Salmond unveils supergrid plan for renewable energy
Scotland's First Minister today set out the case for an energy supergrid to maximise the country's renewables potential.
The Scottish Government is keen to work with its north European neighbours on the project.
Alex Salmond was speaking after meeting Irish power firm Airtricity yesterday on a trip to Dublin.
The firm, which is to be bought over by Scottish and Southern Energy, was the original proposer of plans to develop a European offshore supergrid.
"Scotland boasts one of the greatest coastlines in the world for generating wind, wave and tidal energy," Mr Salmond said today.
"Our natural environment provides us with a clear, competitive advantage in developing clean, green energy sources."
He added: "We must harness the opportunities posed by our natural resources and I firmly believe developing the concept of a supergrid will enable us to do this.
"The north and east coasts of Scotland, the west coasts of Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and the north coast of Germany have a huge potential for capturing offshore wind, wave and tidal energy.
"The challenge we all share is the lack of an electricity grid infrastructure which can enable energy capture to exploit our marine renewable resources."
Scotland and Ireland commissioned a pre-scoping study last year to identify the requirements of a full feasibility study to generate energy from offshore renewables.
An application to the European Commission's territorial cooperation cross border programme is being prepared to support the detailed feasibility study and it is hoped to get the study under way later this year.
A separate North Sea Energy Grid (NSEG) study is exploring potential links between the north and east coasts of Scotland, and the coast of northern mainland Europe.
European partners are currently being sought by the Scottish Government to support the project.
"Scotland is already leading the way in providing safe and sustainable energy," Mr Salmond added.
"The development of a supergrid is fundamental to our plans for increasing the supply and use of renewable energy in Scotland."
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Duns Scotus, The Borders on 3:07pm Thu 14 Feb 08
Bright spark that man Salmond.
Bright spark that man Salmond.
Posted by: tom, europe on 3:23pm Thu 14 Feb 08
It would have been good to hear of Irish reaction to the First Minister's visit, but nary a word in the Irish times or Independent.
It would have been good to hear of Irish reaction to the First Minister's visit, but nary a word in the Irish times or Independent.
Posted by: tom, europe on 3:25pm Thu 14 Feb 08
It would have been good to read of Irish reaction to the First Minister's visit, but nary a word in the Irish Times or Independent.
It would have been good to read of Irish reaction to the First Minister's visit, but nary a word in the Irish Times or Independent.
Posted by: Sam, somewhereelse on 3:52pm Thu 14 Feb 08
[quote][bold]Duns Scotus[/bold] wrote:
Bright spark that man Salmond.[/quote] Liked that comment. Of course the danger will be when Scotland is surviving on the energy produced on her own shores and maybe reducing energy costs to her citizens, what will her southern neighbours think? I can imagine if all this happens before Independance, the Westminster government, be it Labour or Conservative will find a way to tax the benefits this scheme could bring....
Duns Scotus wrote:
Bright spark that man Salmond.
Liked that comment. Of course the danger will be when Scotland is surviving on the energy produced on her own shores and maybe reducing energy costs to her citizens, what will her southern neighbours think? I can imagine if all this happens before Independance, the Westminster government, be it Labour or Conservative will find a way to tax the benefits this scheme could bring....
Posted by: Cynicus, Scotland on 5:01pm Thu 14 Feb 08
This is an utterly hare-brained idea. The trouble with these regions of Europe is their remoteness from from consumers who tend to be in places like SE England, Northern Italy, the Paris Basin and along the Rhine. The waste in transmission costs will be collossal. Salmond is not thinking straight. Any renewables strategy should be focused on proximity to point of consumption and be coupled with a strong energy waste reduction strategy. His is the very opposite: generate energy far away from its markets and use a highly wasteful supergrid.
This is an utterly hare-brained idea. The trouble with these regions of Europe is their remoteness from from consumers who tend to be in places like SE England, Northern Italy, the Paris Basin and along the Rhine. The waste in transmission costs will be collossal. Salmond is not thinking straight. Any renewables strategy should be focused on proximity to point of consumption and be coupled with a strong energy waste reduction strategy. His is the very opposite: generate energy far away from its markets and use a highly wasteful supergrid.
