" has to pay for the wind generated energy.

There are possibly subsidies over-and-above the tariff rate - that the turbine guys get for the power generated - a bit like the ridiculous sums domestic power generators (PV owners) get for the power they generate. It beggars belief that some are being paid up to four times the price for each KW generated that the consumer actually pays for each KW consumed.

In other words, although there could be wind energy available for use on the grid, there could well be financial reasons why the "grid' chooses not to buy it.

I think you are right on the Tariff being paid out to the Landowners. I thought they were paid on 'Installed Capacity' but maybe there is a generating tariff on top of that. I believe there is a landowner fairly near here where the land owner get £10,000 per year per turbine. There are 18 turbines on his land so gets £180,000 a year for doing nothing. His Farm never generated this sort of income when he had to work very hard for what he got. NO need to work anymore.
These monstrosities are very very expensive to manufacture,install and run with ridiculous tariffs designed by the idiots who rule over us.
Thanks for the suggestion as to why these things are not being part of the Base Station structure. Putin's aid got it right when he said the UK was a small island nobody takes any notice of any more. WIth the ruling classes dreaming up these ridiculous and expensive eyesores, it it any wonder the world laughs at us.

 

[Dave54]

It's all playing around with figures so we can keep up our end of the various carbon emission agreements we've been signed up for.
What we actually need, is several large capacity nuclear stations, and we need them now. Otherwise sometime in the future we're going to have blackouts. We need to be self sufficient as far as possible for energy.
It's another case of government trying to look good, be green, and placate the "No to nuclear" lobby while not actually doing what is needed.

 

[Hysteresis]

It's all playing around with figures so we can keep up our end of the various carbon emission agreements we've been signed up for.
What we actually need, is several large capacity nuclear stations, and we need them now. Otherwise sometime in the future we're going to have blackouts. We need to be self sufficient as far as possible for energy.
It's another case of government trying to look good, be green, and placate the "No to nuclear" lobby while not actually doing what is needed.

I couldn't agree with you more, Dave.
Nuclear has it's problems, but should never be leaving our Grandchildren with an Energy problem.
Let's face it Fusion, is the answer to all out energy needs. But it is the biggest Scientific problem to crack, if ever the problem is cracked. Some reports suggest that we are nearer to the solution than is realised!!! It must have been in the Daily Mail, as they usually print rubbish anyway. If it ever is cracked, I would think the costs of Constructing a fusion station would be astronomic.

 

[Norcon]

The answer to our energy needs is too use less and put the populating tool away.

Only an idiot would want a perpetually creating energy source anyway.

Its only September and I'll bet most of you have your heating on.

 

[Hysteresis]

The answer to our energy needs is too use less and put the populating tool away.

Only an idiot would want a perpetually creating energy source anyway.

To use less energy would only be a delay to the inevitable.

Your idiot suggestion is a little silly IMO. If you are religious (Which I am not) your God created the ultimate perpetual energy source in the Sun, and all life is dependant upon it. Even if you are an atheist as I am, then the fact that our existence and indeed ALL life on earth relies totally on a perpetual energy source is indisputable.
SO maybe the Idiot suggestion is aimed in the wrong direction.

 

[JBR]

If power cuts come along, and perhaps that may not be too far in the future, then it will have been due to serious mismanagement.

As Dave said, we need more nuclear power stations now. I cannot understand why the government hasn't the balls to stand up to these naive greenies and get on with it. As always, if and when they do something about it, it will be too late and there will be a big panic about what to do to try to put things right.

 

[Dave54]

It doesn't matter what is done to address the use of energy. In a climate like ours we will still need a large and continuous supply which should not be provided, and controlled by another country. As you say Hysterisis, nuclear has it's problems, and in an ideal world we wouldn't use it, but unless we're prepared to invest in some sort of "all weather and conditions" system we are going to come unstuck somewhere down the line.
I'll bet 10 Downing Street won't be cold and dark when that happens on one bitterly cold Winter's evening!

 

[Norcon]

To use less energy would only be a delay to the inevitable.

The inevitability of what? War?
War will happen anyway regardless of your perpetual fusion energy you've been reading about in the mail or what ever you call it.

The sun is not a perpetual source of energy btw. What make's you think that?

 

[jockscott]

I cannot understand why the government hasn't the balls to stand up to these naive greenies and get on with it.

Easy, our government now pander to all sorts of minority groups (at the expense of the majority) The Green Brigade, will not be happy until we're living back in the stone age. The internet will be replaced with "jungle drums" as the preferred method of communication. Candles will be our only source of light and fire our only source of heat. We'll return to a "hunter/gatherer" existence and if you want to know what the weather is, ya just pop yer head out of yer cave.

 

[tony1851]

Jockscot has hit the nail on the head.

Since the 19th Century, people in this country have been obsessed with turning back the clock to pre-industrial times; the 'Greens' are just the latest incarnation of this movement.

And yes, they want us all to be growing our own food and making our own clothes again.

We have sufficient energy resources in the form of COAL for producing electric power. What other nation refuses to use its own natural resources, and chooses instead to import - at great expense - ridiculous and un-economic forms of power generation in the form of windmills?

 

[Norcon]

There's only about 1000 years worth of coal left world wide so its not sustainable.

Google wrote

The World Coal Institute estimates that at current coal consumption rates that there are sufficient world coal reserves for 147 years

.