UK Wind-Generated Electricity on a fairly windy night

We have a steady 'blow' at the moment throughout the UK, strong wind, but not too strong, so pretty well ideal conditions ...
As I illustrate below, I don't think that the recent situation is anything like as unusual/uncommon as you seem to think/imply (albeit, as I've said, it would be crazy to put too high a proportion of our eggs in the Wind basket, since nothing about Wind can ever be guaranteed) ...
Re: periods of no wind ; Not usually a problem at the moment. Yes it goes up and down but turbines are spread all across the UK and coastline so there is usually wind somewhere. Especially offshore. Offshore wind has 40% capacity factor versus 20% onshore.
Indeed - and I hope to shortly be sort-of illustrating that. Watch this space!
"Shortly has come :)

See the four graphs below - which are based on gridwatch data (data every 5 minutes) for the 12 month period starting on 1st November 2020.

The first graph shows the mean amount of wind generation (mean of all 288 5-min data for the day) each day.

The second graph is the same as the first, but smoothed (by means of a 7-day moving average) to get rid of some of the day-to-day variation and hence make it a little easier to 'read'. Note, however, that 'smoothing out the day-to-day variation' is potentially misleading because it will tend, for example, to 'conceal' short (e.g. a day or two) periods of little (or no!) wind generation. However, it can be seen from the first graph (and the two which follow) that there were no days on which there was no wind generation, very few on which the average was <1 GW and not many on which it was <2 GW (about 7% of average total daily demand).

One bit of my intuition which seems to have been correct is that wind generation has been considerably (and 'obviously') greater during the cooler months (November-April), when electricity demand is likely to be greater, than during the warmer months (May - October).

The third and fourth graphs show the distribution of the 'average wind-generated GW during a day' during the 12-month period considered - i.e. the percentage of days on which the mean wind generation was a certain figure (third graph) or above a certain figure (fourth graph).

These graphs show that on nearly half (about 45%) of the days, wind generation was greater than nuclear (essentially fixed at ~5 GW), in some cases considerably greater - more than double nuclear on about 15% of days.

In view of what Simon has recently written (below) the next thing I plan to do when I have a little time is look at the durations of periods of very low Wind generation (probably over periods longer than 12 months - there appears to be about 10 years' data available from gridwatch). I may be proved wrong, but I suspect that there will not have been periods as long as "a week or two" with little/no UK wind generation - although, as I said at the start, we can't put too high a proportion of our eggs in the Wind basket, since there will never be any guarantees.

.... The reality was that there were periods (and not just a few hours) where there was effectively no useful wind across the UK - and at the same time there was little wind across northern Europe. Furthermore, there were periods in the record where most of northern Europe was under a high pressure zone - leading to low wind conditions for a couple of weeks. At the moment, grid scale storage is measured in terms of "(10s or 100s of) megawatts for hours" - not 10s or 100s of gigawatts for a week or two.

... and now the graphs ...

upload_2021-10-30_22-2-49.png


upload_2021-10-30_22-3-10.png


upload_2021-10-30_22-3-28.png


upload_2021-10-30_22-3-47.png


Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
Found this interesting when listening to some middle of the night radio, http://isleofeigg.org/eigg-electric/. Capped at 5kW for domestic and 10kW for business usage at any one time.
Sounds like a (worse version of) France!

Given they are 'off grid', I suppose they have little choice, but ...electric showers, and probably cookers, are presumably 'out' - as, in practice, is probably almost any use of electricity to create heat. What, I wonder, are they going to do if/when (as we're heading in the rest of UK) the burning of fossil fuels (gas, oil, coal, peat etc.) and wood is outlawed? (I'm not sure that 5 kW would be enough to run heat pumps {as well as some other things}, would it?)

Kind Regards, John
 
I'm not sure that 5 kW would be enough to run heat pumps {as well as some other things}, would it?

Almost certainly not but perhaps preferable to what they had up until 2008 (a generator for each property). Interestingly an islander on the programme said they can't even provide the limit of 5/10kw for everyone at once. Not sure what happens then.
 
Sponsored Links
Almost certainly not but perhaps preferable to what they had up until 2008 (a generator for each property). Interestingly an islander on the programme said they can't even provide the limit of 5/10kw for everyone at once. Not sure what happens then.
Indeed. People who live in such isolated places presumably have to accept the limitations. Do they have a piped water supply, I wonder (I suspect not)?

Kind Regards, John
 
The development looks like better than they had before. It's a tough life on the Isles.

5kW will heat a well-insulated cottage and a hot water cylinder. Though it is difficult to insulate old stone buildings.

