coal trains on our network; how many left?

[jjb1970]

I don't think anybody thinks renewables are capable of operating without support from thermal generation yet, and it may never get to a point where we have no thermal or nuclear back up. However, it is undeniable that there is a transition to low emissions energy, and I think the acceleration in the transition to low carbon energy over the last couple of years and the huge drop in offshore renewable costs has taken everybody by surprise (including most of the offshore renewables sector) as has the step change in energy storage projects. For thermal generation support, gas is far more sensible than coal, it's a lots quicker and cheaper to build a CCGT, they're lower maintenance and cheaper to run and a lot cleaner. I just don't see a place for coal unless somebody unveils a viable means of carbon capture and storage, but CCS is moribund and there is now quite a consensus that it is better to just not make the pollution in the first place rather than spending billions to figure out a way of capturing carbon and figuring out what to do with that carbon.

[Hesperus]

Sorry but I disagree,  there is a limited amount of gas and a massive infastructure in the UK that pipes it into millions of homes to run central heating systems.  When the gas runs out millions of people will switch to either electric, oil or solid fuel heating.  I'm certain that a power station can burn coal in a far cleaner and more efficiant way than thousands of AGA's.  Burning gas to make electricity may drop the emmissions this year but it is a foolish short term solution. 

 

I'm a huge fan of renewable power and have happily spent slightly more on my bills to support it for years but there isn't enough capacity to support the UK at the moment.  I can't decide whether coal or nuclear should be the backup but the only place for gas is as a very short term backup when peaks of demand happen on dark still nights when renewables aren't helping much and the coal + nuclear can't get up to capacity quick enough.

[Mark Saunders]

Sorry but I disagree,  there is a limited amount of gas and a massive infastructure in the UK that pipes it into millions of homes to run central heating systems.  When the gas runs out millions of people will switch to either electric, oil or solid fuel heating.  I'm certain that a power station can burn coal in a far cleaner and more efficiant way than thousands of AGA's.  Burning gas to make electricity may drop the emmissions this year but it is a foolish short term solution. 

 

I'm a huge fan of renewable power and have happily spent slightly more on my bills to support it for years but there isn't enough capacity to support the UK at the moment.  I can't decide whether coal or nuclear should be the backup but the only place for gas is as a very short term backup when peaks of demand happen on dark still nights when renewables aren't helping much and the coal + nuclear can't get up to capacity quick enough.

Personally I would have the wind farms connected hydrolysis plantst for splitting water in to Hydrogen and Oxygen and then storing it till required as the back up!

 

Mark Saunders

[jjb1970]

Sorry but I disagree,  there is a limited amount of gas and a massive infastructure in the UK that pipes it into millions of homes to run central heating systems.  When the gas runs out millions of people will switch to either electric, oil or solid fuel heating.  I'm certain that a power station can burn coal in a far cleaner and more efficiant way than thousands of AGA's.  Burning gas to make electricity may drop the emmissions this year but it is a foolish short term solution. 

 

I'm a huge fan of renewable power and have happily spent slightly more on my bills to support it for years but there isn't enough capacity to support the UK at the moment.  I can't decide whether coal or nuclear should be the backup but the only place for gas is as a very short term backup when peaks of demand happen on dark still nights when renewables aren't helping much and the coal + nuclear can't get up to capacity quick enough.

I think there are fundamental differences between back-up power and base load power. If thermal plant is primarily a source of back-up power for when renewables cannot operate and for when energy storage is insufficient to cover the gaps then you really need something which is flexible, quick to respond and which is low cost/maintenance when not in operation. CCGT plants score much more highly than coal plants on all of those counts, in addition to being more efficient and cleaner. They’re a lot cheaper to build, a lot cheaper to operate, compact and a lot simpler to dismantle at the end of their life (de-commissioning is primarily a concern with nuclear, but some of the old CEGB coal sites will cost an arm and a leg to properly de-contaminate for other uses).

The issue of gas supply is related to fears over a gas system reliant on gas being pumped into the system directly from gas fields and with limited gas storage capacity. That can be addressed by LNG facilities and conventional gas storage. LNG is a globally traded commodity no different to oil or coal and there is a relative abundance of the stuff (it’s a lot cheaper than oil in most markets). Even then, who is to say domestic users will continue to want gas? Gas was a cheap fuel, as micro generation and home energy storage become more common then it may end up with all electric houses becoming the norm in which case concerns over the security of domestic gas supplies become somewhat nugatory. I think the profundity of the transition we are going through is hard to overstate, it is not just about centralised power generation, it is as much about how we use power, how we distribute power and how we manage power. The big energy companies have finally started waking up to the fact that large centralised power plants supporting a national grid may no longer be the solution to our energy needs. Yes, we’ll probably always need some base load capacity and large plants but the days of the CEGB and a system fed by large power plants are slowly slipping into the past, being replaced by de-centralised generation and local generation.

Either way, I really can’t see a future for coal, unless somebody does invent a cheap, effective and reliable means of carbon capture, and even then I really struggle to see a future for coal.

[Reorte]

Yes, we’ll probably always need some base load capacity and large plants but the days of the CEGB and a system fed by large power plants are slowly slipping into the past, being replaced by de-centralised generation and local generation.

Very large offshore windfarms seem like the equivalent of large plants and right now that seems like the direction things are going in, and certainly need a grid to distribute the energy from them (and to help average out between them). Anyway as you say as far as this thread is concerned it all points to less and less coal.

Edited September 20, 2017 by Reorte