In article <k0etpsFhjp0U1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
<Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
> > So we had to burn more gas, as we did.

> That's because if the intermittency of renewables.

Erm Tidal and sea flow is predictable and regular. And due to the UKs
sitaution and costline the flows/heights vary to give peaks spread out
around the day/night. The energy density is also very high compared with
typical wind. Main challenge is engineering to cope with fouling, etc. But
ships have developed methods to deal with this, and they can be transferred
to tidal/flow machines.

WRT wind have a look at

https://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/temp/WhenTheWindDoesntBlow.jpeg

It shows a fairly typical example of "when the wind doesn't blow" *on the
UK mainland*. But it also shows the extent of the area allocated just to
Scotland for economic use. This is much bigger than the UK mainland, and
covers area which are world-known for, erm, quite a lot of high winds,
wave, and tidal flows. Add in the areas for the rUK and it is even bigger.

And yes, commercial companies are developing systems to harvest this as
they can see profit in doing so. The levels and 'reliability' of current UK
wind farms have a lot of growth potential.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <k0edf8Ff6dgU1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
<Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
> Generation from renewable sources decreased 9.3 per cent to 122.2 TWh in
> 2021. This was driven by less favourable weather conditions for wind,
> hydro and solar generation. In particular, wind generation dropped to
> 64.7 TWh in 2021, down 14 per cent despite increased capacity. This was
> because of unusually low average wind speeds across most of 2021.

Interesting use of cherry-picking one data point from a much longer series.
:-)

Note that the geographical extent of wind farm locations will rise,
reducing the worries about "when the wind doesn't blow". Add in the
offshore potential. Then add in tidal, flow, etc.

Basically, these sectors have only just got started compared with where we
could be in a few years time. Yet they already displace quite large amounts
of (more costly) gas burning.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <k0e9spFelc9U1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
<Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:

> We‘ve just enjoyed ~20 days like that, with an enormous 6TWh of energy
> shortfall from wind over gas. More periods like this have been suggested
> for early next year

> Someone with an OU Science Foundation course will be along soon to
> explain why this isn‘t real, and to calculate the size of the battery
> farms needed to power the gap. Sixty million car batteries take a lot of
> finding and a lot of space.

Afraid I never went to the OU. Had to make do with teaching and doing
research at other Unis.

The current limitations of wind power are to a fair extent due to political
inertia and vested interests. However when you consider that wind power now
already often gives 20GW (thus saving burning the gas that displaces) and
that the existing farms are just a tiny fraction of the wind capacity we
could choose to build over the next decade the real problem is elsewhere.

It is the politicians who have hampered the expansion and development of
wind turbines.

However, given how profitable they are now we can expect a rapid expansion
- offshore to a significant extent - during the next decade or so. If
nothing else the Scots Gov is keen even if Westminster isn't.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <k0dudvFctthU1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
<Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:

> Because they Can't Do Sums, they believe that 'the wind always blows
> somewhere' - refusing to believe that sometimes the wind doesn't blow on
> their subsidy farm.

Erm. The idea is the have a number of wind farms, etc, spread over a wide
area. One that extends well out to sea. Given that, the wind essentially
does blow in quite a few of those 'somewheres' at any given time.

Plus, of course, developing other sources like tidal which is perfectly
predictable and reliable.

And unlike fossil source locations those places don't become depleted
eventually by the extraction of the finite consumable being taken.

I suggest you and others regularly check the pages I referenced up-thread.
They show the potential and that it is pretty preliable once properly
untilised. The reality doesn't agree with your narrow POV.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <k0eerhFfcdlU1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> >> next question, who counts what as renewable?
> >
> > Solar + Wind + Hydro + Pumped Storage + Biomass
> >
> > What's your problem?

> It's tiny but I wouldn't include pumped storage it gives back what it
> has taken in, minus efficiency losses

I've been wondering if the 'Solar' value actually includes the generation
by all the panels on people's roofs that they use 'internally' and isnt
exported back into the grid. Does it?

