Renewables, the Grid, and Blackouts

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

2 minutes ago, turbguy said:

You do know that certain large industrial customers have an "interruptible contract" with utilities, which they get a negotiated discount for, that causes them outages at the "whim" of the utility?  Does that count?  Or does it have to disturb residential customers, instead?

 

Of course. "Demand management" is an ordinary part of grid management. No, it does not "count" as a rolling blackout. In a rolling blackout, customers who have a reasonable expectation of continuous electrical service are without electricity. Loss of electricity can cause hardship.

A company that does not need continuous service is free to pay less and sign up for an interruptible service: No hardship, everybody wins.

"Interruptible" contracts will eventually become available to consumers as technology evolves. Right now, the communications and regulatory systems are not in place for this. If most or all of the air conditioners in California were "smart", we would not have needed rolling blackouts. The AC units in participating homes and businesses would have been commanded to cool down an extra 3 degrees in the early afternoon, and then allow the temperature to rise throughout the peak demand time.

 

[turbguy + 1,554]

2 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

"Interruptible" contracts will eventually become available to consumers as technology evolves. Right now, the communications and regulatory systems are not in place for this. If most or all of the air conditioners in California were "smart", we would not have needed rolling blackouts. The AC units in participating homes and businesses would have been commanded to cool down an extra 3 degrees in the early afternoon, and then allow the temperature to rise throughout the peak demand time.

 

Yup! That'l come soon, I expect. 

[LANDMAN X + 181]

8 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Yeah!  And we Wyomingites got the most guns per capita, the most diesel trucks per capita, and the highest consumption of BTU's per capita.  That's to be expected in a state that's really a small town with VERY long streets. But we export most of the electricity produced here to whoever pays the most (a day or an hour ahead).  Perhaps we need a severance tax on electrons.

Why are you down grading hydrocarbons.  ALL- Americans and world countries need energy.  HUGE majority of it comes from oil, coal and gas.  How in the hell are we to grow our families and country while piling on huge amounts of deficit spending??  Now what? 30 Trillion in debt?   It's getting scary.   Our GNP is around 19 Trillion now.  Debt at or close to 30 Trillion.  Folks, WE ARE UPSIDE DOWN.  

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

This was a predicted number, not what actually occurred. During emergencies, the Governor of almost any state advertises the worst-case projections in an attempt to get the population to take the situation seriously. After the event, the actual numbers are known.

Are you talking about power outages or Covid-19 standalone deaths?

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

14 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Are you talking about power outages or Covid-19 standalone deaths?

The specific example was a predicted rolling blackout. Other examples are evacuations for floods and hurricanes, and in California for wildfires.

[surrept33 + 612]

Here's some modeling done by one of the Gates Foundation efforts (his next 10 "year" goal is indeed to focus as many billions of $ on energy in many different "moonshots":

https://science.breakthroughenergy.org

planning for large increase renewable is accounted for in most "unit commitment models" if you look on standard open access physics or optimization sites (i'd just look at arxiv). There are multiple pathways of course, but it will probably require increases in interoperability of grid systems (I'll just call it a network of macrogrid/microgrids), which governments probably can help coordinate. The actual required optimization are relatively simple computationally (but it does require a lot of either standardization or very advanced noise filtering), even at the edges networks of digital electronic devices with next generation specialized circuits to do some of this in-silico, but are also reprogrammable (in the spirit of software defined hardware).

I'll talk in more abstract terms (hopefully it's familiar enough to classical electrodynamics without some of the rigidity trapped by notions of classical physics), If you just analogize the earth as an engine (that primarily uses radiation from the sun as "fuel") and a braking system that causes "friction". Obviously, "stuff" (life, rivers, oceans, weather, whatever) on earth use "energy" to do "work". If we are designing the generalized engine that produces "power", these days, you'd want to make sure the "brake", which will naturally need to control the "flow" of the engine's power, causes a dissipation of the "power" and "transmits", at least in terms of an adiabatic approximation (in realistic non-equilibrium thermodynamics) how to increase "efficiencies" in dissipation, that both keeps the power on, but also things like freshwater, reduction of volatility (I'd call it stability), understanding of more and more sensitivities etc.

Also, from a society standpoint, we increasingly have to think not only about the generation of power, but what we do with that power. From a cognitive science point of view, if you had for example, a near term immersive VR system that allowed you to experience models of near and far field photonics to go on a safari that would activate your perception in similar ways as the "real thing" (using jet fuel to travel halfway across the world), would you do that? I mean, with advanced computer photogrammetry, we're almost there already, far advanced than the technology out even 5 years ago. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by surrept33

[turbguy + 1,554]

7 hours ago, LANDMAN X said:

Why are you down grading hydrocarbons.  ALL- Americans and world countries need energy.  HUGE majority of it comes from oil, coal and gas.  How in the hell are we to grow our families and country while piling on huge amounts of deficit spending??  Now what? 30 Trillion in debt?   It's getting scary.   Our GNP is around 19 Trillion now.  Debt at or close to 30 Trillion.  Folks, WE ARE UPSIDE DOWN.  

