Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Power outages explained
Shots across the bow ^ | August 15, 2003 | Shots across the bow

Posted on 08/16/2003 11:28:25 AM PDT by tictoc

Power grids and blackouts

Yep, the lights went out for 50 million people yesterday, and we still don't really know why it happened. Canada blames a fault in our system; we blame a fault in Canada's system, or a bad transmission line in the Midwest, but we're all sure it wasn't a terrorist.

Why? Just because nothing blew up?

Let's try a little experiment, change the word terror to sabotage. Sound any more likely now?

The leading theory on the root cause of the failure, at least, the leading theory as I rode in to work this morning, was the simultaneous failure of multiple transmission lines in the northern Mid-West US.

Hmmm. When I learned to trouble shoot, they taught us that multiple faults are very rare, and to look for a single fault first. If you seemed to be chasing a multiple fault, step back and look again. You probably missed something.

Here's a scenario to consider: Some idiot with an axe to grind and no sense of self preservation decides to die gloriously for Allah or whoever. He shorts two high tension transmission lines together, vaporizing himself while causing a cascading overload which shuts down power to 50 million people.

That's "simultaneous failure of multiple transmission lines."

This is offered as a possibility. I have no evidence, not even a hunch. Possibly a short occurred naturally, I don't know. But I'm getting a bit tired of the first words coming out of every politico's mouth when something happens being "It wasn't terrorism" when in truth, there's no way to know.

Don't lie to me.

OK, rant over. Now to the informative portion of this post.

There are a lot of folks griping about the collapse of the power grid, and the predictable voices are blaming the President, as if he had something to do with the design and construction of the grid. First of all, the thing wasn't designed; it grew. Second, it's not a monolithic system with some control room out of Star Trek. It's grunches of smaller, local systems interconnected, co-operative but independent of each other. Third, the complaint that "Somebody ought to do something" is easy; determining what to actually do is the hard part.

To give you some idea of how hard that question is, I have to take you into the complexities of the power grid, give you a tour of how it operates, and why it is set up the way it is. My knowledge in this area is based on my Navy career as Nuclear Reactor Operator. I didn't deal directly with the power distribution system, but through extensive cross training, I am familiar with the principles and techniques involved. And if I make any mistakes, I'm sure Sparky will correct me.

A simple power grid has three components:

The generator converts physical energy, ie movement, into electrical energy. The transmission lines carry this energy from the plant to the distribution center, where it is routed to the loads. If any of the three components fail, the grid goes down and the lights go out, and Auntie Eunice can't watch her stories.

Deciding that this was a bad thing, some fairly smart people decided that if you put two small generators instead of one big generator in the grid, if one failed, you could still handle most of the load with the one that was left, and Auntie wouldn't miss finding out if Jim and Suzy got married, even though Suzy was pregnant with Ralph's baby.

So that's what they did.

Now it gets interesting.

Two generators carrying the same load are said to be operating in parallel, like two horses pulling the same wagon. Now there has to be some way of controlling how much of the electrical load each generator is carrying, so that the system will be stable. Like our horse and wagon, if one horse is pulling harder than the other, not only is the off horse not doing his share of the work, but the wagon is also harder to steer. Unbalanced loads on parallel generators have a similar effect. Fortunately, it turns out that electricity is pretty cool, because it will automatically distribute the load based on the voltages the generators are putting out. The higher the voltage, the more load the generator will carry, reducing the load on the other generator. So we can control the output voltage of each generator to match the loads. Remember this bit, because it becomes very important later in the discussion.

So what we've done is increase the reliability of the system by building in backup generating plants, which adds both spare capacity, and redundancy. The problem is that building plants is expensive. There's a constant battle being fought over how much spare capacity the system needs, and how much redundancy is cost effective. Spare capacity costs money, but doesn't generate revenue, so plant owners want the minimum amount necessary to ensure reliability. Plant managers on the other hand, like to maximize spare capacity to be prepared for outages or overloads.

That's what a local system looks like. Now let's zoom out a little and look at the regional picture. We've got several local power grids, all working to supply power to their communities, all wrestling with the need to grow to meet demand, and to maintain enough spare capacity to handle outages. At some point, a couple of these systems got together, and realized that if they connected their power systems, they would increase their available spare capacity, and redundancy without having to build new plants. It was highly unlikely that a problem would strike both systems simultaneously, which meant that each system could rely on their own spare capacity, and the spare capacity of the other system to handle any outages.

The plant owners were happy with this arrangement, because now they could sell their spare capacity to another system, turning an overhead item into a revenue generating item. The plant managers were happy, because now they had enhanced redundancy, and massive spare capacity.

This is how the power grid came to exist. Discrete power systems interconnected to share both the load, and spare capacity.

"Now this all sounds great, but if the system is so stable, how come we still get massive blackouts?"

