http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7193576.html

In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-
global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


I'm sure TNP will comment on his own good time but on that..

But from that..


Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett said: €œThis is excellent news.
Offshore wind is a fast-growing source of green energy, and one which
the UK should be tapping into much more.

"As it becomes increasingly clear that Hinkley Point C is a white
elephant which will not meet the UK's energy needs, the government must
instead direct resources to renewable sources like wind, the price of
which is falling rapidly while the cost of building new nuclear
facilities mounts."


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still think
that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind blowing to
cover the shortfall.

Just how to prats like her get into influential positions like that
where other guvvermint wallys take notice of them?.



Last one turn out the lights purlesse!...



Oh! there're out!, so let me light a few candles, much nicer light
Dontcha tink;?...
--
Tony Sayer

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:53:47 +0100
tony sayer wrote:

In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-
global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


I'm sure TNP will comment on his own good time but on that..

But from that..


Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett said: €œThis is excellent news.
Offshore wind is a fast-growing source of green energy, and one which
the UK should be tapping into much more.

"As it becomes increasingly clear that Hinkley Point C is a white
elephant which will not meet the UK's energy needs, the government
must instead direct resources to renewable sources like wind, the
price of which is falling rapidly while the cost of building new
nuclear facilities mounts."


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still
think that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind
blowing to cover the shortfall.

Just how to prats like her get into influential positions like that
where other guvvermint wallys take notice of them?.

snip

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

--
Davey.

On 16/08/16 21:53, tony sayer wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-
global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


Ah. I see that a twice-as-expensive-as-nuclear guaranteed subsidy for a
frantically useless and intermittent source has bent the accountants in
favour of a vast white elephant.

Twas ever thus.

--
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Jonathan Swift.

On 16/08/16 23:42, Davey wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:53:47 +0100
tony sayer wrote:

In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-
global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


Just how to prats like her get into influential positions like that
where other guvvermint wallys take notice of them?.

snip

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

Of course.


Makes Hinckley point look like a good deal.

Especially when the cots of stabilising that windpower is at least
another £22/Mwh. Then the cost of the extra grid...the real cost of wind
is probably nearer £200/Mwh. Yis folks every time that turbine turns
your smart meter clocks up £0.25p a unit.



--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

En el artículo , Davey
escribió:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

Ouch!!!

Makes juice from Hinkley C look like a bargain. I really, really hope
we cancel it and stick two fingers up at the Chinese. Untrustworthy
****s.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

On 17/08/16 09:12, Chris Hogg wrote:
Is
there a secret government agenda here, to go for lots of wind-power
backed up by OCGT's to cope with the doldrum days, that we mere
mortals know nothing about?

Its not that secret.
Government is prepared to pay for capacity, no matter how cheap.

Interesting thing of course.

The study done on the Irish grid shows that half the potential carbon
savings from wind were lost due to the increase in inefficiency of CCGT
kit run in "whores' drawers" mode.

Replacing that CCGT with half-the-efficiency OCGT means that all those
windmills won't reduce CO2 emissions one iota...chuck in some Diesel
plant and its probable that the net effect of the windmills will be to
increase emissions overall.


--
€œit should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalins Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.€�

Vaclav Klaus

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:53:47 +0100
tony sayer wrote:

In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-
global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


I'm sure TNP will comment on his own good time but on that..

But from that..


Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett said: €œThis is excellent news.
Offshore wind is a fast-growing source of green energy, and one which
the UK should be tapping into much more.

"As it becomes increasingly clear that Hinkley Point C is a white
elephant which will not meet the UK's energy needs, the government
must instead direct resources to renewable sources like wind, the
price of which is falling rapidly while the cost of building new
nuclear facilities mounts."


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still
think that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind
blowing to cover the shortfall.

Just how to prats like her get into influential positions like that
where other guvvermint wallys take notice of them?.

snip

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

according to the TV report the new farm will be much more efficient (and
presumably will cost much less - though no number was mentioned)

Though doesn't negate the other problems, I agree

tim

On 16/08/2016 21:53, tony sayer wrote:
In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-
global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still think
that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind blowing to
cover the shortfall.



According to the BBC text news, it will supply power for 2 million
homes. I don't think so, not even in a gale.

On 17/08/16 11:04, Andrew wrote:
On 16/08/2016 21:53, tony sayer wrote:
In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-

global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still think
that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind blowing to
cover the shortfall.



According to the BBC text news, it will supply power for 2 million
homes. I don't think so, not even in a gale.

