[benj111]

I am getting it. I'm saying 10 years ago demand was X and we had the gas capacity we needed. Now demand is X-10. We have 10 too much capacity without building any more gas generation.

I haven't even gone into the presumption that it needs to be gas. What about batteries, hydro?

And that's going on the assumption that all wind and solar is going to suddenly drop to zero. And yes it might go low but not all at once without warning.

So yes. I get it. It's you that doesn't seem to.

[KevinMS]

> We have 10 too much capacity without building any more gas generation.

YOU STILL HAVE TO RUN THEM. Maintenance, upkeep, crews, and then you have to subsidize any loses they have for sharing the load to keep them online. Basically any wind farm is TWO power plants, the wind farm and its backup. They never count that backup in these cost assessments.

[DamonHD]

You do realise that the last 2 times the GB grid had major glitches (since 2000) part of the issue was thermal (nuke, gas, coal) plants going down in big chunks beyond the overall system capacity to cope.

1) The system works as a system

2) Big single plants going down (eg 'tripping') are more hazadous to grid stability than smaller individual generators

3) All generators have to be 'backed up' by spare capacity, especially big thermal

4) Yes this stuff is priced in, especially as in some grids some of the time it is over 50% of the generation