Hydrocarbons will be required for "life as we know it" FAR into the foreseeable future.  Less energy will come from traditional extractive sources, while nontraditional sources will contribute more.  Will it be easy?  No.  Will it be cheaper?  It seems it will be.

All living things require energy.  Most of it comes (or came) from the gravity-well fusion reactor 93 million miles (+/-) away.

Money is a man-made "thing".  A confidence game, no more, no less.  The US Mint, by law, can mint platinum coins of ANY face value.  All the Mint has to do is mint 30 platinum  coins of ONE TRILLION dollars face value each, and pass them to the Treasury. Yup, it's that easy.

 

Edited February 2, 2021 by turbguy

[turbguy + 1,554]

6 hours ago, surrept33 said:

Also, from a society standpoint, we increasingly have to think not only about the generation of power, but what we do with that power. From a cognitive science point of view, if you had for example, a near term immersive VR system that allowed you to experience models of near and far field photonics to go on a safari that would activate your perception in similar ways as the "real thing" (using jet fuel to travel halfway across the world), would you do that? I mean, with advanced computer photogrammetry, we're almost there already, far advanced than the technology out even 5 years ago. 

AH!  THE HOLODECK! 

Mankind's last great invention!

[hemanthaa@mail.com + 64]

Even in the UK, especially in Scotland, where there are thiriving farms of wind turbines, the management admitted some 'quiter days. when they were forced to fall back on generators powered by fossil fuels. 'Quiter days' translate into days without wind, despite the farms in question are off-shore.

Edited February 2, 2021 by hemanthaa@mail.com

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

2 hours ago, turbguy said:

AH!  THE HOLODECK! 

Mankind's last great invention!

Perhaps it would be wise for Governor Newsom of California to subject himself to various virtual reality positions in order to plot the energy course of California. I can think of a few: 1) What if another Mt. Saint Helens occurs and ash blocks the sun for a few weeks? 2) What if there is a "dead calm" for a week, with no wind? 3) What if a calamity occurs in the lithium-ion concourse in Moss Landing, putting a million people out of electricity? 

And Mr. Biden should run a few: 1) What happens when we are once again dependent on Saudi Arabia and OPEC for oil, and Iran plants a small nuke in the Strait of Hormuz? 2) What happens when you make it impossible to run American refineries with light sweet oil? 3) What happens when nobody has electricity for sale on the reserve, even coal-burning Wyoming? 

I agree that the holodeck is a fine way to view the world through the lenses of a totally different set of risks and circumstances. Please carry your idea to Mr. Biden. 

[NickW + 2,714]

13 hours ago, LANDMAN X said:

Turbguy, have you studied history going back few thousand years?  Notice all those cold periods followed by warm periods.  Check Greenland cores out of ice going back several thousands years.  Question?  how many volcanoes in the last 50 years have shot more sulfrer, CO2, carbon or whatever junk goes up with them than mankind combined today?  Just one in SE Asia around 1990's (Pinto?), buried a US base with over 50 feet of volcanic fly ash?  shot more industrial waste, chemicals, CO2, sulfer, junk and whatever comes out of them, than all of mankind's total industrial waste piled up to this today...figure that one out?   Mankind can not effect climates.  Nature will and always will.   

Groundhog day is back. 

CO2 emissions are about 250mt per year or roughly what the UK produces every 7 months. 

Volcanic sulphur and particulates (ash) cause short term cooling effects - globally if the Volcano is big enough such as Pinatubo. 

[NickW + 2,714]

11 hours ago, turbguy said:

PLANNED outages (1-4 hours long) are announced and happen once-twice a year in my area, typically to perform maintenance on substation or high-line equipment.  It's FORCED outages that piss people off.

You do know that certain large industrial customers have an "interruptible contract" with utilities, which they get a negotiated discount for, that causes them short-notice outages at the "whim" of the utility?  Does that count?  Or does it have to disturb residential customers, instead?

 

 

 

In the Uk industrial users on that type of contract get power at a discounted rate. They chose this option if it suits them

Typical examples include large cold stores, some smelters and other chemical plants. 

[markslawson + 1,061]

18 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

We need to understand what is really happening in order to really fix it.