Homes don't take that much electricity to run.

IIRC is around 15kWh/day.

lets say 24kwh, so about a Kw average, so two millions homes is 4GW.

Well that's the peak output of the farm..so its the usual green fraud, of

(a) making a big number of homes, which are not the major consumers of
leccy and
(b) using the word 'could' so as to quote peak power, not average power and
(c) leaving out intermittency, by not saying that a wind farm this size
could supply no homes at all, in calm weather.



--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

On 17/08/16 10:49, tim... wrote:

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:53:47 +0100
tony sayer wrote:

In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-

global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


I'm sure TNP will comment on his own good time but on that..

But from that..


Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett said: €œThis is excellent news.
Offshore wind is a fast-growing source of green energy, and one which
the UK should be tapping into much more.

"As it becomes increasingly clear that Hinkley Point C is a white
elephant which will not meet the UK's energy needs, the government
must instead direct resources to renewable sources like wind, the
price of which is falling rapidly while the cost of building new
nuclear facilities mounts."


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still
think that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind
blowing to cover the shortfall.

Just how to prats like her get into influential positions like that
where other guvvermint wallys take notice of them?.

snip

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

according to the TV report the new farm will be much more efficient (and
presumably will cost much less - though no number was mentioned)

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price. Offshore its £3billion per
GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor. And a lifetime of less than 25 years.

Contrasts Hinkley at around £6bn per GW., and 90% capacity factor. And a
40 year minimum life.


Though doesn't negate the other problems, I agree

tim




--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

I find I get quite a bit of wind when out at see on a boat, sadly it is not
the useful kind.
B Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-
global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


I'm sure TNP will comment on his own good time but on that..

But from that..


Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett said: "This is excellent news.
Offshore wind is a fast-growing source of green energy, and one which
the UK should be tapping into much more.

"As it becomes increasingly clear that Hinkley Point C is a white
elephant which will not meet the UK's energy needs, the government must
instead direct resources to renewable sources like wind, the price of
which is falling rapidly while the cost of building new nuclear
facilities mounts."


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still think
that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind blowing to
cover the shortfall.

Just how to prats like her get into influential positions like that
where other guvvermint wallys take notice of them?.



Last one turn out the lights purlesse!...



Oh! there're out!, so let me light a few candles, much nicer light
Dontcha tink;?...
--
Tony Sayer

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:49:36 +0100
"tim..." wrote:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets increased to
account for inflation.

--
Davey.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:41:35 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:32:21 +0100, Davey
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:49:36 +0100
"tim..." wrote:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets increased to
account for inflation.

AIUI all strike prices (aka Contracts for Difference, CfD) are index
linked. This, from http://tinyurl.com/za5q6ll p.22

"4.21. In the November CfD Heads of Term we indicated that the CfD
strike price would be indexed to the Consumer Price Index (CPI),
either wholly or partially. In the EMR Spending Review Announcement of
June 2013 we confirmed that the CfD strike price would be fully
indexed in line with CPI throughout the entire term of the CfD."


So it will always be the same multiple of the price of Hinckley Point's
power that it started out at.

--
Davey.

On 17/08/16 12:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price. Offshore its £3billion
per GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor.

Does this mean that you'll never see more than 350MW from this lot,
given optimum conditions all round?

No it means it will average 350MW.

And a lifetime of less than 25 years.

Contrasts Hinkley at around £6bn per GW., and 90% capacity factor. And
a 40 year minimum life.



--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 17/08/16 10:49, tim... wrote:

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:53:47 +0100
tony sayer wrote:

In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-

global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


I'm sure TNP will comment on his own good time but on that..

But from that..


Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett said: €œThis is excellent news.
Offshore wind is a fast-growing source of green energy, and one which
the UK should be tapping into much more.

"As it becomes increasingly clear that Hinkley Point C is a white
elephant which will not meet the UK's energy needs, the government
must instead direct resources to renewable sources like wind, the
price of which is falling rapidly while the cost of building new
nuclear facilities mounts."


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still
think that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind
blowing to cover the shortfall.

Just how to prats like her get into influential positions like that
where other guvvermint wallys take notice of them?.

snip

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

according to the TV report the new farm will be much more efficient (and
presumably will cost much less - though no number was mentioned)

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price.

but they have, that as the point of the news report.

