and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:04:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

Bob Eager wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?

It's a domain I gave to TNP ...

On 20/01/2020 10:57, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:04:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?



What are you on about?

--
€œThose who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit
atrocities.€�

€• Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles Ã* M. Claparede, Professeur de
Théologie Ã* Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de
M. de Voltaire

On 20/01/2020 11:01, Andy Burns wrote:
Bob Eager wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?

It's a domain I gave to TNP ...

And its a much nicer domain name too. Thanks andy


--
€œThose who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit
atrocities.€�

€• Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles Ã* M. Claparede, Professeur de
Théologie Ã* Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de
M. de Voltaire

On 20/01/2020 10:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk

The 'usual' winter high pressure over the UK that the Greens like to ignore?

--
F

Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

wiki says 7.3 GW, are any closed ones kept moth-balled for
balancing/reserve purposes? I suppose you can't leave a mountain of
coal out in the rain indefinitely ...

On 20/01/2020 12:12, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:43:51 +0000, Andy Burns
wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

wiki says 7.3 GW, are any closed ones kept moth-balled for
balancing/reserve purposes? I suppose you can't leave a mountain of
coal out in the rain indefinitely ...

The company I used to work for had their own coal-fired power station
up until about 1970, to supplement the grid or to use when the grid
went down. The man who managed the coal stocks told me that the stock
decreased naturally every year, by about 10% IIRC (which seems a lot,
I may have mis-remembered), simply due to aerial oxidation of the
stockpile. In the extreme, they can suffer spontaneous combustion.
http://tinyurl.com/wcv5jay


Nothing to do with sneaky pilfering by the workforce (and/or public) ?

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:01:25 +0000, Andy Burns
wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?

It's a domain I gave to TNP ...

Did he threaten to shoot your puppy?

On 20/01/2020 11:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/01/2020 10:57, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:04:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?



What are you on about?


https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

https://gridwatch.org.uk

On Monday, 20 January 2020 10:04:19 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


That which was to be illustrated:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txcjml4toi...Power.jpg?dl=0

Five 400 MW gas turbines apparently flat out (at right).

Three wind turbines apparently totally still (at left).

On 20/01/2020 10:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk



Yup UK now chugging out 318 grams CO2 for every kWh produced.

On 20/01/2020 11:12, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:04:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk

So, much as expected. I wouldn't be surprised to see OCGTs up later.
Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

square root of sweet fanny adams I thought and all of it due to close soon

'The other mike' prolly knows


--
Renewable energy: Expensive solutions that don't work to a problem that
doesn't exist instituted by self legalising protection rackets that
don't protect, masquerading as public servants who don't serve the public.

On 20/01/2020 13:17, Richard wrote:
On 20/01/2020 11:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/01/2020 10:57, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:04:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?



What are you on about?


https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

https://gridwatch.org.uk


same site


--
Renewable energy: Expensive solutions that don't work to a problem that
doesn't exist instituted by self legalising protection rackets that
don't protect, masquerading as public servants who don't serve the public.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

all of it due to close soon

Fiddler's Ferry closing down at end of March, Drax's remaining coal
units will convert to gas in 2023, the final three coal stations will be
gone by 2025.

On Monday, 20 January 2020 11:43:56 UTC, Andy Burns wrote:
Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

wiki says 7.3 GW, are any closed ones kept moth-balled for
balancing/reserve purposes? I suppose you can't leave a mountain of
coal out in the rain indefinitely ...

it's been sitting in the wet for millions of years already. I can't see how it would shrink 10% a year other than by shrinkage, but I'm no coalologist.


NT

wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

I suppose you can't leave a mountain of coal out in the rain
indefinitely ...
it's been sitting in the wet for millions of years already. I can't
see how it would shrink 10% a year other than by shrinkage, but I'm
no coalologist.
Dunno, thought I'd read that getting wet increased the likelihood of
self-combustion, they do keep busy turning the heap over at
Ratcliffe-on-Soar all year round ...

wrote in message
...
On Monday, 20 January 2020 11:43:56 UTC, Andy Burns wrote:
Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

wiki says 7.3 GW, are any closed ones kept moth-balled for
balancing/reserve purposes? I suppose you can't leave a mountain of
coal out in the rain indefinitely ...

it's been sitting in the wet for millions of years already.

