Posted By: WillInAberdeenGot the impression it doesn't matter whether you export or not - if you have PV and use it yourself (eg charge EV, dump to hot water, run AC in Australia) then that is load that now becomes unavailable for the grid to use to balance their oversupply. So net impact on grid balance is the same.

I don't think that's the case. If the demand goes down you just cut generation to match. No stability problem. The problem occurs when there's generation online that can't be controlled, such as domestic PV and DNO-connected wind, and even some coal stations, and nuclear stations to some degree.

But they still need PV to export in the shoulder periods (morning, evening, autumn) when the grid is not overloaded, so they can't just ban people from connecting any more home PV.

If they've got grid instability they absolutely can refuse to connect problematic new connections. They'll be shedding existing load in breach of contract to supply anyway!

Mmm, this is the source cited...

"October 2021, Global Warming Policy Forum rebranded itself as Net Zero Watch"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Global_Warming_Policy_Foundation


The recent NESO report on 2030 is actually fairly lukewarm about interconnection,

"the impact of additional interconnector capacity above our pathways on reducing
the use of unabated gas is limited"

They're more excited about batteries and long duration storage.

Posted By: WillInAberdeenThe recent NESO report on 2030 is actually fairly lukewarm about interconnection,

"the impact of additional interconnector capacity above our pathways on reducing
the use of unabated gas is limited"

They're more excited about batteries and long duration storage.

The text you've "quoted" doesn't actually appear in the report AFAICT. What they actually say is:

"The sensitivities we explore in this report suggest that more interconnection or Long Duration
Energy Storage (LDES) can help reduce curtailment, constraints 3 and costs and can improve
security of supply. Despite this, the impact of additional capacity above our pathways on reducing
the use of unabated gas is limited and dependent upon location."

Posted By: WillInAberdeenAnd NESO are not assuming 63% load factor for offshore wind, which the blog says they are, and then attacks as being too high.

Where does the blog say that? I see where *NESO* says "If load factors as high as 63% (as proposed by DESNZ in their Generation Cost 2023 publication)".pf The blog mentions 61% and criticizes the DESNZ (not NESO) approach at some length for what seem like sensible reasons.

I'm also confused about what document cited the GWPF as a source?