Offshore its £3billion per GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor. And a lifetime of less than 25 years.

only for the turbine. The tower construction, and the distribution system,
which I suspect is a major part in the cost will be good for much longer
with a replacement turbine in place.

tim

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:49:36 +0100
"tim..." wrote:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets increased to
account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

The agreed price for H2 could be anything

The assumption that it is the same as H1 is false.

timn

On 17/08/16 14:00, tim... wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 17/08/16 10:49, tim... wrote:

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:53:47 +0100
tony sayer wrote:

In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-


global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


I'm sure TNP will comment on his own good time but on that..

But from that..


Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett said: €œThis is excellent news.
Offshore wind is a fast-growing source of green energy, and one which
the UK should be tapping into much more.

"As it becomes increasingly clear that Hinkley Point C is a white
elephant which will not meet the UK's energy needs, the government
must instead direct resources to renewable sources like wind, the
price of which is falling rapidly while the cost of building new
nuclear facilities mounts."


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still
think that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind
blowing to cover the shortfall.

Just how to prats like her get into influential positions like that
where other guvvermint wallys take notice of them?.

snip

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

according to the TV report the new farm will be much more efficient (and
presumably will cost much less - though no number was mentioned)

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price.

but they have, that as the point of the news report.

Offshore its £3billion per GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor. And a lifetime of less than 25 years.

only for the turbine. The tower construction, and the distribution
system, which I suspect is a major part in the cost will be good for
much longer with a replacement turbine in place.

You honestly think we will offer index linked licences to print money in
25 years time?


tim






--
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Jonathan Swift.

On 17/08/16 13:37, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 17/08/16 12:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price. Offshore its £3billion
per GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor.

Does this mean that you'll never see more than 350MW from this lot,
given optimum conditions all round?

No it means it will average 350MW.

OK, so what could it peak at and sustain given just the right wind
conditions?

Whatever its nameplate capacity is.


--
"I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah
puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".

On 17/08/16 13:52, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:40:51 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price. Offshore its £3billion per
GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor.

Does this mean that you'll never see more than 350MW from this lot,
given optimum conditions all round?


They _claim_ they're going to get an annual 4.1TWh from H-1,
(http://tinyurl.com/ztsua4s last line of that section). H-1 has a
boilerplate capacity of 1.2GW, so 4.1TWh per annum corresponds to an
average power output of 468GW. So a capacity factor of 39%.
Optimistic? Who knows; only time will tell.

IF the damned turbines dont break they might just scrape that offshore.

But the turbines are always failing. Its ghastly conditions to operate
machinery like that.


--
"I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah
puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:02:26 +0100
"tim..." wrote:


She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets increased
to account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

That's why I mentioned Hornsea 1.

--
Davey.

"Chris Hogg" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:04:33 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 16/08/2016 21:53, tony sayer wrote:
In article ,
harry scribeth thus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...limate-change-
global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html


Course what the silly green moo forgets that on days like today the
freaking wind output is sod all so on windless days and they still think
that a few offshore wind farms will have sufficient wind blowing to
cover the shortfall.



According to the BBC text news, it will supply power for 2 million
homes. I don't think so, not even in a gale.

Certainly not in a gale - they will shut down.

But Ofgem reckons the average medium sized house uses 3,100kWh per
year http://tinyurl.com/h9kz4w7 , or an average rate of 0.353kW. The
average output from Hornsea 2 will be 0.7GW, allowing for a claimed
39% load factor on 1.8GW, so they can reasonably claim to be able to
supply 2 million homes at the 0.353kW rate (1.98 million homes to be
exact, if one can be exact about these things). On the same basis,
Hornsea 1 will supply a little over 1 million homes. But that's the
trouble with averages like that in this situation. They tell you
nothing about the doldrum days.

As an aside, and answering my own question about whether Dong Energy

http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/d.htm

is actually Chinese, Dong apparently stands for Danish Oil and Natural
Gas, and is 76% owned by the Danish government. But coincidentally,
Dong in Chinese means East, which would also be appropriate if they
were Chinese-funded.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:42:27 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:02:26 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:49:36 +0100
"tim..." wrote:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed,
at £140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets increased
to account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

The agreed price for H2 could be anything

The assumption that it is the same as H1 is false.


Well I wouldn't say it could be anything, but H2 could well be a
little lower than H1. The Government has set strike prices for
offshore wind of £150 for 2016/17, £140 for 2017/18 and £135 for
2017/18. http://tinyurl.com/jpaezrq So I guess it depends on when the
contract with the generator begins, and there may be some negotiating
around those prices, I don't know, but I doubt the actual strike
prices agreed will deviate far from them.


What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted, or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

--
Davey.