Not necessarily with most minable coal.

I can't see how it would shrink 10% a year
other than by shrinkage, but I'm no coalologist.

And clearly dont have a ****ing clue about anything else either.

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 17:32:23 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 08:47:36 -0800 (PST), polygonum_on_google
wrote:

On Monday, 20 January 2020 10:04:19 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


That which was to be illustrated:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txcjml4toi...Power.jpg?dl=0

Five 400 MW gas turbines apparently flat out (at right).

Three wind turbines apparently totally still (at left).

Where, OOI?

Pembroke is the only site that fits that profile of 5 x 400MW gas units

Arse end of nowhere but with a legacy of very strong grid connections
--

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:43:51 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

wiki says 7.3 GW, are any closed ones kept moth-balled for
balancing/reserve purposes? I suppose you can't leave a mountain of
coal out in the rain indefinitely ...


6.5GW, with no other coal capacity in reserve.

Permanent HV disconnections and removal of connection assets totgether with
network reconfigurations have already been made at any coal plant withdrawn from
the market

From next Autumn it's currently 5.25GW of declared coal

--

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 05:05:40 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the senile Australian troll's troll****

05:05??? AGAIN? Is your LONELINESS so unbearable, sleepless senile cretin?
It's what you get for being a quarrelsome, auto-contradicting asshole!

--
Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID:

Oh dear, still we'll be fine, they will cut off t'north first .. grin.
Brian

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

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions
is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my
apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 17:18:33 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 20/01/2020 13:17, Richard wrote:
On 20/01/2020 11:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/01/2020 10:57, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:04:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?



What are you on about?


https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

https://gridwatch.org.uk


same site

The reason I mentioned it was that earlier today I couldn't get the
'nice' name to resolve. It does now.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:12:25 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:

The company I used to work for had their own coal-fired power station
up until about 1970, to supplement the grid or to use when the grid
went down. The man who managed the coal stocks told me that the stock
decreased naturally every year, by about 10% IIRC (which seems a lot,
I may have mis-remembered), simply due to aerial oxidation of the
stockpile. In the extreme, they can suffer spontaneous combustion.
http://tinyurl.com/wcv5jay

Indeed it does degrade, I can't recall by how much and preventing
degradation and ultimately fire in the heap was always top prority.

Most of the sites using coal pulverisation rather than chain grate
boilers always had three separate heaps, with only one at a time
having coal taken from it, one being full and the other being built
with new deliveries. They normally entered the winter period with
maximum coal stocks with the lowest level as they entered the summer
main overhaul periods (except when a miners strike was predicted and
then all three heaps were the size of a mountain)

There was a strict rotation of usage and regular compression of the
heaps by driving huge dozers/scrapers over them to keep the airspace
to a minimum.

Coal could also come straight off the trains and into the boiler
hoppers such as overnight and in bad weather when driving up coal
heaps is a bit unsafe.

The net weight of coal delivery is determined by weighbridge and was
the basis of payment rather than the actual energy value, but with
predicted coal sources and washing out of stone etc before delivery
the quality would be relatively consistent.

Coal was randomly sampled every day off the conveyors on the way to
the boiler hoppers and the labs on site did a calorific value test
that formed the basis of the thermal efficiency figures that
ultimately determined the order of despatch, at least within the
specific regions, with National Control determining the energy
contribution from each region and the transfer across the region
boundaries.

All this is from a very rusty memory because it was many decades ago.
Power stations, at least then, were mucky places, now they are clean
but just as dangerous

polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 10:04:19 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


That which was to be illustrated:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txcjml4toi...Power.jpg?dl=0

Five 400 MW gas turbines apparently flat out (at right).

Three wind turbines apparently totally still (at left).


They get paid to keep the wind turbines idle. It is making the companies a
fortune which we are paying.

On Monday, 20 January 2020 19:03:47 UTC, The Other Mike wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 17:32:23 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 08:47:36 -0800 (PST), polygonum_on_google
wrote:

On Monday, 20 January 2020 10:04:19 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


That which was to be illustrated:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txcjml4toi...Power.jpg?dl=0

Five 400 MW gas turbines apparently flat out (at right).

