I doubt that there would be sufficient HVO available to supply a power station.

There wouldn't enough HVO for that – there's not enough to fully switch all rural, kerosene-burning homes to HVO in the UK.

Posted by: @julianc

↑

@derek-m the grid has decarbonised by 50% in the past 10 years. I’m sure you know better than me. There are only 3 coal power stations. One burns wood chip. One is due to be decommissioned. Leaving the one near Nottingham - I drive past it weekly to visit client. Coal supplies were very limited last year but have been rebuilt I suppose as a backup if required. 
Buying “green” electric from the likes of Octopus drives the market to build more eco power solutions. To continue to decarbonise the grid. We can only do our individual bit to encourage reducing CO2. 
I don’t think HVO is the answer. Even as an interim.

The power station to which you refer, Drax, actually burns wood pellets in, I can't remember if it is three or four of its boilers. The other two boilers I do believe still burn coal.

I would be very happy if the UK was totally decarbonised and being powered solely by renewable energy. Unfortunately that is not the case and will not be for quite some time if ever.

From the research that Mars has carried out, HVO is more environmentally beneficial than burning other oil products, and can be more environmentally friendly than burning gas to generate electricity. I cannot see HVO as any form of long term solution, but should have a useful place in the present energy mix.

I'm afraid that adding up the total wind turbine capacity and total solar PV capacity and then claiming that the UK potentially has sufficient renewable capacity to meet total energy demand just does not work. Even when, as I think has been proposed, the wind turbine capacity has been increased to four times its present size, there will still be occasions when there is insufficient supply to meet demand, and that is before the many gas and oil boilers have been replaced with heat pumps. What do you suggest should be done to fill the electricity shortfall?

You will probably say "they can just run a gas fired power station", but which company is going to pay the maintenance costs and staff costs to keep a gas fired power station, or two available, for periods when the wind doesn't blow or the Sun doesn't shine? I worked at one gas fired power station that was shut down and decommissioned because it was not called to run very often, and therefore became financially nonviable.

Rather than just building more and more wind farms, without adequate energy storage, some of the available subsidies should be used to ensure all forms of heating systems are correctly configured and operating in the most efficient manner, along with much better home energy efficiency projects being undertaken.

Posted by: @derek-m

↑

Do you actually believe that the electricity that you receive is 100% renewable?

No, but it's the best that can be done now: equivalent "green" electricity to my usage is bought into the grid. 

Posted by: @derek-m

↑

How many wind turbines do you think that it takes to replace a 2000MW power station, [...]

I don't know and I don't really need to know. I've done my bit, buying "green" and stopping burning oil. It's up to others to decide the best way to deliver the purchase. I don't require it to be all wind turbines. 

Posted by: @julianc

↑

@editor I’m not sure how you calculate HVO is “greener” than the grid & hence an ASHP?  An oil boiler is 85-90% efficient. My ASHP COP in cold weather is 2.43, with a SCOP of 3.85. You pick on a few cold, still days to help justify HVO. Whilst still burning HVO which releases CO2. 
I recognise not everyone can afford £12k, but prices are coming down. Octopus offering systems for £8k. With HSBC and another bank offering £1-2k incentives to mortgage holders. 
Octopus Energy have just agreed to buy a huge number of TW of energy from the new offshore wind farm. I do not believe they are using carbon credits - but stand to be corrected

Octopus do use separate REGO certificates in addition to generating their own green energy and having Power Purchase Agreements with green energy generators. They make this clear on their website. 

Some would argue separate REGOs are green washing. You could buy energy generated from a fossil fuel power station then you buy some cheap REGOs some months later for example. 

The two suppliers that don’t use separate REGOs the last time i looked were Scottish Power and Good Energy. Scottish Power for example have their own green energy generation capacity to cover all their customers over the year on average. 

