I am seriously considering installing a home battery, to complement my solar PV array and heat pump, and basically I'm wondering if it is a good idea - both financially and in terms of CO2. Both questions are hard to know the answers to, but I think there are a few posters here who can give considered opinions.
Part one - on the financial side: I have been offered a 10.5kWh PylonTech system, by someone who owes me a favour, for £7850 fully installed. I've got a very clear idea of how much I can utilise this, and with energy prices as they are right now, I forecast that it'll save me £1060 per year. That relies on being able to use cheap night time electricity on days when there's not much sun to charge them - at the moment, Octopus does this for 12p/kWh, up from 5p last year.
I suppose the question I should ask myself is: what else I could do with that £7850? If I put it all in a five year bond today at 4.25%, and assuming that I can re-invest it at a similar, rate, it'd be worth £11900 in ten years (the extent of the battery warranty) and £14660 in fifteen years (a reasonable estimate of how long the batteries might continue to work for, even at a reduced capacity).
In comparison the batteries would have made me £10600 in ten years and £15900 in fifteen years, if I assume energy prices don't change a bit. I ought to allow for both battery capacity degradation and price inflation... I can imagine these two factors might more or less cancel themselves out over a long enough period.
But that's obviously a massive unknown. Are prices ever going down, or is this a new normal? Even if the war in Ukraine ends tomorrow, I don't think we will want to go back to relying heavily on cheap Russian gas, so I tend to think that we have these energy prices for some time to come - at least until we can build significantly more solar/wind/nuclear.
Part two - the CO2 consideration. At the moment it is fair to say that the UK grid essentially always has some CCGT in the mix, and that means that a battery can't save any CO2. If I use some of my own PV to save importing energy later in the day, I'm just displacing some gas from the evening into the daytime.
In fact, as a battery doesn't have a 100% efficient cycle, it's actually slightly increasing total energy usage and CO2 emissions (I factored a 90% round cycle efficiency into my cost calculation).
But, one day, we will have a grid with a regular excess of renewables and nuclear, and then batteries do become carbon negative - saving excess low carbon electricity to prevent a CCGT spinning up later is a genuine carbon saving.
My question here is how far off that day is? We're increasing our renewables at a decent rate - are we going to see periods with renewables and nuclear carrying the whole grid, reasonably soon?
I happen to have the money to spare, due to a big tax refund. What would UKC do?
I'll say what I always say on this; if you put your money into renewables schemes that day will come ever so slightly sooner, and you'll probably get about 6% along the way.
I've always been of the opinion that using the money to build my own micro solar farm at one-off retail prices in an imperfect location could never put as many kW of panels onto the grid as it would as a small part of an industrial scale installation, so I feel fine with doing that.
Other opinions are available, and possibly more correct.
Edit to add: if you have ISA space to do it in, even better
You're probably right. The single 'best' thing I could do with this money (given my aim of making a decent return with an strongly environmental bent) is invest it in a company building a solar farm.
I've been ever so slightly burned with this sort of thing - I have a few thousand in a local hydro scheme that's underperforming. The flow down the Thames hasn't been as reliable as we hoped and it's paying back at ~3.5%, rather than the ~5.5% we'd been lead to expect.
I guess, in part, I want a new toy I can point at for my trouble
Usual caveats apply of course. But there are loads of vehicles now for doing this, some really quite large and popular, so you can have eggs in many baskets. NESF, FSFL, BSIF are just a few of the bigger ones.
> My question here is how far off that day is? We're increasing our renewables at a decent rate - are we going to see periods with renewables and nuclear carrying the whole grid, reasonably soon?
As to this, I'm similarly hopeful. We made a lot from windmills last year and iirc something like 5GW more are set to come online soon in the North sea alone.
But .... When the day comes I'd bet the decent tariffs will die out overnight or the goalposts will otherwise move in some way such that your battery installation won't compete with the big players in a world where there's real money to be made from big scale battery storage (which is actually already kinda here).
Wholesale gas prices are already below pre Ukrainian war level apparently……so has things calm down it may make your assumptions invalid. We never relied on cheap Russian gas in the U.K.
Battery storage is an excellent idea. You don’t say whether that price includes vat. I know that a company called future-gen. Www.future-gen.co do an excellent 13.4 kwh battery for £8000 + vat, installed with an excellent 5kw inverter. Also their battery is made in Spain rather than China so if there is a problem with warranty then they are easily approached.
