[HN Gopher] Turning off electrical grids to prevent wildfire- a ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Turning off electrical grids to prevent wildfire- a complex,
       technical operation
        
       Author : rntn
       Score  : 29 points
       Date   : 2024-04-14 19:00 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (theconversation.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (theconversation.com)
        
       | puzzledobserver wrote:
       | The Practical Engineering Youtube channel has a very interesting
       | video on black starts of an electrical grid [0]. Are there any
       | additional challenges in turning a grid off?
       | 
       | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOSnQM1Zu4w
        
         | idiotsecant wrote:
         | There's a pretty big challenge, which is that you aren't
         | turning off a grid at all -just particular transmission lines.
         | Your typical power flows rely on those lines being up, and
         | without them strange conditions can occur. Its sometimes just
         | as bad to have an unusually lightly loaded line as it is to
         | have an overloaded line. Lightly loaded lines with lots of
         | generation end up messing up line voltages due to capacitive
         | loading. You can end up having to shut down a line or taking
         | other remedial action like shutting down generation because not
         | _enough_ power is flowing through a line.
        
       | ckdarby wrote:
       | I suspect we'll see more openness to this with homes in the
       | future coming with batteries to power for 12-24 hours without the
       | grid.
        
         | robocat wrote:
         | In my experience 12-24 hours won't help you enough in a city,
         | and is woefully inadequate in rural areas.
         | 
         | There are better ways to spend your money to cover risks than
         | batteries. Maybe if you were getting a battery for other
         | reasons, or as a luxury if you are wealthy enough.
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | I think if you have a big enough time of use differential,
           | and you have significant use during peak pricing, you can
           | justify a local battery system for peak shaving and get
           | backup power 'for free' or vice versa.
           | 
           | 12-24 hours would have outlasted any outage I've experienced,
           | until I moved to my current place, but it has a propane
           | fueled whole house generator (and low utility rates with no
           | time of use component; i haven't attempted the math, but I'm
           | pretty sure running from my generator is way more expensive
           | than utility power... OTOH, I've had many utility failures
           | and only one generator failure (12v battery failed due to
           | charger failure))
        
       | amluto wrote:
       | I would like to know why grid operators turn portions off instead
       | of installing devices to mitigate the fire risk when a fault
       | occurs. "Rapid Earth Fault CLearance" devices (REFCL), also known
       | as ground fault neutralizers, are a newish but commercially
       | available technology that massively reduces current, and thus
       | heating energy, delivered into a ground fault. In testing in
       | Australia, a REFCL-protected line was intentionally dropped into
       | dry plants without setting them on fire.
       | 
       | What gives? I doubt these devices are so expensive that they're
       | worse than the cost of "public safety power shutdowns" or of the
       | billions of dollars that utilities are spending, and charging
       | customers for, for undergrounding of lines and extra tree work.
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | > I would like to know why grid operators turn portions off
         | instead of installing devices to mitigate the fire risk when a
         | fault occurs.
         | 
         | The stuff you're mentioning is - at least from a quick Google,
         | I'll admit that - only certified in Australia. Even here in
         | Germany, introducing that onto the grid would take years for
         | certifications. Bureaucracy moves slowly.
         | 
         | Then, you'd need to upgrade _a lot_ of transmission lines
         | including the regional distribution grid (i.e.  < 100 kV), a
         | single unprotected line in a danger-prone area is enough to
         | start a deadly fire. And there are a looooot of power lines
         | that haven't had an inspection for decades - the hook that
         | caused the 2018 fire was almost a century old [1]. And so,
         | instead of inspecting, maintaining and upgrading the many
         | thousand km's of national and regional lines, shutting them
         | down during peak fire condition times is cheaper.
         | 
         | IMHO it only makes sense to install REFCL devices as part of a
         | general overhaul of an entire transmission grid _area_.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-old-metal-hook-could-
         | deter...
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | Because they already have the ability to turn portions off.
         | Installing a lot of new equipment means regulatory effort to
         | get a plan approved, and a lot of installation labor.
         | 
         | I imagine these systems will be put in place over time, but I
         | was just looking at Wikipedia on Reclosers and they said
         | Sensitive Ground Fault protection reduces the risk by 80%; if
         | the risk is high enough, that probably still warrants
         | deenergizing risky lines at times.
        
