- #36
- 11,308
- 8,744
Read #29.DaveE said:Yes, the devil is in the details.
Read #29.DaveE said:Yes, the devil is in the details.
DaveE said:I think the interesting part of this is the fall out regarding public attitudes towards regulation vs free market; cheap energy vs. reliable supply; collective solutions vs. isolation from other states, etc. Texas has been an outlier in these choices. Will that continue?
That's a tricky one. While in itself it's true: in practice it's often used to reduce the amount of reserves (especially in case some heavily donated intermittent sources pressuring the grid), so overall you can easily end with just bigger blackouts. As it went in Europe, a continent wide blackout is no longer just a nightmare - it's already an existing danger.artis said:1) A smaller grid with too small reserve capacity is more likely to fail than a larger one with more backups, this I think is pretty much a universal axiom
Tom.G said:A case of You Reap What You Sow.
Reminds me of a question concerning the safety of nuclear power plants from an anti-nuclear activist, "What would happen if a giant asteroid hit a nuclear plant?" The paraphrased response was "if an asteroid hit a nuclear plant, the plant wouldn't be the problem."anorlunda said:A giant asteroid crashing into Earth could cause a world-wide blackout. But we wouldn't care, because we would all be dead anyhow.
Not a primary cause, but certainly a contributor to the fiasco that unfolded. If power had been available from Louisiana and/or Arkansas, assuming there was plenty of reserve/excess, then perhaps gas transmission lines could have delivered gas if the problem had been losing electrical power to the compressors.anorlunda said:I say Texas' lack of interstate connections was not a primary cause of this event.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/17/22287130/texas-natural-gas-production-power-outages-frozenNatural gas wells and pipes ill-equipped for cold weather are a big reason why millions of Texans lost power during frigid temperatures this week. As temperatures dropped to record lows across some parts of the state, liquid inside wells, pipes, and valves froze solid.
Ice can block gas flow, clogging pipes. It’s a phenomenon called a “freeze-off” that disrupts gas production across the US every winter. But freeze-offs can have outsized effects in Texas, as we’ve seen this week. The state is a huge natural gas producer — and it doesn’t usually have to deal with such cold weather.
While the frigid cold slashed fuel supplies of all sorts, it also drove up demand for natural gas to heat homes. That “mismatch” is what’s driving these blackouts, says Coombs. There simply hasn’t been enough fuel on hand to power the state’s electricity needs. Natural gas production was pretty much halved in Texas and its gas-rich Permian Basin during the recent cold and stormy weather. It fell from 22.5 billion cubic feet of gas produced per day in December to between 10 to 12 billion cubic feet of gas per day this week, according to estimates from BTU Analytics.
That drop-off in production is thanks to freeze-offs at wellheads where oil and gas are pumped out of the ground. But the cold has also stopped equipment from working properly at gas processing plants, Coombs says. Processing plants separate gas from fluid and impurities; when equipment freezes, plants have to heat it up or wait for temperatures to rise before they can resume their work.
While other states invest more in equipment that helps prevent freeze-offs, Texas hasn’t seen the need. North Dakota typically sees 20 days a year with freeze-off events, while the Permian Basin would normally have just four days a year with freeze-offs disrupting gas production, according to BTU Analytics.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/wea...or-power-it-wasnt-ready-for-the-extreme-cold/Production of natural gas in the state has plunged, making it difficult for power plants to get the fuel necessary to run the plants. Natural gas power plants usually don’t have very much fuel storage on site, experts said. Instead, the plants rely on the constant flow of natural gas from pipelines that run across the state from areas like the Permian Basin in West Texas to major demand centers like Houston and Dallas.
. . .
The systems that get gas from the Earth aren’t properly built for cold weather. Operators in West Texas’ Permian Basin, one of the most productive oil fields in the world, are particularly struggling to bring natural gas to the surface, analysts said, as cold weather and snow close wells or cause power outages that prevent pumping the fossil fuels from the ground.
“Gathering lines freeze, and the wells get so cold that they can’t produce,” said Parker Fawcett, a natural gas analyst for S&P Global Platts. “And pumps use electricity, so they’re not even able to lift that gas and liquid, because there’s no power to produce.”
It's not the temperature per se, but the accumulation of ice on the blades, which cause imbalance.Regarding contributory causes. Almost all of us (including me) want one or two primary things to blame for bad outcomes. A hypothetical event with 20 causes, each contributing 5% to the risk, would be profoundly unsatisfying to people who would like to render judgement.Astronuc said:Similarly, with wind turbines, they can operate (as long as there is sufficient wind) in cold climates without freezing.
https://atomicinsights.com/south-texas-project-unit-1-tripped-at-0537-on-feb-15-2021/On Monday, Feb. 15, 2021, at 0537, an automatic reactor trip occurred at South Texas Project in Unit 1. The trip resulted from a loss of feedwater attributed to a cold weather-related failure of a pressure sensing lines to the feedwater pumps, causing a false signal, which in turn, caused the feedwater pump to trip. This event occurred in the secondary side of the plant (non-nuclear part of the unit). The reactor trip was a result of the feedwater pump trips. The primary side of the plant (nuclear side) is safe and secured.
I like complicated problems. I've done plenty of root cause failure analyses, mostly with respect to nuclear fuel and core component failures, and there are often several factors (e.g., design, materials, manufacturing and operation). Often though, it's a matter of what was overlooked or ignored in design and/or operations.anorlunda said:Almost all of us (including me) want one or two primary things to blame for bad outcomes. A hypothetical event with 20 causes, each contributing 5% to the risk, would be profoundly unsatisfying to people who would like to render judgement.
It's not a question of rendering judgement, but that the widespread extent and prolonged nature of the failure cannot be attributed to one technical fault. Almost by definition, any failure on this scale must ultimately point to a systematic failure of governance. This is well beyond what could possibly have been caused by one engineering or technical oversight - or even several technical blunders.anorlunda said:It's not the temperature per se, but the accumulation of ice on the blades, which cause imbalance.Regarding contributory causes. Almost all of us (including me) want one or two primary things to blame for bad outcomes. A hypothetical event with 20 causes, each contributing 5% to the risk, would be profoundly unsatisfying to people who would like to render judgement.
Do you mean the Jamaican bobsleigh team?artis said:Well I think this is mainly the same problem as with the joke about the "Jamaican hockey team",
You're trivializing a problem that's more difficult than you think. Studies in many countries have investigated that question and looked at many methods in addition to heating elements. Try this search:artis said:Maybe we need a new patent for wind turbine blades with heating for turbines that work in winter conditions.
For safety reasons, the turbines are shut down while the heating elements melt off the ice, Kurt said. That way, there’s no chance of ice flying off spinning blades, potentially damaging the turbines or, worse, striking someone on the ground, she said.
This article in the Texas Tribune shows an outage map of Texas from 1000-1100 on February 16.anorlunda said:"Rolling blackouts" are supposed to be designed so that no customer is out for more than 3-4 hours (they said 12 hours in the WSJ article). Even in thin walled houses, it may take longer than that for pipes to freeze. But this week, some customers were out for more than 72 hours. That indicates a second level failure. The rolling blackouts didn't roll.
Thanks for the hard data @Astronuc . Imposition of rolling blackouts is a manual thing. People decide where and when, and the influence of politics and/or personal preference are always suspected. At my organization during the 2003 blackout, one operator said "We are about to loose S*******," referring to an upstate city with population 150K. The supervisor said, "F*** S*******. Protect New York City." It has always been the case, that in New York State, only New York City counts.Astronuc said:It's interesting how non-uniform it was, and how some went without power for a few hours to a few days, while other didn't lose power (not referring to El Paso).
