Memorandum by Mr Robert Horler
I understand that the Select Committee on the
Economics of Renewable Energy are gathering evidence on the feasibility
of Renewable Energy. Whilst I am not suggesting I am an academic
expert on the subject I did work as an engineer for the National
Grid Company for over 30 years, I have subsequently retired. My
experience is based on many years in the Grid Control Centre and
therefore on the day-to-day operation of the grid system.
The vast majority of people have no idea how
the electricity system works and that includes many of the people
who are currently making decisions on future sources of energy.
Therefore, might I respectfully suggest, before you try to evaluate
the feasibility of any renewable energy source you arrange a visit
for your committee members to the Grid Control Centre at Wokingham.
This will enable you to understand the very delicate balance of
matching generation to demand on a minute to minute basis. You
will then be able to assess for yourselves the impact on the functioning
of the Grid System of the various renewable energy sources.
Renewable energy comes in various forms, Solar
Power, Photo Voltaic, Hydro, Tidal, Wave and Wind energy. They
all have a role to play but are too small, too expensive and too
unpredictable to play a significant role in the future energy
needs of our country.
Solar and Photo Voltaic could be considered
as part of a demand reduction drive. More generous grants should
be forth coming to assist households to install these schemes.
Perhaps making them zero rated for VAT.
All or nearly all feasible sites for Hydro have
already been used. As fuel cost rise more Hydro sites may become
cost effective, but even then very small amounts of generation
would be available. France who have a much bigger Hydro potential
than the UK still only generate 15% of their demand from Hydro.
Tidal and Wave schemes have very low availabilities
due to rotation of the tides and weather availability, and could
quite likely not be available when the demand is at its highest.
This leaves wind power and this represents the
biggest misunderstanding of all. ( Some would say Scam ). Wind
energy is not green and is responsible for the production of C02
when connected to the grid system. Because it is of such a variable
nature any wind generated energy has to be backed up with conventional
fossil fuelled plant running partly loaded. This of course results
in C02 emissions and extra cost.
The back up cost needs to be added to the cost
of the wind energy to give the true cost. Something the wind farm
developers conveniently forget to do. On average there are fifty
days in the year with no wind at all. There are other days when
generation is not possible because the wind not strong enough
or too strong. It is not uncommon in this country to experience
a high pressure over the UK in the middle of winter. This can
result in very low temperatures causing the highest demand of
the year and no wind to drive the turbines. At best wind power
has 24% availability, which means that a wind farm of 100MW installed
capacity will on average only generate 24MW.
As a general rule the grid system developed
with the sources of generation reasonably close to the areas of
high demand. Now wind power is situated in extremely remote areas
with long, sometimes tenuous links to the main grid system. This
results in increased line losses and an increased possibility
of system stability problems. In the event of faults on the grid
system caused by perhaps bad weather, any wind turbines connected
to the system will shut down, possible making the fault situation
much worse and increasing the risk of loss of supply.
In addition these vast structures which can
be well over 400 feet tall are being sited in some of the most
beautiful countryside in the whole of the UK. The effects on wildlife,
water courses and on the peat that's being destroyed are all played
down by the developers who want to reap the rich harvest of subsidies.
There are also health problems associated with wind turbines especially
from the effects of low frequency noise.
The current situation regarding the supply of
coal gas and oil must be a cause of great concern to those responsible
for the security of electricity supplies in the UK. I'm sure you
are all aware of how politically unreliable our suppliers of fossil
fuels are and it needs very little imagination to picture the
worse case scenario of major blackouts in the UK. However, the
case for coal has changed dramatically over the last 10 years
and with the advent of effective de-sulphurizing plant and improved
filter systems coal has become a much cleaner source of fuel.
Indeed I understand the German Government has recently given approval
for five new coal fired stations to be built. France has shown
what an efficient clean source of energy Nuclear Power is. The
government should now go all out on the next nuclear programme.
It should review the coal situation and the clean technology now
available. It needs to redirect the £30 billion subsidies
being poured into the wind developers pockets and direct it to
assisting householders to insulate efficiently and install solar
and photo voltaic units in domestic properties,
In the global economy in which we live we simply
cannot afford to have the most expensive energy in Europe. Therefore
the myth that large scale wind power is the way forward must be
refuted.
2 June 2008
| 