Depends what you care about
I’m kicking myself that I’ve made no progress with my micro hydro plans; perhaps £12k outlay and 1 kW continuous for the 6 winter months of the year. 12 months ago the justification was marginal, now the ROI is over 30% per year. On that note, our local wind farms have had about 1/3rd of the turbines out of action for years; with the rising prices there’s been a massive rush to fix them.
You are relying on night time electricity prices staying low, this may not be the case as EV use increases? I would expect installing more wind capacity offsets this but can it be built at the required rate? I dunno.
BTW I would save the money, but I'm the sort of person who goes for the do nothing option when faced with this sort of conundrum. The cost benefit looks marginal to me. But I think you are different and you enjoy this sort of stuff so spending money on this because this is what you interested in is fine too. It's better than spending it on a car, ie a depreciating asset.
> Part two - the CO2 consideration. At the moment it is fair to say that the UK grid essentially always has some CCGT in the mix, and that means that a battery can't save any CO2. If I use some of my own PV to save importing energy later in the day, I'm just displacing some gas from the evening into the daytime.
I don't think that's true. If you're saving some of your PV power to use later that removes that part of your use from the grid/CO2 part.
We never relied on cheap Russian gas in the U.K. - not directly no, but as part of the larger grid you did., or at the very least it impacts supply and cost of the gas the UK imports.
> I know that a company called future-gen. Www.future-gen.co do an excellent 13.4 kwh battery for £8000 + vat,
Really? How did you stumble across them??
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/8D75hAg...
> Also their battery is ...
Interesting use of the third person.
10/10 for spotting the post on a niche web forum, signing up and posting an advertorial. That's some dedicated marketing. Actually impressed.
I forgot to say your forecast saving of £1060 is probably very optimistic. Most people who do financial forecasts for their own favourite issues make the numbers look good anyway.You are probably making the numbers work to show that type of return because it suits your argument. So as a start recognise this a weakness.
I would start by getting a friend who is good with financial numbers really ripping your forecast to pieces and checking they stack up.
it’s an interesting subject.
Thanks, everyone. Some useful things for me to think about here.
Thanks especially to the marketing shill! I've just searched for his name and a few key words and not found any other similar forum posts, so I guess I am lucky enough to have been Mark's first foray into this sort of marketing..?
Wintertree: I agree on the CO2 point, for the time being, but I wonder how long it can be until we have genuinely 100% low carbon power on the grid? It's a windy day today, and of the 35GW demand we're only burning about 5GW of fossil fuels. 20GW is coming from wind. If we installed another 5GW of wind then we could be looking at no FF on the grid right now, and (as LSRH points out) apparently we have plans to more or less double wind capacity in the next seven years, so perhaps we will get to a point fairly soon when load shifting really is saving CO2?
The embedded CO2 in the battery is an important point. I've just found several sources that seem to agree on something around 800-1000kg/CO2 for a 10kWh battery installation. If wind saves ~0.45kg/kWh then I will need to displace 2200kWh to offset the construction, taking around nine months.
I'm not certain if the system I'm being offered is grid independent in the case of a power cut. We don't get many here but it would still be a nice bonus. I will have to check.
WBO: yes, saving some of my own PV energy removes that demand from the grid, but if I had exported that energy then someone else's electricity would have been able to make use of it. Think of it this way - before my battery, in a sunny afternoon I'm exporting power so a gas turbine somewhere can spin down a little. That evening, I need to import so the turbine has to spin up again. But after I got the battery, I would not be exporting in the afternoon, so the turbine needs to spin up a bit more... and then in the evening I won't need any import so it spins down a little. With a perfectly efficient battery it's a zero sum game (and actually with ~90% efficiency it's not even that).
Nikoid: I've just played with my model to see how sensitive it is to my overnight tariff. At the moment I can buy at 12p overnight and that gives an annual saving of £1060. If it goes up to 20p, the saving only drops to £1000 - not much change because generally my big PV array does more of the work than the overnight tariff does. At 30p it's £930, and if I set the overnight rate to equal my daytime rate (effectively saying that it'll work on PV alone) then the annual saving falls to £830.
I don't know how 'safe' the idea of cheap overnight electricity is. My gut instinct would be that, if we do crack on and install loads more wind capacity, then load shifting will become more important so time-of-use tariffs will become more likely. But on the other hand the rapid uptake of EVs is increasing night time demand. Perhaps this tells me that I need to make sure the inverter can communicate with truly variable time-of-use tariffs (like Agile, rather then Go).
Sorry, missed this whilst I was writing my post above!
> I forgot to say your forecast saving of £1060 is probably very optimistic. Most people who do financial forecasts for their own favourite issues make the numbers look good anyway.You are probably making the numbers work to show that type of return because it suits your argument. So as a start recognise this a weakness.