I don't suppose they get much sun in winter, but plenty of wind. Electric light and a radio are a good start.

Eigg has some forestry, so there must be a certain amount of wood available.

The article mentions fan heaters, but when an excess of electricity is available, surely storage heaters would be better.
 
See the four graphs below - which are based on gridwatch data (data every 5 minutes) for the 12 month period starting on 1st November 2020.

The first graph shows the mean amount of wind generation (mean of all 288 5-min data for the day) each day.

The second graph is the same as the first, but smoothed (by means of a 7-day moving average) to get rid of some of the day-to-day variation and hence make it a little easier to 'read'. Note, however, that 'smoothing out the day-to-day variation' is potentially misleading because it will tend, for example, to 'conceal' short (e.g. a day or two) periods of little (or no!) wind generation. However, it can be seen from the first graph (and the two which follow) that there were no days on which there was no wind generation, very few on which the average was <1 GW and not many on which it was <2 GW (about 7% of average total daily demand).
Even the first graph is hiding detail. It would be interesting to see a distribution of "rate of change of output", or perhaps "change of X GW in less than Y hours" with un-smoothed data - when I've looked at the short term graphs (before BMReports did it's facelift and made things a lot harder to see), there were some massive swings in output which would be significantly reduced once averaging out data to fit days or weeks onto a graph.
The third and fourth graphs show the distribution of the 'average wind-generated GW during a day' during the 12-month period considered - i.e. the percentage of days on which the mean wind generation was a certain figure (third graph) or above a certain figure (fourth graph).
...

... and now the graphs ...

View attachment 248984
The first things I note on that are :
The number of massive power changes over short times - there are several times when output changes between something like 100% of maximum "real" output, and 10%, over only a day or two. Just take a moment to think about that, that's a change from 10% to 100%, or from 100% to 10%, over only a day or two. So "something else" has to ramp down or up to cover 90% of your capacity, or in the order of 10GW, over a short time scale. And that's with the data averaged so in detail there will probably be even more significant swings.
I also note that there are a lot of days with low output. Yes, it's easy to say there were no days with zero output, but from a users' PoV, if the industry told users "you can only use 5% of your normal load today" then that wouldn't be very useful :rolleyes: I can see quite a few days where output, in terms of mean or max, is "quite low" - low enough that in the absence of "something else" to fill the gap would mean lights going out across the UK.
And again, I can pick out some interesting stats from these :
Some 10% of the time, UK windmills produced less than 1GW. And about 15% of the time, they produced over 10GW. That's a massive variation in output which "something else" has to cover. And we need to consider what else is going on. In summer it represent a much greater change (as a % of supply/demand) than in winter. I wonder what a graph of "wind output as a % of total demand" would look like ?

In view of what Simon has recently written (below) the next thing I plan to do when I have a little time is look at the durations of periods of very low Wind generation (probably over periods longer than 12 months - there appears to be about 10 years' data available from gridwatch). I may be proved wrong, but I suspect that there will not have been periods as long as "a week or two" with little/no UK wind generation - although, as I said at the start, we can't put too high a proportion of our eggs in the Wind basket, since there will never be any guarantees.
December 2010 would be a good place to start, if the data goes that far back.
And looking at teh first graph, early Dec 20, and late Jan 21 appear to show periods of "several days" with significantly reduced output - and I'm guessing significantly increased demand due to heating loads.
Found this interesting when listening to some middle of the night radio, http://isleofeigg.org/eigg-electric/. Capped at 5kW for domestic and 10kW for business usage at any one time.
Interesting, and a few things to note about it which would be useful to bear in mind when discussing the UK wide grid and some of the "more interesting" claims made by some parties.
  • Firstly, they have about 4 times the hydro than wind. Hydro is much more predictable, and has significantly less variation over shortish timescales - other than massive downpours which could swell a dryish stream to full flow in a short space of time, any well engineered system out to have variation measured in % of output per day rather than per minute. As such, they are starting with a much more predictable and reliable base capacity.
  • They also have battery capacity capable of supplying full load for a day - though it's not really clear how much of the total the batteries can provide.
  • And they have 100% diesel backup - which they accept that even with an excess fo renewables provides about 5% of supply over a year.
Scale that up and we'd be needing between 50 and 100GW of additional hydro. Not going to happen - I suspect that even if we could get around the objections to flooding some of our nicest countryside, the capacity just isn't there.
And we'd be needing in the order of 1/4 to 1/2 a terawatt hour of storage. Bear in mind that the UK's largest pumped storage scheme is Dinorwig, which is rated for 1.8GW and a total of 9.1GWH - it's not easy working out the numbers for some of the other 3, but it looks like they have a total capacity in the order of 12GWHr. So less than one hours worth of UK usage (even if you used the total capacity), and then they need "recharging".

