Tag: energy policy

Storage solutions: 3 ways energy storage can get the grid to net zero

28 February 2022

Electrification

Key points:

  • Energy storage plays a crucial role in the UK electricity system by not only providing reserve power for when demand is high but also absorbing excess power when demand is low.
  • The UK’s electricity system’s growing dependency on intermittent renewables means the amount of energy storage needed will increase to as much as 30 GW by 2050.
  • There are three different durations of energy storage needed to help balance the grid: short-term, day-to-day and long term.
  • It will take a range of technologies including batteries, pumped storage hydro and new approaches to meet the storage demands of a net zero grid.

When you turn on a lightbulb – in 10, 20, or 30 years – the same thing will happen. Electricity will light up the room. But where that electricity comes from will be different. As the country moves toward net zero emissions, low carbon and renewable power sources will become the norm. However, it’s not as simple as swapping in renewables for the fossil fuels the grid was built around.

Weather dependant sources, like wind and solar, are intermittent – meaning other sources are needed at times when there’s little wind or no sunshine to meet the country’s electricity demand. Equally as challenging to manage, however, is what to do when there’s an excess of power being generated at times of low demand.

Energy storage offers a low carbon means of delivering power at times of low supply, as well as absorbing any excess of generated power when demand is low, helping to balance and stabilise the grid. As the electricity system transforms through a range of low-carbon and renewable technologies, the amount of energy storage on the UK grid will need to expand from 3 GW of today to over 30 GW in the coming decades.

The storage solution

Even as the UK’s electricity system transforms, from fossil fuels to renewables, the way the grid operates remains primarily the same. Central to that is the principle that the supply of electricity being generated must always match the demand on a second-by-second basis.

Too little or too much power on the system can cause power outages and damage equipment. National Grid needs to be able to call on reserve power sources to meet demand when supply is low or pay to curtail renewable sources’ output when demand drops. During the summer of 2020, for example, lower demand due to Covid-19 coupled with high renewable output resulted in balancing costs 40% above expectations.

“There is a lot of offshore wind coming online in Scotland, as much as 11 GW by 2030 and a further 25 GW planned,” explains Steve Marshall, a Development Manager at Drax.

Offshore wind farm along the coast of Scotland

“It’s great because it increases the amount of renewable power on the system, but the transmission lines between Scotland and England can become saturated as much as 30-40% of the time because there is too much power.”

Electricity storage can provide a source of reserve power, as well as absorb excess electricity. These capabilities are crucial for balancing the grid and ensuring that frequency remains within a stable operating range of 50 Hertz, as well as providing other ancillary services.

Whether it’s absorbing power or delivering electricity needed to keep the grid stable, in energy storage, timing is everything.

There are three main time periods electricity storage needs to operate over:

  1. Fast-acting, short term electricity

Because electricity supply must always match demand, sudden changes mean the grid needs to respond immediately to ensure frequency and voltage remain stable, and electricity safe to use.

Batteries are considered the fastest technology for responding to a sudden spike in demand or an abrupt loss of supply.

Battery technology has evolved rapidly in recent decades as innovations like lithium-ion batteries, such as those used in electric cars, and emerging solid-state batteries become more affordable and more commonplace. This makes it more feasible to deploy large-scale installations that can absorb and store excess power from the grid.

“Batteries are good for near-instantaneous responses. It can be a matter of milliseconds for a battery to deploy power,” says Marshall. “If there’s a sudden problem with frequency or voltage, batteries can respond – it’s something that’s quite unique to them.”

The speed at which batteries can deploy and absorb electricity makes them useful grid assets. However, even very large battery setups can only discharge power for around two hours. If, for example, the wind dropped off for a long period the grid needs a longer-duration supply of stored power.

  1. Powering day-to-day changes in supply, demand, and the grid

When it comes to managing the daily variations of supply and demand the grid needs to be able to call on reserves of power for when there are unexpected changes in the weather or electricity demand from users. Pumped storage hydro power offers a low carbon way to provide huge amounts of electricity, quickly and for periods that can last as long as eight or even 24 hours.

The technology works by moving water between two reservoirs of water at different elevations. When there is demand for electricity water is released from the upper reservoir, which rushes down a series of pipes, spinning water turbines, generating electricity. However, when there is an excess of power on the electricity system the same turbines can reverse and absorb electricity to pump water from the lower to the upper reservoir, storing it there as a massive ‘water battery’.