I hope I'm being dispassionate about the figures. I run a spreadsheet of all the electrical demand in the house, day by day, split into car / heat pump/ other demand and PV / imported power. So I am genuinely working with real data. That figure of £1060 comes from nine months of data (I only installed the HP nine months ago so I'm having to guesstimate its effects for Jan/Feb/Mar).
So I'm confident that this is correct for my current tariff, and also to make predictions for changes to the tariff (I can easily adjust the day and night import and export prices).
What I am far less sure I am forecasting correctly is the likelihood of changes to the tariff, and the effects of inflation.
I do know that there is a nine year old boy in me shouting 'just buy the toy'...
> I would start by getting a friend who is good with financial numbers really ripping your forecast to pieces and checking they stack up.
I've spoken about this with a couple of people, but honestly, that's what I'm trying to achieve on here!
> But, one day, we will have a grid with a regular excess of renewables and nuclear, and then batteries do become carbon negative - saving excess low carbon electricity to prevent a CCGT spinning up later is a genuine carbon saving.
> My question here is how far off that day is? We're increasing our renewables at a decent rate - are we going to see periods with renewables and nuclear carrying the whole grid, reasonably soon?
> I happen to have the money to spare, due to a big tax refund. What would UKC do?
I don't think the day of 100% renewables or more is far off (on some days). Just looking at the planned and under construction offshore wind farms here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_Kingdom shows a big increase to come over the next 5 years and we already get 50% under the right condition (46% as I type).
However, I do expect the necessary storage infrastructure to be provided large scale by the energy providers, initially with grid-scale battery storage. So I'd say it depends how quickly that happens. It doesn't seem sensible to me for the energy providers to be relying on very small scale infrastructure in a domestic settings.
Just out of interest, how of much do you typically get from your PV array November to Feb?
> It doesn't seem sensible to me for the energy providers to be relying on very small scale infrastructure in a domestic settings.
That's an interesting point. I guess it's quite like PV itself - far more efficient to ground mount it in big commercial arrays, but it took lots of roof mount to get to the point that we began building the ground arrays.
> Just out of interest, how of much do you typically get from your PV array November to Feb?
This year, average per month: Nov 8.5kWh/day, Dec 6.2kWh. Last year Jan 7.9kWh, Feb 11.6kWh. These are dominated by a few clear days, though - it's very intermittent. There are plenty of days < 1kWh.
> I don't think the day of 100% renewables or more is far off (on some days). Just looking at the planned and under construction offshore wind farms here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_Kingdom shows a big increase to come over the next 5 years and we already get 50% under the right condition (46% as I type).
> However, I do expect the necessary storage infrastructure to be provided large scale by the energy providers, initially with grid-scale battery storage. So I'd say it depends how quickly that happens. It doesn't seem sensible to me for the energy providers to be relying on very small scale infrastructure in a domestic settings.
Might be a while yet, under the targets the UK needs to at least double it's total generating capacity by 2035 so around 14GW per year plus some/a lot of storage.
> That's an interesting point. I guess it's quite like PV itself - far more efficient to ground mount it in big commercial arrays, but it took lots of roof mount to get to the point that we began building the ground arrays.
I do notice the energy companies are pushing home batteries so it may well figure in their plans. I suppose from their point of view it is 'sub-contracting' the investment, if you see what I mean.
> This year, average per month: Nov 8.5kWh/day, Dec 6.2kWh. Last year Jan 7.9kWh, Feb 11.6kWh. These are dominated by a few clear days, though - it's very intermittent. There are plenty of days < 1kWh.
Thanks! Just one more question, do you think your generation by month tallies with the graph shown here (4th image down)?
Edit the link!: https://www.nea.org.uk/who-we-are/innovation-technical-evaluation/solarpv/h...
> Might be a while yet, under the targets the UK needs to at least double it's total generating capacity by 2035 so around 14GW per year plus some/a lot of storage.
I'm not talking about meeting targets, I'm just talking about the day the UK will produce more than 100% demand from renewables, even for a short period, as that is relevant to the discussion we are having, which is about storage.
Wind dominates in the UK, and if you look at the link and add up some columns you will see that planned and under construction will more than double the UKs capacity in a few years.
What do your numbers look like if you go back to the tariffs pre Ukraine ?
that should be your financial benchmark imho
> This year, average per month: Nov 8.5kWh/day, Dec 6.2kWh. Last year Jan 7.9kWh, Feb 11.6kWh. These are dominated by a few clear days, though - it's very intermittent. There are plenty of days < 1kWh.
cripes, how big is your array?
