Anyone catch an interview with an Eirgrid spokesperson on RTE Radio One 6 news?
Apparently the world is looking on with amazement as the Irish connect massive amounts of wind onto their grid. I bet they are.
He said Eigrid have made offers of 3900MW to wind farms under gate 3. He also said that the cost of building a grid to connect these wind farms would be between 3 & 4 Billion euros. That's a staggering ~ 1 million euros per MW just for the required grid sprawl.
Adding the cost of wind farms themselves (~ 1.5 million/MW) brings the cost of wind power to~2.5 million euros/MW.
For comparison, the ESB's 435MW Aghada CCGT plant cost euro360 million. How much would equivalent (in energy terms) wind power cost? Using a 25% wind capacity factor, wind power would cost:
435 x 2.5 / 0.25 = 4.35 Billion euros
i.e. more than 10 times the cost of Aghada.
This is kamikaze stuff. And the Irish are boasting about it!
At the podcast page RT.ie Radio1: Drivetime our buddy Padraig Howard from Spirit of Ireland/West Clare Renewables fame was moaning about a lack of a ... guess what ???... GRID CONNECTION !!!
He claims 50 permanent full time jobs will be created for 29 turbines !!!Drivetime Podcast - Problems for Wind Farm in Co.Clare
Planning permission granted for a giant wind farm in Clare, but still no approval for connection to the national grid
Mount Callan requires no expenditure.
And the cost of shallow connection is included in the installed cost per MW of a windfarm.
The capacity factor at Mount Callan is 40%
The national Spirit of Ireland projects also include grid costs.
The CER regulates the monopoly electricity transmission and distribution systems (high and low voltage wires/pylons) with the aim of delivering "value for money" for the end customer.
OverviewThis area is covered by EU and National regulations and interconnectors are normally regulated under so called merchant rules. Such is the case with EirGrid's almost complete East-West interconnector. In a merchant model a company must bid in advance for capacity and pay a fee per unit carried.I think you will find that they in fact are not prevented from owning and building the interconnectors that they say are required to make wind viable.
It is possible to achieve a derogation from merchant operation when building a private interconnector.
Article 7 (1) of the Regulation 1228/2003/EC stipulates that a member state may exempt new cross-border interconnectors from the provisions of Article 6 (6) of the Regulation and Articles 20 and 23 (2), (3) and (4) of the Directive 2003/54/EC, provided that the Interconnector meets the following six conditions:
• Condition (a): the investment in the interconnector enhances competition in
• Condition (b): the level of risk attached to the investment is such that the investment would not take place unless an exemption was granted
• Condition (c): the interconnector will be owned by a natural or legal person which is separate at least in terms of its legal form from the relevant system operators to whose systems that infrastructure will be connected
• Condition (d): charges will be levied on users of the interconnector
• Condition (e): since the partial opening referred to in Article 19 of Directive 96/92/ EC, no part of the capital or operating costs of the interconnector has been recovered from any component of charges made for the use of transmission or distribution systems linked by the licensee's interconnector
• Condition (f): the exemption is not detrimental to competition or the effective functioning of the internal electricity market, or the efficient functioning of the regulated system to which the interconnector is connected
Work on this form of interconnection is ongoing and on target.
I beg to differ and as the likely market reforms in the UK electricity market become clearer, the opportunity looks ever more inviting.A few years on and still no sign of an export market.
riven you quoted a figure of 9% as a typical transmission loss and I didn't argue, this could be the case where the path included long distance transmission and distribution losses possibly involving 3 or more kv levels.Furthermore I never said that transmission losses are dependent on generation type. However the fact that they are (in certain cases such as distributed power) is worrying for you. More transmission means more losses. Power generation that is diffuse will inherently generate more losses. Power sources that demand export will do the same.
In the Irish grid, many windfarms, circa 600MW, are connected at distribution level as so called embedded generation. ESB Networks have won power industry awards for achieving this level of integration of so called diffuse generation, the losses involved in embedded generation would be far lower than your estimate.
In general the higher the kv rating of the transmission line the lower the losses, which makes Clare with a dual 400kv line already available, prime country for kickstarting the wind export industry.
It is not outside the bounds of possibility that HVDC interconnector/s with the UK grid might start its/their journey at the Shannon.
The analysis might be that wind generates electricity with a low CO2 component and low marginal cost.
It is the method chosen to provide reserve that negates the CO2 and marginal cost savings.
If pumped hydro were to be used instead of OCGT to provide the reserve for wind, then those savings would be preserved.
If pumped hydro were to be used as reserve to CCGT then the CO2 savings of modern CCGT would be preserved.
Lets further assume that a future government were to reconsider nuclear then the pumped hydro assets would also be available to preserve the CO2 and marginal cost savings of the nuclear asset.
- wind, especially in very large quantities such as is planned for Ireland, contributes little to CO2 savings and at a high cost
- nobody is measuring the CO2 savings, if any, that is attributable to our wind policy
- that is not stopping us driving ahead with the "plan"
- pumped hydro helps capture any wind-related CO2 benefits but at a cost
- SOI expect to reduce this cost to levels that still make good economic sense
- many others remain to be convinced (including me) but I genuinely hope you are correct
- there will be occasions when there is not enough wind to supply the pumped hydro, often in mid-winter
- in these cases, thermal stations will be needed to supply the demand and the pumped hydro
- as thermal stations are needed to be kept available, then all their fixed costs remain
- the wind generation is not needed to supply the demand or the pumped hydro
- the wind generation is therefore an overhead
- some studies have shown that pumped hydro with large interconnection can actually increase the CO2 footprint of our electricity system
- pumped hydro can smooth peaks in generation and can result in CO2 and cost reduction from whatever generation is used
- this particularly helps larger generation plants such as carbon capture and storage or nuclear units
- but the benefits are not guaranteed or maximized without having a plan that is properly researched and costed
- an energy crisis (of availability and/or cost) may be the "next big thing", rivaling our current financial woes
- without a proper plan, the crisis may be much worse than it needs to be
- this is too important a topic to leave to political expediency.
Advanced nations are delivering their large infrastructural projects through national policies. We should do the same.
Pat, your work on this site is of benefit in bringing us to where we need to be before we can develop these policies. We don't agree on everything, but I appreciate your integrity and endeavour - with a bit of impish humour thrown in for good measure!