Pumped storage hydro is a long-established technology, having been developed since the 1890s in Italy and Switzerland. In the UK today there are four pumped storage hydro power stations in Scotland and Wales, with a total capacity of 2.8 GW.

Among those is the Drax-owned Cruachan Power Station in the Scottish Highlands. The plant is made up of four generating/pumping turbines located inside Ben Cruachan between Loch Awe and an upper reservoir holding 10 million cubic metres of water.

Turbine Hall at Cruachan Power Station

Pumped hydro storage facilities can rapidly begin generating large volumes of power in as little as 30 seconds or less. The ability to switch their turbines between different modes – pump, generate, and spin mode to provide inertia to the gird without producing power – make pumped storage hydro plants versatile assets for the gird.

“How Cruachan operates depends on weather,” says Marshall. “We make as many 1000 mode changes a month, that’s how frequently Cruachan is called on by National Grid.”

As the electricity system transforms there will be a greater need for flexible energy storage like pumped storage hydro, this is why Drax is kickstarting plans to expand Cruachan Power Station, however, the specific conditions needed for such facilities can make new projects difficult and expensive.

Cruachan 2, to the east of the original power station, will add up to 600 MW in generating capacity, more than doubling the site’s total capacity to more than 1GW. By increasing the number of turbines operating at the facility it increases the range of services that the grid can call upon from the site.

  1. Long-term electricity solutions

However, storage technologies as they exist today cannot alone offer all the solutions the UK will need to achieve its net zero targets. While technologies like pumped storage can generate for the better part of a day, longer periods of unfavourable conditions for renewables will need new approaches.

In March 2021, for example, the UK experienced its longest cold and calm spell in more than a decade, with wind farms operating at just 11% of their capacity for 11 days straight, according to Electric Insights.

The shortfall in the country’s primary source of renewable power was made up for by gas power stations. But in a net zero future, such responses will only be feasible if they’re part of carbon capture and storage systems or replaced by other carbon neutral or energy storage solutions.

Generating enough power to supply an electrified future, as well as being able to take pressure off the grid and provide balancing services will require a range of technologies working in tandem over extended periods.

Interconnectors with neighbouring countries, for example, can work alongside storage solutions to shed excess power to where there is greater demand. Similarly, rather than curtailing wind or solar power, extra electricity could be used for electrolysis to produce hydrogen. Other functions may include demand side response where heavy power users are incentivised to reduce their electricity usage during peak periods helping to reduce demand.

To achieve stable, reliable, net zero electricity systems the UK needs to act now to not only replace fossil fuels with renewables but put the essential energy storage and balancing solutions in place, that means electricity is there when you turn on a lightbulb.

How to build a business model for negative emissions

10 May 2021

Carbon capture
Watching a biomass train as it prepares to enter Drax Power Station's rail unloading building 2 (RUB2)

In brief

  • Policy intervention is needed to enable enough BECCS in power to make a net zero UK economy possible by 2050

  • Early investment in BECCS can insure against the risk and cost of delaying significant abatement efforts into the 2030s and 2040s

  • A two-part business model for BECCS of carbon payment and power CfD offers a clear path to technology neutral and subsidy free GGRs

The UK’s electricity system is based on a market of buying and selling power and other services. For this to work electricity must be affordable to consumers, but the parties providing power must be able to cover the costs of generating electricity, emitting carbon dioxide (CO2) and getting electricity to where it needs to be.

This process has thrived and proved adaptable enough to rapidly decarbonise the electricity system in the space of a decade.

With a 58% reduction in the carbon intensity of power generation, the UK’s electricity has decarbonised twice as fast as that of other major economies. As the UK pushes towards its goal of achieving net zero emissions by 2050, new technologies are needed, and the market must extend to enable innovation.

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is one of the key technologies needed at scale for the UK to reach net zero. Yet there is no market for the negative emissions BECCS can deliver, in contrast to other energy system services.

BECCS has been repeatedly flagged as vital for the UK to reach its climate goals, owing to its ability to deliver negative emissions. The Climate Change Committee has demonstrated that negative emissions – also known as greenhouse gas removals (GGRs) or carbon removals – will be needed at scale to achieve net zero, to offset residual emissions from hard to decarbonise sectors such as aviation and agriculture. But there is no economic mechanism to reward negative emissions in the energy market.

