scrap the distribution network - generate locally

fclauson · 10-12-2014 5:00pm #1

Here is a very good argument for locally generated - locally used

Page 22 of http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Statistics_Publications/Energy_in_Ireland/Energy-in-Ireland-1990-2013-report.pdf

Shows that for every bit of gas burnt to generate electricity (2098 KTOE) all of it is wasted in transmission and conversion lose(2004 KTOE)

Now obviously you could not rip out the entire grid and stop the waste but it does make one think how we could locally generate and locally use

If we put in a large number of PV on the roof of home to cover the base load of the home - would this be a better use of PSO levy compared to what it is being used for ?

I love my PV (80%+ of generated product used on site)

Cookie_Monster · 15-12-2014 12:39am

someone mentioned recently that the power companies have just cut the feedin rate for micro generation, making it less viable. Same thing has just happened in NZ. This needs to change before micro pv is cost efficient, or indeed storage systems need to become far better and cheaper. I really want to add PV as the sunshine hours here are really good, but they've just cut the feed in rate from 17c to 5c per kw so the payback is now terrible...

Markcheese · 15-12-2014 12:48am

So where's your power coming from on a crappy winter day? And if it's coming from the grid isn't that going to be expensive ? I mean you don't need the power most of the time but it has to be available to you all the time,if everyone did the same ,they'd be paying a huge standing charge for grid system and generating capacity -
There is an argument for local grids and local power stations/ systems -so either small gas plants or biomass/rubbish burning maybe even mini nuclear - can't imagine Many local communities signing up to any of the above - there'd be war- Rural Ireland needs a better power service but rural Ireland won't accept- wind or thermal- or even those pylons- we're being ignored by that shower in Dublin I tells ya-

Nukem · 15-12-2014 12:59am

The tper is 2.4kw to 1kw in Ireland currently. That is staggering but a vast improvement on what it was over 10'years ago. A new bit of legislation out recently is going to force Ireland to look at the transmission and distribution of electricty and gas in a more energy efficent way.

fclauson · 15-12-2014 10:49am

Nukem wrote: »

The tper is 2.4kw to 1kw in Ireland currently. That is staggering but a vast improvement on what it was over 10'years ago. A new bit of legislation out recently is going to force Ireland to look at the transmission and distribution of electricty and gas in a more energy efficent way.

which legislation ?

Nukem · 16-12-2014 8:02am

S.I.426 Energy Efficiency

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/pdf/2014/en.si.2014.0426.pdf

freddyuk · 16-12-2014 2:29pm

It is already happening in Bedfordshire ,UK. Not long term supply but peak load only. Is it viable?? Probably not but it may push battery development forward which is all good.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30488657

Old diesel · 20-12-2014 4:57pm

Markcheese wrote: »

So where's your power coming from on a crappy winter day? And if it's coming from the grid isn't that going to be expensive ? I mean you don't need the power most of the time but it has to be available to you all the time,if everyone did the same ,they'd be paying a huge standing charge for grid system and generating capacity -
There is an argument for local grids and local power stations/ systems -so either small gas plants or biomass/rubbish burning maybe even mini nuclear - can't imagine Many local communities signing up to any of the above - there'd be war- Rural Ireland needs a better power service but rural Ireland won't accept- wind or thermal- or even those pylons- we're being ignored by that shower in Dublin I tells ya-

People who have PV like Francis can still be on the grid - so he can still use the grid if PV is not producing.

My interpretation of Francis's 80 percent comment was that he uses 80 percent of the power he produces via his PV

Moving into the future - theres potential in terms of having your PV charge a battery - Honda the car maker have actually put together a potential solution - using the battery that's used on one of their hybrid cars.

I think though regardless of the wider merits of PV and microgen - vs large scale wind - the big issue is how we plan solutions and how we plan COMMUNITIES and everyday living.

The large scale wind solution tends to be designed in complete isolation from everything around it - and vital aspects like everyday living.

I think it would be easier for people to embrace new to them energy solutions etc - if their everyday living solutions for the future were also looked at - and both PLANNED TOGETHER.

That's the major missing link - as is how will communities and living in the decarbonised economy and country going to look like.

People are more likely to embrace things if they can see them fitting into their everyday lives

[Deleted User] · 26-12-2014 10:18pm

Jim Martin · 31-12-2014 2:03pm

Sub-station massive battery back-up!

http://www.leightonbuzzardonline.co.uk/news/business/business-news/leighton-s-big-battery-powered-up-by-energy-minister-1-6476130

Capt'n Midnight · 01-01-2015 11:06pm

fclauson wrote: »

Here is a very good argument for locally generated - locally used

Page 22 of http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Statistics_Publications/Energy_in_Ireland/Energy-in-Ireland-1990-2013-report.pdf

Shows that for every bit of gas burnt to generate electricity (2098 KTOE) all of it is wasted in transmission and conversion lose(2004 KTOE)

NO!

what it actually says gas represents less than half the power on the grid (2098 of 4382)

It says that overall 2004 KTOE is lost. This is mainly as low grade heat. This is because of Carnot efficiency. You know thermodynamics. Even if we had ridiculously expensive fuel cells (price a 300MW one sometime) we couldn't convert 100% of the energy in fossil fuel into electricity. The only way of using this heat would be district heating. And even then there are losses, and demand would be minimal for much of the year.

No it's not economic to use the heat and CO2 from the plant in greenhouses, because otherwise that would already be happening.

BTW when you quote a figure of 80% for your PV , I'm guessing it's closer to 8% because solar panels aren't 100% efficient.