> I do notice the energy companies are pushing home batteries so it may well figure in their plans. I suppose from their point of view it is 'sub-contracting' the investment, if you see what I mean.
I imagine so. And I think I see the value of being an early adopter in order to demonstrate a technology as viable - not unlike those who got PV panels early, paying a lot (and being rewarded for it with the FiT) so that nowadays we see the technology as mainstream.
> Thanks! Just one more question, do you think your generation by month tallies with the graph shown here (4th image down)?
Broadly, yes - they're measuring a poorly situated roof in London, and I have a more or less perfectly aligned roof in Oxford so I need to account for that. To pick one data point - in Jun 2017 they got about 8.6kWh/day from a 2.35kW system with an alignment factor of around 0.90, so they were getting 8.6/2.35 / 0.9 = 4.1 kWh per kW, with alignment corrected for. That month I got an average of 23.5kWh from a 5.7kW system, with an alignment factor of 0.98, which equates to 4.6kWh per kW.
Oddly, in Jan 2017 they got about 1.5kWh/day so that's 1.5/2.35 / 0.9 = 0.71 kWh per kW. I got 7.5kWh, which works out at 1.34kWh per kW. I can only conclude that they have some low down shading that's more significant in the winter (not at all unlikely in a dense urban environment).
You have provoked me to check one way that I could have been fooling myself - if the year of data I'm basing this on were an unusually sunny one, then I'd be over estimating the (very cheap) PV contribution and underestimating the overnight contribution. But 2022 has been a reasonably average year. My system generates between 5600 and 6400kWh/year, and 2022 was bang in the middle at 5960kWh.
5.7kW on the roof, throttled to 5kW at the inverter, and facing almost exactly south.
It is amazingly intermittent though - December, for example, was eight clear sunny days generating 15-17kWh, a couple of middling ones of ~8kWh, and all the rest sub 3kWh!
But you haven't looked at the projected increases in demand in the same period i.e bev's, rail, heat pumps, industrial processes etc.
That's not a bad idea at all. So post Ukraine I'm paying 12p/kWh overnight, 43p daytime, and exporting at 6p.
Pre Ukraine I got 5p overnight, 14p daytime, and the same 6p export. If I pop those values in... ouch. Annual savings of £238, so it would take 33 years to pay for itself. This is why I never considered the idea back then!
I guess the question is, do we expect ever to see those energy prices again?
I think you have answered your own question. I would just wait if you can for another few months.
Ooh - was UKC down for everyone for an hour then?
Yes, you've certainly given me reason to pause. Home scale batteries were always a pretty marginal buy - they only really made sense if you bought then at the same time as the PV (to get the cheaper VAT rate) and you were on deemed export (so the energy you put into them didn't cost you anything). Neither of those are true for me.
If I could guarantee the current pricing regime would last, it still looks fairly attractive. If I knew we would return to pre Ukraine prices, definitely not...
> But you haven't looked at the projected increases in demand in the same period i.e bev's, rail, heat pumps, industrial processes etc.
That's a good point to consider, definitely. But then I only looked at offshore wind under construction or latter stage planning. If onshore wind gets the go ahead (and I think it will), then we could easily double even the 2027 projected offshore wind capacity in a few years. That is 'crystal ball gazing' as the OP put it, but so is projection of the take up of EVs and heat pumps. Unfortunately I think the current cost of living crisis will hamper both as they require upfront investment from individuals.
> Broadly, yes - they're measuring a poorly situated roof in London, and I have a more or less perfectly aligned roof in Oxford so I need to account for that. To pick one data point - in Jun 2017 they got about 8.6kWh/day from a 2.35kW system with an alignment factor of around 0.90, so they were getting 8.6/2.35 / 0.9 = 4.1 kWh per kW, with alignment corrected for. That month I got an average of 23.5kWh from a 5.7kW system, with an alignment factor of 0.98, which equates to 4.6kWh per kW.
Thanks for a detailed reply.
> Oddly, in Jan 2017 they got about 1.5kWh/day so that's 1.5/2.35 / 0.9 = 0.71 kWh per kW. I got 7.5kWh, which works out at 1.34kWh per kW. I can only conclude that they have some low down shading that's more significant in the winter (not at all unlikely in a dense urban environment).
Yes this is the what I've been thinking about regarding my own house. I've got a south facing roof on one side, but with a big tree in front. I think I'd do well in summer but the PVs could just be ornaments for 6 months. I think I'll leave it for a year while I observe the amount of sun the roof gets over a year, seasonally. And of course the council could decide to chop the tree in that time (but I wouldn't want to encourage that!).
