19 Jun 2009
National Grid has today released a major new report debunking the myth that the variability of wind energy means that planned increases in renewables capacity will require a similar increase in fossil fuel-based backup capacity.
Opponents of wind energy, such as the recently launched National Alliance of Wind Farm Action Groups, have long maintained that the variable nature of wind energy means that investments in wind farms will not deliver net reductions in emissions.
However, the new 82-page report from National Grid categorically rejects the suggestion that huge increases in backup power will be required as the UK's reliance on wind energy increases. It concludes that "challenges from moving to a low-carbon electricity system with increased variable wind generation and larger nuclear power stations are manageable".
The report, which will now be subject to a consultation period, states that increased backup generation is not the only means of managing variable levels of wind energy, arguing that the emergence of new energy storage and smart grid systems, coupled with improvements in grid infrastructure, will allow wind energy to play a greater role in the UK's energy mix.
Chris Bennett, National Grid’s future transmission networks manager, welcomed the report as the "most comprehensive view yet" of how Britain could balance electricity supply and demand, adding that it "moves the debate firmly beyond the simplistic view that we just need more backup generation".
The report predicts that in the medium term, variable wind and larger nuclear power stations can be accommodated into the grid without the need for major technology innovations.
In the longer term, it predicts that smart grid systems that can automatically turn off fridges during times of peak demand and draw on energy from electric car batteries, will limit the requirement for backup power, while improved large-scale battery and supercapacitor technologies will have a similar effect.
An anticipated doubling of the capacity for importing energy using interconnectors linked to Europe will also allow wind intermittency to be balanced out across a wider area, again limiting the need for backup power.
Maria McCaffery, chief executive of the British Wind Energy Association Chief Executive, said the report should deliver a blow to opponents of wind energy who have repeatedly used the argument that it is a variable energy source to undermine the sector.
"This report shows that large quantities of wind power can be integrated into our grid without the lights going out and at reasonable cost," she said. "It knocks on the head the myth that large amounts of capacity of "hot" standby is the only way to deal with the variability of wind."
LATEST STORIES ABOUT TECHNOLOGY
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
LATEST JOBS
TODAY'S TOP STORIES
HIGHLIGHT
The best green companies in the UK should be preparing their entries for annual BusinessGreen Leaders Awards
INSIGHT
INSIGHT
The science and practical application of an improved method for the specification of power and cooling infrastructure for data centres
A look at alternative approaches to managing energy for cost and/or sustainability reasons in data centres
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Add your comment
Grid report
1st. The report appears to place wind and nuclear in the same category. Nuclear can perform alone as base load plant while wind cannot. In a nuclear/ wind only system, wind would be the passenger. The report is all futuristic. There is no historic performance measurment. This could work and this could not. No trial were condicted
Posted by Val Martin, 20 Dec 2011
More than one type of environmental damage
Wind farms are an unreliable source of energy-Engineers can't alter that. The NG report repeats this fact time and again - still searching for a reliable Capacity Credit. Only vested interested parties would read anything positive from their report. Electricty amounts to on 10% of Scottish citizens energy usage (12kWh/day out of 120Kwh/day - so why Oh why are they ruining our beautiful country with their ugly wind farms and , because they are far from the market, scarring it further with huge transmission towers. Which they refuse to bury - as Scottish oil did before them. Price too high??? The alternative of course is to stop this insane rush, put them out to sea, use tidal ( only avaiable 10 hours a day) and waves (when not becalmed). Until the technology is available use a FRACTION of the money on insulation, low energy lighting and a dozen other energy efficient tools.
Posted by Bob Hamilton, 04 Apr 2011
Did You Read the Paper??
Did you actually read the consultation paper from the Natiuonal Grid? It clearly shows that in 2008 on the five days of maximum demand the average wind speed over the whole of the UK was insufficient to even turn turbines (<4 m/sec)
Posted by Charlotte, 09 Jul 2009
A case of mirepresentation or misunderstanding?
The report is a consultation paper. The National Grid is of the opinion that for 25GW of wind, only 5GW (i.e. 20% of the wind capacity) of conventional capacity can be retired. This paper does nothing to change that view.
Posted by Howard Goodall, 09 Jul 2009
Fractal vs Classical Probability
I would guess that this report is based on classical probability. Classical probability theory would indicate that the more wind turbines that are gridded together, the less the variability in the total power output. There are two problems with that: 1. It is the wind conditions over the area of the grid rather than the wind turbines that are the issue. So, you need to consider the probabilities for the wind velocities over the area of the grid. 2. If you believe mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot, if it is possible for a wind turbine to stop, then it is possible that they will all stop at once and this will happen. There would also seem to be an issue with this theory as well. Again, since we are talking about weather and there is a limit to how large a contiguous area you can have where there is no wind. So, a large enough grid area should eliminate the possibility that they would all stop at once. So, some careful research is needed since the minimum power output of gridded wind turbines is going to be less than classical probability theory would indicate, but if the gridded area is large enough, there is always going to be some power output. The real answer to this problem will come with storage. Till then, the best solution is natural gas backup plants powered with bio-methane.
Posted by James Richard Tyrer, 20 Jun 2009
Oh yes it is... Oh no it isn't...
I'd like to read that report... But on the basis of this article, the key message is that backup *fossil* power isn't needed. Just lots of backup *nuclear* power. Or a bunch of technologies that don't exist yet - like electric cars that interface into a smart grid so that the car can be used as a storage bank for excess wind power and to supplement the grid during shortages. So at dinner time when everyone is cooking and opening and closing the fridge door (making the compressor run), the smart grid will discharge the batteries in my electric car so that I can't go out later to the cinema (whatever I'd planned to do after dinner). Or maybe my car is a hybrid so the electric that the smart grid had "borrowed" from my car will be replenished by charge from... oh wait... my petrol engine. Now we're making even more CO2 and I'm paying for the fuel to plug the gap left by wind power... Nice one. Who knows... the giant flywheels or compressed air storage systems or super capacitors may be the answer but they are designed for very short bursts of energy (a few minutes / hours) not a high pressure weather system parked over the UK for a couple of days with next to no wind. Then we're into buying electric from Europe or the Russians who will have built lots of gas powered generators... So much for "energy security".
Posted by AccordGuy, 19 Jun 2009