| |||||||||||||||||||||
Download the data | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fred / DaveYour statement about nuclear is not correct.For example, the French have been well above 40% nuclear (annual energy percentage) since the mid 1980s . And they do not rely on their external connections to provide all their load following and frequency controlIt is not necessarily an issue if you design the nuclear units to have the flexibility that is needed . The old magnox units in the UK were not so designed and could not be flexible but they are almost all closed now anyway.Depends whether you have a "can-do" or "can't do" attitude. (Same applies to wind)RegardsDave Ward(PS, I tried to post this direct to grid-supergrid-in...@googlegroups.com but it seems I don't have access to that)-----Original Message-----
From: grid-supergrid-in...@googlegroups.com [mailto:grid-supergrid-in...@googlegroups.com]On Behalf Of star...@yahoo.com
Sent: 17 December 2011 16:21
To: grid-supergrid-in...@googlegroups.com; wind-energ...@googlegroups.com; Claverton AB MAIN GROUP; Jerome Guillet
Subject: Re: "we cannot go above 40% wind penetration without resorting to external links?" HVDC transmission economics, 'big wind' intermittencyDear AllIt seems to be completely lost on people that nuclear cannot go above 40% either, without flexible external links, mainly coming from hydro or from convnetional fossil plants.The 30 % of output from nuclear in Britain in the late 1990s was starting to cause strain on the fossil plant sector. Because of the concern, a major conference was set up in London in 2001 on the effects of plant cycling on power plant maintenance and costs. A report of the conference is given in "Materials at High Temperature"It was at this conference, in the opening presentation, I asked delegates to look beyond the present concern caused by nuclear to the coming problems resulting from wind energy. I believe I was the first raise this issue and have been harping on about it ever since.Fred
Dear All,OK, so if we say nuclear is non-dispatchable, neither is wind dispatchable at all, except that you can feather the blades or switch it off altogether. So does not the 30-40% limit argument apply equally to Wind for the reasons you have given?Personally, I have never claimed that nuclear should exceed that level, unlike the claims I have heard for "close to 100%" Renewable.Andrew
From: "star...@yahoo.com" <star...@yahoo.com>
To: "grid-supergrid-in...@googlegroups.com" <grid-supergrid-in...@googlegroups.com>; "davida...@btinternet.com" <davida...@btinternet.com>; Claverton AB MAIN GROUP <energy-disc...@googlegroups.com>; Claverton Wind energy group <wind-energ...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 17 December 2011, 19:58
Subject: Re: FW: "we cannot go above 40% wind penetration without resorting to external links?" HVDC transmission economics, 'big wind' intermittency
Dear AllDavid Andrews and myself published a short note in 2008 in the ICE Energy journal pointing out that the 70% of power from nuclear in France depends greatly on exports and imports from England . Switzerland, Belgium, Germany and Italy. These enable French nuclear plants to run at a near constant output.Most of the imports come from hydropower, and in France itself considerable use is made of pumped hydroSome very modest changes in output can be done from nuclear, but they are quite unable to two shift. That is to be shut down overnight and started up the next day.If Europe as whole decided to go nuclear, the European average would be in the 30-40% range. The best that can be said about nuclear is that it will require less hydro or fossil plant to cater for the day time demand than wind needs as back up.Fred Starr