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <k0etpsFhjp0U1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
> <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>> So we had to burn more gas, as we did.
>
>> That's because if the intermittency of renewables.
>
> Erm Tidal and sea flow is predictable and regular. And due to the UKs
> sitaution and costline the flows/heights vary to give peaks spread out
> around the day/night. The energy density is also very high compared with
> typical wind. Main challenge is engineering to cope with fouling, etc. But
> ships have developed methods to deal with this, and they can be transferred
> to tidal/flow machines.
>
> WRT wind have a look at
>
> https://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/temp/WhenTheWindDoesntBlow.jpeg
>
> It shows a fairly typical example of "when the wind doesn't blow" *on the
> UK mainland*. But it also shows the extent of the area allocated just to
> Scotland for economic use. This is much bigger than the UK mainland, and
> covers area which are world-known for, erm, quite a lot of high winds,
> wave, and tidal flows. Add in the areas for the rUK and it is even bigger.
>
> And yes, commercial companies are developing systems to harvest this as
> they can see profit in doing so. The levels and 'reliability' of current UK
> wind farms have a lot of growth potential.
>
> Jim
>

I’m a little bit against tidal schemes because although they appear
attractive at first thought, the effect on the local ecology can be very
negative. The engineering never quite works out either, the few schemes
that have been built suffer from silting up etc. Offshore wind farms on the
other hand seem to be providing sanctuary for marine life, especially as
trawlers can’t fish there.

Now, as to the unreliability of wind - it’s not that unreliable. For the
few days a year when there is a perfect calm at sea what is wrong with
firing up thermal plant? Obviously plant that is not used all the time is
more expensive but that is a price to pay. Completely ignoring the green
arguments, from an economic point of view it is much better not to be
spending foreign exchange on importing gas, and from a security point of
view it is best to reduce reliance on supplies from some of the more
unsavoury parts of the world. If the Ukraine war has taught us anything, it
should be that being as self reliant on energy production as possible is
important.

TLDR: For renewables don’t let perfection be the enemy of good.

Jim Lesurf wrote:

> I've been wondering if the 'Solar' value actually includes the generation
> by all the panels on people's roofs that they use 'internally' and isnt
> exported back into the grid. Does it?#

I think unlike the other data (which comes from Elexon) the rooftop solar is an
estimate from Seffield university

<https://www.solar.sheffield.ac.uk/pvlive/>

it does talk about "generation" rather than "exports", so I'd say it incldes
self-consumption ...

In article <5a5a54c8cenoise@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
<noise@audiomisc.co.uk> scribeth thus
>In article <k0edf8Ff6dgU1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
><Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
>> Generation from renewable sources decreased 9.3 per cent to 122.2 TWh in
>> 2021. This was driven by less favourable weather conditions for wind,
>> hydro and solar generation. In particular, wind generation dropped to
>> 64.7 TWh in 2021, down 14 per cent despite increased capacity. This was
>> because of unusually low average wind speeds across most of 2021.
>
>Interesting use of cherry-picking one data point from a much longer series.
>:-)
>
>Note that the geographical extent of wind farm locations will rise,
>reducing the worries about "when the wind doesn't blow". Add in the
>offshore potential. Then add in tidal, flow, etc.
>
>Basically, these sectors have only just got started compared with where we
>could be in a few years time. Yet they already displace quite large amounts
>of (more costly) gas burning.
>
>Jim
>

So who is this deity who can magick up tempests Jim;?..

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <5a5a39d5bcnoise@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
<noise@audiomisc.co.uk> scribeth thus
>In article <k0dudvFctthU1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
><Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Because they Can't Do Sums, they believe that 'the wind always blows
>> somewhere' - refusing to believe that sometimes the wind doesn't blow on
>> their subsidy farm.
>
>Erm. The idea is the have a number of wind farms, etc, spread over a wide
>area. One that extends well out to sea. Given that, the wind essentially
>does blow in quite a few of those 'somewheres' at any given time.

Provided that there is sufficient wind blowing to meet demand needs!..

>
>Plus, of course, developing other sources like tidal which is perfectly
>predictable and reliable.
>
>And unlike fossil source locations those places don't become depleted
>eventually by the extraction of the finite consumable being taken.
>
>I suggest you and others regularly check the pages I referenced up-thread.
>They show the potential and that it is pretty preliable once properly
>untilised. The reality doesn't agree with your narrow POV.
>
>Jim
>

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Anyone care to explain the WIND generation difference between these two
>>>> sites please?, sometimes 3 odd GW apart for wind!..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://gridwatch.co.uk/
>>>>
>>>> https://grid.iamkate.com/
>>>
>>> You could ping TNP for an explanation but I know that Gridwatch says it
>>> doesn't include embedded wind (see under "Key") whereas IamKate says
>>> "Embedded solar and wind data comes from National Grid ESO" which
>>> implies it does.
>>
>> Small correction…
>>
>> TNP’s website is actually
>>
>> <https://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/>
>>
>
>
>
>Thanks. I've no excuse as I even thought "it looks different".
>
>And it may be I was vaguely remembering the text that comes if you hover
>over the wind note there: "Wind contributes about another 30% from
>embedded (or unmetered) ..."
>
>
>
So this embedded wind is connected to and feeds the grid but whoever
owns that wind farm gets paid a fixed amount or they just get paid?.