I don't think much understanding is required.. build enough firm power from gas plants and hydro and the like to supply all needs and then ensure that all renewables projects have battery back up that allows the installation to maintain power output for half an hour - ie the grid managers have half an hour warning that it will go offline. That should be enough time to ramp up the firm capacity to fill the gap (won't work with coal plants, they can't ramp output up or down fast enough). Then the renewables crazies can have as many green projects as they want, and never mind poor people having to pay extra for power. That is the energy future. I dunno if this will save any emissions, especially once the life-cycle of the wind generators and PV panels are taken into account.. but it will stop the greenies shouting..   

[turbguy + 1,554]

14 hours ago, markslawson said:

I don't think much understanding is required.. build enough firm power from gas plants and hydro and the like to supply all needs and then ensure that all renewables projects have battery back up that allows the installation to maintain power output for half an hour - ie the grid managers have half an hour warning that it will go offline. That should be enough time to ramp up the firm capacity to fill the gap (won't work with coal plants, they can't ramp output up or down fast enough). Then the renewables crazies can have as many green projects as they want, and never mind poor people having to pay extra for power. That is the energy future. I dunno if this will save any emissions, especially once the life-cycle of the wind generators and PV panels are taken into account.. but it will stop the greenies shouting..   

Please remember to consider the life-cycle of traditional generators (and their fuel supply) as well.  That is not small either.

"Excuse me while I consume several thousand gallons of fuel oil to move these empties back to be refilled with black dirt to add to a pile in the east.  OH!  Thanks for building this great road, too!!"

Edited February 3, 2021 by turbguy

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

13 minutes ago, markslawson said:

I don't think much understanding is required.. build enough firm power from gas plants and hydro and the like to supply all needs and then ensure that all renewables projects have battery back up that allows the installation to maintain power output for half an hour - ie the grid managers have half an hour warning that it will go offline. That should be enough time to ramp up the firm capacity to fill the gap (won't work with coal plants, they can't ramp output up or down fast enough). Then the renewables crazies can have as many green projects as they want, and never mind poor people having to pay extra for power. That is the energy future. I dunno if this will save any emissions, especially once the life-cycle of the wind generators and PV panels are taken into account.. but it will stop the greenies shouting..   

This is clearly a viable way to avoid the peak capacity shortfalls that resulted in the need for rolling blackouts. As I have said repeatedly, peak capacity shortfalls are almost a non problem and CA is fixing them quickly. Our much larger problem is PSPS (shutoffs to keep the power company from being sued during fire weather). No amount of additional generation capacity can solve the PSPS problem. The difference between rolling blackouts and PSPS is the "understanding" that is required.

PG&E is now looking at community microgrids to mitigate PSPS. If each little community in the fire-prone areas has its own batteries, then PG&E can shut off the big feeder lines to those communities. During peak fire weather. Of course, the folks with rural distribution lines will still be screwed, but there are not nearly as many of them.

[surrept33 + 612]

Another thing that I think you'll likely see is more sharing by the ISOs and the RTOs:

https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/Order-841.pdf

Already, via virtual purchase agreements, they are already linked by huge electricity consumers (think industries and things like data centers) - there just need to be more physical high voltage transmission links between ISOs. 

I think you'll see more grid scale storage that holds better to the arrhenius effect degradation (unlike most lithium batteries). Ironically of the initial promising redox flow patents expired years ago without being commercialized.

[Tom Nolan + 2,443]

Irina Slave (OILPRICE.COM writer) has a great article on this topic...

Europe’s Unforeseen Renewables Problem

By Irina Slav - Jan 31, 2021, 12:00 PM CST

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Europes-Unforeseen-Renewables-Problem.html

ZERO HEDGE ran this story...

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/europes-unforeseen-renewables-problem

Earlier this month, something happened in Europe. It didn’t get as much media attention as the EU’s massive funding plans for its energy transition, but it was arguably as important, if not more. A fault occurred at a substation in Croatia and caused an overload in parts of the grid, which spread beyond the country’s borders. This created a domino effect that caused a blackout and prompted electricity supply reductions as far as France and Italy. The problem was dealt with, but it’s only a matter of time before more problems like this occur—the reason: the rise of renewables in the energy mix.

Bloomberg reported on the incident citing several sources from Europe’s utility sector. While no one would directly blame the blackout and the increased risk of more blackouts on renewables, it is evident that Europe’s change in the energy mix is raising this risk.

The problem has to do with grid frequency. Normally, it is 50 hertz, Bloomberg’s Jesper Starn, Brian Parkin, and Irina Vilcu explain. If the frequency deviates from this level, connected equipment gets damaged, and power outages follow. The frequency is normally maintained by the inertia created by the spinning turbines of fossil fuel—or nuclear, or hydro—power plants. With Europe cutting its coal and nuclear capacity, this inertia declines as well, exposing the grid to frequency deviations.

