NESO spending upwards of £50m/wk on constraint payments due to inadequate transmission now. Either the govt just forces this and other schemes through or there is no point building anymore offshore wind as it will just drive up constraint payments even more.
I certainly agree that the East Anglian overland pylon plan should be implemented asap and that otherwise constraint payments will increase. However I think there’s been some exaggerated descriptions of the financial impact of constraint payments. They certainly are not an average of £50 million a week or more. I have commented on the exaggerations made in support of locational pricing at https://davidtoke.substack.com/p/how-exaggerated-claims-about-payments
Apologies ive quoted totally balancing costs but they are certainly been spending 25-30m/wk on thermal constraints. This includes payments to windfarms to turn down and payments to turn up CCGTs.
My point is that ccgts would have been operating if the Scottish windfarms didn’t exist. They wouldn’t exist if locational pricing only promoted windfarms in the South where they were unlikely to be built in the first place.
Whatever happened to community hydro energy schemes. Given the political will energy could and should be generated from hydro. Any current of water including treated wastewater could be harnessed. Here in Wales ( in energy surplus ) it’s like the Klondike gold rush of speculators, looking to make a fast buck due to the lack of regulation. Wind farms and pylons are causing friction and getting renewables a bad name.
NESO spending upwards of £50m/wk on constraint payments due to inadequate transmission now. Either the govt just forces this and other schemes through or there is no point building anymore offshore wind as it will just drive up constraint payments even more.
I certainly agree that the East Anglian overland pylon plan should be implemented asap and that otherwise constraint payments will increase. However I think there’s been some exaggerated descriptions of the financial impact of constraint payments. They certainly are not an average of £50 million a week or more. I have commented on the exaggerations made in support of locational pricing at https://davidtoke.substack.com/p/how-exaggerated-claims-about-payments
Apologies ive quoted totally balancing costs but they are certainly been spending 25-30m/wk on thermal constraints. This includes payments to windfarms to turn down and payments to turn up CCGTs.
https://www.neso.energy/document/350231/download
My point is that ccgts would have been operating if the Scottish windfarms didn’t exist. They wouldn’t exist if locational pricing only promoted windfarms in the South where they were unlikely to be built in the first place.
Whatever happened to community hydro energy schemes. Given the political will energy could and should be generated from hydro. Any current of water including treated wastewater could be harnessed. Here in Wales ( in energy surplus ) it’s like the Klondike gold rush of speculators, looking to make a fast buck due to the lack of regulation. Wind farms and pylons are causing friction and getting renewables a bad name.
Quite a few got started when FIT payments were available. But some projects are still being developed. See https://www.renewableenergyhub.co.uk/main/hydroelectricity-information/community-hydroelectricity-stations There are still some possible funding streams available. See https://renewablesfirst.co.uk/renewable-energy-technologies/hydropower/community-hydropower/community-hydropower-funding-development-construction/
https://communityenergy.wales/our-work/energy-generation/ynni-ogwen
https://www.ynniteg.cymru/
A couple of links to what is being achieved in Wales and there is no reason other than they can’t make “ bombs “ why they couldn’t work everywhere ??