I've quickly read through the DUKES 2024 figures (for the year 2023), which were released at 10:00 today.

There was an omission which I've had to source from elsewhere.
The way in which Grid Connection Applications are processed was changed by a Directive from Ofgem at the end of November 2023.
So I've picked up that particular statistic from the NG-ESO Connections Reform document (PDF) which explains the changes in detail.

Here's the relevant paragraph:

Incorporating the figures into the histogram I posted yesterday, we get this:

I've left the figure of 48.6GW 'as is'. It's the maximum demand which the UK has ever experienced.

Regards, Toodles.

Two good points there @toodles

1: NGET have undertaken modelling to check the required increase in grid capacity if everyone with a car changed it to an EV.

There was only 10% additional capacity required.
That can easily be handled by time-shifting when EV Smart Chargers operate.

2: We could be self-sufficient now if we took action to flatten the early evening peak demand.

That's very much cheaper than the £billions required for grid upgrades.
If we don't want to be charged for massive infrastructure enhancements, then you know what to do!

Much of the upgrades being planned by National Grid and the DNOs for the next 10 years is because they'd prefer to 'do work' and create a super-grid because that earns them money.
If instead we flattened the peaks, then they'd lose the mechanism by which they intend raising our bills.

Once the grid upgrades have been completed we will have a massive surplus of available electricity.

That will be transported to other countries using the existing interconnectors.
But the interconnectors themselves and the long list of grid connection sites are mostly in foreign ownership.
The profits will be paid out to overseas investors, rather than lowering our bills.

@transparent Why am I not surprised?!😉

The ‘Duck’ curve needs to be flattened (or shot perhaps!) and we would have the makings of a service fit for some years ahead then?

It does not surprise me that commercial greed is protecting that Duck and promoting the idea of build for the peak (even if 90% of the time, it will be grossly OTT). (I’ll carry on only using the grid when it is the cheapest and most capable.) I have a battery and a 1st Class Degree with honours in Scrooge Economics. Regrets, Toodles.

Posted by: @toodles

↑

@transparent I imagine that the maximum demand occurs outside of the ‘normal’ hours used currently for much of the EV charging of domestic vehicles and therefore, the maximum demand is not likely to increase significantly if EV uptake increases as it is hoped? I realise that it is no trivial matter to dramatically reduce the connections queue but it would appear on the surface that the UK could be self sufficient were all that energy available down the wires.

Regards, Toodles.

If the vast majority of UK households are expected to have heat pumps and EV's by 2050, then even if the maximum demand is no higher than that predicted, the total energy consumption each day will, I suspect, be much higher than present.

Even if the full 420GW of proposed capacity is actually connected, I suspect there will be many days when only a small fraction of this full capacity is actually available. It must be remembered that a generator of 500MW capacity at a power station can actually supply 500MW of power whenever it is deemed available. 500MW capacity of wind or solar will not be able to supply 500MW for most of the time, hence the need for there to be a much larger available capacity of wind and solar.

There is also the need for much greater storage of energy in the form of battery storage or hydrogen, so that the troughs can be filled when necessary.

@derek-m I would have thought that diversification throughout the UK (using the most windy and the most sun drenched areas) would stand the best chance of fulfilling our needs with ‘surplus’ being stored in ever improving battery designs or exported (preferably through UK owned companies and publicly owned ventures) at times of ‘more than plenty’. Solar panels are still undergoing improvements and wind turbine blades are still improving in design and I would hope, longevity. I would be happy to invest in an ISA type scheme that benefitted me and the UK. Regards, Toodles.

Posted by: @derek-m

↑

Even if the full 420GW of proposed capacity is actually connected, I suspect there will be many days when only a small fraction of this full capacity is actually available.

Yes. DUKES allows for this by de-rating those sources of generation which exhibit intermittent output:

Posted by: @derek-m

↑

the need for much greater storage of energy in the form of battery storage or hydrogen, so that the troughs can be filled when necessary.

Yes, but I disagree with the strategies presently being encouraged for storage.

If you place commercial storage on the grid, then this tides over the periods when there is less sun or wind.
It does nothing to alter the demand curve.
And it makes lots of dosh for the BESS owners, who will be exporting when prices are at maximum, even though it has to send that energy back across the grid again.

But if instead that storage were placed in the premises where it is eventually needed, then it has a dramatic effect in reducing the demand peaks.

I'd prefer to see the concept of battery storage being linked to the installation of a heat pump.
A heat-pump and a battery (which can't re-export) is a better match than PV panels and a battery.

Ed Miliband MP has a heat-pump and a storage battery.
I have yet to find out what models he's had installed.

Although having a battery in the majority of homes sounds like a noble idea, I can't  see it happening personally.

I prefer the certainty of mass storage where the upfront cost is funded by the private sector.

It is going to be hard enough getting  the heat pump rollout up to scale. Adding more upfront costs onto households and telling them they also need to install a battery... good luck with that...

I can't see any party mandating that and staying in power, even if the objective is sound.

Posted by: @jeff

↑

I prefer the certainty of mass storage where the upfront cost is funded by the private sector.

I'm afraid that level of confidence in large-scale commercial BESS isn't supported by the evidence.

My MP currently has two ongoing cases in which the way that battery storage is being implemented poses a threat to the grid.

It was a failure of Embedded Generation which caused the wide-scale outage on 9th Aug'19.
Coincidentally I posted a resumé of that incident here on the forum just 3 days ago.
It initiated a Cascade Effect which spread to the Hornsea offshore wind farm and two gas-fired generators.

For obvious reasons I'm not going to explain here how/why a commercial storage site is more likely to increase the risk from a Cascade Effect.

Posted by: @transparent

↑

2: We could be self-sufficient now if we took action to flatten the early evening peak demand.

That's very much cheaper than the £billions required for grid upgrades.
If we don't want to be charged for massive infrastructure enhancements, then you know what to do!

I wrote to my new MP about this very issue at the weekend.

I am in Milton Keynes - a new city, so you might think the local infrastructure would have plenty of capacity. However, many of the sub-stations already have limited availability for prospective solar generation, batteries and EV chargers.

Posted by: @jeff

↑

Although having a battery in the majority of homes sounds like a noble idea, I can't  see it happening personally

Aren't you forgetting the one (or more) on the driveway?  50 plus kWh is a lot of battery!