The closet you will get to a green supplier is one of these two right now and try and time your electricity when it is greenest for your postcode, with the caveat about the wind doesn't always blow and it depends where you live etc.... 

https://www.scottishpower.co.uk/greenwashing

Personally i wouldn't get too hung up on the 100% claims. I would find the cheapest supplier, invest in reducing my consumption or give to charity if my tariff was cheaper. I don't honestly believe the 100% tariff are making the UK grid more green myself. Change is being driven via other mechanisms IMHO. 

I wonder how many people on the forum are with Scottish Power or Good Energy due to their green credentials? 

Posted by: @mjr

↑

 

I don't know and I don't really need to know. I've done my bit, buying "green" and stopping burning oil. It's up to others to decide the best way to deliver the purchase. I don't require it to be all wind turbines. 

I suspect that the buying and selling of 'green' credits merely pushes up the overall price that consumers end up paying.

Looking at the peak energy demand so far today, this occurred around 10:30 at a total of 46.3GW, of which 7.9GW was deemed to be from renewable sources. So what was the source of the other 38.4GW?

If everyone asks for 100% renewable electricity, what will be the actual source, since it cannot be from renewable generation? The electricity suppliers will probably buy REGO's at some point in the future when there is an abundance of renewable energy, but charge the consumers for the privilege. So I suspect asking for 100% renewable electricity does not benefit the consumer, and probably not even the supplier or generator, it merely makes some trader and the company for which he or she works richer, at the consumer's expense.

I think the largest installed wind turbines at the moment have a maximum generating capacity of 10MW, so to replace the output from a 2000MW power station would require approximately 200 turbines operating at full output. If they are only operating at 10% output, the number required would be 2000. When the wind is not blowing the number becomes infinity.

Today required 23 x 2000MW power stations to satisfy peak demand. That is a hell of a lot of wind turbines that would have to be manufactured and installed. Why don't we all do something about reducing demand. I know I am being silly now.

I think that there are something like 29 million homes in the UK, but if each household could reduce their electrical energy consumption by just 1kWh each day, it is possible that up to 1000 wind turbines would not need to be manufactured and installed.

George Eustice (MP) is going to introduce a Ten Minute Rule Bill in Parliament on Wednesday, January 11, 2023, to support the use of HVO in heating. The bill seeks to reduce the duty charged on renewable liquid heating fuel.

If you reside in a rural property and rely on kerosene for your heating, please write to your MP.

There’s an easy to use template you can download below to help you formulate your letter.

@editor Thank you for the prompt Mars.  I have written to my MP asking her NOT support changes to HVO and inviting her to come and see my ASHP.  HVO is not a renewable energy source.  It is supported by the fossil fuel industry.

@julianc – you're right. We should let the 1.7 million homes in the UK keep burning kerosene because that'll be far better for the environment.

Posted by: @julianc

↑

@editor Thank you for the prompt Mars.  I have written to my MP asking her NOT support changes to HVO and inviting her to come and see my ASHP.  HVO is not a renewable energy source.  It is supported by the fossil fuel industry.

Whilst I fully agree that homeowners should be encouraged to move away from burning kerosene, I don't disagree with the use of HVO.

I always try to look at the bigger picture. The present energy source is not 100% renewable, since there is still gas and even coal fired electricity generation in the UK at the moment. Many of the oil fired boilers in use may still be fully functional and can still provide many years of useful service, but I suppose that you suggest that all these should be scrapped, and be replaced by heat pumps probably manufactured in China, where I do believe that they still have considerable coal fired electricity generation. 🙄 

You can correct me if I am wrong, but the last time I looked I do believe that the UK and China were still on the same planet. 😮 

@derek-m, I’ve made this point several times. There’s no silver bullet to renewable heating. Heat pumps, HVO, wood burning stoves, biomass, etc. all have a place, and it’s up to homes to cut emissions in whatever they can to help the planet. Every win is a win, and the transition from kerosene to HVO is a simple, cost-effective one, even if it’s a transition fuel for homes for a few months or years. 

As you’ve correctly stated, the UK’s electricity supply is still dependent on gas (and coal) when the wind stops blowing - that doesn’t mean heat pump owners should turn off their heating on still nights when there’s no wind and solar production. It’s all about curbing emissions.