Posted by: Rab The Ranter, Ayrshire on 5:03pm Thu 14 Feb 08
Salmond and Think Straight are a contradition in terms. Well said CYNICUS
Salmond and Think Straight are a contradition in terms. Well said CYNICUS
Posted by: Rab The Ranter, Ayrshire on 5:04pm Thu 14 Feb 08
Salmond and Think Straight are a contradition in terms. Well said CYNICUS
Salmond and Think Straight are a contradition in terms. Well said CYNICUS
Posted by: Oskar Matzerath, Glasgow on 5:37pm Thu 14 Feb 08
Cynicus
It's really not so hare-brained. In the near future, the phasing-out of the internal combustion engine will begin - it is already shceduled in Sweden for 2020. Cars and other methods of transportation will be powered by electricity, at least to a much larger degree than at present, leading to massive surge in the levels of electricity we need simply to adapt.
Also, as carbon emissions are now traded, it is highly likely that 'clean' electricity will be charged at a premium over 'dirty' electricity which will be more than enough to withstand the costs incurred by generators for the losses in capacity associated with distance transfer. By building a North Europe supergrid, generators also have access to the large centres of European population for whom the generation of 'clean' electricity is simply not an option, due to lack of coastline, lack of available uninhabited landmass or antipathy toward nuclear which rightly or wrongly is widespread.
Cynicus
It's really not so hare-brained. In the near future, the phasing-out of the internal combustion engine will begin - it is already shceduled in Sweden for 2020. Cars and other methods of transportation will be powered by electricity, at least to a much larger degree than at present, leading to massive surge in the levels of electricity we need simply to adapt.
Also, as carbon emissions are now traded, it is highly likely that 'clean' electricity will be charged at a premium over 'dirty' electricity which will be more than enough to withstand the costs incurred by generators for the losses in capacity associated with distance transfer. By building a North Europe supergrid, generators also have access to the large centres of European population for whom the generation of 'clean' electricity is simply not an option, due to lack of coastline, lack of available uninhabited landmass or antipathy toward nuclear which rightly or wrongly is widespread.
Posted by: nurse bill, dumfries on 5:44pm Thu 14 Feb 08
Cynicus.I do see the point you're making and agree 100% with your second emphasis on waste reduction being as equally important as energy generation.There seems to be a whole new industry waiting to be developed around higher building standards to save energy in new housing,better insulation standards in the housing and industry we already have,and combined heat and power production to make better use of what waste we already produce.
I wonder if the debate about generation is now moving on to onshore wind=bad and offshore tide,wave and wind=good.It's difficult to keep up with what's in and what's out,what's hot and what's not.A lot of the barney about the Lewis project and Beauly/Denny seems to be about the distance to the market(leaking power all the way) as well as the visual effects.It may become better if/when the industry ever becomes established that there is an established presumption against land generation.
Cynicus.I do see the point you're making and agree 100% with your second emphasis on waste reduction being as equally important as energy generation.There seems to be a whole new industry waiting to be developed around higher building standards to save energy in new housing,better insulation standards in the housing and industry we already have,and combined heat and power production to make better use of what waste we already produce.
I wonder if the debate about generation is now moving on to onshore wind=bad and offshore tide,wave and wind=good.It's difficult to keep up with what's in and what's out,what's hot and what's not.A lot of the barney about the Lewis project and Beauly/Denny seems to be about the distance to the market(leaking power all the way) as well as the visual effects.It may become better if/when the industry ever becomes established that there is an established presumption against land generation.
Posted by: sipeki, Clackmannanshire on 8:22pm Thu 14 Feb 08
The loses are not that great, and there is always HVDC. The other issue with AC transmission is the maximum distance of 4000km.
Transmission and distribution losses in the USA were estimated at 7.2% in 1995 , and in the UK at 7.4% in 1998.
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Electric_po
wer_transmission
The advantage of HVDC is the ability to transmit large amounts of power over long distances with lower capital costs and with lower losses than AC. Depending on voltage level and construction details, losses are quoted as about 3% per 1000 km.
HVDC is better for undersea cables, where high capacitance causes additional AC losses.
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/High-voltag
e_direct_current
The loses are not that great, and there is always HVDC. The other issue with AC transmission is the maximum distance of 4000km.
Transmission and distribution losses in the USA were estimated at 7.2% in 1995 , and in the UK at 7.4% in 1998.
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Electric_po
wer_transmission
The advantage of HVDC is the ability to transmit large amounts of power over long distances with lower capital costs and with lower losses than AC. Depending on voltage level and construction details, losses are quoted as about 3% per 1000 km.
HVDC is better for undersea cables, where high capacitance causes additional AC losses.
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/High-voltag
e_direct_current
Posted by: Charles McGrory, Glasgow on 8:37pm Thu 14 Feb 08
Further to sipeki's comments, the Club of Rome and other European backers are developing a grid project using HVDC technology to link all of Europe, Iceland capturing thermal generated energy, Scotland with wind and tide, mainland Europe with all varieties of renewables where solar in Germany has avoided some six nuclear stations and the Sahara Desert where they plan a very large solar farm. The old wisdom needs to change.
Further to sipeki's comments, the Club of Rome and other European backers are developing a grid project using HVDC technology to link all of Europe, Iceland capturing thermal generated energy, Scotland with wind and tide, mainland Europe with all varieties of renewables where solar in Germany has avoided some six nuclear stations and the Sahara Desert where they plan a very large solar farm. The old wisdom needs to change.
Posted by: foldart, ek on 8:57pm Thu 14 Feb 08
OK so HVDC is more efficient ie less losses over long distance
It is however extremely expensive - see the PB report
And someone has to pay - do you really want to double your electricity bill to have clean renewable power?
OK so HVDC is more efficient ie less losses over long distance
It is however extremely expensive - see the PB report
And someone has to pay - do you really want to double your electricity bill to have clean renewable power?
Posted by: Scamp on 11:17pm Thu 14 Feb 08
The unfortunate truth is that up to now energy has been cheap. That's going to change. All energy costs are on their way up and there is no escape.
The unfortunate truth is that up to now energy has been cheap. That's going to change. All energy costs are on their way up and there is no escape.
Posted by: leesome, Glasgow on 11:53pm Thu 14 Feb 08
HDV is extremely expensive? Its a more flexible way of connecting different grids. The technology has been around for decades, Now very refined and flexible enough to intergrate with any grid, as its possible to sync the power electronically and so connect to different grids at different cycles, no matter where the generators are in the grid, France, Germany or UK all from one. HVDC also travels further and as the above poster has stated it is the ideal solution for pushing power through a cable in (sea) water.
HDV is extremely expensive? Its a more flexible way of connecting different grids. The technology has been around for decades, Now very refined and flexible enough to intergrate with any grid, as its possible to sync the power electronically and so connect to different grids at different cycles, no matter where the generators are in the grid, France, Germany or UK all from one. HVDC also travels further and as the above poster has stated it is the ideal solution for pushing power through a cable in (sea) water.
Posted by: Nlys, Hilltown on 12:49am Fri 15 Feb 08
God help us: Salmond and Mather allowing Airtricity to lead them by the nose.
There was a time when power engineers rather than snake oil salesmen ran the show.
God help us: Salmond and Mather allowing Airtricity to lead them by the nose.
There was a time when power engineers rather than snake oil salesmen ran the show.
Posted by: watty, australia on 7:14am Fri 15 Feb 08
[quote][bold]Charles McGrory[/bold] wrote:
Further to sipeki's comments, the Club of Rome and other European backers are developing a grid project using HVDC technology to link all of Europe, Iceland capturing thermal generated energy, Scotland with wind and tide, mainland Europe with all varieties of renewables where solar in Germany has avoided some six nuclear stations and the Sahara Desert where they plan a very large solar farm. The old wisdom needs to change. [/quote] What was the predicted cost of replacing the 6 nuclear power with solarstations in Germany? hadn't caught up with the solar solution but I seem to remember to replace the nuclear required about 25,00 wind turbines.Hardly a pretty sight?
Charles McGrory wrote:
Further to sipeki's comments, the Club of Rome and other European backers are developing a grid project using HVDC technology to link all of Europe, Iceland capturing thermal generated energy, Scotland with wind and tide, mainland Europe with all varieties of renewables where solar in Germany has avoided some six nuclear stations and the Sahara Desert where they plan a very large solar farm. The old wisdom needs to change.
What was the predicted cost of replacing the 6 nuclear power with solarstations in Germany? hadn't caught up with the solar solution but I seem to remember to replace the nuclear required about 25,00 wind turbines.Hardly a pretty sight?
Posted by: Maureen Acorn on 8:28am Fri 15 Feb 08
It is a pity that Gordon Brown has just given the Chinese £50million of taxpayers money to develop this kind of system over there. What a boost it would have given to Scotland, but we all know that Gordon likes to tax the British and throw it away overseas.
It is a pity that Gordon Brown has just given the Chinese £50million of taxpayers money to develop this kind of system over there. What a boost it would have given to Scotland, but we all know that Gordon likes to tax the British and throw it away overseas.
Posted by: David Beattie, perth oz on 8:31am Fri 15 Feb 08
Watty, I presume you mean 25,000 wind turbines to replace those sixGerman nuclear plants?
Watty, I presume you mean 25,000 wind turbines to replace those sixGerman nuclear plants?
Posted by: HIbernia, Dublin on 1:53pm Fri 15 Feb 08
Tom
With regard to Tom Europe's comments above there IS actually a very interesting piece in Irish Independent (14 Feb)on the subject of offshore windfarms. (see letters page). It highlights the outdated legislation governing offshore wind farm construction in Ireland and the amazing lack of protection for our marine life. Hopefully the Irish government will change this legislation which appears to be allowing wind farm developers to take over large sections of coast in a most undemocratic fashion.
Tom
With regard to Tom Europe's comments above there IS actually a very interesting piece in Irish Independent (14 Feb)on the subject of offshore windfarms. (see letters page). It highlights the outdated legislation governing offshore wind farm construction in Ireland and the amazing lack of protection for our marine life. Hopefully the Irish government will change this legislation which appears to be allowing wind farm developers to take over large sections of coast in a most undemocratic fashion.
Posted by: Maxgen, Swindon, England on 6:41pm Fri 15 Feb 08
For the record Germany has 17 nuclear reactors producing a third of it's electricity. It would take around 100,000 1MW wind turbines located in Germany to produce the same amount of power. By 2006 they had built just under 21,000MW, only another 89000MW to go.....
For the record Germany has 17 nuclear reactors producing a third of it's electricity. It would take around 100,000 1MW wind turbines located in Germany to produce the same amount of power. By 2006 they had built just under 21,000MW, only another 89000MW to go.....
Posted by: Nlys, Hilltown on 7:36pm Fri 15 Feb 08
Re. German wind turbines - they are running out of sites for onshore turbines and have problems with what they have:
1. ‘FRANKFURT (Thomson Financial) - German utilities are warning the government of bottlenecks in power transmission grids due to the difficulties of integrating higher shares of wind energy, Handelsblatt reported. [...] ‘The number of incidents has risen significantly over the past two years, the report said. Vattenfall Europe AG's transmission unit recorded 155 days where the situation was critical on grids last year [2007], and 28 out of 29 days so far this year.
[...]’ (Thomson Financial News, 31 Jan 2008).
2. Production companies complain at the use of 'curtailment' (shutting down of wind power stations) in the effort to dampen instability. In 2006 wind turbines were taken off the grid for several hours on about 40 windy days, “And with respect to this year we are already talking about a downtime of 15 percent,” said Hermann Albers, vice president of the BWE.
Could explain why they are building all those coal/lignite power stations.
Re. German wind turbines - they are running out of sites for onshore turbines and have problems with what they have:
1. ‘FRANKFURT (Thomson Financial) - German utilities are warning the government of bottlenecks in power transmission grids due to the difficulties of integrating higher shares of wind energy, Handelsblatt reported. ‘The number of incidents has risen significantly over the past two years, the report said. Vattenfall Europe AG's transmission unit recorded 155 days where the situation was critical on grids last year , and 28 out of 29 days so far this year.
’ (Thomson Financial News, 31 Jan 2008).
2. Production companies complain at the use of 'curtailment' (shutting down of wind power stations) in the effort to dampen instability. In 2006 wind turbines were taken off the grid for several hours on about 40 windy days, “And with respect to this year we are already talking about a downtime of 15 percent,” said Hermann Albers, vice president of the BWE.
Could explain why they are building all those coal/lignite power stations.
News
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (21)
