Introduction
More than 55% of Weather Dependent Renewable Energy – Wind Onshore-Offshore and Solar PV, installations in the EU(28) are accounted for by three Nations. Hourly generation data is employed for the 12 month period from December 2018 to November 2019 inclusive. These Nations have markedly differing approaches to power generation:
- Germany WDR ~36% EU(28): the most massive Global commitment to all types of Weather Dependent Renewable technologies via its “Energiewende” policy.
- The United Kingdom WDR ~11% EU(28), second only to Germany: substantial commitment to Weather Dependent Renewables and a world leader in Offshore generation.
- France WDR ~9% EU(28): 75% dependent on Nuclear generation, no Offshore wind generation, nonetheless a significant Renewables installation but less than Spain and Italy.
Spain, primarily with Onshore Wind, and Italy, primarily with Solar PV, each representing ~11% of EU(28) Renewable installations make up the major balance of other Weather Dependent Renewable commitments in Europe.
This post presents graphics assembled from hourly datasets showing power output by each of the generating technologies for the three Nations. All power output graphics are set to the same gross scale for direct comparisons. Percentage graphics are set on the basis of the proportion of total local National generation.
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/the-progress-of-weather-dependent-renewables-in-europe-2008-2019/
Three hourly National data sets are used for the 2018-2019 period. They include Megawatt data for every hour over the year.
Productivity / Capacity percentage is the performance measure for generation technologies it consists of the actual power output / Name Plate power rating.
All traditional dispatchable power generation technologies are all capable of capacities of up to 90%, only having to be curtailed by routine maintenance, whereas Weather Dependent Renewables when in combination over the year only return ~20% of their Name Plate rating.
Data is presented here for each of the following generation technologies:
- nuclear: with no CO2 output: capable of 90% productivity
- coal: hard coal with high CO2 production for energy generated: capable of 90% productivity
- lignite: brown coal, with very high CO2 production for energy generated, only used in Germany: capable of 90% productivity
- natural gas: the fossil fuel with the lowest CO2 production for power generated, (about half that of Coal for equivalent power output). In the USA the transition from Coal to Natural Gas for electricity generation has achieved the greatest reduction of CO2 emissions worldwide: capable of 90% productivity
- biomass: primarily UK imported wood chips and other waste, with very high CO2 production for energy generated: nominally “Green” but dispatchable and capable of 90% productivity
- hydro-pumped: combined data for hydro electric generation and pumped storage plants: capable of 90% productivity but likely curtailed by lack of rainfall
- wind onshore: the original UK Gridwatch data set presently makes no differentiation between Onshore and Offshore generation, but an estimate is made for the UK here using the proportion of Offshore / Onshore wind production for 2019 by the Renewable Energy Foundation. UK – 2019 Onshore productivity was ~23%
- wind offshore: this data set provides the Offshore data for Germany and estimates are made for the UK Offshore installation. UK – 2019 Offshore productivity was ~35%
- solar PV: grid scale photovoltaics. UK – 2019 productivity ~12%
In addition an assessment is made of net transfers to and from each Nation.
It is important to note that:
- these data sets count the full productivity of various generation technologies, including Weather Dependent Renewables. The results are thus generous assessments of the value/worth of the power produced by Renewables. They do not account for the timing of that power production and thus of the usefulness to the grid of the power Weather Dependent Renewables may produce at any one moment in time.
- in addition these data sets do not account for the difficulty in coping with the wide variability and intermittency of the power output by Weather Dependent Renewables within a Nation’s supply Grid, which is tasked to provide dependable and consistent power for that Nation. The mandated insistence on the use of power from Renewables in preference to “base load power”, whenever it may be available also means that those more valuable sources of consistent power generation may be chronically underused much of the time, as they are forced to continually compensate for the vagaries of weather incurred by the intermittency and variability of power production by Renewables.
Graphic presentations and a short commentary for each of the three Nations follows.