Investment in solar, trees and a lack of a right to light is an interesting area. Imaging your invested ten grand in a big array and then your neighbour plants a monstrous Leylandii hedge. Half a decade down the line your array is rendered pointless.
I’m a strong believer that there should be strong legislation on urban height, but as it stands people putting panels on in an urban location have no solar specific protection from the effects of hedges or building works.
Handy website here that shows realtime, daily, month and annual UK electricity sources by type
On a windy day like today doubling the amount of wind power available (along with some nuclear base load) would be just about enough to generate all of the UK’s electricity needs without using fossil fuels or biomass, but we need a whole lot more than that on less windy days and to displace gas for home heating and industrial uses.
> I guess the question is, do we expect ever to see those energy prices again?
Well, we should expect that. If the principal explanation for the recent rapid increase in both energy and commodity prices is the war in Ukraine, then it is natural to expect that the situation should eventually relax. But it will be 'interesting' to see what happens.
Thanks I'm a grdiwatch fan already. To recap we were discussing the future point were we do 'generate all of the UK’s electricity needs without using fossil fuels or biomass' for the first time. Obviously that will be for a short period (in an hourly and daily sense), but it's the point where energy storage will replace rather displace fossil fuel or biomass use.
My original point was that point is feasibly within the next few years if we just look at under construction and planned offshore wind projects.
Edit: quick sums based on the table here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_Kingdom
Current offshore capacity ~13GW
Planned and under construction capacity ~ 23GW
So if all of those go head we are looking at a capacity of 36GW by 2028. Obviously I don't expect all will go ahead as planned so went for a reasonable 'at least double'.
Why a battery? (Serious question)
Do you: live somewhere very rural subject to power cuts, OR... are you unable to get an electric tariff that buys back surplus generation?
If there's a "Yes" above, then a battery makes sense, if both are "No" I don't see who'd benefit apart from someone selling/installing the battery. Anecdotal case study: my mum have PV panels on roof, she lives alone and uses hardly any of anything, she generates slightly more than she consumes, this is subtracted from her combined gas+elec bill. They used to buy units at a higher rate than they sold it, but now it's roughly the same.
You don't think that registering on a forum, and your first post being to promote a particular business, that you just happen to forget to mention that you are a director of, might be seen as just a touch pushy?
> Do you: live somewhere very rural subject to power cuts, OR... are you unable to get an electric tariff that buys back surplus generation?
No to both of those.
> ...They used to buy units at a higher rate than they sold it, but now it's roughly the same.
Seriously? Where is she selling her electricity at roughly the same price as her import cost? That's a genuine question - if I have missed a trick somewhere I would love to know!
For comparison, I sell at a metered 6p per kWh - that's the fixed export payment for someone who installed at the time I did. I was buying at 5p overnight/14p daytime but recently that's become 12p/43p. So, in the current climate, a battery might make sense because I save (43-6)p for every unit. Payback is about seven years.
The risk, as neilh has pointed out, is that the 43p drops. I don't think there's a serious likelihood of it ever getting back to the 14p I used to enjoy, but even if it fell to 20p then I'd be looking at a payback time of 18 years.
> They used to buy units at a higher rate than they sold it, but now it's roughly the same.
Current domestic export tariffs
https://solarenergyuk.org/resource/smart-export-guarantee/?cn-reloaded=1
Domestic customers importing electricity are now paying 34p/kWh on average.
Edit: And you will see the better export tariffs now require a battery to be fitted.
> The risk, as neilh has pointed out, is that the 43p drops. I don't think there's a serious likelihood of it ever getting back to the 14p I used to enjoy, but even if it fell to 20p then I'd be looking at a payback time of 18 years.
Right I'll join in the crystal ball gazing...... I don't think the price of electricity will drop significantly till the price is decoupled from gas, however long that is.
There's been a lot of talk recently about the falling gas price, but long term, it is still very high.
https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/uk-natural-gas#:~:text=UK%20Natural%...
(adjust the timescale to 10y)
The surge started well before Russia invaded Ukraine, so while I think that caused the spike, I think we are also seeing a long term increase based on supply and demand. I read somewhere prices might start to fall significantly towards the end of the decade and that seems reasonable.
> Current domestic export tariffs
And just to clarify, these are the rates you can get for installations post 2020. Anything before that is on the old FiT system, which guaranteed generation and export tariffs. I'm getting 5.99p/kWh.
18 years is still a crazy and poor payback period.
Useful graph; thanks.
> The surge started well before Russia invaded Ukraine, so while I think that caused the spike, I think we are also seeing a long term increase based on supply and demand.