On 18/08/16 00:38, Davey wrote:
What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted, or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

It is the price the government agreed to pay them

--
How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.

Adolf Hitler

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:02:26 +0100
"tim..." wrote:


She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets increased
to account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

That's why I mentioned Hornsea 1.

But that's a done deal

It might have been a bad deal, but it's all water under the bridge.

It cannot be used as proof that any deal made today will also be
automatically bad, and that is, ISTM what you were tying to show.

tim

En el artículo , Davey
escribió:

What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted,

It's tied to some index - I forget which - so can vary.

or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

It won't. It's dead in the water.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 04:46:08 +0100
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 18/08/16 00:38, Davey wrote:
What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted, or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

It is the price the government agreed to pay them


That doesn't answer the question. Thankfully, Chris Hogg did answer the
question.

--
Davey.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:01:56 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:38:52 +0100, Davey
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:42:27 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:02:26 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:49:36 +0100
"tim..." wrote:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as
agreed, at £140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets
increased to account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

The agreed price for H2 could be anything

The assumption that it is the same as H1 is false.


Well I wouldn't say it could be anything, but H2 could well be a
little lower than H1. The Government has set strike prices for
offshore wind of £150 for 2016/17, £140 for 2017/18 and £135 for
2017/18. http://tinyurl.com/jpaezrq So I guess it depends on when
the contract with the generator begins, and there may be some
negotiating around those prices, I don't know, but I doubt the
actual strike prices agreed will deviate far from them.


What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted, or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

£92.5 @ 2012 prices. Customers pay nothing until the power plant is
operational. The contract will last for 35 years, the strike price is
fully indexed to inflation through the CPI. Read all about it
http://tinyurl.com/h84n2ba


Thank you. A good clear answer.

£16 billion. How many of those could we build for the price of one HS2?

--
Davey.

In article , tim...
scribeth thus

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:02:26 +0100
"tim..." wrote:


She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as agreed, at
£140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets increased
to account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

That's why I mentioned Hornsea 1.

But that's a done deal

It might have been a bad deal, but it's all water under the bridge.

It cannot be used as proof that any deal made today will also be
automatically bad, and that is, ISTM what you were tying to show.

tim





http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...uld-leap-frog-
hinkley-and-lead-21st-century-nuclear-r/
--
Tony Sayer

On 18/08/16 11:46, tony sayer wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...uld-leap-frog-
hinkley-and-lead-21st-century-nuclear-r/

Sadly another puff piece looking for investment in unproven reactor
technology.

'inherent dangers of PWR' indeed.

What about the inherent dangers in windmills?


--
€œBut what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!€�

Mary Wollstonecraft

On 18/08/16 11:28, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:01:56 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:38:52 +0100, Davey
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:42:27 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:02:26 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:49:36 +0100
"tim..." wrote:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as
agreed, at £140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets
increased to account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

The agreed price for H2 could be anything

The assumption that it is the same as H1 is false.


Well I wouldn't say it could be anything, but H2 could well be a
little lower than H1. The Government has set strike prices for
offshore wind of £150 for 2016/17, £140 for 2017/18 and £135 for
2017/18. http://tinyurl.com/jpaezrq So I guess it depends on when
the contract with the generator begins, and there may be some
negotiating around those prices, I don't know, but I doubt the
actual strike prices agreed will deviate far from them.


What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted, or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

£92.5 @ 2012 prices. Customers pay nothing until the power plant is
operational. The contract will last for 35 years, the strike price is
fully indexed to inflation through the CPI. Read all about it
http://tinyurl.com/h84n2ba


Thank you. A good clear answer.

£16 billion. How many of those could we build for the price of one HS2?

Dunno. What's the latest estimates on HS2? £45bn?

So about three. Enough to replace the entire existing nuclear fleet.

To actually create what I would consider the correct and most cost
effective amount of nuclear power - around 30GW - would be achieved with
10 Hinkleys at £160bn, or 10 ABWRs at about £30bn.

Assuming the government had the guts to tell the greens to **** off, and
rammed the project through.




--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

In article , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 18/08/16 11:28, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:01:56 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:38:52 +0100, Davey
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:42:27 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:02:26 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:49:36 +0100
"tim..." wrote:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as
agreed, at £140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets
increased to account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

The agreed price for H2 could be anything

The assumption that it is the same as H1 is false.