Germany
The hourly data of power production for Germany is shown in the graphic below.
The comparison between the total generation installations and their actual achieved output is shown below.
The data from Agora Energiewende shows that Weather Dependent Renewables in Germany now amount to ~60% of all generating installations. However in spite of this major longterm effort to introduce Renewables with the “Energiewende” policy in absolute terms Weather Dependent Renewables still only produce less than 29% of the total German power output.
Nuclear generation and transfers
Even though Germany has had a policy to eliminate its Nuclear fleet by 2022 since the Fukushima tsunami and Nuclear disaster. Even so Nuclear energy still provided ~12% of Germany’s power needs in 2019. The elimination of consistent base-load Nuclear generation will not necessarily be replaced by the introduction of further Weather Dependent Renewables, even though that may be expedient to appease “Green” political pressures. Even with its Nuclear generation on occasions it is found necessary for Germany to import power in the summer seasons.
The 2019 external power transfers amounted to an average of ~6% of all German power production. Such transfers can on occasion reach up to 30% of output showing the extent of over-production by Weather Dependent Renewables in many winter months, particularly from October to April. These external transfers are made to dispose of the sometimes excessive but unpredictable power generation occurring from the large Onshore Wind Power Renewable installations in Germany. Such transfers are made at low prices and on occasions at negative prices. That excess power generation is of no benefit to the German economy, but arise from the non-dispatchable, unreliability of its Weather Dependent Renewables.
CO2 emitting generation
In spite of the massive efforts to install Weather Dependent Renewables via its “Energiewende” policy in 2019 Germany still remains ~46% dependent on generators creating significant CO2 emissions. These installations contribute to the high German CO2 emissions/head of 8.78 tonnes/head, in comparison with the European (28) average of 6.72 tonnes/head.
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/global-man-made-co2-emissions-1965-2018-bp-data/
The bulk of this CO2 emitting generation arises from the use Coal, Lignite and Biomass: these fuels all result in high CO2 emissions for the power generated. Although it is “Energiewende” policy that these generators should be curtailed, Germany is in fact still building Coal / Lignite fired power stations to enable dispatchable base load power that has become essential to compensate for its earlier irrational policy to curtail its productive Nuclear fleet in the near future. A further German policy is to import gas from Russia via the Nordstream pipelines. This policy of course would put Germany’s power generation under the control of Russia and therefore at real political risk.
It is anachronistic that the actions of the “Green” movement, substantially supported by Russian funding, have effectively eliminated the use of Fracking in Europe and yet at the same time German policy has been to promote the import of gas from Russia.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/december-2019/the-plot-against-fracking/
Only 1/3rd of Germany’s CO2 emitting generation used Natural Gas, the lowest CO2 emitting fossil fuel. The use of that fuel has already significantly contributed to the reduction of CO2 emission levels in the USA.
Nominally “Green” generation
With its longstanding “Energiewende” policy Germany leads the world in the employment of Weather Dependent Renewables. As well as its massive installation on Onshore wind power, running at a 2019 productivity factor of ~20%, Germany is also developing Offshore generation in the North Sea and has achieved productivity factors approaching 35%. On occasions in combination all nominally Green generators can approach ~80% of German power generation as can be seen above. As well as limited power production from Biomass ~4%, Germany benefits from ~8% of its power derived from Hydro electric generation, but it is likely all the favourable mountainous sites are now well developed.
Solar power in Germany only produces at a productivity factor of ~10%, and inevitably this solar power is diurnally intermittent: the world turns.
What is also clear from the graphic above is that there are many times when Weather Dependent Renewables fail to produce at all leaving major shortfalls of power in Germany for several days at a time.
Germany Renewables performance
The 2019 contributions to total power of Weather Dependent Renewables on a monthly basis is shown below. The wind power falloff of generation in the summer months is clear, as is the summer peaking of Solar contribution from the significant UK solar installations. However the massive diurnal variation to the Solar contributions means that they can cause real difficulties of being accommodated within the Grid. In addition, it is clear below that Solar input in winter months is about 1/10th of the summer power output: accounting for the poor overall productivity capacity of ~10%.