“The problem isn’t posed by growing green electricity directly but by shrinking conventional capacity,” the chief electricity system modeler at Cologne University’s EWI Institute of Energy Economics told Bloomberg.

This is pretty much the same as saying it is not the pandemic that is wreaking havoc on the global economy, but the lack of enough healthy people to keep it going. Wind and solar power, for all their benefits, such as a much lower emissions footprint, do have drawbacks, as does every source of energy. In this case, the drawback is the intermittency of generation. This intermittency cannot maintain the inertia necessary to keep the grid at 50 hertz.

Related: Can Big Oil Surprise This Earnings Season?

Utilities know about the problem. “It is not a question about if a blackout in some European regions will happen, it is only a question of when it will happen,” said Stefan Zach, head of communication at Austrian utility EVN, told Bloomberg. “A blackout might happen even in countries with high standards in electricity grid security.”

But the problem is not being publicized enough to spur those in charge of decision-making into action. The Bloomberg report mentions things like energy storage and batteries, yet batteries—where they are now—cannot replace the inertia-creating turbines of coal-fired power plants, which keep the grid buzzing at 50 hertz. They would help in a brief outage, but they can’t keep millions of households and industrial facilities running. Take the world’s biggest battery to date, currently in construction in Australia: with its capacity of 300 MW/450 MWh, the battery can power half a million households. For an hour.

Problems such as what happened at the Croatian substation highlight one fact that few of those riding on the renewables bandwagon would like to talk about: that solar and wind capacity is maybe being added a little too quickly, while fossil fuel capacity is being retired a little too quickly.

Take Germany: it is fast reducing its nuclear and coal generating capacity. And yet, the country, which is the poster boy for renewable energy in the EU, is currently generating more energy from coal than from wind, simply because the wind does not blow permanently. It is also generating zero energy from solar at the moment because it’s winter, which does not make for the optimal conditions for solar farms.

Or take California and its rolling blackouts last summer when heat waves hit the state that gets a third of its electricity from renewable sources. At the time, officials refused to acknowledge this fact as a potential cause of the blackouts, but with or without acknowledgment, the fact remained: electricity output from solar farms declines as the sun goes down just when there is a surge in demand from households. At the same time, as it retires its natural gas plants, the state did not have enough backup generation capacity to make up for the lost supply.

Or here’s another example: back in 2018, the UK went for nine days with zero power generations from wind farms. Why? Because of something called a wind draught. At the time, this event led to a spike in next-day electricity prices, and forecasts for calm weather for two weeks did not help. The UK government now wants to power the whole country with wind power, which in light of past events might be a little bit risky.

Renewable energy is a great thing. Once they’re manufactured, solar panels and wind turbines do not emit greenhouse gases for the duration of their production life. Solar specifically has become a cheap way to become relatively independent in terms of electricity supply if you happen to live in a sunny part of the world.

Yet solar and wind have been touted as a silver bullet solution to the emissions problem the planet is having, and they are not a silver bullet. There is no silver bullet solution. The sooner decision-makers realize this, the sooner they can start working on ways to reconcile renewables with grid reliability. Otherwise, we might see an unwelcome repeat of what many Soviet bloc countries experienced in the 1980s—timed blackouts lasting months and even years.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

[nsdp + 449]

On 2/1/2021 at 1:28 PM, turbguy said:

 

You ARE aware that recent wind turbines are able to deliver CONSIDERABLY MORE of their rotating inertia to the grid than synchronous machines, no?  All thanks to power electronics and DFIG's. 

Also be aware that plants running "pedal to the metal" (eg, Nuclear plants), CANNOT participate in grid frequency regulation (at least in frequency drop situations).  The "main purpose" of the generation side (aka, BOP, BalanceNERC.  of Plant), is to provide a pressure reducing valve for the reactor!

I can speak to utilities that shut off lighting and air conditioning at plants and offices on hot summer days, and then begin shutting off "interruptible" industrial customers (who pay a discount for that category) with some regularity.

Turbo guy you and your friends here don't know the first thing about Power Generation and Transmission Grid  operations. I started 50 years ago and got my IEEE Power Generation and Transmission Protection certification in 1975.   I spent 10 years ending in 2014 as one of two independent members of  the WECC Constraints and Needs Committee(including CAISO) for NERC. You need to start by reading and understanding this paper from IEEE Spectrum. https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-smarter-grid/zombie-coal-plants-reanimated-to-stabilize-the-grid

You control frequency by increasing grid voltage and reactive power level.  Generator speed has nothing to do with frequency control."Synchronous condensers are dynamic controllers of reactive power—AC whose current wave leads or lags the voltage wave and whose presence determines local grid voltage. Adding current to the spinning condenser’s coils produces reactive power—measured in volt-amperes reactive, or VARs—and boosts grid voltage. Reduce the current and the machine absorbs VARs, depressing voltage.