Well I wouldn't say it could be anything, but H2 could well be a
little lower than H1. The Government has set strike prices for
offshore wind of £150 for 2016/17, £140 for 2017/18 and £135 for
2017/18. http://tinyurl.com/jpaezrq So I guess it depends on when
the contract with the generator begins, and there may be some
negotiating around those prices, I don't know, but I doubt the
actual strike prices agreed will deviate far from them.


What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted, or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

£92.5 @ 2012 prices. Customers pay nothing until the power plant is
operational. The contract will last for 35 years, the strike price is
fully indexed to inflation through the CPI. Read all about it
http://tinyurl.com/h84n2ba


Thank you. A good clear answer.

£16 billion. How many of those could we build for the price of one HS2?

Dunno. What's the latest estimates on HS2? £45bn?

So about three. Enough to replace the entire existing nuclear fleet.

To actually create what I would consider the correct and most cost
effective amount of nuclear power - around 30GW - would be achieved
with 10 Hinkleys at £160bn, or 10 ABWRs at about £30bn.

Assuming the government had the guts to tell the greens to **** off,
and rammed the project through.




I'm not too optimistic about that. The same old cycle seems to be
repeating itself
Decide to build nuclear
Oh my god, How much?
Decide to have a review
Look at all the alternative nuclear options just emerging
Kick the can down the road.
--
bert

On 18/08/16 14:45, bert wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 18/08/16 11:28, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:01:56 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:38:52 +0100, Davey
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:42:27 +0100
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:02:26 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:49:36 +0100
"tim..." wrote:

She forgets to mention the cost of Hornsea 1 power, as
agreed, at £140 per megawatt-hr.

That was then...

But is still the price they will be paid. Unless it gets
increased to account for inflation.

The point is it's the agreed price for H1.

The agreed price for H2 could be anything

The assumption that it is the same as H1 is false.


Well I wouldn't say it could be anything, but H2 could well be a
little lower than H1. The Government has set strike prices for
offshore wind of £150 for 2016/17, £140 for 2017/18 and £135 for
2017/18. http://tinyurl.com/jpaezrq So I guess it depends on when
the contract with the generator begins, and there may be some
negotiating around those prices, I don't know, but I doubt the
actual strike prices agreed will deviate far from them.


What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted, or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

£92.5 @ 2012 prices. Customers pay nothing until the power plant is
operational. The contract will last for 35 years, the strike price is
fully indexed to inflation through the CPI. Read all about it
http://tinyurl.com/h84n2ba


Thank you. A good clear answer.

£16 billion. How many of those could we build for the price of one HS2?

Dunno. What's the latest estimates on HS2? £45bn?

So about three. Enough to replace the entire existing nuclear fleet.

To actually create what I would consider the correct and most cost
effective amount of nuclear power - around 30GW - would be achieved
with 10 Hinkleys at £160bn, or 10 ABWRs at about £30bn.

Assuming the government had the guts to tell the greens to **** off,
and rammed the project through.




I'm not too optimistic about that. The same old cycle seems to be
repeating itself
Decide to build nuclear
Oh my god, How much?
Decide to have a review
Look at all the alternative nuclear options just emerging
Kick the can down the road.

AS long as we frack instead, it buys us a generation that we can educate
into the realities of nuclear power.

The terrifying prospect is that we do neither.


--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

On 18/08/16 19:10, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:59:05 +0100, Mike Tomlinson
wrote:

En el artÃ*culo , Davey
escribió:

What is the situation for the oft-quoted £95 for Hinckley? Is it the
price for now, to be adjusted,

It's tied to some index - I forget which - so can vary.

or the price whenever it finally goes
online?

It won't. It's dead in the water.

Don't be too sure about that. EDF have just announced local contracts
amounting to £250M. http://tinyurl.com/zmayzy5

It might suit EDF to sell on a 'nuclear ready' site at a profit...


--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."

En el artículo , Chris Hogg
escribió:

Don't be too sure about that. EDF have just announced local contracts
amounting to £250M. http://tinyurl.com/zmayzy5

EdF is tying to bully the govt into agreeing to build by presenting it
with a fait accompli. "But look! £250m of 'investment' and xxx thousand
jobs will be lost if the project is cancelled!" (my quotes around
investment)

It remains to be seen if May will blink. If I were in her leopard-print
shoes, I'd be sweating EdF for better terms while politely telling the
Chinese to **** off.

Articles in Private Eye (last issue and current issue) are well worth a
read for the background scuttlebnutt. EdF are finished if the bid for
Hinkley fails.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

On 17/08/2016 15:18, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/08/16 13:37, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 17/08/16 12:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price. Offshore its £3billion
per GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor.

