Will The Power Grid Fail? 251
rhyder writes: "This article from CNET explains the increasing chances that the nations power grid will not be able to support the growing high tech economy.
Maybe it is time for those of you running e-commerce servers out of your home to check out Home Power and generate your own electricity."
The obvious answer to NIMBY is to pay people (Score:3)
For that matter, how many other things do you not want in your back yard? How much would you have to be paid to have them there?
Maybe someday we'll ALL have undesirable things in our back yards, and we'll ALL be subsidising each other.
Re:Solar cells are dirty to make (Score:1)
From tests I have done I have personally seen maximum output power decrease over 20% between 30 degree (F) and 90 degrees.
Marv
G4s are really quite amazing (Score:2)
Power Grid NOT failing...(at least in New England) (Score:1)
We currently have more than enough capacity for current demands and there are new plants being built that will add enough capacity for the next 10 years...
Californias system is also expanding their power capability. My company has the ability to take measures to protect the grid if needed (power reduction, begging the state to send home state workers, and more)... California probably has the same or similar powers.
If these "e commerse" companies need 99.99999 uptime then they should do what hospitals and other critical places do.. build their own backup power system..
As for Y2K issues... I had to work on Y2K EVE because of all the paranoia. There was ONE incident on the entire planet attributed to Y2K (in a Japanese Nuclear plant).
Won't solve the problem (Score:1)
Home generated power will not solve this problem unless the entire power system is rethunk.
There are two reasons for this - firstly, the main consumers of power are either cities or industries, neither of which are suitable for this kind of thing.
However the most important reason is that solar power is generated at the wrong time. power consumption peaks in the morning and just before tea time, with OPHW in the middle of the night. Coal and nuclear power plants take hours (days for nuclear) to change their output, so having power generated in the middle of the day is pretty useless.
I think the only way to solve the problem is to have viable fuel cells and fuel transportation. Then large power plants can simply generate hydrogen to store power, areas can use hydrogen to generate their power or it can be used to smooth out the load and allow cogenerators to really make a difference.
The other problem is with "energy conservation". Remember all that talk back in the eighties about using flourescent lights and efficient appliances? It all came to nothing (at least here in Australia) because people want more and more air conditioning, computers and crap and think the power system is someone else's problem.
I could go on all day (I work for a power distributor), but I'd better stop here.
Re:Privitization is the answer (Score:1)
I sincerely hope this is a joke.
Privatising an industry is great for lowering prices, but in the electricity industry this means slashing maintenance and capital budgets.
So if you want cheap power, fine - but don't expoect reliability when your power company lays off half it's workforce and outsources everything to save a few bucks. Try totally deregulating the industry and see how reliable your power supply is.
If you don't believe me do some research on Mercury Energy in New Zealand.
Government Energy Monopolies may be slow, costly and inefficient but at least they get the job done and are accountable to the consumers.
There are about 525,000 minutes in a year. (Score:2)
Um, dudes, these numbers do not add up.
Even if we assume that that is a peak, and the average is 1/10 that.. How many companies on the planet run 50 billion dollars of revenue a year? More importantly, ANY such company would be plenty big enough to afford to avoid these outages.
The only other thing that plays with that quantity of money is banking. (Credit cards/Stock market), neither of which are californian E-businesses.
So, as written, it reads like trash. They're off by 3 orders of magnitude from the believable values.
Nuclear power (Score:1)
Of coruse, apart from that it is probably the less worse choice because it gives us the time to find a solution (fusion?).
Re:Raise the voltage. Raise the frequency. (Score:1)
There's an "urban myth" of a guy stealing power by placing several large coils in his back yard under a primary transfer line... The power company eventaully sued him.
Distributed Power solutions (Score:1)
You can read one of their reports in this [rmi.org] issue of their newsletter. More stuff is available here [rmi.org].
As fuel cells become more common, the approach becomes realistic.
Supplanting and replacing the old-fashioned power grid system makes alot of sense: You don't lose power in long distance transmission, and your demand and your production can track much more closely. It also has the potential to introduce a powerful market incentive towards conservation. Imagine: everyone has a fuel cell in their home and in their car. The grid is networked so that if you have surplus, you can sell it to the grid; if you need more power, you can buy it. On a hot summer day, you have the choice between paying (probably through the nose) for more power for your A/C, or just plugging in a fan and drinking icewater.