For decarbonisation technologies like BECCS in power to develop to the scale and within the timeframe needed, the Government must implement the necessary policies to incentivise investment, and allow them to thrive as part of the energy and carbon markets.

BECCS is essential to bringing the whole economy to net zero

The primary benefit of BECCS in power is its ability to deliver negative emissions by removing CO2 from the atmosphere through responsibly managed forests, energy crops or agricultural residues, then storing the same amount of CO2 underground, while producing reliable, renewable electricity.

Looking down above units one through five within Drax Power Station

Looking down above units one through five within Drax Power Station

A new report by Frontier Economics for Drax highlights BECCS as a necessary cornerstone of UK decarbonisation and its wider impacts on a net zero economy. Developing a first-of-a-kind BECCS power plant would have ‘positive spillover’ effects that contribute to wider decarbonisation, green growth and the UK’s ability to meet its legally-binding climate commitments by 2050.

Drax has a unique opportunity to fit carbon capture and storage (CCS) equipment to its existing biomass generation units, to turn its North Yorkshire site into what could be the world’s first carbon negative power station.

Plans are underway to build a CO2 pipeline in the Yorkshire and Humber region, which would move carbon captured from at Drax out to a safe, long-term storage site deep below the North Sea. This infrastructure would be shared with other CCS projects in the Zero Carbon Humber partnership, enabling the UK’s most carbon-intensive region to become the world’s first net zero industrial cluster.

Developing BECCS can also have spillover benefits for other emerging industries. Lessons that come from developing and operating the first BECCS power stations, as well as transport and storage infrastructure, will reduce the cost of subsequent BECCS, negative emissions and other CCS projects.

Hydrogen production, for example, is regarded as a key to providing low, zero or carbon negative alternatives to natural gas in power, industry, transport and heating. Learnings from increased bioenergy usage in BECCS can help develop biomass gasification as a means of hydrogen production, as well as applying CCS to other production methods.

The economic value of these positive spillovers from BECCS can be far reaching, but they will not be felt unless BECCS can achieve a robust business model in the immediate future.

With a 58% reduction in the carbon intensity of power generation, the UK’s electricity has decarbonised twice as fast as that of other major economies. As the UK pushes towards its goal of achieving net zero emissions by 2050, new technologies are needed, and the market must extend to enable innovation.

Designing a BECCS business model

The Department for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) outlined several key factors to consider in assessing how to make carbon capture, usage and storage (CCUS) economically viable. These are also valid for BECCS development.

Engineers working within the turbine hall, Drax Power Station

Engineers working within the turbine hall, Drax Power Station

One of the primary needs for a BECCS business model is to instil confidence in investors – by creating a policy framework that encourages investors to back innovative new technologies, reduces risk and inspires new entrants into the space. The cost of developing a BECCS project should also be fairly distributed among contributing parties ensuring that costs to consumers/taxpayers are minimised.

Building from these principles there are three potential business models that can enable BECCS to be developed at the scale and in the timeframe needed to bring the UK to net zero emissions in 2050.

  1. Power Contract for Difference (CfD):
    By protecting consumers from price spikes, and BECCS generators and investors from market volatility or big drops in the wholesale price of power, this approach offers security to invest in new technology. The strike price could also be adjusted to take into account negative emissions delivered and spillover benefits, as well as the cost of power generation.
  2. Carbon payment:
    Another approach is contractual fixed carbon payments that would offer a BECCS power station a set payment per tonne of negative emissions which would cover the operational and capital costs of installing carbon capture technology on the power station. This would be a new form of support, and unfamiliar to investors who are already versed in CfDs. The advantage of introducing a policy such as fixed carbon payment is its flexibility, and it could be used to support other methods of GGR or CCS. The same scheme could be adjusted to reward, for example, CO2 captured through CCS in industry or direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). It could even be used to remunerate measurable spillover benefits from front-running BECCS projects.
  3. Carbon payment + power CfD:
    This option combines the two above. The Frontier report says it would be the most effective business model for supporting a BECCS in power project. Carbon payments would act as an incentive for negative emissions and spillovers, while CfDs would then cover the costs of power generation.
Cost and revenue profiles of alternative support options

Cost and revenue profiles of alternative support options based on assuming a constant level of output over time.

 Way to go, hybrid!

Why does the hybrid business model of power CfD with carbon payment come out on top? Frontier considered how easy or difficult it would be to transition each of the options to a technology neutral business model for future projects, and then to a subsidy free business model.

