On 27/08/2019 19:28, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 13:17:31 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Isn't that an guesstimated 1/2 GW? As it's embedded in the
distribution and not monitored/metered, all they see is a (slight)
reduction in demand from their forecast. Probably well within the
error bars of that forecast.

No. they see an immediate and sudden drop as the frequency goes down.
That is they will see a step change in DEMAND, upwards...

I was thinking under normal conditions. With the embedded stuff only
showing up as a reduction in demand for a given area from the grids
predictions, assuming said prediction doesn't make allowance for the
embedded stuff. Which I expect it does, otherwise the margin will end
up too big.

The reduction in generation from these events was:

737 MW â Hornsea
244 MW â Little Barford
c 500 MW â embedded generation

The cumulative amount of lost generation was 1,481 MW,

Ah that Lttle Barford figure has changed from what I remember. Must
get aroound to reading the proper reports sometime...

I think that sbesequently Barford dropped its OCGT half - IIRC it is
480MW OCGT and 244MW steam...

A shade under 2GW in all.



--
€œIt is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.€�

Thomas Sowell