So to recap.
The transmission losses AND own use is just 6% of overall power.
and you can probably count on loosing 1% on the step up transformers as well as the step down ones. As you well know peak demand is three times minimum demand. Using tonnes more aluminium to shave off a fraction the remaining losses just isn't economic, even if the NIMBY's allowed you to build extra pylons to carry more conductors.

fclauson · 01-01-2015 11:41pm

what I was trying to show is that there is massive loss from the inputs to the outputs

if we loose 50% of input energy then is electricity all the wounder we think it is ?

Old diesel · 02-01-2015 12:12am

fclauson wrote: »

what I was trying to show is that there is massive loss from the inputs to the outputs

if we loose 50% of input energy then is electricity all the wounder we think it is ?

The scary element of this is that if im interpreting you correctly - is that 1500 MW going in equals 750 MW going into where its needed.

That is scary

Capt'n Midnight · 02-01-2015 1:20am

fclauson wrote: »

what I was trying to show is that there is massive loss from the inputs to the outputs

if we loose 50% of input energy then is electricity all the wounder we think it is ?

Old diesel wrote: »

The scary element of this is that if im interpreting you correctly - is that 1500 MW going in equals 750 MW going into where its needed.

That is scary

When you burn fossil fuel you get heat.

Some of the heat gets converted to electricity.

The rest doesn't.

Old diesel · 02-01-2015 1:24am

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

When you burn fossil fuel you get heat.

Some of the heat gets converted to electricity.

The rest doesn't.

I interpreted as half of whats actually coming into the system - ie actual produced electricity

apologies

[Deleted User] · 02-01-2015 3:41pm

Using heat to produce electricity to produce heat is an entirely pointless cycle imho. Burn gas/solid fuel in your home for a much higher return of investment.
As far as I'm concerned electrickery is for motors, lekytronics, light and what-have-you. Electric heaters and showers are ludicrous.

fclauson · 02-01-2015 4:40pm

I would sort of agree until it comes to Heatpump. The declared output of mine for the low temp heating (under floor) is 420% - that is 1Kw should give 4.2Kw out. (Thats what the documentation tells me)

This gets over the 50% loss in the conversion and allows that conversion to take place in a plant which is probably managed better than most domestic boilers.

The hot water gets around 220% (again from the documentation) which is sort of break even with heating it via gas in my own home

My site is basically CO2 free - although we have a wood stove for aesthetics (you cannot sit around under floor heating on a cold winters day drinking a wee dram)

PV provides around 4000Kwh/annum which basically matches my heating/hot water usage and I take advantage of the grid as a "storage device".

[Deleted User] · 02-01-2015 4:43pm

A heat pump is a motor.

Capt'n Midnight · 02-01-2015 6:16pm

Sir Liamalot wrote: »

Using heat to produce electricity to produce heat is an entirely pointless cycle imho. Burn gas/solid fuel in your home for a much higher return of investment.
As far as I'm concerned electrickery is for motors, lekytronics, light and what-have-you. Electric heaters and showers are ludicrous.

Electric heaters are cheap. If you are building apartments it's a lot cheaper than following all the building regs for gas.

If you live in a home all day then local heat is great. But if you don't then at one extreme you are firing up a stove/cooker with back boiler for ages before you get the first bit of real heat from it.

Ye olde "instant hot water" works out better for some if you turn off the power off straight away.

Yes there are gas burners that produce electricity. They are still crazy money and not really economic unless you need heat all the time like institutions. 20Kw boiler flat out, but 6Kw normally giving 1Kw of electricity, which will mostly be dissipated as heat anyway.

gctest50 · 02-01-2015 6:43pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

.......
Yes there are gas burners that produce electricity. They are still crazy money and not really economic unless you need heat all the time like institutions. 20Kw boiler flat out, but 6Kw normally giving 1Kw of electricity, which will mostly be dissipated as heat anyway.

honda have a cute little one , still $$$$$ though ,has a variable length conrod more or less to get the most out of the natural gas

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F2dRxt0EMY

now if you could only run the gas off the electricity

gets linked up to a condensing gas boiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1MXvfnmHLA

[Deleted User] · 03-01-2015 2:55am

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Electric heaters are cheap.

1kWh Electric : €0.19c / €0.09
1kWh Natural Gas : €0.06

Markcheese · 03-01-2015 9:51am

Sir Liamalot wrote: »

1kWh Electric : €0.19c / €0.09
1kWh Natural Gas : €0.06

That's the "fuel" to run the heaters- electric heaters are still cheap (and flexible). you can buy an electric heater for 20 /30 euro ,go home and plug it in - heat -

[Deleted User] · 03-01-2015 6:23pm

Convenience doesn't make it sustainable. Electric heaters are likely running on gas anyways further down the line. Point I'm hoping to shed light on is it's using ~twice the gas for up to 3 times the cost with the same net output.

Electric cookers are another offender too, they spend half their time heating the hobs. Induction cookers however are highly efficient..moreso than gas.

Capt'n Midnight · 03-01-2015 9:25pm

Electric infra-red / fan heaters are pretty instant - the trick is to turn them off when not using them. Or only use them until the central heating comes on.

At this time of year gas is the best for boiling a kettle , simply because the wasted heat is needed to heat the house anyway.

Anyway insulation is better than heating,

fclauson · 04-01-2015 12:13am

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

E
Anyway insulation is better than heating,

So true - spend once - and never spend again

[Deleted User] · 04-01-2015 3:31am

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Anyway insulation is better than heating,

+2

Electric heaters and immersions make pretty good wind turbine dump loads if running on batteries.

scrap the distribution network - generate locally

Comments