Dave SOD, I am an avid reader of Electrical Review (first editor was Michael Faraday though unfortunately I dont have any issues from that time!), and have been since the seventies, when it was much more of an interesting magazine than the 90% advertising content it sports today. The most interesting page by far is "Gossage" insider news from the electrical industry, and it is an eye opener. there are many problems in the electrical supply industry, but one of the major ones is the unprecedented drop in demand, which has fallen 15% in the last ten years, and due to the ongoing conversion of all street lighting, shop lighting,traffic signals etc etc to LED demand is continuing to fall. Consider a time when all UK lighting is LED, which is about 90% more efficient than incandescent, and you are looking at 90% less demand for lighting.
The reason Hitachi have just pulled out of building two nuclear stations is the fact that, even at the garunteed price per MWh the government have promised them (approx double the rate today) they are unwilling to make such a huge investment on a falling demand market without garuntees the government was not willing to give them. A cynical viewpoint would be that the very reason they were invited to bid in the first place was that the government knew demand would fall to a point where nuclear power was so expensive that it simply was not a viable business model, and therefore needed someone else to carry the risk. When Tony Benn, as energy minister made his announcment that nuclear energy would be so cheap it would not be worth metering, and you would pay for it at an annual "rate" like water, he was not in possesion of the true costs of nuclear power stations, the only thing cheap about them is the fuel, the costs of building, maintaining, repairing, and eventual dismantling are collosal in comparison with other methods of turning water into steam for turbines which are, at best about 33% efficient. Remember also that when it comes to decomissioning, the taxpayer picks up the tab!
Hinkley is a case in point, there have been several different consortiums, most of whom have pulled out, leaving EDF holding the baby. Electricite De France is heavily backed by the french government, who have refused any more money to build this type of power station until and if EDF complete one and actually make it work. At present, the one they have built in France ( which, of the 5 they are building is supposedly nearest completion) has not produced a watt, is massively over budget, and (I think) 7 years behind schedule. In fact, no one from EDF will give a time when it will be completed, or will start testing! (Gossage, a few months ago, you can read gossage online at https://www.electricalreview.co.uk/features/10545-gossagegossip)
If you go to www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk you will see what is generating our power 24/7/365, updated every 5 minutes. Oil is now only used in standby stations, and coal usage is very low. Almost 50% of demand is met by combined cycle gas turbines, which are approaching 50% efficient, and use exhausted heat from the gas turbine to make steam for an additional turbine, hence the efficiency. Nuclear, at very best output, with all reactors operating at full output can only supply about 24% of peak demand and it is a red letter day when this happens. Even if Hinkley is ever finished and works, which is by no means certain ( the whole idea should be scrapped!) it will not provide any EXTRA energy, because it will be replacing existing units, which are long past their sell by dates (really) and will be shut down.
The problems with nuclear go on and on because of the golden deal they have with the government which goes back to the fifties. The electricity supply companies, whoever they may be, are tied to buying ALL the output from nuclear stations before they can use other forms of generation This is the only way nuclear can ever be commercially viable. As I have said before, you cannot push extra power into the grid, output from generators has to be matched as exactly as possible to demand at all times, so many times a day, some generation will have to be shut down, and because of the "golden deal" what is shut down is wind and solar. I am sure you have driven past turbines on breezy days and seen them not running, well this is the reason! What is needed is a reversal of this situation, so that the base load is picked up by wind and solar, and the top up comes from other forms of generation. This of course is not going to happen till (perhaps we have almost got there?) the nuclear plants are worn out (they are already well past their design life) and too expensive to repair or replace.
Please check out the Grid status link, at the moment wind is providing 10.03 Gigawatts, whilst nuclear is providing 5.77 gigawatts coal is providing 3.5GW, and combined cycle gas turbine is providing 22.6GW and oil no longer features at all. We are not running out of fossil fuels, despite the horror stories of the sixties and seventies, Britian has huge coal deposits which are virtually unmined today, and new oil and gas discoveries are being made all the time, indeed some areas of the scientific world are beginning to look at if these substances are indeed "fossil fuels" entirely, or by products of the huge amount of underground volcanic activity which cases them to rise up from the core to be trapped under impervious rock layers
Edited By Phil Whitley on 21/01/2019 20:35:08