So how do they get paid is it just a flat rate or what?..

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <5a5a558098noise@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
<noise@audiomisc.co.uk> scribeth thus
>In article <k0eerhFfcdlU1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
><usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> >> next question, who counts what as renewable?
>> >
>> > Solar + Wind + Hydro + Pumped Storage + Biomass
>> >
>> > What's your problem?
>
>> It's tiny but I wouldn't include pumped storage it gives back what it
>> has taken in, minus efficiency losses
>
>I've been wondering if the 'Solar' value actually includes the generation
>by all the panels on people's roofs that they use 'internally' and isnt
>exported back into the grid. Does it?
>
>Jim
>

How can they measure that?, is there some sort of GSM link in the
inverters?..

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <5a5a3a58cfnoise@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
<noise@audiomisc.co.uk> scribeth thus
>In article <k0dvgkFd3i2U1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
><usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>
>> <https://gridwatch.co.uk/demand/percent>
>
>> but look at this whole year and last whole year, bottom two graphs gas
>> (light brown) dominates.
>
>You need to consider all-time (i.e. many years) to smooth out the annual
>cycle of demand, etc. That shows the (continuing) rise in wind power, etc.
>
>In round figures, wind capacity is about 20GW at present and rising at
>about 2GW per year. That will tend to be exponentlal in the future as the
>area, take/turbine and importance increase.
>
>
>Jim
>
But surely Jim suppose we shall we say get used to a possible 30 GW or
more, wind capacity and then one of these blocking highs that we had
recently comes along so where do we make up the missing wind power
from?, theres only so much Gas Nuclear and Hydro etc generation so what
happens when the say 30 GW comes just a few GW?..

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <5a5a558098noise@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
> <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> scribeth thus
>> In article <k0eerhFfcdlU1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
>> <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>>> next question, who counts what as renewable?
>>>>
>>>> Solar + Wind + Hydro + Pumped Storage + Biomass
>>>>
>>>> What's your problem?
>>
>>> It's tiny but I wouldn't include pumped storage it gives back what it
>>> has taken in, minus efficiency losses
>>
>> I've been wondering if the 'Solar' value actually includes the generation
>> by all the panels on people's roofs that they use 'internally' and isnt
>> exported back into the grid. Does it?
>>
>> Jim
>>
>
> How can they measure that?, is there some sort of GSM link in the
> inverters?..
>

Not every inverter, but mine is hooked up via my WiFi back to the inverter
vendor and they get readings every 10 minutes. Like opinion polls, it
probably provides enough data points to allow reasonable nationwide
estimates to be made.

tony sayer wrote:

> Jim Lesurf wrote:
>
>> I've been wondering if the 'Solar' value actually includes the generation
>> by all the panels on people's roofs that they use 'internally' and isnt
>> exported back into the grid. Does it?
>
> How can they measure that?, is there some sort of GSM link in the
> inverters?..

Most PV installations are installed under some govt scheme or another, I'm sure
a close approximation of the total installed capacity is known, and an average
value for insolation worked out daily ... so an estimated generation can be
arrived at.

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> tony sayer wrote:
>
>> Jim Lesurf wrote:
>>
>>> I've been wondering if the 'Solar' value actually includes the generation
>>> by all the panels on people's roofs that they use 'internally' and isnt
>>> exported back into the grid. Does it?
>>
>> How can they measure that?, is there some sort of GSM link in the
>> inverters?..
>
> Most PV installations are installed under some govt scheme or another, I'm sure
> a close approximation of the total installed capacity is known, and an average
> value for insolation worked out daily ... so an estimated generation can be
> arrived at.
>
>
>
>

The installed capacity should be known, as the local distribution operator
has to be informed of this. Compass bearing and any shading isn’t known via
this route.

On 22/12/2022 12:59, tony sayer wrote:
>
> But surely Jim suppose we shall we say get used to a possible 30 GW or
> more, wind capacity and then one of these blocking highs that we had
> recently comes along so where do we make up the missing wind power
> from?, theres only so much Gas Nuclear and Hydro etc generation so what
> happens when the say 30 GW comes just a few GW?..