Also of note is that a spinning turbine such as the hydro unit provides significantly better inertia than inverter output wind turbines. That's already an issue on the UK grid - remember the power cut in the south east a little while back ? Again, not insurmountable if you throw enough of our money at it.

And of course, if domestic loads are restricted to just 5kW, where would that leave EV owners with their 7kW chargers, or homeowners with the push for heat pumps which for a larger home will probably need that just for the heating at times. I realise a limited supply isn't novel - in the past I've dealt with colleagues in Italy where sometimes they'd lose office power for a couple of minutes while they went to reset the breaker if running the aircon had tripped it.
 
Last edited:
The development looks like better than they had before. It's a tough life on the Isles.
Yes, they do mention that before they didn't even have 24 hour electricity. So in that respect, while it may seem "poor" to use, it's probably a massive improvement.
5kW will heat a well-insulated cottage and a hot water cylinder. Though it is difficult to insulate old stone buildings.
I suspect that many of the buildings predate any thought about energy efficiency - and as you say, are likely to be very difficult to insulate.
The article mentions fan heaters, but when an excess of electricity is available, surely storage heaters would be better.
Possibly. Being involved with our local church, having excess go into storage heaters would be preferable. As it is, we use the building in the worst way possible - it sits empty and unheated for 6 1/2 days a week, then we heat it (with oil) for a few hours on Sunday, barely enough to draw any moisture out of the very thick lime mortar and cobble walls. To do any more than that would be prohibitively expensive.
Which reminds me, I'm supposed to be looking for a new dehumidifier for us to buy. We've had two small ones (one mine, the other belonging to someone else) running for a while and it makes a massive difference taking half a gallon a day of water out - but they've both broken now.
 
Even the first graph is hiding detail....
I think we are looking at this in different ways.

Most of your comments relate to the variability in wind, hence wind generation, hence the fact that one cannot rely upon it, and therefore has to have enough 'other generation capacity' ("something else") to entirely replace wind generation (even at times of high demand) should it fall to, or close to zero for periods of time. I have acknowledged that.

What I have been trying to illustrate (and what somewhat 'impresses' me) is the extent to which 'on average' wind can contribute towards the total demand. Yes, to be safe (on a day-to-day and hour-to-hour basis) one has to have enough 'reserve capacity' in some other form of generation to be able to completely take over from wind if/when the need arises - but, even if that reserve consists of a 'planet unfriendly' method of generation, it will only be for a relatively small proportion of time that it will be needed (obviously a lot less than if there were never any wind generation).