The United Kingdom
The hourly data of power production for the United Kingdom is shown in the graphic below.
The comparison between the total generation installations and their actual achieved output is shown below.
The data from Gridwatch shows that Weather Dependent Renewables in the UK now amount to ~54% of all generating installations. However in spite of this major longterm effort to introduce Renewables in absolute terms Weather Dependent Renewables still only produce less than 23% of the UK power output.
Nuclear generation and transfers
Except for the major 3.3 Gigawatt development at Hinckley point due for completion in 2023, the UK Nuclear fleet is ageing. Closures are progressing and Nuclear output is diminishing. Nonetheless in 2019 the fleet was still providing ~22% of UK power needs. There is hope that Small Modular Reactors may in future begin to be installed and thus take on a substantial part of base load power generation. There is still likely to be a significant delay in this development.
However crucially in 2019 the UK was wholly dependent on substantial power imports for ~7% of its power needs, mainly provided by Nuclear production in France. As present French policy is to reduce its Nuclear fleet, dependency on such imports are an existential threat to the future UK power supply.
CO2 emitting generation
In 2019 the UK still remains ~47% dependent on generators that create CO2 emissions. The 1990’s UK “Dash for Gas” policy means that ~38% of that CO2 generating fuel is Natural Gas, which produces about half the CO2 emissions of Coal when burnt. At present that Natural Gas fuel is mainly imported at a cost to the balance of payments, however without the influence of “Green” activism, supported by Russian funding, to negate UK fracking that fuel would have been produced indigenously by now. The use of Natural Gas, the lowest CO2 emitting fossil fuel has already significantly contributed to the reduction of CO2 emission levels in the USA.
The former 1990’s policy to transition to Natural Gas has almost inadvertently helped to reduce UK CO2 emissions/ head to 5.52 tonnes/head, well below the EU(28) average of 6.72 tonnes/head.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/december-2019/the-plot-against-fracking/
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/global-man-made-co2-emissions-1965-2018-bp-data/
These CO2 emission savings from the use of Natural Gas have been substantially negated by the UK policy to convert one of its largest power stations, Drax in Yorkshire, to use imported Biomass. Burning Biomass emits ~70% more CO2 than Coal for the power produced. However this additional local CO2 output at the plant does not include for the CO2 emission implications of drying, pelletisation and trans Atlantic transport of this “biofuel”, nor does it account for the environmental damage of clear felling of those overseas forests.
Nominally “Green” generation
The UK is the world leading developer of Offshore generation in the North Sea and has on occasions achieved productivity factors approaching 35%. The UK has significant parallel installations of Onshore wind power, with a productivity factor in 2018 of ~20%, On occasions in combination these nominally Green generators can approach ~50% of UK power generation as can be seen above. Nonetheless, what is also clear from the graphic is that there are many times when Weather Dependent Renewables fail to produce at all leaving major shortfalls in power. UK Solar power produces intermittently at ~10% of nameplate productivity overall: the world turns.
About 7% of UK generation is provided by Biomass, mainly by the subsidised conversion of the installation at Drax, giving a dispatchable “Green” generation source. This may not be as wise a Green interventional as it might seem. Importing Biomass, when Coal is readily available, (Drax was intentionally built on a productive Coal seam), will substantially increase overall CO2 emissions, see above.
The geography of the UK is generally unsuitable for Hydro power generation and this generation source with pumped storage only accounts for about a 2% contribution to UK power.
The UK Renewables performance
The 2019 contributions to total power of Weather Dependent Renewables on a monthly basis is shown below. The wind power falloff of generation in the summer months is clear, as is the summer peaking of Solar contribution from the significant UK solar installations. However the massive diurnal variation to the Solar contributions means that they can cause real difficulties within the Grid. In addition, it is clear below that Solar input in winter months is about 1/10th of the summer power output: accounting for the poor overall solar productivity of ~10%.