"Severe voltage drops, for example, hobble SVCs, whose reactive power output drops at double the rate of line voltage. In contrast, a synchronous condenser’s spinning rotor keeps on pumping out reactive power. It will also generate real power if needed, moderating the drop in AC frequency that would result, say, from shutting down a power plant.

And the condenser’s output can briefly handle several times its rated capacity for tens of seconds as its metal components heat up temporarily—behavior that is not possible for devices relying on comparatively fragile silicon switches. “Because they’re iron and copper, they have a lot of overload capability. You can’t overload silicon significantly,” says Nicholas Miller, a power systems expert with GE Energy Consulting, in Schenectady, N.Y.

"Speed was a critical factor in the California Independent System Operator’s decision to order a condenser conversion, though in a gas-fired plant instead of a coal plant, following the shuttering in 2012 of the San Onofre nuclear power plant. Without the 2,200-MW plant, located between Los Angeles and San Diego, voltage control weakened all across Southern California.( you are wrong about what can be done with nuke plants) “The potential for rolling blackouts in the L.A. basin was seen as a very high risk,” says Chris Davidson, an electrical solutions business-­development director for Siemens, which did the conversion.(Huntington beach Plant)

"Seeing what the converted condensers could do, meanwhile, inspired San Diego Gas & Electric Co. to start one of the largest deployments of new synchronous condensers. The utility expected to start spinning its first two condensers last month and plans to install five more in 2017.

"Studies directed by GE’s Miller for the U.S. National Renewable Energy Lab show that converted condensers could serve as a bulwark against blackouts on future grids. Though the electronic inverters built into renewable power plants can help manage grid stability far more than is appreciated today, they lack the inertia that can help get a grid through a major fault.

"Another wild card to watch, says Miller, is wind power. “You can suck some of the energy out of that rotating mass temporarily and give it to the grid,” says Miller."  But there is a catch. see https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/renewables/can-synthetic-inertia-stabilize-power-grids

"The trouble, says Aubut, is what happens after the frequency drop. In all but the strongest wind conditions(45kph+) providing synthetic inertia will slow a wind turbine's rotor. Re-accelerating to optimal speed thereafter absorbs some of the wind power that the turbine can export to the grid. Data from ENERCON shows power reductions of up to 60 percent in some turbines.

This energy recovery phase delays the grid’s frequency recovery. After Québec’s December 2015 transformer event, for example, the system frequency flat-lined for several seconds at 59.4 Hz before additional power reserves could push it back to 60. Under different conditions, says Aubut, that post-inertia recovery could have actually caused a “double-dip” in system frequency, increasing the risk of triggering protective relays at substations and causing blackouts. 

Hydro-Québec is revising its synthetic inertia to minimize the risk of a double-dip. It plans to limit power reduction during recovery to no more than 20 percent of a wind turbine’s capacity. Turbine manufacturers are already testing second-generation synthetic inertia systems that comply with the new standard."

This actually caused rolling blackouts on ERCOT on Feb. 6, 2014. Also read this:  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331224792_A_Survey_on_Power_System_Blackout_and_Cascading_Events_Research_Motivations_and_Challenges

Pete Wilson is the primary governor that created the mess in California although some policies on not replacing and upgrading transmission stated with Reagan. The transmission line that caused the Paradise fire in 2018 should have been updated and replaced on Reagan's watch. . Gray and Arnie tried to undo Wilson's damage.  then came Gov Moon Beam and Michael Picker at the CPUC. Parallel path problems not addressed in Reagan's years and subsequently administrations means you have a core grid  with limitations on the ability to move adequate power supplies at Lugo, Adelante and Devers to customers into core areas. The is no shortage of power. There is a shortage of transmission lines to move power where it is needed.  The fact that the CPUC has never authorized the money to upgrade 4160 volt distribution lines is exhibit one  in the vast catalogue of  government mistakes.  I started out at HL&P in 1971 and all of our 4160 had been removed by my second month on the job. That was 1971.

 

[nsdp + 449]

1 hour ago, Tom Nolan said:

Irina Slave (OILPRICE.COM writer) has a great article on this topic...

Europe’s Unforeseen Renewables Problem

By Irina Slav - Jan 31, 2021, 12:00 PM CST

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Europes-Unforeseen-Renewables-Problem.html

ZERO HEDGE ran this story...