As we've already reached 20GW, this should *already* be a noticeable
problem, so what happens now?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <5a5a3a58cfnoise@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
> <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> scribeth thus
>> In article <k0dvgkFd3i2U1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
>> <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> <https://gridwatch.co.uk/demand/percent>
>>
>>> but look at this whole year and last whole year, bottom two graphs gas
>>> (light brown) dominates.
>>
>> You need to consider all-time (i.e. many years) to smooth out the annual
>> cycle of demand, etc. That shows the (continuing) rise in wind power, etc.
>>
>> In round figures, wind capacity is about 20GW at present and rising at
>> about 2GW per year. That will tend to be exponentlal in the future as the
>> area, take/turbine and importance increase.
>>
>>
>> Jim
>>
> But surely Jim suppose we shall we say get used to a possible 30 GW or
> more, wind capacity and then one of these blocking highs that we had
> recently comes along so where do we make up the missing wind power
> from?, theres only so much Gas Nuclear and Hydro etc generation so what
> happens when the say 30 GW comes just a few GW?..

We’ve just experienced what happens when such a blocking High settles over
Western-Central Russia and encompassing the whole of Europe.

As can be seen on TNP’s web site in the appropriate monthly graph for the
last 30 days here:

<https://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/>

Wind has underperformed CCGT for the greater part of 20 days, except for a
handful of hours around the 3rd to the 5th of December.

There would seem to be about a 10GW difference over that period, or rather
more than 4TWh.

There are ~12000 wind turbines in the UK which over that period produced an
average of about 7.5GW, suggesting we need another 16000 turbines to make
up the shortfall.

The actual number needed will be greater than that due to turbine failures
and routine maintenance, say 25% more for a total of 24000 extra turbines.

These will need bases comprising 400 tons of concrete each, or around 10
million tons in total.

The production of the unrecyclable blades is also carbon intensive, as are
the metal components and connecting cables. Maintenance also has a carbon
cost.

When the wind does blow on this turbine behemoth, we will have to pay
people to take the vast surplus of electricity.

--
Spike

Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <k0edf8Ff6dgU1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
> <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
>> Generation from renewable sources decreased 9.3 per cent to 122.2 TWh in
>> 2021. This was driven by less favourable weather conditions for wind,
>> hydro and solar generation. In particular, wind generation dropped to
>> 64.7 TWh in 2021, down 14 per cent despite increased capacity. This was
>> because of unusually low average wind speeds across most of 2021.
>
> Interesting use of cherry-picking one data point from a much longer series.
> :-)
>
> Note that the geographical extent of wind farm locations will rise,
> reducing the worries about "when the wind doesn't blow". Add in the
> offshore potential. Then add in tidal, flow, etc.
>
> Basically, these sectors have only just got started compared with where we
> could be in a few years time. Yet they already displace quite large amounts
> of (more costly) gas burning.
>
> Jim

I’ll just note that the recent blocking high was located over
western-central Russia and was several thousand miles in extent, raising
the issue of where these extra wind farms are to be situated.

--
Spike

Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <k0e9spFelc9U1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
> <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>> We‘ve just enjoyed ~20 days like that, with an enormous 6TWh of energy
>> shortfall from wind over gas. More periods like this have been suggested
>> for early next year
>
>> Someone with an OU Science Foundation course will be along soon to
>> explain why this isn‘t real, and to calculate the size of the battery
>> farms needed to power the gap. Sixty million car batteries take a lot of
>> finding and a lot of space.
>
> Afraid I never went to the OU. Had to make do with teaching and doing
> research at other Unis.
>
> The current limitations of wind power are to a fair extent due to political
> inertia and vested interests. However when you consider that wind power now
> already often gives 20GW (thus saving burning the gas that displaces) and
> that the existing farms are just a tiny fraction of the wind capacity we
> could choose to build over the next decade the real problem is elsewhere.

Actions speak louder than words, and the Achilles Heel of Wind and other
renewables is their intermittency.

Having more of them doesn’t necessarily deal with that problem. The sun
goes down every evening and Solar output drops to zero, meaning something
else has to be brought in to make up the shortfall. Wind is far less
predictable than Solar.

> It is the politicians who have hampered the expansion and development of
> wind turbines.
>
> However, given how profitable they are now we can expect a rapid expansion
> - offshore to a significant extent - during the next decade or so. If
> nothing else the Scots Gov is keen even if Westminster isn't.
>
> Jim
>

--
Spike

Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <k0dudvFctthU1@mid.individual.net>, Spike
> <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Because they Can't Do Sums, they believe that 'the wind always blows
>> somewhere' - refusing to believe that sometimes the wind doesn't blow on
>> their subsidy farm.
>
> Erm. The idea is the have a number of wind farms, etc, spread over a wide
> area. One that extends well out to sea. Given that, the wind essentially
> does blow in quite a few of those 'somewheres' at any given time.
>
> Plus, of course, developing other sources like tidal which is perfectly
> predictable and reliable.
>
> And unlike fossil source locations those places don't become depleted
> eventually by the extraction of the finite consumable being taken.
>
> I suggest you and others regularly check the pages I referenced up-thread.
> They show the potential and that it is pretty preliable once properly
> untilised. The reality doesn't agree with your narrow POV.

> Jim

I’ve recently posted on this topic (of the width of a winter blocking-high
etc, including a calculation with a typo in the required numbers of wind
turbines) further down the thread; and it’s my belief your sanguine
approach is not justified .

--
Spike

On 22/12/2022 12:51, tony sayer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone care to explain the WIND generation difference between these two
>>>>> sites please?, sometimes 3 odd GW apart for wind!..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://gridwatch.co.uk/
>>>>>
>>>>> https://grid.iamkate.com/
>>>>
>>>> You could ping TNP for an explanation but I know that Gridwatch says it
>>>> doesn't include embedded wind (see under "Key") whereas IamKate says
>>>> "Embedded solar and wind data comes from National Grid ESO" which
>>>> implies it does.
>>>
>>> Small correction…
>>>
>>> TNP’s website is actually
>>>
>>> <https://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks. I've no excuse as I even thought "it looks different".
>>
>> And it may be I was vaguely remembering the text that comes if you hover
>> over the wind note there: "Wind contributes about another 30% from
>> embedded (or unmetered) ..."
>>
>>
>>
> So this embedded wind is connected to and feeds the grid but whoever
> owns that wind farm gets paid a fixed amount or they just get paid?.
>
> So how do they get paid is it just a flat rate or what?..
>
>
I've never had cause to bottom it. I think their output is estimated
from the output of those that are metered. But their income depends v
much on subsidies (Renewables Obligation Certificates) and constraint
payments.
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 22/12/2022 12:51, tony sayer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone care to explain the WIND generation difference between these two
>>>>> sites please?, sometimes 3 odd GW apart for wind!..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://gridwatch.co.uk/
>>>>>
>>>>> https://grid.iamkate.com/
>>>>
>>>> You could ping TNP for an explanation but I know that Gridwatch says it
>>>> doesn't include embedded wind (see under "Key") whereas IamKate says
>>>> "Embedded solar and wind data comes from National Grid ESO" which
>>>> implies it does.
>>>
>>> Small correction…
>>>
>>> TNP’s website is actually
>>>
>>> <https://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks. I've no excuse as I even thought "it looks different".
>>
>> And it may be I was vaguely remembering the text that comes if you hover
>> over the wind note there: "Wind contributes about another 30% from
>> embedded (or unmetered) ..."
>>
>>
>>
> So this embedded wind is connected to and feeds the grid

PS

doesn't feed "the grid" (as in the high voltage National Grid). They
are by definition generators who feed in to one of the DNOs at a lower
voltage. In passing this means DNOs have had to become active in
balancing supply with demand.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In article <PNOgtAFggyojFwXZ@bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
<tony@bancom.co.uk>
wrote:

> Anyone care to explain the WIND generation difference between these two
> sites please?, sometimes 3 odd GW apart for wind!..

> https://gridwatch.co.uk/

> https://grid.iamkate.com/

Dunno at present. AIUI Kate bases her automated update on data fetched from
the National Grid data that has a granularity of 15 mins. She is an 'open
source' programmer so her programs are presumably available for someone to
check though and use/modify as they wish. However she interacts via the
modern 'social meedja' that I don't use so haven't contacted her about such
questions. Plan to DIY my own analysis from a different tack. When in
doubt, check and DIY.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <2d42fd71-df4b-c7da-0b31-99576e4a30b8@outlook.com>, Robin
<rbw@outlook.com> wrote:
> > https://gridwatch.co.uk/
> >
> > https://grid.iamkate.com/

> You could ping TNP for an explanation but I know that Gridwatch says it
> doesn't include embedded wind (see under "Key") whereas IamKate says
> "Embedded solar and wind data comes from National Grid ESO" which
> implies it does.

Ah! Thanks.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Jim Lesurf wrote:

> tony sayer wrote:
>
>> https://grid.iamkate.com
>
> AIUI Kate bases her automated update on data fetched from
> the National Grid data that has a granularity of 15 mins.

Different sources, at varying intervals ...

"Most data comes from the Balancing Mechanism Reporting System and is updated at
five minute intervals.

Embedded solar and wind data comes from National Grid ESO and is updated at half
hour intervals.

Emissions data comes from the Carbon Intensity project by the National Grid and
the University Of Oxford Department Of Computer Science, and is updated at half
hour intervals."