By looking ahead to tech neutrality, the business model would not unduly favour negative emissions technologies – such as BECCS at Drax – that are available to deploy at scale in the 2020s, over those that might come online later.

Plus, the whole point of subsidies is to help to get essential, fledgling technologies and business models off to a flying start until the point they can stand on their own two feet.

The report concluded:

  • Ease of transition to technology neutrality: all three options are unlikely to have any technology neutral elements in the short-term, although they could transition to a mid-term regime which could be technology neutral; and
  • Ease of transition to subsidy free: while all of the options can transition to a subsidy free system, the power CfD does not create any policy learnings around treatment of negative emissions that contribute to this transition. The other two options do create learnings around a carbon payment for negative emissions that can eventually be broadened to other GGRs and then captured within an efficient CO2 market.

‘Overall, we conclude that the two-part business model performs best on this criterion. The other two options perform less well, with the power CfD performing worst as it does not deliver learnings around remunerating negative emissions.’

Assessment of business model options

Assessment of business model options. Green indicates that the criteria is largely met, yellow indicates that it is partially met, and red indicates that it is not met.

Transition to a net zero future

Engineer inspects carbon capture pilot plant at Drax Power Station

Engineer inspects carbon capture pilot plant at Drax Power Station

Crucial to the implementation of BECCS is the feasibility of these business models, in terms of their practicality in being understood by investors, how quickly they can be put into action and how they will evolve or be replaced in the long-term as technologies mature and costs go down. This can be improved by using models that are comparable with existing policies.

These business models can only deliver BECCS in power (as well as other negative emissions technologies) at scale and enable the UK to reach its 2050 net zero target, if they are implemented now.

Every year of stalling delays the impact positive spillovers and negative emissions can have on global CO2 levels. The UK Government must provide the private sector with the confidence to deliver BECCS and other net zero technologies in the time frame needed.

Go deeper

Explore the Frontier Economics report for Drax, ‘Supporting the deployment of Bioenergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the UK: business model options.’

Supporting the deployment of Bioenergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the UK: business model options

8 April 2021

Carbon capture
Innovation engineer inspecting CCUS incubation area BECCS pilot plant at Drax Power Station, 2019

Click to view/download the report PDF.

Drax Power Station is currently exploring the option of adding carbon capture and storage equipment to its biomass-fired generating units. The resulting plant could produce at least 8 million tonnes (Mt) of negative CO2 emissions each year, as well as generating renewable electricity. Drax is planning to make a final investment decision (FID) on its bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (‘BECCS in power’1) investment in Q1 2024, with the first BECCS unit to be operating by 2027.

The potential of BECCS as part of the path to Net Zero has been widely recognised.

  • BECCS in power is an important part of all of the Climate Change Committee (CCC)’s Net Zero scenarios, contributing to negative emissions of between 16- 39Mt CO2e per year by 20502. Investment needs to occur early: by 2035, the CCC sees a role for 3-4GW of BECCS, as part of a mix of low carbon generation3.
  • The Government’s Energy White Paper commits, by 2022, to establishing the role which BECCS can play in reducing carbon emissions across the economy and setting out how the technology could be deployed. The Government has also committed to invest up to £1 billion to support the establishment of carbon capture, usage and storage (CCUS) in four industrial clusters4.
  • National Grid’s 2020 Future Energy Scenarios (FES) indicate that it is not possible to achieve Net Zero without BECCS5.

However, at present, a business model6 which could enable this investment is not in place. A business model is required because a number of barriers and market failures otherwise make economic investment impossible.

  • There is no market for negative emissions. There is currently no source of remuneration for the value delivered by negative emissions, and therefore no return for the investment needed to achieve them.
  • Positive spillovers are not remunerated. Positive spillovers that would be delivered by a first-of-a-kind BECCS power plant, but which are not remunerated include:
    • providing an anchor load for carbon dioxide (CO2) transport and storage (T&S) infrastructure that can be used by subsequent CCS projects;
    • delivering learning that will help lower the costs of subsequent BECCS power plants; and
    • delivering learning and shared skills that can be used across a range of CCS projects, including hydrogen production with CCS.
  • BECCS relies on the presence of CO2 transport and storage infrastructure. Where this infrastructure doesn’t already exist, or where the availability or costs are highly uncertain, this presents a significant risk to investors in BECCS in power.
CCUS incubation area, Drax Power Station, July 2019

CCUS incubation area, Drax Power Station; click image to view/download

Frontier Economics has been commissioned by Drax to develop and evaluate business model options for BECCS in power that could overcome these barriers, and help deliver timely investment in BECCS.