France
The hourly data of power production for France is shown in the graphic below.
The comparison between the total generation installations and their actual achieved output is shown below.
Since the 1950’s France has had a longstanding policy of using Nuclear energy for power generation. Of this total of ~56GW of Nuclear generation a substantial amount 6.6GW is exported to support other European Nations, including, the UK, Germany, Italy, Spain and Switzerland. The data from Gridwatch shows that Weather Dependent Renewables in France now amount to ~26% of all generating installations. However these Renewables only produce ~7% of the French power output in absolute terms.
As a result of its long-standing pro Nuclear policy France has the lowest CO2 output/head at ~4.31 tonnes/head of any Developed Nation. This level of CO2 emissions was just below the Global average, including the whole undeveloped World, showing that Nuclear power comprehensively applied can make significant and economic inroads into CO2 emissions. In addition as a result of its Nuclear policy, France has the lowest power prices in Europe.
Nuclear generation and transfers
The most consistent export demand is from the UK but larger net transfers occur to Germany and other European Nations: shown below as Megawatts hourly.
These transfers are profitable for France but must call into question the present Macron policy which is intending to reduce its Nuclear fleet by about 1/3rd, to be replaced by the installation of Weather Dependent Renewables. Presumably this policy will be to the detriment importers of power from France, and that policy will undermine the the stability of power supply throughout the EU(28).
As with other European Nations, the UK was is dependent on substantial power imports for ~7% of its power needs. As present French policy is to reduce its Nuclear fleet, dependency on such imports are an existential threat to the future UK power supply.
CO2 emitting generation
With its longstanding pro Nuclear policy its hardly surprising that France is less than 20% dependent of CO2 emitting generation, and on many occasion very much less. There is only marginal use of Biomass and occasional use of Coal. The use of Natural gas is limited and helps balance the variable intermittency of the small amount of Onshore Wind and Solar generation. The French Nuclear fleet is not so adaptable to rapid changing situation that Weather Dependent Renewables induce.
Nominally “Green” generation
France has a substantial hydro electric resource contributing ~11% of its power production. Biomass is very marginal at ~1% of generation. France is yet to develop any significant Offshore wind power. Its Onshore installations amount to ~18% of its installation of generators but they only contribute ~5% of its power. Solar Power is also established at ~11% of it generators but only contributes ~2% of its power over the year.
France Renewables performance
The 2019 contributions to total power of French Weather Dependent Renewables on a monthly basis is shown below. The wind power falloff of generation in the summer months is clear, as is the summer peaking of Solar contribution Solar installations. However the massive diurnal variation to the Solar contributions means that they can cause real difficulties within the Grid. In addition, it is clear below that Solar input in winter months is about 1/10th of the summer power output: accounting for the poor overall solar productivity of ~12%.
An Appalling Delusion
Weather Dependent Renewable Energy depends on capturing essentially dilute and very variable sources of power. Weather Dependent Renewables are thus both capital and maintenance expensive and inevitably unreliable.
Weather Dependent Renewables are universally more expensive than the conventional alternatives of Nuclear power or Gas-firing. The example of the UK shows those costs to be ~1.5 – 2.5 times for Nuclear power and ~10 – 12 times more expensive than Gas-firing.
The late Prof David Mackay (former chef scientific advisor of the Department of Energy and Climate Change) in a final interview before his untimely death in 2016 said that the concept of powering a developed country such as the UK with Weather Dependent Renewable energy was:
“an appalling delusion”.
At the time he also said:
“there’s so much delusion, it’s so dangerous for humanity that people allow themselves to have such delusions, that they are willing to not think carefully about the numbers, and the reality of the laws of physics and the reality of engineering….humanity does need to pay attention to arithmetic and the laws of physics.”
later in the same interview he said that:
“if it is possible to get through the winter with low CO2 Nuclear and possibly with Carbon Capture and Storage there is no point in having any Wind or Solar power in the UK generation mix”
and later in the same interview he said that:
This is especially so for Solar energy, the UK is one of the darkest nations on earth and produces about 1/9th of the power output in winter as in the summer.”