Three wind turbines apparently totally still (at left).

Where, OOI?

Pembroke is the only site that fits that profile of 5 x 400MW gas units

Arse end of nowhere but with a legacy of very strong grid connections

Correct. I knew someone would work it out. A few minutes later the mist had cleared somewhat and you could see the stacks more clearly. But I liked that photo. :-)

On 20/01/2020 11:43, Andy Burns wrote:
Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

wiki says 7.3 GW, are any closed ones kept moth-balled for
balancing/reserve purposes? I suppose you can't leave a mountain of
coal out in the rain indefinitely ...



And, when we are finally kicked out of the oil fields of the Middle
East, we have reserves; declared in 2015...
http://scot-buzz.co.uk/roll-out-the-...-englands-oil/

but, South East is too nice to fill with oil wells and all the mess that
comes with it, but, with tongue in cheek I say, sell up. If the solar
system continues to warm up(the age of Aquarius), the south could be
under water in a few life times. Ice-ages, besides being erratic, are a
rarity in comparison to the 'other three ages'.

The English channel is about 8000 years old since 10,000yrs ago sea
levels were 80mtrs lower. Maybe then it might be considered that Wales
would be a better place for a capital given it would be the most popular
seaport.

20,000 yrs back sea levels were 120 to 140 mtrs lower. Given the seas
are mow ice and the glacial ice contains no salt. You might wonder how
salty was the little sea there was left? Maybe the age of Pisces was
cos, more water, less salt density?

The names of the constellations are not fairy stories, they are signs(of
the time).

Dan Britt - Orbits and Ice Ages: The History of Climate - YouTube

Yes, I know, Rod. Bull****. Got it, cheers :-)

I wont be coming back to this so, nice one on lending you car to mates,
makes you less of a ****, in a nice way. :-)

On Monday, 20 January 2020 22:14:46 UTC, Brian Reay wrote:
polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 10:04:19 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


That which was to be illustrated:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txcjml4toi...Power.jpg?dl=0

Five 400 MW gas turbines apparently flat out (at right).

Three wind turbines apparently totally still (at left).


They get paid to keep the wind turbines idle. It is making the companies a
fortune which we are paying.

Even if they were paid a fortune for them not to be idle, there was effectively zero wind. The only way they might have been turning would have required a motor to turn them.

On 21/01/2020 08:39, polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 22:14:46 UTC, Brian Reay wrote:
polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 10:04:19 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


That which was to be illustrated:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txcjml4toi...Power.jpg?dl=0

Five 400 MW gas turbines apparently flat out (at right).

Three wind turbines apparently totally still (at left).


They get paid to keep the wind turbines idle. It is making the companies a
fortune which we are paying.

Even if they were paid a fortune for them not to be idle, there was effectively zero wind. The only way they might have been turning would have required a motor to turn them.


The stats look even worse today. No wind, not much sun right now and
France importing. CCGT practically flat out


Thank **** we have some coal power


--
"If you dont read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 19:04:14 +0000, The Other Mike
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:43:51 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

wiki says 7.3 GW, are any closed ones kept moth-balled for
balancing/reserve purposes? I suppose you can't leave a mountain of
coal out in the rain indefinitely ...


6.5GW, with no other coal capacity in reserve.

Permanent HV disconnections and removal of connection assets totgether with
network reconfigurations have already been made at any coal plant withdrawn from
the market

From next Autumn it's currently 5.25GW of declared coal


But to continue, as generation declarations remain until closures are confirmed
and declarations withdrawn it's a bit worse than that, 1.5 GW is due to go from
Aberthaw so it's going to be closer to 4GW, maybe a bit below.

Taking their actual Transmission Entry Capacity as of today for 'coal' is
11304MW, but that includes Unit 4 at Drax which is already Biomass so that total
is slightly overstated by around 645MW and 2000MW from Cottam which has already
closed but not yet surrendered TEC.