Business model options

We started with a long list of business model options. After eliminating options that are unsuitable for BECCS in power, we considered the following three options in detail.

  • Power Contract for Difference (CfD): the strike price of the CfD would be set to include remuneration for negative emissions, low carbon power and for learnings and spillover benefits.
  • Carbon payment: a contractual carbon payment would provide a fixed payment per tonne of negative emissions. The payment level would be set to include remuneration for negative emissions, low carbon power and for learnings and spillovers.
  • Carbon payment + power CfD: this option combines the two options above. The carbon payment would provide remuneration for negative emissions and learnings and spillovers while the power CfD would support power market revenues for the plant’s renewable power output.

We first considered if committing to any of these business model options for BECCS in power now might restrict future policy options for a broader GGR support scheme. We assessed whether these options could, over time, be transitioned into a broader GGR support scheme (i.e. one not just focused on BECCS in power), and concluded that this would be possible for all of them.

We then considered how these business model options could be funded, and whether the choice of a business model option is linked to a particular source of funds (for example, power CfDs are currently funded by a levy paid by electricity suppliers to the Low Carbon Contracts Company [LCCC]). We concluded that business models do not need to be attached to specific funding sources; all of the options can be designed to fit with numerous different funding options, so the two decisions can be made independently. This means that the business model options can be considered on their own terms, with thinking about funding sources being progressed in parallel.

We then evaluated the three business model options against a set of criteria developed from principles set out in the BEIS consultation on business models for CCS, summarised in the figure below.

Figure 1: Principles for design of business models

Instil investor confidence▪ Attract innovation
▪ Attract new entrants
▪ Instil supply chain confidence
Cost efficiency▪ Drive efficient management of investment costs
▪ Drive efficient quantity of investment
▪ Drive efficient dispatch and operation
▪ Risks allocated in an efficient way, taking into account the impact on the cost of capital
Feasibility▪ Limit administrative burden
▪ Practicality for investors
▪ Requirement for complementary policy
▪ Wider policy and state aid compatibility
▪ Timely implementation
Fair cost sharing▪ Allows fair and practical cost distribution
Ease of policy transition▪ Ease of transition to subsidy free system
▪ Ease of transition to technology neutral solution

Source: Frontier Economics. Click to view/download graphic. 

All three business model options performed well across most criteria. However, our evaluation highlighted some key trade-offs to consider when choosing a business model:

  • investor confidence: the power CfD and the two-part model with a CfD performed better than the carbon payment on this measure, as they shield investors from wholesale power market fluctuations;
  • feasibility: the power CfD performed best on this measure. Because it is already established in existing legislation and is well understood, it will be quick to implement. Introducing a mechanism to provide carbon payments may require new legislation. However, this will be needed in any case to support other CCUS technologies7, and could be introduced in time before projects come online; and
  • potential to become technology neutral and subsidy free: all three options could transition to a mid-term regime which could be technology neutral. However, the stand-alone power CfD performed least well as it does not deliver any learnings around remunerating negative emissions.

Overall, the two-part model performed well across the criteria and would offer a clear path to a technology neutral and subsidy free world, delivering learnings that will be relevant for other GGRs as well.

Conclusions

The UK’s Net Zero target will be challenging to achieve, and will require investment in negative emissions technologies to offset residual emissions from hard-to-abate sectors, as highlighted by the CCC8. BECCS in power is a particularly important part of this picture, and represents a cost-effective means of delivering the scale of negative emissions needed. Early investment in BECCS is also important in insuring against the risk and cost of ”back ending” significant abatement effort.

However, market failures, most notably the lack of a market for negative emissions, lack of remuneration for positive spillovers and learnings, and reliance on availability of T&S infrastructure, mean that without policy intervention, the required level of BECCS in power is unlikely to be delivered in time to contribute to Net Zero.

There are a number of business options available in the near term to overcome these barriers. In our view, a two-part model combining a power CfD and a carbon payment is preferable.

This measure:

  • addresses identified market failures;
  • can be implemented relatively easily and in time to capture benefits of early BECCS in power investment; and
  • can be structured to ensure an efficient outcome for customers (including with reference to investors’ likely cost of capital) and in a way that allocates risks appropriately.