In other words, I'm obviously not suggesting that the existence of wind generation could significantly reduce the generating capacity by other means that one has to have - but I am saying that having wind generation means that one would, 'on average', only have to use a fairly small proportion of that reserve 'capacity'. You might regard that as a 'waste of resources' but (in the absence of a high nuclear capability) the only alternative would presumably be to have much/most of our electricity generated in 'less green' ways (less 'green' than wind). I imagine that the 'something else' would probably have to be gas since, even if we had a lot of nuclear capacity, I don't think it's really suitable for changes in output in real time in response to changes in demand (and/or wind).
It would be interesting to see a distribution of "rate of change of output", or perhaps "change of X GW in less than Y hours" with un-smoothed data - when I've looked at the short term graphs (before BMReports did it's facelift and made things a lot harder to see), there were some massive swings in output which would be significantly reduced once averaging out data to fit days or weeks onto a graph.
I'm not totally sure what your interest is in such 'rate of change' data, but I'll have a think and see what I can do. As for smoothing/resolution, I can do anything you want - from yearly averages (extreme smoothing) to 5-minutely data (no smoothing at all). I chose 'daily' for my ('unsmoothed') graphs as a reasonable compromise because if one tries to go down any further (to hours, or even 5-min intervals), it just gets more messy and the resolution of software, screens and eyes etc. makes it impossible to really see 'fine detail', anyway (5-minutely data over one year would have just over 100,000 data points plotted across the width of the graph). Explicit smoothing (such as my moving averages) obviously obscures short-term changes even more but, for some purposes, make it easier to get an overall feel for the data.
The first things I note on that are : ... The number of massive power changes over short times - ... So "something else" has to ramp down or up to cover 90% of your capacity, or in the order of 10GW, over a short time scale.
I have acknowledged and addressed that above.
... I also note that there are a lot of days with low output. Yes, it's easy to say there were no days with zero output, ...
That obviously depends upon what you mean by 'low output In any event ...
...but from a users' PoV, if the industry told users "you can only use 5% of your normal load today" then that wouldn't be very useful :rolleyes: I can see quite a few days where output, in terms of mean or max, is "quite low" - low enough that in the absence of "something else" to fill the gap would mean lights going out across the UK.
Again, I refer you to the above. I do not deny the need for a "something else" which (since wind can theoretically almost 'completely disappear' for short periods) is cable of totally taking over from wind if/when it has so - but that reserve will not necessarily be needed all that much (usually only 'partially needed' and not necessarily needed all that often).
And again, I can pick out some interesting stats from these : Some 10% of the time, UK windmills produced less than 1GW. And about 15% of the time, they produced over 10GW. That's a massive variation in output which "something else" has to covered we need to consider what else is going on. In summer it represent a much greater change (as a % of supply/demand) than in winter.
I'm getting a bit fed up with repetitive type - so, yet again, 'see above' :)
I wonder what a graph of "wind output as a % of total demand" would look like ?
That should be fairly straightforward - and, as you imply, could potentially be quite interesting. Watch this space!
December 2010 would be a good place to start, if the data goes that far back.
The gridwatch data appears to only go back to 13th May 2011, if that's good enough for you (... and there's a bit of a problem if it isn't :) )).
And looking at teh first graph, early Dec 20, and late Jan 21 appear to show periods of "several days" with significantly reduced output - and I'm guessing significantly increased demand due to heating loads.
I suppose it's another case of "yet again, see above". Once one has accepted that one has to have capacity in "something else" (probably gas) to potentially replace the entirety of wind generation (potentially at times of high demand) if/when needed, it doesn't really matter, conceptually, whether that 'reserve capacity' is used partially for one 3-hour period per year, fully for 7 consecutive days in every month or anything in-between. However, the less the 'reserve' has to be used (less frequent and/or for lesser periods of time) the happier should the planet be!

Kind Regards, John
 
I wonder if they have a hill that could accomodate pumped storage.
 
Trouble is, if you crunch realistic numbers, it's still going to be too small by orders of magnitude.

That is pretty much what I have been saying for quite a few years and ever since the idea of everyone driving round in EV's was first suggested - the capacity numbers simply do not add up.
 
I suppose it's another case of "yet again, see above". Once one has accepted that one has to have capacity in "something else" (probably gas) to potentially replace the entirety of wind generation (potentially at times of high demand) if/when needed, it doesn't really matter, conceptually, whether that 'reserve capacity' is used partially for one 3-hour period per year, fully for 7 consecutive days in every month or anything in-between. However, the less the 'reserve' has to be used (less frequent and/or for lesser periods of time) the happier should the planet be!

That would be great, if only.. You cannot simply push a button and run the equipment, the massive lumps need time to come up to temperature gently. That's some of the reason why they are paid to sit on standby.
 
That is pretty much what I have been saying for quite a few years and ever since the idea of everyone driving round in EV's was first suggested - the capacity numbers simply do not add up.
I have been thinking and saying (here and elsewhere) exactly the same 'for years'.

Indeed, as I frequently remind people, even before the prospect of widespread EVs (let alone heat pumps) was a consideration, serious concerns were being voiced about the adequacy of our generating capacity to service demand as we moved forward (particularly with nuclear facilities coming to the end of their lives etc.) - and the rapid escalation of EVs, and now heat pumps, merely adds to that pre-existing problem.

Maybe we're both missing something but, as you say, the figures simply don't seem to 'add up'

Kind Regards, John
 
That would be great, if only.. You cannot simply push a button and run the equipment, the massive lumps need time to come up to temperature gently. That's some of the reason why they are paid to sit on standby.
I realise that - but you surely are not suggesting that we should simply abandon all the 'renewable' methods of generating electricity, on the grounds that most/all of them are subject to unpredictable variations, are you?

'Pumped' generation (the nearest we have to 'storage') can be used in the very short term whilst other sources are 'coming up to temperature gently', and the amount of that available is not negligible ... as I type, nearly 6% of UK demand is coming from that source...

upload_2021-10-31_18-40-29.png


Kind Regards, John
 
I realise that - but you surely are not suggesting that we should simply abandon all the 'renewable' methods of generating electricity, on the grounds that most/all of them are subject to unpredictable variations, are you?

Wind is fine for the few thing which can sit being charged, where there is absolutely no urgency for the charge to be completed. Unfortunately there is generally no such need.

Yes I do feel we should abandon the whole idea of renewable and concentrate on what we know is viable - nuclear.
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top