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/europes-unforeseen-renewables-problem

Earlier this month, something happened in Europe. It didn’t get as much media attention as the EU’s massive funding plans for its energy transition, but it was arguably as important, if not more. A fault occurred at a substation in Croatia and caused an overload in parts of the grid, which spread beyond the country’s borders. This created a domino effect that caused a blackout and prompted electricity supply reductions as far as France and Italy. The problem was dealt with, but it’s only a matter of time before more problems like this occur—the reason: the rise of renewables in the energy mix.

Bloomberg reported on the incident citing several sources from Europe’s utility sector. While no one would directly blame the blackout and the increased risk of more blackouts on renewables, it is evident that Europe’s change in the energy mix is raising this risk.

The problem has to do with grid frequency. Normally, it is 50 hertz, Bloomberg’s Jesper Starn, Brian Parkin, and Irina Vilcu explain. If the frequency deviates from this level, connected equipment gets damaged, and power outages follow. The frequency is normally maintained by the inertia created by the spinning turbines of fossil fuel—or nuclear, or hydro—power plants. With Europe cutting its coal and nuclear capacity, this inertia declines as well, exposing the grid to frequency deviations.

“The problem isn’t posed by growing green electricity directly but by shrinking conventional capacity,” the chief electricity system modeler at Cologne University’s EWI Institute of Energy Economics told Bloomberg.

This is pretty much the same as saying it is not the pandemic that is wreaking havoc on the global economy, but the lack of enough healthy people to keep it going. Wind and solar power, for all their benefits, such as a much lower emissions footprint, do have drawbacks, as does every source of energy. In this case, the drawback is the intermittency of generation. This intermittency cannot maintain the inertia necessary to keep the grid at 50 hertz.

Related: Can Big Oil Surprise This Earnings Season?

Utilities know about the problem. “It is not a question about if a blackout in some European regions will happen, it is only a question of when it will happen,” said Stefan Zach, head of communication at Austrian utility EVN, told Bloomberg. “A blackout might happen even in countries with high standards in electricity grid security.”

But the problem is not being publicized enough to spur those in charge of decision-making into action. The Bloomberg report mentions things like energy storage and batteries, yet batteries—where they are now—cannot replace the inertia-creating turbines of coal-fired power plants, which keep the grid buzzing at 50 hertz. They would help in a brief outage, but they can’t keep millions of households and industrial facilities running. Take the world’s biggest battery to date, currently in construction in Australia: with its capacity of 300 MW/450 MWh, the battery can power half a million households. For an hour.

Problems such as what happened at the Croatian substation highlight one fact that few of those riding on the renewables bandwagon would like to talk about: that solar and wind capacity is maybe being added a little too quickly, while fossil fuel capacity is being retired a little too quickly.

Take Germany: it is fast reducing its nuclear and coal generating capacity. And yet, the country, which is the poster boy for renewable energy in the EU, is currently generating more energy from coal than from wind, simply because the wind does not blow permanently. It is also generating zero energy from solar at the moment because it’s winter, which does not make for the optimal conditions for solar farms.

Or take California and its rolling blackouts last summer when heat waves hit the state that gets a third of its electricity from renewable sources. At the time, officials refused to acknowledge this fact as a potential cause of the blackouts, but with or without acknowledgment, the fact remained: electricity output from solar farms declines as the sun goes down just when there is a surge in demand from households. At the same time, as it retires its natural gas plants, the state did not have enough backup generation capacity to make up for the lost supply.

Or here’s another example: back in 2018, the UK went for nine days with zero power generations from wind farms. Why? Because of something called a wind draught. At the time, this event led to a spike in next-day electricity prices, and forecasts for calm weather for two weeks did not help. The UK government now wants to power the whole country with wind power, which in light of past events might be a little bit risky.

Renewable energy is a great thing. Once they’re manufactured, solar panels and wind turbines do not emit greenhouse gases for the duration of their production life. Solar specifically has become a cheap way to become relatively independent in terms of electricity supply if you happen to live in a sunny part of the world.

Yet solar and wind have been touted as a silver bullet solution to the emissions problem the planet is having, and they are not a silver bullet. There is no silver bullet solution. The sooner decision-makers realize this, the sooner they can start working on ways to reconcile renewables with grid reliability. Otherwise, we might see an unwelcome repeat of what many Soviet bloc countries experienced in the 1980s—timed blackouts lasting months and even years.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

The fundamental  problem in Europe is that they are tying to use Grid Formed Inverters (https://www.entsoe.eu/network_codes/rfg/) which are silicon based.  They short out after a few seconds  of overload. Synchronous  condensers (like Biblis in Germany)are iron and copper and last longer. The rest of the above is ignorance of the real conditions on the  various grids.   Wind and solar re not the cause.  The problem began when Germany started shutting down the nukes without planning to replace the reactive power provided by the nukes. just like closing SONGS in California.

