Gas alert as demand and prices rise

[adam2]

Gas stocks down to 9,200.
Yesterday, 10,800.
Reduction in stock over 24 hours is 1,600.

At the present rate of use, enough for about 5 days, though as has already been posted we might be in trouble before then.

[mikepepler]

Parts of the country should be less cold from tomorrow, so we may be OK. Subject to there being no mechanical breakdown of course!

[kenneal - lagger]

....If anything of this order were to be maintained it wouid be a shot in the arm for fracking....

Why on earth isn't it a shot in the arm for home insulation and low cost comfort?

[Potemkin Villager]

....If anything of this order were to be maintained it wouid be a shot in the arm for fracking....

Why on earth isn't it a shot in the arm for home insulation and low cost comfort?

Because the "system" is supply side fixated as itg sees ongoing fuel sales ensuring a stream of economic activity and tax take which home insulation and low cost comfort do not.

[fuzzy]

Because our gov works for scum in the city of london.

[vtsnowedin]

....If anything of this order were to be maintained it wouid be a shot in the arm for fracking....

Why on earth isn't it a shot in the arm for home insulation and low cost comfort?

Why not both in the long run. The insulation to reduce the need and the fracking to supply what will still be needed.

[BritDownUnder]

The way I see it is the country has relied upon 50 year old coal plants not breaking down, 30 year old nuclear plants not breaking down and the wind blowing consistently at 10 GW for nearly 3 days because newer gas power stations can't get or wont burn their fuel. I think so far the UK has been pretty lucky.

Short term-ism has prevailed so far but needs to stop and some serious renewable energy and storage planning needs to happen. I agree that insulation needs to be seriously looked at as well.

Australia has this scenario coming in five to ten years. Exporting gas cheaply, depletion and finally domestic shortages. Closing power stations that burn cheap indigenous coal, building gas replacements and then having a power shortage.

[vtsnowedin]

Well I'll take a big 'I told you so" on this one. Back when they announced the schedule for closing down the coal plants in the UK I railed about the stupidity of closing a still operational coal plant before its replacement was on line with an adequate supply of fuel and or relying on intermittent wind and solar to reliably replace more then twenty five percent of grid power.
But of course that was just common sense and even though many in the UK pointed out the same obvious common sense no one in charge took the hint and followed a more secure approach.
You need smarter people in charge.

[woodburner]

You need smarter people in charge.

Er, you don’t mean a trump do you? If so I think we are better off with the thick ones. Certainly safer as the teachers in the UK won’t be given the maens to shoot their students.

[vtsnowedin]

You need smarter people in charge.

Er, you don’t mean a trump do you? If so I think we are better off with the thick ones. Certainly safer as the teachers in the UK won’t be given the maens to shoot their students.

No certainly not. Didn't vote for him and think every day sense the inauguration has been a disaster.
You just need some people with both common sense and enough engineering ability to do sixth grade math without an app from their phone.

[kenneal - lagger]

........... Why not both in the long run. The insulation to reduce the need and the fracking to supply what will still be needed.

There is already enough oil and gas in the world to fry the planet twice over so why are we looking for more. The UK has already contributed more to Global Warming than most other countries by our inauguration of the Industrial Revolution so maybe we should be leading the way off fossil fuels and onto alternatives. We certainly have the engineering expertise to do so. All we need is the twats in the City of London to do something useful for a change and finance it. If they won't finance the engineering the government should print the money itself.

We have one of the biggest wind resources in the world and there is plenty of research, some carried out at the UCL Energy Institute, which shows that we could certainly have an uninterrupted supply using nuclear, wind and solar for 95% of the time. Add into that our tidal energy resource, again one of the largest in the world and which UCL didn't take account of, and we could easily have 100% renewable energy without resorting to nuclear.

[woodburner]

........... Why not both in the long run. The insulation to reduce the need and the fracking to supply what will still be needed.

There is already enough oil and gas in the world to fry the planet twice over so why are we looking for more. The UK has already contributed more to Global Warming than most other countries by our inauguration of the Industrial Revolution so maybe we should be leading the way off fossil fuels and onto alternatives. We certainly have the engineering expertise to do so. All we need is the twats in the City of London to do something useful for a change and finance it. If they won't finance the engineering the government should print the money itself.

We have one of the biggest wind resources in the world and there is plenty of research, some carried out at the UCL Energy Institute, which shows that we could certainly have an uninterrupted supply using nuclear, wind and solar for 95% of the time. Add into that our tidal energy resource, again one of the largest in the world and which UCL didn't take account of, and we could easily have 100% renewable energy without resorting to nuclear.

It’s a pity these posts are emotive rather than rational. “Fry the planet�? It will not happen. If you think it will, please say where we are going to get enough lard.

Rather than the UK “leading the way off fossil fuels� what about following the countries that use far less?

“The twats in the city�. Doesn’t make those who would like to persiade the decision makers look credible.

“We have one of trhe largest wind resources in the world.� But it doesn’t necessarily blow at the time the power is needed. Are you happy to have wind turbines almost everywhere? Are you happy about the number of birds killed by the turbines? Don’t believe it happens? Videos available on youtube.

“Tidal energy source�? So could we assume you are prepared to sacrifice habitats used by migratory birds to feed your desire for power?

I note many of your posts recently are reminescent of religious preachers who think their’s is the only way. But then as a world frying, draught loving, fuel wasting bigot, what would I know?

[adam2]

Gas prices have fallen a bit since yesterdays truly exceptional figure, but still remain at several times the "normal" price.

[kenneal - lagger]

....It’s a pity these posts are emotive rather than rational. “Fry the planet�? It will not happen. If you think it will, please say where we are going to get enough lard.

I have been arguing logically that if you have an airtight house you can have any level of ventilation that you require whereas if your house is draughty you cannot control the ventilation if the weather is at all windy. It's you who have been getting emotive because you cannot deploy any logical argument against my proposition.

Yes, "fry the planet" is a rather "fruity" description whereas overheating the planet for human and wildlife habitation is a more accurate and scientifically acceptable description.

Rather than the UK “leading the way off fossil fuels� what about following the countries that use far less?

The scientists who I have been talking to at the UCL Energy Institute and Lord Stern in his book "Why Are We Waiting" are sure that we will have to wean ourselves completely off fossil fuels to reach the Paris target of 1.5 degrees of warming given the procrastination of the world's politicians over achieving those targets.

“The twats in the city�. Doesn’t make those who would like to persuade the decision makers look credible.

I didn't know there were any. If there are any they are obviously not twats like the rest of the gambling fraternity there.

“We have one of the largest wind resources in the world.� But it doesn’t necessarily blow at the time the power is needed. Are you happy to have wind turbines almost everywhere? Are you happy about the number of birds killed by the turbines? Don’t believe it happens? Videos available on youtube.

Again UCL have done research which shows that 95% of the time we can power ourselves using nuclear, wind and solar as the wind is usually blowing somewhere most of the time. With advances in energy storage and tidal generation, which they have completely discounted so far, we can power ourselves on renewable 100% of the time. Proper building insulation will obviously help.

What is better? Having wind turbines over some areas of the country and out at sea or having large areas of our food growing land go under water and even larger areas become unproductive because of extreme variability of the climate caused by our fossil fuel use?

Same goes for birds. Killing a few with wind turbines or massive numbers dying because of shifts in food distribution patterns, habitat loss and climate change? We lose a few birds every year because they fly into buildings and vehicles. Are you going to ban vehicles and buildings?

“Tidal energy source�? So could we assume you are prepared to sacrifice habitats used by migratory birds to feed your desire for power?

No, not at all. Smaller scale lagoons such as the Swansea and Cardiff Bay schemes are better and more sustainable that a Seven Barrage. Also tidal turbines such as the ones in Northern Ireland at Strangford Lough and in Scotland in the Pentland Firth can be placed at many, many other locations around the coast with very little adverse affect on wildlife.

I note many of your posts recently are reminescent of religious preachers who think theirs is the only way. But then as a world frying, draught loving, fuel wasting bigot, what would I know?

There is only one sensible way to stop Global Warming destroying the habitat which we and the world's remaining wildlife, including the birds which you worry about, have grown up in and evolved into and that is by not using the pollutants which are causing the problem. We have let the problem go on for so long that we now require desperate measures to alleviate the crisis. We have many different technologies to deploy to replace those fossil fuels but the main one will be wasting much less energy in the future.

Lastly, if the cap fits, wear it!

[adam2]

Gas stocks down to 8,000 GWH.
Yesterday, 9,200.
So in the last 24 hours we have used 1,200.

At the present withdrawal rate supplies will last about 6 days, but as has already been posted we could be in trouble before then.

I also expect that the withdrawal rate will increase, the slightly milder weather being offset by a drop in wind power requiring more gas for electricity production.

A sustained drop in wind power from 10GW to 5GW, Is over 24 hours 120 more GWH of electricity required from gas.
That 120GWH of electricity will require the burning of about 300GWH* of gas, a not negligible addition to the withdrawal rate.

*my estimate based on the estimated efficiency of the marginal gas burning capacity. Some of the best CCGT does better than my estimate, but remember that the most efficient plant will be that already running.