View/download the full report (PDF).

1: Biomass can be combusted to generate energy (typically in the form of power, but this could also be in the form of heat or liquid fuel), or gasified to produce hydrogen. The resulting emissions can then be captured and stored using CCS technology. The focus of this report is on biomass combustion to generate power, with CCS, which we refer to as ‘BECCS in power’. We refer to biomass gasification with CCS as ‘BECCS for hydrogen’.

2: CCC (2020) , The Sixth Carbon Budget, Greenhouse Gas Removals, https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Sector-summary-GHG-removals.pdf The CCC’s 2019 Net Zero report also saw a role for BECCS, with 51Mt of emissions removals included in the Further Ambition scenario by 2050. CCC (2019), Net Zero: The UK’s Contribution to Stopping Global Warming. https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/net-zero-the-uks-contribution-to-stopping-global-warming/

3: CCC (2020), Policies for the Sixth Carbon Budget, https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Policies-for-the-Sixth-Carbon-Budget-and-Net-Zero.pdf

4: BEIS (2020), Powering our Net Zero Future, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/945899/201216_BEIS_EWP_Command_Paper_Accessible.pdf

5: National Grid (2020), Future Energy Scenarios 2020, https://www.nationalgrideso.com/future-energy/future-energy-scenarios/fes-2020-documents

6: In this report, we use “business model” to describe Government market-based incentives for investment and operation. This is in line with the use of this term by BEIS, for example in BEIS (2019), Business Models For Carbon Capture, Usage And Storage, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/819648/ccus-business-models-consultation.pdf

7: BEIS (2020), CCUS: An update on business models for Carbon Capture, Usage and Storage https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/946561/ccus-business-models-commercial-update.pdf

8: CCC (2020) , The Sixth Carbon Budget, Greenhouse Gas Removals, https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Sector-summary-GHG-removals.pdf

Standing together against climate change

Will Gardiner, Chief Executive Officer, Drax Group

27 January 2021

Opinion
Global leadership illustration

Tackling climate change requires global collaboration. As a UK-US sustainable energy company, with communities on both sides of the Atlantic, we at Drax are keenly aware of the need for thinking that transcends countries and borders.

Joe Biden has become the 46th President of my native country at a crucial time to ensure there is global leadership and collaboration on climate change. Starting with re-joining the Paris Agreement, I am confident that the new administration can make a significant difference to this once-in-a-lifetime challenge.

This is why Drax and our partners are mobilising a transatlantic coalition of negative emissions producers. This can foster collaboration and shared learning between the different technologies and techniques for carbon removal that are essential to decarbonise the global economy.

Biomass storage domes at Drax Power Station in North Yorkshire at sunset

Biomass storage domes at Drax Power Station in North Yorkshire

Whilst political and technical challenges lie ahead, clear long-term policies that spur collaboration, drive innovation and enable technologies at scale are essential in achieving the UK and US’ aligned targets of reaching net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Collaboration between countries and industries

What makes climate change so difficult to tackle is that it requires collaboration from many different parties on a scale like few other projects. This is why the Paris Agreement and this year’s COP26 conference in Glasgow are so vital.

Sustainable biomass wood pellets being safely loaded at the Port of Greater Baton Rouge onto a vessel destined for Drax Power Station

Our effort towards delivering negative emissions using bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is another example of ambitious decarbonisation that is most impactful as part of an integrated, collaborative energy system. The technology depends upon sustainable forest management in regions, such as the US South where our American communities operate. Carbon capture using sustainable bioenergy will help Drax to be carbon negative by 2030 – an ambition I announced at COP25, just over a year ago in Madrid.

Will Gardiner at Powering Past Coal Alliance event in the UK Pavilion at COP25 in Madrid

Will Gardiner announcing Drax’s carbon negative ambition at COP25 in Madrid (December 2019).

Experts on both sides of the Atlantic consider BECCS essential for net zero. The UK’s Climate Change Committee says it will play a major role in tackling carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions that will remain in the UK economy after 2050, from industries such as aviation and agriculture that will be difficult to fully decarbonise. Meanwhile, a report published last year by New York’s Columbia University revealed that rapid development of BECCS is needed within the next 10 years in order to curb climate change.

A variety of negative emissions technologies are required to capture between 10% and 20% of the 35 billion metric tonnes of carbon produced annually that the International Energy Agency says is needed to prevent the worst effects of climate change.

