What happens if the lights go out?

Energy supply is so important that the political parties need to get together and agree the best way forward.

Like Chris, I can keep my house heated and lit through normal power cuts but I would not like to go back to frequent power cuts like we had in the 70s.

Hi Dean, I’ve visited Dinowic in Wales and even did a tour! It was fascinating – but the way I understand it, it’s built as a back-up power station for times of peak demand on the National Grid. Due to the way the station works (dropping tonnes of water from a lake at the top of of a mountain through turbines to generate electricity very quickly, then pumping it all the way back up to the top of the mountain again), I don’t believe it’s an economically viable way of providing electricity.

They manage to make it work for this power station, despite the fact it uses up more electricity pumping the water back up to the top of the mountain than it generates on the way down, by only using the station when absolutely necessary and by pumping the water back up at off-peak times, when electricity prices are cheapest.

Hi Jennifer,

I believe you are incorrect with one of your statements, it is actually VERY economically viable, especially compared to other renewables. The reason being that they don’t pump the water straight back up, they effectively reverse the whole system and pump it back to the top reservoir at night when electricity is very cheap. I am also unsure your point that it uses more electricity than it generates is correct. If that was the case then they wouldn’t have made their money back and they probably wouldn’t have even built the thing in the first place.

The power station was built in the 80’s and made a return on investment in 10 years which is a magnificent ROI for a large infrastructure project. Compare it to the channel tunnel.

Yes it is a backup station, but if you create say 10 of these in a grid of their own, add a Severn, Humber, Forth and Thames barrage/tidal system, plus grow river hydro production across the country for local generation then perhaps it could be an alternative. The coal and gas fired stations don’t shut down because it’s not economically viable and takes days to fire up again. Until a new way of storing electricity is created, then it will always be a demand driven economy.

Wind power has it’s place but is unreliable when there is no wind or the wind is too strong

With water you can constantly respond to demand with no usage restrictions (like wind) and if there was a large infrastructure built on this ethos, it may be valid alternative to coal and gas powered stations.

cheers
Dean

Actually if you think about it logically Dinowic (electric mountain) isn’t really a power station in the normal sense. It’s really more like a battery you charge up and use when you need it.
I think the idea is great and we should build more of them. They’re ideal for saving wind generated power for when the wind doesn’t blow, or even solar for when the sun doesn’t shine.
But best of all it would at least go some way in answering the incessant moaning we get from the anti-wind power brigade.
I’m all for wind power, free energy, but I’d conceed only really practical if produced from off shore installations where wind conditions are more consistant. On shore not so good, better to put solar on shore, also not so much a landscape changer.

Hi Dean, I was really curious to find out more about Dinorwig power station, and as I couldn’t find much definitive information online, I decided to contact them. I’ll paste their email below, which should hopefully clarify a few things!

“Jennifer,

Thanks for your note.

1. For every 3 units of electricity that is generated here at Dinorwig, we use 4 units to pump the water back up to Llyn Marchlyn (the top lake) – so the whole operation is a net consumer of electricity. In fact, Dinorwig Power Station pumping overnight is amongst the largest single consumer of power on the UK grid system.

2. Pumped storage units are generally fast responding and undertake “peak lopping” type generation at key, high demand periods of the day only where the margins are sufficient to cover the cost of pumping the water back to the top of the hill.

3. Our limited stored energy at the beginning of each day means that we need to carefully choose the exact periods of the day that we generate taking into account the fact that we need to pump all the water collected in the lower lake back to the top overnight ready for the following day.”

So, as Chris, Gloucester points out, it’s easier to think of Dinorwig as a ‘battery you charge up for use when you need it’, rather than as a viable option for ongoing renewable energy. Particularly as it uses more energy than it generates!

All methods of electricity generation cause environmental damage.

Coal and nuclear power stations cannot just be switched on when they are needed so it makes sense to use surplus power to pump water uphill or to store energy in other ways.

Josh

Until it is safe to install cavity wall insulation without risking problems, some of us will not risk installing it. As discussed in another Conversation, some people suffer from damp problems as a result of poor workmanship.

Double glazing used to be fraught with problems, but it is now straightforward for most. The same needs to happen with cavity wall insulation.

@ Wavchange and @Josh Green:
I agree about CWI: my house is unsuitable according to several builders and some CWI installers, but why is it unsuitable and why are there not alternatives out there yet?
In a similar vein, Wavechange and I and Sophie Gilbert, to name but three contributors, have boilers up to 33 years old, working absolutely fine, and have no plans to change because new ones are designed to last only about 7 or 8 years and many are very unreliable long before that. Why on earth is the Government not forcing boiler makers to make boilers with 30+ years life expectancy and reliability still (we sued to do it so it can be done) but also with modern efficiency?

We’re never going to get anyone to save energy on a significant scale whilst such silly situations exist.

I still think the way to make real savings, though, is to force commercial users to reduce consumption and to ban all standby options on every appliance: I’m convinced that those two measures would make vast and fast reductions.

Josh and Dave

I’m planning to move house and will look for a place with CWI and no evidence of problems. No doubt I will inherit one of these new-fangled, sophisticated, unreliable boilers – something I do not relish.

We need to move to having goods and services provided by a decent guarantee. In an installer has to rectify problems with CWI free of charge for ten years they might be a little more careful about doing a proper job. If a boiler manufacturer or supplier has to provide ten years parts and labour cover then boilers will soon be better designed and more reliable.

