FCMR Posted July 13, 2005 Author Share Posted July 13, 2005 During the construction of the Power Station, complaints were made to Downie and the DTI regarding non approved contractors working on the project (not specialist) an inspector that went to investigate was turned away and on her second visit was phisically chucked out. A Complaint over this was made to Downie, who refused to act on the Grounds that no Government money was involved with the MEA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButterflyMaiden Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 The gas obtained from the UK costs the MEA 33p per therm and the cost charged to pump it through the pipe line is 19p per therm on top, why have the MEA signed a contract like this when it only cost about 1/2p per therm to transport in to other areas <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The combined cost of gas plus the transmission cost of the gas really does leave me gobsmacked. How on earth can the building of a PowerStation ON the island be justified when for one thing the transmission costs of electricity would be a gnats cock of the cost of the transmission cost of the fuel to create the electricity, and for another there was to be (was) a damn great cable being laid to the Mainland that could have been tied into the UK National Grid and power then purchased from the most competitive supplier? ........... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A more measured approach would begin by checking a few facts. FCMR reports Gas Costs of 33p per therm and transport costs of 19p per therm. This does seem a disproportionate amount for transport when measured against a claimed 1/2 p per therm in the UK. However, OFGEM seems to think transport costs in the UK are 40% of gas costs .. follow this link ..OFGEM I would argue we can accept the OFGEM paper as factual. Isle of Man transport costs are still higher ..but the difference is incremental rather than different scale. Regarding transmission costs for power the arrangements seem to be very complicated and I cant make any sense out of it ..National Grid I do wonder which is the most expensive to move ..power or electricity ? Rog seems to know the answer ..but I wonder how he arrived at it. Finally .. that report still doesnt seem to be available. Has anyone any idea when it will be in the public domain ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButterflyMaiden Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 I do wonder which is the most expensive to move ..power or electricity ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oops ...correction .. I meant gas or electricity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 The report is available from Tynwald library at Goverment offices---Free of charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Is there any sort of annual fee for the cost of the gas pipeline? Not talking about the price of the actual gas. IOM is on a branch, right? Does Ireland still use the gas pipe? Doesn''t Ireland now have it's own gas sources? Who owns the gas pipe? Are the fees for use fixed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 A more measured approach would begin by checking a few facts. FCMR reports Gas Costs of 33p per therm and transport costs of 19p per therm. This does seem a disproportionate amount for transport when measured against a claimed 1/2 p per therm in the UK. However, OFGEM seems to think transport costs in the UK are 40% of gas costs .. follow this link ..OFGEM I would argue we can accept the OFGEM paper as factual. Isle of Man transport costs are still higher ..but the difference is incremental rather than different scale.Regarding transmission costs for power the arrangements seem to be very complicated and I cant make any sense out of it ..National Grid I do wonder which is the most expensive to move ..power or electricity ? Rog seems to know the answer ..but I wonder how he arrived at it. Finally .. that report still doesnt seem to be available. Has anyone any idea when it will be in the public domain ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The cost of transmission quoted by FMCR is I believe the raw cost of transport using the new pipe, and not directly related to the average all – up case in the UK where all sorts of other factors not least routine maintenance is factored in. But as regards electricity ----- Cost of transmitting electricity is made up of --- Cost of terminal equipment at power station. Cost of conductor plant (cable). Cost of terminal equipment at end point. In the case of gas the same simplistic costs can be identified BUT --- What must be bourn in mind is that the item being transported is in both cases energy. In the case of electricity the energy that is to be used is in its final form whereas in the case of gas it is in an intermediate form as it mist be converted to electricity at a power station before it can come out of a thirteen amp socket. Here’s the cruncher, well, there’s two of ‘em actually. First off, economy of scale. Generally speaking the bigger the power station the more efficient it becomes. Pulrose is not remotely big.. But here’s the big one. To physically transport gas over a distance and especially under the sea needs a pipe that has a high capital cost anda massive installation cost. It also introduces losses that can only be got around by physical size and some quite complicated pneumatics. The more energy needed hence the more gas – in simple terms the bigger the pipe must be. And it’s expensive. Expensive to install and also quite liable to damage. Bend a pipe and you’re pushing your luck, bend a cable and you’re not to anything like the same extent. But that aside the real cruncher comes with the physics involved in the transmission of electricity. The losses involved in transmitting electricity are mainly due to the electrical resistance of the cable and these result in a drop in the voltage between what is applied at the sending end and what appears at the load end. The great thing about voltage drops is that they are directly related to the resistance of the cable and the amount of power going through it – (power being related to the number of appliances strung out on the end.) As it happens this voltage drop is then a constant, and so if the voltage applied at the transmission end is ramped up high – like 333,000 volts and in many cases much more, the voltage drop will only be a small percentage of the total and so most of the energy gets through. (That is why some overhead power transmission lines have such dam great insulators and crackle and fizz, especially in the fog) If the sums are now done to compare the material plus installation cost of a pipeline plus power station plus cable on the one hand, compared to the material costs plus installation costs of simply a duplicated cable (for security), what comes out is very interesting indeed. Once the running costs are then factored in and the cost, not price, per kW/h come out there are questions that should be asked as to why on Gods sweet earth the new power station plus gas pipe plus cable plan was ever decided upon in favour over a duplicated electrical hook up to the UK national grid with juice being bought from the most competitive electricity generation company. There’s something fundamental around this issue that stinks of either astounding incompetence at government level or graft or both. Funny how so many things that are arse upwards these days seem to end up in the general direction of ‘ol ‘Docker’ Downie. Coincidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 I may be completely wrong, and I'm quite prepared to be corrected, but my understanding of the original plan was that electricity was to be imported from Scottish Power, with the Pulrose station running in tandem with it and providing a back-up in case of problems. I was also under the impression that the rationale behind choosing gas turbines was that the 'natural' gas would be sold on to Manx Gas (or in opposition to it, if need be) as a replacement for the high cost LPG that was being used throughout the island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FCMR Posted July 14, 2005 Author Share Posted July 14, 2005 The Blacked out lines in the PKF report I wonder if they contain the following names Docker, Ned, The Don The Milkman and Telecon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonty Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyconcrete Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 Is the report in public circulation? and if so, can someone scan the beast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButterflyMaiden Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 But as regards electricity ----- Cost of transmitting electricity is made up of --- Cost of terminal equipment at power station. Cost of conductor plant (cable). Cost of terminal equipment at end point. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, thats much easier to understand than the complcated mathematical models on the National Grid Website. Thanks :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollag Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Roq's description of the transmission of electrical power is spot on, does anyone know if they transmit the gas as a liquid or a vapour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 The report is available for download at http://www.gov.im/cso/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisner Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Is the report in public circulation? and if so, can someone scan the beast <{POST_SNAPBACK}> to repeat Fred's post: The report is available from Tynwald library at Goverment offices---Free of charge. (It would take half a day to scan sort and post etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mission Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Yep, 168 pages is a tad too much to scan and post. Click the url and save the pdf to your hard drive and read at your leisure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.