Well, there are two factors operating here. Many major cities do not generate anywhere near enough power to supply their loads. They depend on shared power from outside the city to meet their needs. The recent energy crisis in California was a perfect illustration of this. Due to outages, maintenance and other factors, the state could not generate enough electricity to meet its needs, and had to buy energy from other states. If a large city loses its access to that shared power, through a fault in the transmission or distribution system, it will not have enough power to sustain its load, and there will be a blackout. The second factor is that demand for electricity is outstripping supply. The grid has a fair amount of spare capacity under normal use conditions, but when power demand hits a peak, like it did this week due to the hot weather, spare capacity in the region is almost nil. Any outage at that point is extremely likely to cascade, spreading far beyond the initial blackout.

"That's the second time you've talked about a cascade. What do you mean?"

(Excerpt) Read more at shotsacrossthebow.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News
KEYWORDS: blackout; cause; outage; powergrids; poweroutage
While the big fat New York Times is apparently unable to provide answers to how power outages happen and what is the nature of an electricity grid, this blogger came up with explanations that to my laymans' eye sound informative and reasonable.

Another blogger analyzed usage graphs from the Web and drew his preliminary conclusions here.

1 posted on 08/16/2003 11:28:25 AM PDT by tictoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tictoc
Just unsubstantiated mumbo jumbo. There's a guy in canada who blogged the cia did the world trade center crashes because you can't use cell phones from airplanes and it sounded just as reasonable.

And if it *WAS* terrorism then hooo-friggen-rah for the media that finally got a clue. If it was terrorism then the terrorists got NOTHING out of this. Just a few million people who shrugged it off as a naturall hapenstance. No message got out, nobody got scared, nobody got angry. The sick relationship between the terrorist and the press, broken.

2 posted on 08/16/2003 12:03:04 PM PDT by pcx99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tictoc; Beacon Falls
BUMP

Terrorism, or sabotage, come in many forms. Not saying this is muslim connected or not. Just think "WORM" "WINDOWS". There's plenty of nasty-ass people out there to consider....JMHO.

FMCDH

3 posted on 08/16/2003 12:07:29 PM PDT by nothingnew (I've changed my tagline and will tell no one what it is until I'm on the Jay Leno show!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tictoc
One scenario I've seen suggested is that some power plants aren't capable of safely dealing with rapidly-varying load conditions except via emergency shutdown. If a nuclear plant is, at a given time, supporting two cities and one of them suddenly sees a massive power draw from outside, the link between the plant and the city might open to avoid excessive drain on the nuclear plant. Unfortunately, the plant might not be able to accommodate an instantaneous 50% load reduction without an emergency shutdown (the nuclear pile is going to produce a certain amount of heat per second until its output can be 'ramped down', and that heat has to go someplace).

If this is indeed the operative scenario, perhaps what's needed is to construct some thermal reservoirs near the plants which contain a fair amount of water along with some large resistive heating elements. In case part of the plant's load needs to be disconnected, divert energy into the reservoir. Since the water wouldn't generally be circulating, there wouldn't be any need for expensive purified water; rainwater would probably suffice for baseline usage, and tap water for replenishment.

4 posted on 08/16/2003 12:17:35 PM PDT by supercat (TAG--you're it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pcx99
Well, the politicians are gearing up to use this. Whether that will last we will have to see.
5 posted on 08/16/2003 12:21:21 PM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.collegemedianews.com *some interesting radio news reports here; check it out*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tictoc
Another blogger analyzed usage graphs from the Web and drew his preliminary conclusions here.

That's outrageous. We can't go around letting people informing themselves and reaching conclusions while bypassing the New York Times.

6 posted on 08/16/2003 12:33:32 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tictoc
Excellent article. The comments after the article (at the blog site) were informative also.
7 posted on 08/16/2003 12:37:45 PM PDT by FReepaholic (My other tag line is hilarious.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tictoc
Did you see the latest, which purports to explain it, except this doesn't make sense either?

Blackout Pinned on Three Ohio Failures (claim they found "real" cause)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/965237/posts

WASHINGTON (AP)--The failure of three transmission lines in northern Ohio was the likely trigger of the nation's biggest power blackout, a leading investigator said Saturday.

Experts are working to understand why the disruption spread throughout the Northeast and Midwest and into Canada, and was not contained.

===

3 transmission lines simultaneously!!!
8 posted on 08/16/2003 2:10:42 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pcx99
Regardless of the cause, the public reaction has to be deeply disturbing to the terrorists and their stooges on the left. From my vantage point in Cleveland, there was nowhere near any mass panic. People were extremely cooperative and friendly and I haven't heard of anything near to a breakdown in any other impacted areas.
9 posted on 08/16/2003 2:16:44 PM PDT by Ukiapah Heep (Shoes for Industry!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ukiapah Heep
Hold Muh Powerline Alert!

Gum

10 posted on 08/16/2003 2:18:06 PM PDT by ChewedGum ( http://king-of-fools.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
The more I read about the power grid, the more it becomes baffling why huge power outages like last Thursday occur so rarely.

Just goes to show, things we take for granted, like electricity, are not simple at all.

11 posted on 08/16/2003 2:18:31 PM PDT by tictoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tictoc
Bump for later!
12 posted on 08/16/2003 2:20:24 PM PDT by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson