Talk:Control of the National Grid (Great Britain)

message: The original material was added by User:Engineman to the National Grid UK page.  I didn't even read it all, but it dwarfed the rest of the article, wasn't wikified, didn't use an encyclopedic voice, appeared to go into great detail regarding diesel engine operation, and appeared to include advocacy for wind power.  I'm moved it here for others to clean up or remove as they see fit. - Crosbiesmith 15:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is terrific stuff! It'll get chopped up and bashed about as it is forced into Wikipedia style, but thanks for giving us this unprecedented level of detail about power supply management: it's fascinating. -- The Anome 19:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of content

message: *:How the UK National Grid is presently controlled → :UK National Grid —(Discuss)—  —LeSaint 04:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Move 

message: None of this material has any bearing at all on how the Grid is operated. What is it doing in the article? Really, it should all be removed. — BillC  talk 01:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This creates some problems.
# The article title is "Control of the National Grid UK". Your description in your reply suggests that is is more about 'potential future sources for reserve generation in the UK'.
# The article contains about 4200 words, of which 2200 are about Wessex Water diesel generators reserve capacity. Reserve and frequency control constitute only a small part of grid control: topics such as the balancing mechanism, demand forecasting, transmission asset management, reactive reserve optimisation, transmission contingencies, pumped storage policy, load levelling, demand reduction, SCADA systems,  and uplift management, just to name a few topics off the top of my head, all play a part in control of the national grid, but are all very subsidiary, if mentioned at all, in this article. As such, the article runs into big problems with WP:WEIGHT.
# It's completely unreferenced. "Content based on a talk given at an Open University Seminar" doesn't meet the requirements of WP:V. Who was at this talk and what did they say? Has anyone offered any significant alternative views? Is there any means of verifying the statements in this article? — BillC  talk 22:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wessex Water 

message: OK good points but all the speakers at the OU conference, including the one on diesels, have now had their presentations published in book form. they are all pretty authoritative, and edited by Professors Boyle and Elliot of the Open University.
"Renewable Electricity and the Grid - the challenge of variability" Pub Earthscan. London isbn 13:978-1-84407-418-1
The above based on a conference:
"Integrating renewables into the electricity system" A one day conference on Tuesday January 24th at the Open University, Milton Keynes.......http://eeru.open.ac.uk/conferences.htm - viewable on line.
And the following conference / convention repeated pretty much the same thing - there is no real dispute about the contents veracity - it is well known amongst people who study this sort of thing.
Power Convention 2007 10 - 11 September Imperial College, London 2007 covers these points as well.
You can also look it up on the Transco Web site.
Regarding your other points about control not mentinoed yes you are right, but this is meant to be a starting point and I am waiting for other people to add to it.  Don't see why I should write it all.  But I would say even many experts are unaware of the role of instantaneously disconnected loads, and rapid start diesels.
Yes there is too much stuff on Wessex Water and any one can be free to cut it out.  But it does need some reference to an authentic player such as WW in this market to indicate that it is a highly significant element. Engineman (talk) 16:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreferenced

message: i would tend to disagree with the above statement - its easy to control the national grid if the load changes only slowly and predictably - you just start more power stations / stop them, maintain a spinning reserve and allow the governors to do the control.  The tricky bit is dealing with sudden changes - ie large power station outages, or sudden demand jumps.  That is why Frequency Response and Reserve Service are so important. Engineman (talk) 20:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Reserve and frequency control constitute only a small part of grid control:" 

message: I think that's being a bit picky - that's a comment in the discussion, not the article itself.
I've had a look at the article and it seems to me to be packed full of a good description of how the UK grid controls itself on a daily basis, to meet varying loads with different kinds of plant.  I am sure it can be tidied up a bit, but the basic facts are good, and no one who knows anything about the industry would dispute them.  The talk upon which this article is based was reviewed by senior engineers who actually work for National Grid, some who were at the various presentations and what I said was considered by them unremarkable.Engineman (talk) 20:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The article title is "Control of the National Grid UK". Your description in your reply suggests that is is more about 'potential future sources for reserve generation in the UK'

message: I have had another look and yes it does contain far too much mention of Wessex Water.  If cut quite a few out but it could do with someone else doing a bit more.  It does merit some mention because it does give a clear account from a credible source - no other company has gone on record but its got far too much.
I suggest part of it could be hived off to say diesel generator?
Engineman (talk) 14:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wessex Water

message: This gives quantities in recent tenders for Reserve etc:
Letter from National Grid contracts engineer:
 
David,
 
The latest STOR market report has data on how much reserve we procured in the first tender round can be found via the link below.  For the first two seasons of this year there was just over 2 GW of accepted tenders with roughly two thirds from large generators (BM units) and a third from the demand side (non BM (NBM)) providers.  The non-BM consisting of both back up generation and sites which can reduce their electricity demand (e.g. water pumping)
 
http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/883E5532-EE34-4C26-AA01-F679ADE3092F/16453/STORMIR0701.pdf
 
On frequency response the total demand side load is of the order 500-550MW.  The link below is to the frequency tender report for June.  Figure 9 shows the level of contracted secondary response, with base level around the 550 mark, being the contracted demand side sites
 
http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/8EAB041D-C38E-4C50-951B-02F345FF6EF4/16803/FFR_Market_Info_Jun_2007_v1.pdf
 
 
 
Regards
John
 
Fred xxxxxxxxxxxx
Senior Contract Developer
Contracts and Settlement  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Engineman (talk • contribs) 17:27, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edited letter from National Grid

message: Hi, What proportion of capacity is contributed to the grid in terms of home micro generation - either by solar cells or wind generation or water mills. Also what proportion is generated by National Rail and water company river weir systems?? 77.100.14.241 (talk) 01:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Micro generation from homes 

message: i have now put in a whole lot of what i hope are credible references.  It may  still appear to read too much about Wessex Water, on the other hand, to maintain credibility I think one has to name the organization that has gone on record.  Whilst many other companies, including Thames Water and Anglian Water do essentially the same thing, plus hospital, Tesco, etc, they have not gone on record.Engineman (talk) 06:32, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Re edit and references added

message: The claim that wind power variation is not a problem at all is wrong. This is a not problem in country that use few wind power (<10%). A great part of efforts and research on electrical energy storage systems is done to deal with wind power variations, when wind penetration is 30% or more. See "Energy Technology Perspectives 2008", a book by the International Energy Agency.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.168.64.223 (talk) 12:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This section makes claims which are unreferenced and dubious. For example, the claim that the Sizewell B nuclear power station is a source of intermittency and that wind is more "reliable" is likely to be challenged by any qualified electrical engineer. This section reads more as a promotional for Vestas than an unbiased reference. It should be completely re-wrtitten or deleted. GrahamP (talk) 03:42, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think what this is supposed to be indicating is that a single 1000 MW unit is a lot more likely to disappear off the grid without warning than are 1000, 1 MW units scattered over hundreds of square miles. It doesn't matter what the prime mover is, if a big block of capacity (or transmission!) drops out instantanenously, it's a problem for network stability. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Not disputing actual numbers, but section appears to be original research, in particular the novel and unorthodox use of the term 'intermittency' - please provide references from credible engineering sources for the claims.GrahamP (talk) 22:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Intermittency is defined as "For the purposes of this report National Grid has interpreted ‘intermittent’generation as renewable plant that does not have full control over its primary fuel source to the extent that it cannot plan in the longer term to run at maximum output at times of system peak." http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/459CB43B-5098-4F4E-9240-E969B713EE7B/9239/Condition3reportfinal.pdf (page 3)    Given this, the section needs to be completed re-written or deleted as it appears to be original research.GrahamP (talk) 01:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Sizewell B might be the biggest potential source of supply loss, and thereby set the level of frequency response required, but it is never considered an intermittent generator, unlike wind, which is radically reshaping reserve and energy considerations in the UK. There are some really bad parts of this article, but WP:COI prevents me from editing it. —BillC talk 03:30, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources of intermittency on the UK National Grid 

message: Of course intermittency is a problem, but National Grid does not see it as a problem which cannot be dealt with at reasonable cost with already known techiques so in this context it is not a problem merely a set of technical issues to be addressed with known solutions, which dont actualy include storage which is a red herring.
"Despite this, we believe that there were no technical barriers, including supply chain issues, to the incorporation onto the system of the level of wind required to meet targets. " from national grid
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmenergy/194/194we32.htm
Engineman (talk) 20:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem

message: Since we have the article National Grid (Great Britain) (which is redirect from National Grid (UK) ) shouldn't this article be at Control of the National Grid (Great Britain)?  Other nations also have a national grid.  RJFJR (talk) 21:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.Rangoon11 (talk) 02:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed rename 

message: This article has been marked for cleanup since 2007, so I'll have a crack at it. Also, some of the content would be better suited to other articles. Happy to discuss any changes, of course. Here is a summary my edits:
*Lead: Re-write to summarise the article and remove (uncited) content related to National Grid in general (as opposed to the control of it). Moving the discussion about location to its own section.
*Power generation and transmission statistics: Moving "general" statistics to National Grid article. This section feels a bit like a "brain dump", so content  may end up being moved to other sections.
*Matching of power station output to load: renaming to Load Forecasting
*Dynamics of the grid: removing for copyvio
*Short term and instantaneous load and generation response mechanisms: removing intro for copyvio. Removing the Standing Reserve section for the same copyvio. Removing Use of the Reserve Service and Frequency Service in Practice for copyvio
*Sources of intermittency on the UK National Grid: due long standing to Disputed tage, trimming text to that directly supported by references
*The number of diesel generators in the UK: removing due to copyvio
Regards, 1292simon (talk) 03:52, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup