Re: [SystemSafety] nuclear energy - disparate policies?

From: Martyn Thomas < >
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 16:50:59 +0000

In the UK, the EHV transmission grid was designed hierarchically, with a small number of generators branching out to medium-voltage and low-voltage distribution networks that serve consumers.

The transmission grid is balanced mostly by managing the supply (though major consumers can be taken off grid and there is a (LW radio) mechanism for shifting some consumer heating load).

That architecture works well when there is a high proportion of constant-power generation.

Renewable sources such as wind and PV tend to be geographically dispersed and to vary significantly and quite rapidly in power generation. The UK does not have much capability to store electricity at present.

So as the amount of avaiable renewable generation increases in the UK, it becomes desirable to connect generators to the lower-voltage distribution networks and to balance these networks by managing consumption (for example by switching off freezers, heat pumps and EV chargers briefly). The alternative is a lot of very expensive renewal of the networks.

Then there are power quality issues, which can get tricky because of the characteristics of commercially attractive generators, pumps and chargers, and which have the potential to damage equipment.

In the UK, it seems that going much above 25% renewable generation will create some rather significant employment opportunities for power engineers...

(DYOR. I'm no expert in this. I just listen to people who are).

What's the situation in other countries?


The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Tue Oct 29 2013 - 17:51:13 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:06 CEST