Does this mean that you'll never see more than 350MW from this lot,
given optimum conditions all round?

No it means it will average 350MW.

OK, so what could it peak at and sustain given just the right wind
conditions?

Whatever its nameplate capacity is.

Only if it is maintained to an extremely high standard. I have never
seen a windfarm without at least 10% of the turbines feathered or with
gearboxes under maintenance. So more like 90% of nameplate capacity for
a large enough installation and much worse on small scale ones.

A group of three I pass regularly seldom has all of them working. The
Nissan plant in Sunderland manages their kit somewhat better but it is
still common for at least one to be out of action most days.

Regards,
Martin Brown

On 18/08/16 19:43, Martin Brown wrote:
On 17/08/2016 15:18, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/08/16 13:37, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 17/08/16 12:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price. Offshore its £3billion
per GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor.

Does this mean that you'll never see more than 350MW from this lot,
given optimum conditions all round?

No it means it will average 350MW.

OK, so what could it peak at and sustain given just the right wind
conditions?

Whatever its nameplate capacity is.

Only if it is maintained to an extremely high standard. I have never
seen a windfarm without at least 10% of the turbines feathered or with
gearboxes under maintenance. So more like 90% of nameplate capacity for
a large enough installation and much worse on small scale ones.

The clue is in the 'could'


A group of three I pass regularly seldom has all of them working. The
Nissan plant in Sunderland manages their kit somewhat better but it is
still common for at least one to be out of action most days.

Regards,
Martin Brown

I pass a farm of about 8-10 and generally 2 are out.


--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

On Thursday, 18 August 2016 19:43:26 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
On 17/08/2016 15:18, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/08/16 13:37, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 17/08/16 12:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Exactly. Windmills haven't fallen in price. Offshore its £3billion
per GW nameplate capacity

At around 35% capacity factor.

Does this mean that you'll never see more than 350MW from this lot,
given optimum conditions all round?

No it means it will average 350MW.

OK, so what could it peak at and sustain given just the right wind
conditions?

Whatever its nameplate capacity is.

Only if it is maintained to an extremely high standard. I have never
seen a windfarm without at least 10% of the turbines feathered or with
gearboxes under maintenance. So more like 90% of nameplate capacity for
a large enough installation and much worse on small scale ones.

A group of three I pass regularly seldom has all of them working. The
Nissan plant in Sunderland manages their kit somewhat better but it is
still common for at least one to be out of action most days.

The latest wind turbines have no gearbox.

In article ,
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , Chris Hogg
escribió:

Don't be too sure about that. EDF have just announced local contracts
amounting to £250M. http://tinyurl.com/zmayzy5

EdF is tying to bully the govt into agreeing to build by presenting it
with a fait accompli. "But look! £250m of 'investment' and xxx thousand
jobs will be lost if the project is cancelled!" (my quotes around
investment)

It remains to be seen if May will blink. If I were in her leopard-print
shoes, I'd be sweating EdF for better terms while politely telling the
Chinese to **** off.

Articles in Private Eye (last issue and current issue) are well worth a
read for the background scuttlebnutt. EdF are finished if the bid for
Hinkley fails.

EDF is owned by the French Government, it can't be "finished". They own a
considerable amount of the UK's electrical distribution system including
that in L0ndon.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 18/08/16 21:02, charles wrote:
In article ,
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artÃ*culo , Chris Hogg
escribió:

Don't be too sure about that. EDF have just announced local contracts
amounting to £250M. http://tinyurl.com/zmayzy5

EdF is tying to bully the govt into agreeing to build by presenting it
with a fait accompli. "But look! £250m of 'investment' and xxx thousand
jobs will be lost if the project is cancelled!" (my quotes around
investment)

It remains to be seen if May will blink. If I were in her leopard-print
shoes, I'd be sweating EdF for better terms while politely telling the
Chinese to **** off.

Articles in Private Eye (last issue and current issue) are well worth a
read for the background scuttlebnutt. EdF are finished if the bid for
Hinkley fails.

EDF is owned by the French Government, it can't be "finished". They own a
considerable amount of the UK's electrical distribution system including
that in L0ndon.

Well its all relative. I suspect what he means is that Areva-as-was will
never build another reactor, ever.

And EDF will simply become a manager of legacy nuclear kit.

Frankly that's probably a good outcome.

Personally I favour a cheep'n'cheerful Hitachi ABWR. A bit crude, but
quick and cheap to build.

Or a CANDU.



--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."