Edited February 3, 2021 by nsdp

[LANDMAN X + 181]

9 hours ago, NickW said:

Groundhog day is back. 

CO2 emissions are about 250mt per year or roughly what the UK produces every 7 months. 

Volcanic sulphur and particulates (ash) cause short term cooling effects - globally if the Volcano is big enough such as Pinatubo. 

Nick, I pointed out just one blowing its top in recent times. Mt. St. Helen blew 30 years of junk (prior all worlds waste combined) in atmosphere 1980.  My family station wagon, in Fargo, ND, was covered in ash.  Blast was 1200 miles away.  Can anyone explain how a mile of ice could form above Canada during just one ice age?  Last one or two actually diverted the Missouri river flowing north into Canada to the south as it is now.  Red River flows north into Canada.  The earth has had many warming and cooling periods, we know, in recent history.  England once produced wine during a warming period.  We all like renewables but I'm not convinced we can spend are way out of fossil fuels overnight by tax and spend green policies.       

[turbguy + 1,554]

1 hour ago, nsdp said:

Turbo guy you and your friends here don't know the first thing about Power Generation and Transmission Grid  operations. I started 50 years ago and got my IEEE Power Generation and Transmission Protection certification in 1975.   I spent 10 years ending in 2014 as one of two independent members of  the WECC Constraints and Needs Committee(including CAISO) for NERC. You need to start by reading and understanding this paper from IEEE Spectrum. https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-smarter-grid/zombie-coal-plants-reanimated-to-stabilize-the-grid

You control frequency by increasing grid voltage and reactive power level.  Generator speed has nothing to do with frequency control."Synchronous condensers are dynamic controllers of reactive power—AC whose current wave leads or lags the voltage wave and whose presence determines local grid voltage. Adding current to the spinning condenser’s coils produces reactive power—measured in volt-amperes reactive, or VARs—and boosts grid voltage. Reduce the current and the machine absorbs VARs, depressing voltage.

"Severe voltage drops, for example, hobble SVCs, whose reactive power output drops at double the rate of line voltage. In contrast, a synchronous condenser’s spinning rotor keeps on pumping out reactive power. It will also generate real power if needed, moderating the drop in AC frequency that would result, say, from shutting down a power plant.

And the condenser’s output can briefly handle several times its rated capacity for tens of seconds as its metal components heat up temporarily—behavior that is not possible for devices relying on comparatively fragile silicon switches. “Because they’re iron and copper, they have a lot of overload capability. You can’t overload silicon significantly,” says Nicholas Miller, a power systems expert with GE Energy Consulting, in Schenectady, N.Y.

"Speed was a critical factor in the California Independent System Operator’s decision to order a condenser conversion, though in a gas-fired plant instead of a coal plant, following the shuttering in 2012 of the San Onofre nuclear power plant. Without the 2,200-MW plant, located between Los Angeles and San Diego, voltage control weakened all across Southern California.( you are wrong about what can be done with nuke plants) “The potential for rolling blackouts in the L.A. basin was seen as a very high risk,” says Chris Davidson, an electrical solutions business-­development director for Siemens, which did the conversion.(Huntington beach Plant)

"Seeing what the converted condensers could do, meanwhile, inspired San Diego Gas & Electric Co. to start one of the largest deployments of new synchronous condensers. The utility expected to start spinning its first two condensers last month and plans to install five more in 2017.

"Studies directed by GE’s Miller for the U.S. National Renewable Energy Lab show that converted condensers could serve as a bulwark against blackouts on future grids. Though the electronic inverters built into renewable power plants can help manage grid stability far more than is appreciated today, they lack the inertia that can help get a grid through a major fault.

"Another wild card to watch, says Miller, is wind power. “You can suck some of the energy out of that rotating mass temporarily and give it to the grid,” says Miller."  But there is a catch. see https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/renewables/can-synthetic-inertia-stabilize-power-grids

"The trouble, says Aubut, is what happens after the frequency drop. In all but the strongest wind conditions(45kph+) providing synthetic inertia will slow a wind turbine's rotor. Re-accelerating to optimal speed thereafter absorbs some of the wind power that the turbine can export to the grid. Data from ENERCON shows power reductions of up to 60 percent in some turbines.

This energy recovery phase delays the grid’s frequency recovery. After Québec’s December 2015 transformer event, for example, the system frequency flat-lined for several seconds at 59.4 Hz before additional power reserves could push it back to 60. Under different conditions, says Aubut, that post-inertia recovery could have actually caused a “double-dip” in system frequency, increasing the risk of triggering protective relays at substations and causing blackouts. 