We believe that sharing our experience and expertise in areas such as forestry, bioenergy, and carbon capture will be crucial in helping more countries, industries and businesses deploy a range of technologies.

A formal coalition of negative emissions producers that brings together approaches including land management, afforestation and reforestation, as well as technical solutions like direct air capture (DAC), as well as BECCS, would offer an avenue to ensure knowledge is shared globally.

Direct air capture (DAC) facility

Direct air capture (DAC) facility

It would also offer flexibility in countries’ paths to net zero emissions. If one approach under-delivers, other technologies can work together to compensate and meet CO2 removal targets.

As with renewable energy, working in partnership with governments is essential to develop these innovations into the cost-effective, large scale solutions needed to meet climate targets in the mid-century.

A shared economic opportunity

I agree whole heartedly that a nation’s economy and environment are intrinsically linked – something many leaders are now saying, including President Biden. The recently approved US economic stimulus bill, supported by both Republicans and Democrats in Congress and which allocates $35 billion for new clean energy initiatives, is a positive step for climate technology and job creation.

Globally as many as 65 million well-paid jobs could be created through investment in clean energy systems. In the UK, BECCS and negative emissions are not just essential in preventing the impact of climate change, but are also a vital economic force as the world begins to recover from the effects of COVID-19.

Engineer inside the turbine hall of Drax Power Station

Government and private investments in clean energy technologies can create thousands of well-paid jobs, new careers, education opportunities and upskill workforces. Developing BECCS at Drax Power Station, for example, would support around 17,000 jobs during the peak of construction in 2028, including roles in construction, local supply chains and the wider economy.

Additional jobs would be supported and created throughout our international supply chain. This includes the rail, shipping and forestry industries that are integral to rural communities in the US South.

We are also partnered with 11 other organisations in the UK’s Humber region to develop a carbon capture, usage and storage (CCUS) and hydrogen industrial cluster with the potential to spearhead creating and supporting more than 200,000 jobs around the UK in 2039.

The expertise and equipment needed for such a project can be shared, traded and exported to other industrial clusters around the world, allowing us to help reach global climate goals and drive global standards for CCUS and biomass sustainability.

Clear, long-term policies are essential here, not just to help develop technology but to mitigate risk and encourage investment. These are the next crucial steps needed to deploy negative emissions at the scale required to impact CO2 emissions and lives of people.

Engineer at BECCS pilot project within Drax Power Station

At Drax we directly employ almost 3,000 people in the US and UK, and indirectly support thousands of families through our supply chains on both sides of the Atlantic. Drax Power Station is the most advanced BECCS project in the world and we stand ready to invest in this cutting-edge carbon capture and removal technology. We can then share our expertise with the United States and the rest of the world – a world where major economies are committing to a net zero future and benefiting from a green economic recovery.

What is electricity trading?

29 December 2020

Power generation

What is electricity trading?

Electricity trading is the process of power generators selling the electricity they generate to power suppliers, who can then sell this electricity on to consumers. The system operator – National Grid ESO in Great Britain – oversees the flow of electricity around the country, and ensures the amounts traded will ultimately meet demand and do not overwhelm the power system.

Who is involved in electricity trading?

There are three main parties in a power market: generators (thermal power plants and energy storage sites, sources such as wind turbines and solar panels producing electricity), consumers (hospitals, transport, homes and factories using electricity), and suppliers in the middle from whom you purchase electricity.

Electricity is generated at power stations, then bought by suppliers, who then sell it on to meet the needs of the consumers.

Electricity trading refers to the transaction between power generators, who produce electricity, and power suppliers, who sell it on to consumers.

How are electricity contracts made?

Electricity trading occurs in both long- and short-term time frames, ranging from years in advance to deals covering the same day. Generation and supply must meet exact demand for every minute of the day, which means that traders must always be ready to buy or sell power to fill any sudden gaps that arise.

When trading electricity far in advance, factors such as exchange rates, the cost and availability of fuel, changing regulations and policies all affect the price. Short-term price is more volatile, and factors such as weather, news events and even what’s on television having the biggest impact on price. 

Traders analyse live generation data and news reports, to predict ahead of time how much electricity will be needed during periods of high demand and then determine a price. Traders then make offers and bids to suppliers and strike a deal – these deals then dictate how and when a power station’s generators are run every day.

Why is electricity trading important?