Oh, I remember that day. Thanks to deregulation, the local utility, like other utilities, had sold off their plants to merchant producers, so they had to buy power from the grid. Prior to deregulation, the local utility could have isolated itself and remained up. After deregulation, when the grid goes down, everyone goes down. Deregulation never reduced cost or save consumers money, as there was never any significant competition (but that is a different matter).anorlunda said:At my organization during the 2003 blackout, one operator said "We are about to loose S*******," referring to an upstate city with population 150K. The supervisor said, "F*** S*******. Protect New York City." It has always been the case, that in New York State, only New York City counts.
anorlunda said:Thanks for the hard data @Astronuc . Imposition of rolling blackouts is a manual thing. People decide where and when, and the influence of politics and/or personal preference are always suspected. At my organization during the 2003 blackout, one operator said "We are about to loose S*******," referring to an upstate city with population 150K. The supervisor said, "F*** S*******. Protect New York City." It has always been the case, that in New York State, only New York City counts.
No, NYC was out from about 4:15PM to 11PM the same day.Office_Shredder said:Didn't new york city lose power for like, two days then? Am I thinking of a different blackout?
anorlunda said:No, NYC was out from about 4:15PM to 11PM the same day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_blackout_of_2003#New_York
Office_Shredder said:The only mention of 11pm I see there is that the path resumed operating.
Most places restored power by midnight (within 7 hours), some as early as 6 p.m. on August 14 (within 2 hours).[2] New York subways resumed limited services around 8 p.m.[2] Full power was restored to New York City and Toronto on August 16.
nsaspook said:
Or, to put it in other words. . . .12:15 p.m... An operator corrects the telemetry problem, but forgets to restart the monitoring tool.
anorlunda said:A very newsworthy follow-up to this event is the sky high bills that Texas electric consumers faced. Numerous new sources say as high as $17000, for 3 days. That is a very important issue.
...
nsaspook said:Talked to my mom in Texas that never lost power, she pays a typical fixed-rate plan like most people so her bill will not increase. It's a news story that as usual leaves out important facts to make a sexy story. Only the few (from a pool of millions that didn't) that signed up to pay wholesale prices might see a change in the bills due to wholesale price spikes. A few, voluntarily, in the state of Texas, took chances to play the wholesale price game and lost.
https://apnews.com/article/texas-high-electric-bills-explained-aa77ff97be48bf2c8fabfdc2e4a6d08c
jedishrfu said:Yes, but this was advertised to all Texas consumers and many trying to save on electrical bills went for it. Texas is a state that values personal freedom to the extreme.
You can own a gun, carry it anywhere unless there's a prohibition posted. It may be concealed or open depending on the license and you can shoot yourself in the foot but you'll need to pay your own medical bills if you do and maybe tell the police why you did it.
What kind of state is that?
That article is about Griddy, one of the 127 provieders. I can foretell the jokes already -- no Griddy but Greedy.nsaspook said:A few, voluntarily, in the state of Texas, took chances to play the wholesale price game and lost.
It's the same in Vermont. You have to be 16 to carry, but 21 to buy a gun in VT.jedishrfu said:You can own a gun, carry it anywhere unless there's a prohibition posted.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...kouts-one-texas-power-giant-sounded-the-alarmVistra Corp., one of the largest power generators in Texas, said it warned state agencies days before cascading blackouts plunged millions into darkness that internal forecasts showed electricity demand was expected to exceed supply.
I can relate to that.jedishrfu said:As an adult I lived through a few ice storms in Poughkeepsie where the October leaves had yet to fall but during the great ice storm big branches took out the power, telephone and cable lines and blocked the roads and yes still no internet, no cell phone, no telephone, no electricity and no cable. But the kids had fun and the ice on the trees was magical in the moonlight and day too.
One that shot itself into the foot figuratively with its electricity grid.jedishrfu said:You can own a gun, carry it anywhere unless there's a prohibition posted. It may be concealed or open depending on the license and you can shoot yourself in the foot but you'll need to pay your own medical bills if you do and maybe tell the police why you did it.
What kind of state is that?