I’d prefer to scrap plans for faster trains and focus effort on getting people living near where they work. That would cut down on the ridiculous amount of fuel we waste commuting.

Before anyone says this is not possible, it is what happened before we had public transport and cars.

Totally agree Wavechange. Did you catch Evan Davis’s TV programme advocating that very thing the other night? Move the work to where the people and resources are instead of piling it all into London & the SE. Part 2 next Monday. Most pertinent.

Thanks John. I’m a Radio 4 listener and TV tends to pass me by. I will try to find the programme on iPlayer.

If our lights do go out and our fuel pumps do run dry then it may help to wake up the people and the politicians to finding practical solutions to using energy and resources wisely. What we must avoid is carrying on as we are and prices escalating so that only the rich can afford to pay.

Maybe with thorium reactors but I think we would have to be pretty desperate to build any more traditional nuclear power stations.

@ David – there are many problems and prejudices to do with nuclear energy generation, BUT, the single GREATEST reason that this is not a viable answer now (although it might have been a few years ago) is that it takes so long to build and bring on line a nuclear power station that, even if money was no object, we could not build any (let alone lots) fast enough to cope with the decommissioning of old power stations (of any type) which will soon reach the ends of their lives.

In other words, we can’t get them up and running in time to avert an electricity shortage crisis.

I do agree with Wavechange’s response to you as well, and personally I’m anti-nuclear, but all that aside, it’s the time factor which makes this an unrealistic answer to the situation that we face now.

Possibly we could get some wind and wave generation (maybe even new coal fired stations, despite the pollution) up and running and use them to “buy time” for building Thorium reactors?

As an aside, and as if to demonstrate the ever-increasing fuekl use, I recently found osme statistics via a professional body to which I belong as an electrician, showing the standard rating of Service Cut-out fuses for domestic property. (I.e. the “main fuse” which sits before your meter.)

Until the 1940’s the main fuse was usually 30 amps – yes 30 amps – that’s what you’d now put on a ring main (socket circuit) or a very old and outdated electric shower or a very small (2 ring) electric cooker.

Between the 40’s and the 70’s the main fuse was usually either 40 or 60 amps, depending whether you lived in an area with no mains gas and therefore expected to cook and heat electric.

in the late 70’s 80 amps became the norm and by the early 90’s 100 amps was the norm.

100amps is still the norm, but for new supplies in new estates the cabling is now designed to cope with up to 150 amps so it’s clear that the suppliers are anticipating another upgrade to cope with increased demand yet again.

Some of the latest luxury homes are even being built with a three-phase (i.e. industrial) supply to them now. – allowing a load of up to 300 amps to be pulled.

Is there any wonder we are running out of generating capacity when the average domestic house is now expected to pull what a small factory or commercial property did half a century ago?

The more tI think about this the more I am convinced that the central issue is reducing demand rather than increasing supply.

There is just so much potential to save energy and fossil fuel that the government should start a mass public education campaign. As I said before, this really needs cross-party support.

I would like Which? to look very carefully at power consumption when choosing Best Buys, especially where appliances are likely to be in continuous or frequent use. I don’t think Which? should even consider reviewing cars unless they average at least 50 mpg. That might go against Which? policy but if that’s the case perhaps policy needs to be updated.

As Dave says, cutting energy consumption could buy time before we are forced to increase generating capacity. Though Thorium reactors are a better alternative to conventional nuclear reactors, the population of the UK would need to be told a lot more before we take the risk of building them.

We also need cross-party cooperation on how to tackle the rise in population of the UK. A lot of our current problems including the one we are supposed to be discussing is because we are burying our heads in the sand. It would be interesting to debate this on a future Which? Conversation rather than take this one off-topic.

I have suggested a more sophisticated version of electricity pricing so that we can all benefit from when there is a surplus, night or day. Many people who have lived off-grid have learned to adapt their lifestyle accordingly and even those who have installed solar PV panels in the last couple of years often give thought to when they should use power.

Storage of electricity by pumping water uphill is obviously valuable to deal with peaks in demand and hopefully this can be extended.

To my mind the answer is simple in the short term – repeal the legislation forcing us to shut down our existing power stations. If this comes from the EU then ignore them just like evrybody else who doesn’t like what’s comoing from them!

Unfortunately Dinorwic stores very little energy – it really is a very short term resource almost an emergency backup.
However the idea of moving some consumption to the off peak period , midnight to 5 am, is well founded ; maybe smart-meters will provide the ability to charge less/more at different times of the day.
Many dishwashers and washing machines already have a delay function so some usage could easily be moved now. The energy used by these appliances will help to pre-heat the kitchen/utility room first thing in the morning.

We are closing down polluting power stations because we are able to do this and it is worth doing.

Unfortunately, we don’t have much control over what China gets up to, though we are doing our best to support their economy by buying products they make.

I take your point about careful users and profligate ones, but the point is the individual user is more likely to be careful – I think it is a fact of life that a house with a number of people in it will be more likely to use electricity inefficiently, as only one of them has an incentive not to use so much – the bill payer. This is where the “stick” will work and the “carrot” of the saving should help the individual who is doing their best.
Smart internal metering might be used – ie sensors that tell if lights are on in an empty room, etc.
None of the options are perfect, or cheap.
The problem we have is having had very cheap energy in the past, we have to change our priorities. The same applies to food and many other things.