Running a power station is an expensive process and demand for electricity never stops.  The electricity market ensures the country’s power demands are met, while also aiming to keep electricity businesses sustainable, through balancing the price of buying raw materials with the price at which electricity is sold.

To ensure the grid remains balanced and meets demand, the systems operator also makes deals with generators for ancillary services, either far in advance, or last-minute. This ensures elements such as frequency, voltage and reserve power are kept stable across the country and that the grid remains safe and efficient.

Electricity trading ensures there is always a supply of power and that the market for electricity operates in a stable way

Electricity trading fast facts  

Go deeper

Committing to a net zero power system as part of COP26

30 November 2020

Carbon capture

Dear Prime Minister, Chancellor, COP26 President and Minister for Energy and Clean Growth,

We are a group of energy companies investing tens of billions in the coming decade, deploying the low carbon infrastructure the UK will need to get to net zero and drive a green recovery to the COVID-19 crisis.

We welcome the leadership shown on the Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution, and the detailed work going on across government to deliver a net zero economy by 2050. We are writing to you to call on the Government to signal what this will mean for UK electricity decarbonisation by committing to a date for a net zero power system.

Head of BECCS inspects pilot plant within Drax Power Station's CCUS Incubation Unit

Head of BECCS Carl Clayton inspects pipes at the CCUS Incubation Area, Drax Power Station

The electricity sector will be the backbone of our net zero economy, and there will be ever increasing periods where Great Britain is powered by only zero carbon generation. To support this, the Electricity System Operator is putting in place the systems, products and services to enable periods of zero emissions electricity system operation by 2025.

Achieving a net zero power system will require government to continue its efforts in key policy areas such as carbon pricing, which has been central in delivering UK leadership in the move away from coal and has led to UK electricity emissions falling by over 63% between 2012 and 2019 alone.

It is thanks to successive governments’ commitment to robust carbon pricing that the UK is now using levels of coal in power generation last seen 250 years ago – before the birth of the steam locomotive. A consistent, robust carbon price has also unlocked long term investment low-carbon power generation such that power generated by renewables overtook fossil fuel power generation for the first time in British history in the first quarter of 2020.

Yet, even with the demise of coal and the progress in offshore wind, more needs to be done to drive the remaining emissions from electricity as its use is extended across the economy.

In the near-term, in combination with other policies, continued robust carbon pricing on electricity will incentivise the continued deployment of low carbon generation, market dispatch of upcoming gas-fired generation with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects and the blending of low carbon hydrogen with gas-fired generation. Further forward, a robust carbon price can incentivise 100% hydrogen use in gas-fired generation, and importantly drive negative emissions to facilitate the delivery of a net zero economy.

Next year, the world’s attention will focus on Glasgow and negotiations crucial to achieving our climate change targets, with important commitments already made by China, the EU, Japan and South Korea amongst others. An ambitious 2030 target from the UK will help kickstart the Sprint to Glasgow ahead of the UK-UN Climate Summit on 12 December.

Electricity cables and pylon snaking around a mountain near Cruachan Power Station in the Highlands

Electricity cables and pylon snaking around a mountain near Cruachan Power Station, Drax’s flexible pumped storage facility in the Highlands

2030 ambition is clearly needed, but to deliver on net zero, deep decarbonisation will be required. Previous commitments from the UK on its coal phase out and being the first major economy to adopt a net zero target continue to encourage similar international actions. To build on these and continue UK leadership on electricity sector decarbonisation, we call on the UK to commit to a date for a net zero power system ahead of COP26, to match the commitment of the US President-elect’s Clean Energy Plan. To ensure the maximum benefit at lowest cost, the chosen date should be informed by analysis and consider broad stakeholder input.

Alongside near-term stability as the UK’s carbon pricing future is determined, to meet this commitment Government should launch a consultation on a date for a net zero power system by the Budget next year, with a target date to be confirmed in the UK’s upcoming Net Zero Strategy. This commitment would send a signal to the rest of the world that the UK intends to maintain its leadership position on climate and to build a greener, more resilient economy.

To:

  • Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
  • Rt Hon Rishi Sunak MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer
  • Rt Hon Alok Sharma MP, Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and UNFCCC COP26 President
  • Rt Hon Kwasi Kwarteng MP, Minister for Business, Energy and Clean Growth

Signatories:

BP, Drax, National Grid ESO, Sembcorp, Shell and SSE

View/download letter in PDF format