But it seems that having bought into the assumption that Catastrophic Man-made Global Warming is an immediate and existential threat that Government elites when faced with these simple but devastating calculations assume a position of “wilful ignorance”, and a stance of “don’t confuse me with the facts, we are saving the world“.
https://www.spiked-online.com/podcast-episode/we-need-a-democratic-revolt-against-the-climate-extremists/ minute 40 onwards
There is also an irrational determination in Government that the only solution to reducing CO2 emissions is the use of Weather Dependent Renewables. This is a fallacy: the only proven solutions to CO2 emissions reduction are”
- the use Nuclear energy as in France
- and / or the use of Natural gas as in the USA.
But these real solutions to reducing CO2 emissions, were it a worthwhile objective, are somehow always rejected out of hand, probably because they do not accord with the tenets of the “Green” religion.
Accordingly this costing model has followed through on Professor Mackay’s back of the envelope calculations, in the UK, showing that Weather Dependent Renewables are plainly expensive. The excess overspend instead of using Gas-firing of the current UK generation fleet roughly amount to some 55£billion in capital costs and the long-term costs approach a further 240£billion.
Accordingly this costing model has followed through on Professor Mackay’s back of the envelope calculations, in the UK, showing that Weather Dependent Renewables are plainly expensive. The excess overspend instead of using Gas-firing of the current UK generation fleet roughly amount to some 55£billion in capital costs and the long-term costs approach a further 240£billion.
Conclusion
If the objectives of using Weather Dependent Renewables were not confused with possibly “saving the planet” from the output of the UK’s small level of CO2 emissions, (for electricity generation, ~25% of 1.1%, the UK 2018 portion of Man-made Global CO2 emissions), their actual cost, in-effectiveness and their inherent unreliability, Weather Dependent Renewables would have always been ruled them out of any engineering consideration as means of National scale electricity generation.
The annual UK CO2 emissions output is well surpassed just by the annual growth of CO2 emissions in China and the Developing world.
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/speculating-about-future-global-co2-emissions-quantifying-futility/
It is essential to ask the question what is the actual value of these government mandated excess expenditures to the improvement of the environment and for the possibility of perhaps preventing undetectable temperature increases by the end of the century, especially in a context where the Developing world will be increasing its CO2 emissions to attain it’s further enhancement of living standards over the coming decades.
Reducing CO2 emissions as a means to control a “warming” climate seems even less relevant when the long-term global temperature trend has been downwards for last 3 millennia, as the coming end of our current warm and benign Holocene interglacial epoch approaches.
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/holocene-context-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-warming/
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/there-is-no-man-made-climate-emergency/
The context in Spring 2020
In spite of all the noisy Climate Propaganda of the past 30 years, in Spring 2020 the world is faced with a different but very real economic emergency from the reactions to the COVID-19 virus pandemic.
That Emergency, with the world facing the immediate death of many citizens as well as global economic breakdown, should put the futile, self-harming and costly Government mandated attempts to control future climate into stark perspective. This real Emergency clearly shows how irrelevant concerns over probably inconsequential “Climate Change” in a distant future truly are.
Data sources
This post gratefully uses the following data sources:
- Germany Renewables provided at hourly intervals
https://www.agora-energiewende.de/en/
- United Kingdom Renewables output at 5 minute intervals, condensed to hourly intervals
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk
- France Renewables output at 15 minute intervals, condensed to hourly intervals
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/france
- For the scale of EU(28) installations by the end of 2019, EurObserver’ER publish their Renewable Energy “Barometers” for each type of Renewable generation annually, for an example, see:
EurObservER-Wind-Energy-Barometer-2020.pdf
edmhdotme 