Electricity prices - what next?

I do not agree with this renewable nonsense above. To even get anywhere near we need 60GW divided by the capacity factor of about 25% of renewables. So 240GW unless we increase electricity use for heating and transport (policy!) when we need much more. This many windmills would cover the entirety of Wales, and cost so much that electricity could never be even reasonably priced. Storage is also very very expensive, say £300 per kWh from Tesla, and because there are not many sites where pumped storage is both possible and anywhere near large enough. So a few £Trillion to get a "magic" number with no scientific justification, just to reduce temperatures by an average of 0.02 degrees, you have to be deluded beyond belief.

I am seriously shocked that supposed engineers could make such comments.

Storage is also very very expensive, say £300 per kWh from Tesla

Presumably that's the capital costs - if the equipment survived for say 3000 cycles (I think Tesla's warranty is for 10 years unlimited cycles) then the additional cost would be around 10p/kWh - if electricity ends up at 40p or 50p per kWh peak and but perhaps 30% or more cheaper off-peak (or lower cost from on-site generation) it might start to look financially attractive.

   - Andy.

I do not see why everyone seems to think that more expensive electricity is OK, I certainly don't. Unless energy prices are similar in all countries (they are not now) there is severe economic damage to be had for those that are more expensive. We already see this in the UK, and for countries that do not have a free market (China) there is a massive trading advantage in manufactured goods. They have lower costs all around from much less regulation, H&S, working hours directive, low imports of food, and virtually everything else. Our power is already quite expensive compared to other countries, even the US where "green" California is about 30% cheaper although being loaded with renewables subsidies. Many other states are considerably cheaper.

Because storage has to be paid for "up front" Andy, your calculation is rubbish, you need to use a reasonable financing model as well, and borrowing money in trillions of pounds is pretty much impossible by private industry (the Electricity Grid). I suggest a real cost of storage is 30p per unit, making stored power completely uncompetitive at 50p to the consumer. At this price, most industry is completely uncompetitive, a total disaster. You need to consider the inflationary effects of this electricity too, wages would increase by  some% to pay for it, and more to pay for more expensive food and goods. Serious inflation is always bad and hits to poorest most.

I do not see why everyone seems to think that more expensive electricity is OK, I certainly don't.

I certainly don't either - but that's where our persistant over-reliance on imported fossil fuels is surely taking us. Had we started investing in local (renewable) sources earlier we perhaps wouldn't be in such a difficult position now and could have spread the cost of investment more thinly over a longer period, but we are where we are. We either pay the Russian's price for gas indefinitely, or we invest in new plant that can generate without needing fuel - for me the long term strategic choice is obvious. Either way the short term will certainly see higher prices.

Unless energy prices are similar in all countries (they are not now) there is severe economic damage to be had for those that are more expensive. We already see this in the UK, and for countries that do not have a free market (China) there is a massive trading advantage in manufactured goods.

Direct comparisons with the like of China are difficult - as you say they don't internally have a free market and prices and, probably more significantly, exchange rates, are manipulated as much for very long term political ends as immediate profit. There will always be differences by geography of course - parts of Scandinavia have traditionally had very low electricity prices due to an abundance of hydro electricity - so have hosted aluminium smelting and more recently data centres. Regions will have to play to their individual strengths.

Because storage has to be paid for "up front" Andy, your calculation is rubbish

I'd dispute strongly that it's rubbish. It's an approximation, certainly, I could do you a discounted cash flow over the a reasonable period if you wanted, but given the current low interest rates the difference would be relatively small. There would be much more variation due to changes in the cost of the equipment - new technology always costs more initially but then declines as designs are rationalised and mass production produces savings. In the case of home battery storage, I gather there are new designs in the pipeline that use 2nd hand electric vehicle batteries, which seem likely to cut capital costs of the batteries significantly.

borrowing money in trillions of pounds is pretty much impossible by private industry (the Electricity Grid).

That's where proper organisation at government level comes in. If done cleverly it becomes a matter of persuading those that have money to invest long-term rather than expecting the tax-payer to cover all the costs directly in a single hit or private companies to borrow with no long term guarantees. While many of the details might not have been right (e.g. the actual size of subsidies), there have been successes in persuading private capital (I suspect mostly pension funds) to pay for wind farms and even individual householders to shell out around £10k a time for PV panels.

  - Andy.

I still haven't figured out how to quote in here yet. :-(

"Direct comparisons with the like of China are difficult - as you say they don't internally have a free market and prices and, probably more significantly, exchange rates, are manipulated as much for very long term political ends as immediate profit."

China may have made itself attractive to western companies, but we didn't have to put our factories there. IMHO, it has been a grave strategic error.

Back to the price of energy - Putin must be having a real giraffe.

The government's for the last 20 years, were infiltrated and taken over by a green agenda based on a climate crisis that does not exist.

If you think renewable are the answer then think again. They are not and never will.

If you want to point your pitchfork somewhere then look no further than the current set of climate alarmists now in charge in Germany and the USA

India, China and a number of other savvy countries know how weak and vulnerable we are with our current pathetic energy policies. Time our people in charge grew up!

Interesting Lazard report on the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) here: https://www.lazard.com/media/451905/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-150-vf.pdf

For lowest unsubsidized cost per megawatt hour, the cheapest options seem to be large scale solar farms or on-shore wind.  We're not building many on-shore wind farms at the moment because Conservative Party supporters are often NIMBYs, so we have to have the more expensive off-shore instead.

I suspect their prices for gas-fired are a bit optimistic in Europe at the moment.

The LCOE includes the cost of building and maintenance, cost of financing, and cost of fuel.  It also includes down-time when not generating.  For renewables, that would be the average actual generation, not the peak.

You need to be careful, the costs here (and outputs too) are deceptive. The solar looks very good but is based on desert conditions in southern USA, it would be wildly less good here and land costs are much higher, and there is no charge for lost agricultural production, which here is high. Clearly fossil fueled power production is much the cheapest, so why would anyone in their right mind stop it? Whilst Nuclear is expensive in capital cost, it is very much a 24/7 supply, and lasts a long time (in Britain 50-60 years). All the renewable sources are biased by the capacity factor in the comparison, add the cost of storage (full output for a week minimum, probably more including recharge time) and wind and solar look pretty bad. If storage is not available the cost of the backup supply also needs to be added, including its construction cost, and again they are bad. The economics simply do not add up. Suggesting that scrap car batteries could be used for backup is delusional, as the only reason to scrap a battery is that it has failed!

Time to dust off the drilling rigs and get them operating in the North Sea. Same with coal mines - we're sitting on tons of the stuff beneath our feet.

And also, look genuinely at fracking options.

Enough of this green nonsense. If they really want to go green, then how about stopping the water utilities from dumping raw sewage into our watercourses.

QUOTE:

That £15k for a 3-phase supply seems a bit steep, but it depends upon where you live. Mine cost about £1k.

Daughter is having some building work done at the moment. The ABC cable seems to be 3-phase to the last pole. I feel sure that re-routing it to the new building wouldn't cost much. She might even get a rebate for the scrap copper.

It may seem selfish, but I say get it while you can.