Looks at various Ofgem/DECC charts/reports, eg:

http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/local_auth/interactive/domestic_solar/index.html

http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/energy_stats/source/fits/fits.aspx

Rgds

Damon

I said it was one big roof!

Well, except that the capacity factor of DRAX is probably >80% and of PV <15% (yes, I don't like using capacity factor) and that makes the GWh/year look a lot less good. I think that we should be aiming for >20GWp of PV, ASAP.

Rgds

Damon

Freely admit I am a bit ignorant when it comes to big numbers. I was wondering how close the PV installed had come to replacing a power station. Thinking we could do with the government feeling a bit more positive about PV rather than dwelling on the FITS payments. More = better.

And most PV generates close to point of use so significantly reduces transmission losses which I think are around 10%.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: DamonHD</cite>When the sun is out, 1GW+ of PV is a big power station, like the nuke Sizewell B. Its average is the equivalent of a smallish gas turbine, but by happy coincidence humans are more active in daytime, so PV is more useful than that average suggests.

Rgds

Damon</blockquote>
IIRC the capacity factor of most UK nukes has been around 30% over the last few years with the amount of breakdowns etc (figure may be a little out of date).

Similarly most of the coal plants that haven't got scrubbers, will increasingly be having capacity factors fairly similar to PV as we approach 2015.

Obviously PV can't have a capacity factor anywhere close to new nuclear / coal / gas, but it's not replacing the new stuff, it's replacing the old knackered stuff where the capacity factors will be more similar. Anyway, I'm sure you get the point I'm attempting to make.

Have to distinguish between installed capacity and generation

So Installed Capacity is in kW (or MW)
Generation is in kWh (or MWh)

Makes a difference as a PV system down here is worth more than one up in Scotland for the same installed capacity.

Comparing that to a traditional method of generation becomes difficult as traditional generation is often used for different purposes, be that base load, balancing, peak load only.
Then you have the issues of integrating into a national grid, who should have priority and what should the criteria be. Should it be price or cost?

Posted By: fostertomWhat's the capacity factor of PV + wind put together - quite gd I'd have thought, as they both tend to fill ea others' hole

Not really realistic to combine the two as they are not comparing like for like with respect to time.

Solar generation has little to do with windpseed and turbine generation has little to do with light intensity (or lack of it).

What you have to look at is seasonal generation potential and then see how well they match together. Then look at hourly generation and look at how well those two match.

Posted By: SteamyTeaWhat you have to look at is seasonal generation potential and then see how well they match together. Then look at hourly generation and look at how well those two match.

That was my question!