Uskmouth, included in the 11304MW figure above is not running either and is
undergoing biomass conversion for completion this year so that's another 230MW
of coal capacity lost

So with Cottam (2000MW) along with West Burton (1987MW) and Fiddlers Ferry
(1455MW) surrendering their TEC as of 1st April 2020, that brings the total to
5632MW (less another 645MW for Drax Unit 4) Bringing the total down to just
over 5GW, factor in the predicted closure at Aberthaw and it's potentially 3.3GW
of Coal capacity going into next winter (Ratcliffe 2021MW and Drax 1290MW being
the last two sites)

Checking the live figures this morning Cottam has already stopped generation,

West Burton is currently running all four units in the 400-450MW range.

Aberthaw also isn't running at the moment and nor is Fiddlers Ferry

--

The Other Mike wrote:

1.5 GW is due to go from Aberthaw

I noticed this morning that it "went" with 2 days notice on 13th December.

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 22:14:41 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay wrote:

polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 10:04:19 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk


That which was to be illustrated:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txcjml4toi...Power.jpg?dl=0

Five 400 MW gas turbines apparently flat out (at right).

Three wind turbines apparently totally still (at left).


They get paid to keep the wind turbines idle. It is making the companies a
fortune which we are paying.

No they don't get paid anything to keep them idle, they do not receive capacity
market payments and, at least the moment, being undispatchable they are
specifically excluded from the capacity market.

What they do get paid for is when their generation is constrained by
transmission system limitations, when I say 'their generation' I mean what they
'declare' they could have generated, which in many cases severely warps the
actual reality of their performance at all other times under similar weather
conditions when they are not constrained.



--

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 09:24:39 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

The Other Mike wrote:

1.5 GW is due to go from Aberthaw

I noticed this morning that it "went" with 2 days notice on 13th December.

Missed that! Cconfirmed here along with the offloading of their capacity market
obligations

https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/m...on-december-13

--

Andy Burns wrote:

The Other Mike wrote:

1.5 GW is due to go from Aberthaw

I noticed this morning that it "went" with 2 days notice on 13th December.

https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/coal/121119-rwes-aberthaw-coal-plant-to-cease-generation-december-13

I'm currently looking at Drax running like a good un and all the visible wind turbines standing still doing a good imitation of chocolate fireguards.

On 21/01/2020 15:20, Cynic wrote:
I'm currently looking at Drax running like a good un and all the visible wind turbines standing still doing a good imitation of chocolate fireguards.

:-)
Bit of solar today tho
for a few hours. nearly gone



--
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper
name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating
or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its
logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of
the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. They must
face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.

Ayn Rand.

On 21/01/2020 15:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/01/2020 15:20, Cynic wrote:
I'm currently looking at Drax running like a good un and all the
visible wind turbines standing still doing a good imitation of
chocolate fireguards.

:-)
Bit of solar today tho
for a few hours. nearly gone



OCGT firing up...gonna be tight this evening...

--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 20/01/2020 12:12, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:43:51 +0000, Andy Burns
wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:

Do you know how much coal capacity we have, in total?

wiki says 7.3 GW, are any closed ones kept moth-balled for
balancing/reserve purposes? I suppose you can't leave a mountain of
coal out in the rain indefinitely ...

The company I used to work for had their own coal-fired power station
up until about 1970, to supplement the grid or to use when the grid
went down. The man who managed the coal stocks told me that the stock
decreased naturally every year, by about 10% IIRC (which seems a lot,
I may have mis-remembered), simply due to aerial oxidation of the
stockpile. In the extreme, they can suffer spontaneous combustion.
http://tinyurl.com/wcv5jay

That sounds like quite a lot to me too. However I imagine that the coal
containing more volatiles might well lose methane and perhaps other
hydrocarbons by evaporation. It might also dry out a bit in spite of
being left in a pile on the ground in the open: after all, underground
there is nowhere for the water to drain to.

Point noted about spontaneous combustion (see "Titanic").

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

gonna be tight this evening...

Looks like the evening peak started mid-morning instead ...

In article , Richard smithski@btinternet.
com.invalid scribeth thus
On 20/01/2020 11:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/01/2020 10:57, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:04:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

and 3.5GW of coal onstream with nukes and CCGT practically flat out

And no imports either...

https://gridwatch.org.uk

Losing your touch remembering domain names?



What are you on about?


https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

https://gridwatch.org.uk

3.11 odd Gw's of Coal barely 1.9 of Wind...
--
Tony Sayer


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.