       | sanderjd wrote:
       | The thing that was most unclear with this incident in Colorado
       | was: How did they decide which areas to shut down? It didn't make
       | me feel like the people in charge knew what they were doing, when
       | we left our neighborhood where the power was intentionally turned
       | off (for over a day) to go to our friends' house where it was
       | kept on, despite them having much stronger winds both in the
       | forecast and in actuality. Their house is also in an area with
       | much higher fire risk, surrounded by dry windswept vegetation.
       | It's hard to trust an organization that says "we're turning off
       | your power due to your area's unique risk of fire" when that
       | conclusion seems incomprehensible to anyone aware of the weather
       | and geography of the area. It's very hard not to wonder whether
       | they are ignorant or are not being forthright. Maybe there is
       | some information that would show that they made the right
       | decisions, but if so, they certainly haven't shared it yet!
        
         | zmj wrote:
         | Agreed this was confusing. It seems like the risk factors that
         | would lead to turning off a neighborhood (non-buried power
         | lines, exposure to wind and available fuels) should have been
         | known and announced in advance.
         | 
         | I'm in Lafayette, and it seemed strange that our power was on
         | when neighborhoods in Louisville and Erie were out.
        
           | sanderjd wrote:
           | Yep, and pretty much the entirety of Boulder preemptively
           | turned off, _but not_ the areas south along 93 and to the
           | east into Arvada near Rocky Flats, which are the exact super
           | dry and windy areas where the Marshall Fire began.
           | 
           | I actually do think there must be some plausible explanation,
           | but it's hard not to feel sympathetic to the people who are
           | convinced it is a tit for tat by Xcel, targeted at people who
           | have been involved in recent legal confrontations with them.
           | There are good reasons they aren't being given the benefit of
           | the doubt here.
           | 
           | I honestly worry more that truth is they were just winging it
           | without any strong process or data with which to make the
           | decision, and that this is their plan moving forward.
           | 
           | But the good news is that the PUC investigating what happened
           | is the way to get these answers, and is exactly what Governor
           | Polis is pushing for.
        
         | michaelrpeskin wrote:
         | My power wasn't turned off - I did get the "we might have to
         | turn your power off" warning though.
         | 
         | I live in probably one of the worst areas for wind, and had
         | gusts to 100 that Saturday night - didn't get any sleep!
         | 
         | I had studied the local grid a bit for some other reasons a
         | while ago, here's how I would put the pieces together:
         | 
         | My neighborhood is all buried lines, and everything is buried
         | starting right near our substation. No raised distribution
         | lines to worry about. However, it's still not really
         | distribution lines that are going to cause wildfires, it's the
         | transmission lines that go through the dry forest. Wind taking
         | out a distribution line isn't that big of a deal, and it
         | wouldn't cause much downstream fire risk.
         | 
         | My co-worker who lives about a half mile from me was without
         | power for nearly 2 days. In other power outages, we've compared
         | notes. Even though they live closer to my substation than I do,
         | they're on a different substation.
         | 
         | The transmission line that powers their substation goes right
         | through the mountains. It's really close to lots of dry fuel
         | and the towers are very far apart, so it would be easy to get
         | those lines to swing in the wind. Additionally, the way the
         | winds blow, if their lines did arc and cause a fire, the wind
         | would sweep it right into town.
         | 
         | So you really don't want to look at "why was my neighborhood
         | without power, we didn't get much wind." You want to look at
         | "where does my substation get it's power, and would an arc on
         | that transmission line be catastrophic".
         | 
         | At least in my immediate area, the substations that were shut
         | down were exactly the ones I would have shut down just by
         | looking at a map and saying "if it's windy and dry here, do I
         | want an energized line?".
         | 
         | I don't know about the decisions in the wider Front Range area,
         | but I would be willing to bet that 1) it's a pain to de- (and
         | re-) energize lines, so they don't do it without weighing the
         | risk, and 2) much of our transmission lines out here are in the
         | mountains to the west, which is terrible when you have westerly
         | winds that will blow the fire into town, so they have a high
         | risk weighting.
        
       | ThinkBeat wrote:
       | There is a bad snowstorm coming in folks. Snow, high winds and
       | temperatures best thought about in Kelvins. Just joking with ya-
       | all. Looks like we will be snowed in for a week or so. To keep
       | ya-all safe, the utility will be turning off the grid. Remember
       | to stay warm.
        
         | zmj wrote:
         | That's actually a real concern for using this strategy in
         | Colorado in the fall. The Marshall Fire (mentioned in the
         | article) was followed by snow and temperatures well below
         | freezing. Sadly, this probably killed some pets that escaped
         | the fire.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-04-14 23:01 UTC)