The graph shows that the most recent ramp in prices started on about March 1, 2021. I wonder what factors were behind that?
The recent oscillations are incredible. But, looking at the graph, it's possible to think that prices might now actually be relaxing back to their historical baseline.
> I read somewhere prices might start to fall significantly towards the end of the decade and that seems reasonable.
Why is that reasonable (or unreasonable)? What's the detailed thinking behind it?
> The risk, as neilh has pointed out, is that the 43p drops. I don't think there's a serious likelihood of it ever getting back to the 14p I used to enjoy, but even if it fell to 20p then I'd be looking at a payback time of 18 years.
Well, now you're in mental position where you're almost willing energy prices to stay high, in order to justify your hopes and expectations! That's not necessarily a rational way to go about it.
I personally think (and hope!) that energy and commodity prices should relax back to their previously 'normal' levels. I don't understand why that shouldn't happen.
> 18 years is still a crazy and poor payback period.
Oh, absolutely! I'd see anything above a ten year payback as really not worthwhile, but I'd accept ten years for something that has definite environmental benefits.
When we installed our PV system in 2015 I was anticipating payback in about ten years. It was pretty much on track, but the last twelve months have accelerated this considerably - now every unit it saves me is worth three times as much as it was. In that sense, I guess I am rooting for higher energy prices... equally, our heat pump was a merely sensible decision when gas was ~3p/kWh but has suddenly become a brilliant decision now it's ~12p.
I guess my intention was always to wean myself off natural gas and proof against future rises - I just didn't expect the future to arrive quite so soon.
Another useful article on the UK electricity production mix in 2022.
https://www.edie.net/what-did-the-uks-electricity-generation-mix-look-like-...
Clearly just doubling the amount of offshore wind capacity isn’t enough to displace fossil fuel electricity production although every bit helps. Even our current government’s target is 50GW of offshore wind by 2030.
https://www.renewableuk.com/news/613936/Wind-power-reaches-new-milestone-of...
But, as the above article says, there is potentially a lot more to come.
“The total pipeline of UK wind projects which are either operational, under construction, consented, in the planning system or at an early stage of development now extends to 129GW. (93.3GW offshore and 36GW onshore).”
Not all of this will get built but, along with more nuclear and solar power, it does look like that by about 2040 eliminating fossil fuels for electricity production is a real possibility, although large scale energy storage schemes will have to be part of the mix to allow this to happen. Encouraging household battery storage would seem to be a sensible idea.
Fortunately, the latest Contract for Difference strike price auction shows that the cost of much of the new renewable energy capacity is still falling so there is a also very strong economic argument for phasing out fossil fuels to go along with the need to reduce CO2 emissions and to increase energy security.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-record-low-price-for-uk-offshore-wind-...
If you have done all those things already then going back to your OP I would suggest you would be better using your money elsewhere.
After all you may move house and have to start all over again, so that pot could be useful
And having had experience of selling a house with solar panels--- you never recoup your outlay in the selling price.
There are so many ways you can think about it then at some stage a line has to be drawn.
> Useful graph; thanks.
> The graph shows that the most recent ramp in prices started on about March 1, 2021. I wonder what factors were behind that?
> The recent oscillations are incredible. But, looking at the graph, it's possible to think that prices might now actually be relaxing back to their historical baseline.
It is possible, but probable? I'm not sure.... if you think it is 'probable' I'd be interested in your detailed thinking.
> Why is that reasonable (or unreasonable)? What's the detailed thinking behind it?
I meant 'plausible', if that makes more sense. It's not very detailed thinking, just that by then I think electricity and gas prices will be decoupled.
> Another useful article on the UK electricity production mix in 2022.
> Clearly just doubling the amount of offshore wind capacity isn’t enough to displace fossil fuel electricity production although every bit helps. Even our current government’s target is 50GW of offshore wind by 2030.
That was not my point. My point was that doubling offshore would produce conditions were at some times, we would not require gas or biomass electricity generation, even just for a short time. Looking at yesterdays 10 minute average https://gridwatch.co.uk/ that point obviously isn't far off.
That is relevant as that is when energy storage (the topic of the OP) will begin to save carbon, not just displace gas usage.
> It is possible, but probable? I'm not sure.... if you think it is 'probable' I'd be interested in your detailed thinking.
I have zero detailed insight - I was merely looking at the actual latest trend in that graph. What would be very nice to understand is exactly what happened in March 2021 to cause the ramp upwards.
Well Germany produced 95% of it's electricity needs on May 8th 2016 from renewables, in fact they actually peaked production at 63GW with demand at 58GW with the difference exported (at a financial loss). For a few hours. On a warm sunny Sunday.
In real life pushing past 50% continous supply is proving to be a exponentially difficult and expensive problem, the best estimates are the generating capacity needs to be multiplied by ten to provide 100% cover 24/7.
> You don't think that registering on a forum, and your first post being to promote a particular business, that you just happen to forget to mention that you are a director of, might be seen as just a touch pushy?
It was. Partly my fault. Mark is my cousin. He doesn't do much climbing. Although he did at the UKC weekend meet at Brimham long ago. The nude climbers were getting more attention. He has been developing advanced energy systems, hydrogen generation, wind, and solar, for many years and knows his stuff. So I emailed him with a link to this thread for his interest and perhaps his input. I didn't tell him adverts were not allowed.
That explains it. There was no harm done.
> I have zero detailed insight - I was merely looking at the actual latest trend in that graph. What would be very nice to understand is exactly what happened in March 2021 to cause the ramp upwards.
Russia started massing forces on the borders of Ukraine in spring 2021.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russian-forces-begin-massing-on-border-with...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-idUSKBN2BT1LX
It's a simple explanation...
...and simple explanations are usually wrong.
That does make a lot more sense of the situation. But I still think that if someone's going to make any kind of statement about a product of a company they run, it would be polite to make the audience aware of their vested interest. That's not a specific UKC rule, or even etiquette specific to forums or the internet in general, I think it should just be common courtesy in any medium.
He didn't offer any general advice on the topic at hand, or give us the benefit of his experience in any way, other than pushing his company's product. If it's not actively dishonest then it's at least rather thoughtless.
> In real life pushing past 50% continous supply is proving to be a exponentially difficult and expensive problem,
Nevertheless, net power generation by renewable now exceeds 50% in germany, and as you can see has been increasing year on year.
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-...
Germany is rather special. They are not keen on nuclear but still burn coal and lignite, so more renewables does not reduce there gas usage but that of coal and lignite.
Germany has not been investing much in storage until recently, partly due to cheap Russian gas and lots of inter connectors with neighbours.
> it wasn’t meant as a direct marketing shrill.
Can you really look back at your post and claim with a straight face that it wasn't marketing? You specifically recommended your product, complete with attempted web link.
> That was why I didn’t say anything bad about the other batteries.
You did rather imply that they were made in China and would have poor customer service in the event of problems.
Here's your original post, for reference. Would you like to point out the part that isn't marketing or the part where you disclose your vested interest?
> Battery storage is an excellent idea. You don’t say whether that price includes vat. I know that a company called future-gen. Www.future-gen.co do an excellent 13.4 kwh battery for £8000 + vat, installed with an excellent 5kw inverter. Also their battery is made in Spain rather than China so if there is a problem with warranty then they are easily approached.
She has some old fixed rate (for now) contract with British Gas, the buy price changed when some subsidy expired. Sounds like while it lasts she's onto a good thing, I'll have to ask when her rates expire because she could be in for a shock
You only get 6p per unit versus their 43p. That's a total rip-off, totally abusive pricing! Now your battery post makes a lot more sense, thanks for correcting/educating me.
> Nevertheless, net power generation by renewable now exceeds 50% in germany, and as you can see has been increasing year on year.
> Germany is rather special. They are not keen on nuclear but still burn coal and lignite, so more renewables does not reduce there gas usage but that of coal and lignite.
> Germany has not been investing much in storage until recently, partly due to cheap Russian gas and lots of inter connectors with neighbours.
And as I said it becomes more and more problematic. The day spot price for electricity on the Leipzig exchange is fluctuating wildly (on Dec 14th 445€/MWh but the 31'st -30€) which makes planning and investment for the generators difficult. Next problem is the so called "must run" plants which are needed for grid stability and covers 20% of the capacity, even back in 2016 we were paying other countries to take power as in fact we were last week despite also propping up the French grid.
The only way to persuade generators to invest is offer more money, both to build gas fast response plants (which may never be turned on) and increase wind/solar feed-in tariffs. The last auction round for wind power was only 50% subscribed so the government has had to increase the tariff and guess who'll be paying.
Germany is in fact investing billions in storage, there is little option. Changing to a hydrogen economy is the favoured method.
> The only way to persuade generators to invest is offer more money
Mmmm... what's actually worked is the sudden detereoration in relationship with Germany's former major energy supplier, hence....
> Germany is in fact investing billions in storage, there is little option.
They are now, but are still behind the UK.
https://www.woodmac.com/news/opinion/europes-grid-scale-energy-storage-capa...
(see first image)
However, Germany's high renewable output does seem to be beneficial
https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/electricity-price (click all for long term)
The current price is much closer to long term baseline than other countries.
Germany's first problem is those old coal and lignite burning plants. As you allude to they are inflexible and the Co2 footprint is huge.
Basically there are many difference in the energy market between UK and Germany.
Ah - in that case I retract most of my sarcasm. Although, as Luke says, it was still a bit disingenous not to mention that he was connected to the company he was recommending. Still, no harm done.
I think we're all a bit touchy these days due to the vast number of sock puppet and AI generated first posts we're seeing. Clearly I should just have asked him what the grade of 3PS was
> She has some old fixed rate (for now) contract with British Gas, the buy price changed when some subsidy expired. Sounds like while it lasts she's onto a good thing, I'll have to ask when her rates expire because she could be in for a shock
If she's getting anything more than about 6p/kWh export then she's got an incredibly good deal!
> You only get 6p per unit versus their 43p. That's a total rip-off, totally abusive pricing! Now your battery post makes a lot more sense, thanks for correcting/educating me.
It's a strange system that I've complained about before. The 'fair' method, to me, would be to insist that any microgenerator gets paid for export at the same rate as their import. I know there's a point of view that says that the microgenerator doesn't control what they put onto the grid when, which devalues their contribution, and also that they are not contributing to the infrastructure (although we are told that this is what the standing charge is for), but yes, the disparity between 6p and 43p is pretty extreme!
Since the Russia problem commercial interest in building new wind farms has dropped to an all-time low. Basically transient renewables (wind/solar) have hit the long predicted wall and until some massive structural changes will remain fairly stagnant. Grid-scale storage in the conventional sense is going nowhere (the UK's planned capacity until 2030 will keep the lights on for maybe half a day) so the plan is go to hydrogen as the only known solution that could work.
> Since the Russia problem commercial interest in building new wind farms has dropped to an all-time low. Basically transient renewables (wind/solar) have hit the long predicted wall and until some massive structural changes will remain fairly stagnant.
It's stuttered in Germany, but they seem to have worked out the problem.
https://windeurope.org/newsroom/press-releases/negative-bidding-in-german-o...
In the UK the pace of offshore wind has continued a pace.
> Grid-scale storage in the conventional sense is going nowhere (the UK's planned capacity until 2030 will keep the lights on for maybe half a day)
That is literally the point of the short term storage underway in the UK. I am sure you are aware that the daily human cycle of activities does not tally well with wind speeds.
> so the plan is go to hydrogen as the only known solution that could work.
Hydrogen is a promising long term storage solution, for prolonged periods of still conditions.
Worked out the problem!!!! Do you actually read all this stuff you link to? Nobody has stepped up to the plate with shedloads of money, the law will be changed for the third time before the next bidding round starts and our buddies are pissed off. Negative bidding is death to the entire industry, public confidence and the investors. Nobody running a multi-billion investment fund would want to get involved in something where the rules change at the whim of a politician.
> Worked out the problem!!!! Do you actually read all this stuff you link to?
I do.... now go easy on your keyboard man! It's a turn of phrase to mean the industry as a whole knows what the issue is and presumably German politicians will belatedly deal with it.
Do you accept this is a German problem not applicable to the UK? (which is what we were actually discussing when you interjected).
The UKs wind development shows no sign of slowing down and it's pretty obvious if we come close to meeting the targets we will need short and long term storage to take full advantage. If you want to argue with me, and you seem to, it is easier for me to participate if you stay on topic.
> if we come close to meeting the targets we will need short and long term storage to take full advantage.
Maybe links will be more important. I can't see it being difficult to sell green capacity as Europe struggles to meet eco targets.
> I have been offered a 10.5kWh PylonTech system, by someone who owes me a favour, for £7850 fully installed.
Just to let you know that cost for 10.5kWh of Pylontech is not doing you a favour, its about the going rate for what is a low quality system.
I do this for a living, so am up to date on costs and brands
I’ve just installed a 5kw array and 10kw battery. I’ve calculated conservatively a 8 year pay back. Roof faces due south with no shade in Cambridgeshire ie almost perfect location
Oh - really? I was under the impression it was a pretty good price.
Powervault quoted about £1000 more for a smaller system, and when I tired to price up DIY pylon systems I was generally finding it would cost me approaching £7k just to buy the batteries and inverter, so I reasonaed that installed for £7850 was quite good. Ought I be trying to find this cheaper, if I do decide to go ahead?
I'm also a bit worried about your mentioning that it's low quality - I thought Pylon was regarded as a fairly solid performer?