Hydro-Québec is revising its synthetic inertia to minimize the risk of a double-dip. It plans to limit power reduction during recovery to no more than 20 percent of a wind turbine’s capacity. Turbine manufacturers are already testing second-generation synthetic inertia systems that comply with the new standard."

 

Huh? You don't get 60 HZ without 2-pole synchronous machines running at 3600 RPM, or 4 pole machines running at1800 RPM, PERIOD!! 

If they run slower, you get less HZ, if they run faster, you get more HZ. There is no substitute for synchronous machine RPM.

If real load (real watts, real power) on the grid increases without any prime mover "real power" input (more torque), the frequency falls, and vice-versa.  The prime mover(s) only provides torque (real power).

You bring up VARS, (Imaginary power) which is a very valid consideration. That portion of current that is out of phase with voltage, and does no useful work, but still heats conductors due to I square R losses.  That portion of the current that "sloshes" back and forth between the "loads" and the generator windings.  More current equates to higher voltage drops in transmission lines and other equipment between the generator and load (s). To correct this, you over (or under) excite the generators, while keeping within the capability of the machine(s), or other grid components. Or you add capacitors to the system.  Or other VAR correcting devices, such as synchronous condensers, or power electronics.

Synchronous condensers (say from retired, converted coal plants) really can be quite useful in supporting system voltage, while adding inertia to the system, until frequency falls (or rises) too far, and protective relaying trips.  You can only extract that inertia from these machines so far.  And they don't provide ANY torque. Wind turbines can provide more on the downside.  Yes, you gotta wait for recovery.  And as you note, wind turbine manufactures are working on that.

A nuc that is already running "pedal to the metal" cannot provide more torque to the system.  It CAN potentially provide more (or absorb) VARS if within the generator's capability curves, just like a synchronous condenser can.

The trick is to avoid transformer failures, or other "within grid equipment" disturbances to start with.

Remember to keep your phase currents balanced, too!  You don't want to "french fry" generator rotors...

 

 

 

Edited February 3, 2021 by turbguy

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

31 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Huh? You don't get 60 HZ without 2-pole synchronous machines running at 3600 RPM, or 4 pole machines running at1800 RPM, PERIOD!! 

If they run slower, you get less HZ, if they run faster, you get more HZ. There is no substitute for synchronous machine RPM.

If real load (real watts, real power) on the grid increases without any prime mover "real power" input (more torque), the frequency falls, and vice-versa.  The prime mover(s) only provides torque.

You bring up VARS, (Imaginary power) which is a very valid consideration. That portion of current that is out of phase with voltage, and does no useful work, but still heats conductors due to I square R losses.  That portion of the current that "sloshes" back and forth between the "loads" and the generator windings.  More current equates to higher voltage drops in transmission lines and other equipment between the generator and load (s). To correct this, you over (or under) excite the generators, while keeping within the capability of the machine(s), or other grid components. Or you add capacitors to the system.  Or other VAR correcting devices, such as synchronous condensers, or power electronics.

Synchronous condensers (say from retired, converted coal plants) really can be quite useful in supporting system voltage, while adding inertia to the system, until frequency falls (or rises) too far, and protective relaying trips.  You can only extract that inertia from these machines so far.  And they don't provide ANY torque. Wind turbines can provide more on the downside.  Yes, you gotta wait for recovery.  And as you note, wind turbine manufactures are working on that.

A nuc that is already running "pedal to the metal" cannot provide more torque to the system.  It CAN potentially provide more (or absorb) VARS if within the generator's capability curves.

The trick is to avoid transformer failures, or other "within grid equipment" disturbances to start with.

 

 

 

Young man he is not speaking to setting up a home solar system or powering your tiny home with a generator. 

Perhaps a you might do some history of 50/60 Hz power transmission. You will find there is a lot of incompatibility.

 

[turbguy + 1,554]

1 hour ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Young man he is not speaking to setting up a home solar system or powering your tiny home with a generator. 

Perhaps a you might do some history of 50/60 Hz power transmission. You will find there is a lot of incompatibility.

 

I honesty have no idea of what you mean.  Please enlighten me.  In the name of Charles Proteus Steinmetz, Please!

Edited February 3, 2021 by turbguy

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

36 minutes ago, turbguy said:

I honesty have no idea of what you mean.  Please enlighten me.  In the name of Charles Proteus Steinmetz, Please!

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

Start here and reflect

[turbguy + 1,554]

18 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

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

Start here and reflect

Yes, I'm quite familiar with at least the North American side of this History.  Now we operate at 60 HZ (with a few, VERY FEW ancient facilities that operate at 25 HZ that might as well be islanded except for rotating frequency converters connected to the "grid").  

Else, I don't see anything in that link that contradicts anything I have said.

Ca you point it out?