Their time has come (Score:1)
They offer good cost savings, especially when you count how many times you have to replace conventional bulbs, and how much electricity they save over their lifetimes. The initial cost is no longer prohibitive, especially if your local energy utility offers rebates for purchase of CF bulbs. I checking with your local electric company to see if they offer a rebate program. I received a Starlights catalog that advertised quite a large range of lighting options.
The biggest energy savings may come where people replace their energy guzzling halogen lamps. You know them: those torchieres that shine their light upwards. Every so often, you might see a puff of flames as a moth catches fire on the bulb. I have a couple of flourescent lamps that look a lot like these halogen monsters, except they work a lot cooler. If you replace a 500W halogen with a 35W flourescent, you remove a fire hazard from your room. The energy savings will be significant: unlike a comparable appliance like a microwave, these things can be left running unattended for hours.
Apart from energy savings and safety, flourescents can make your life easier. You spend much less time standing on chairs changing light bulbs. Your circuit breaker will not overload because someone turned on the microwave and your halogen lights are on. They run cooler, so they give off less heat: important in the coming summer months. That's why I use CFs where they make sense.
fuel cells for the home (Score:1)
My father, a retired power engineer who worked for the New York State PSC in System Planning told me about Plug Power [plugpower.com] , a company that is making and selling PEM (proton exchange membrane) fuel cells for home use. According to the web site, the fuel cells are powered by "natural gas, propane, or methanol and are expected to achieve 40% electrical efficiency. Excess heat generated by the fuel cell can be captured and used for hot water or heating. When this is done, overall efficiency can exceed 80%."
They've had a house running on a 7kW fuel cell in Upstate New York since June 17, 1998.
Re:Raise the voltage. Raise the frequency. (Score:2)
Re:Think Conservation and Energy Efficiency (Score:2)
Fortunately, modern technology has reduced power needs even for computers. If your computer and monitor is Energy Star-rated it means the computer supports APM or ACPI power management and the monitor supports DPMS power management; you can set it so after a set time the system essentially draws less than two percent of power consumption when everything is on.
Re:Think Conservation and Energy Efficiency (Score:3)
First of all, there is a huge up-front expense for installing solar panels. Several thousand dollars. So I wouldn't say that you aren't giving up anything.
Secondly, there are the maintenance costs. These things can and do break (if not the panels themselves, then the supporting electronics), and you as the owner would have to have them fixed. And given the extremely low demand for people who fix solar electrical systems, you can bet that it costs an aweful lot to have someone fix it for you.
Lastly, electricity from even a government-imposed monopoly is just so damn cheap, relative to all the alternatives. Solar power is just not a really good alternative yet. Hopefully the technology will continue to be developed, and those with lots of disposable income and an environmental bent will continue to test and improve it.
Bad trends in power consumption (Score:4)
1. CPUs requiring 30+ watts of power (50+ for an Athlon), so much that they need their own fans. The geeks that *think* they need 1GHz so they can get 350fps in Quake 3 are a blip on the radar, but realize that these kind of machines will shortly be common in insurance offices and secretary's desktops.
2. High-powered 3D graphics cards being standard in all machines, even though 90% of those machines are only used for word processing and web browsing. Most of the recent chipsets are hot to the touch, even with heat sinks, and many are starting to ship with their own fans.
3. The design of window managers and application software that provide incentive to purchase larger monitors. Having a big monitor is a geek goal, but it's getting more and more uncomfortable to use most window managers on reasonably sized monitors (say 14" or 15"). If you think about it, you're only focused on one application at a time, and the rest of your screen goes to other applications that you're not using at the moment. Windows managers could use a good rethinking here, as it's starting to seem silly to spend your days word processing inside of a window that only takes 50% of the screen. Sure, you could maximize it, but then you just have giant margins. I would be happy with a small monitor, if applications and desktop environments were designed for small monitors, and not huge ones. This is similar to the "gotta get me a massive SUV" trend. People think bigger is so cool, until gas prices get near $2.00 a gallon.
The Great Auckland Blackout in New Zealand (Score:5)
Now lemme clarify. I'm not talking about that piddly little 24 hour blackout that hit San Francisco last year and caused all sorts of havoc and fingerpointing or whatnot.
Nah, the same kiwi's(and I say that with awe and respect) who pretty much invented all that is extreme also had probably the biggest blackout in modern times:
Months.
Big city.
No power.
I remember reading this incredible diary documenting what the city went through(gigantic oil tankers turned into floating generators; power backup systems that survived their "smoke tests" but were never meant to run for weeks on end, etc.) but I can't find it. The best I can see is this link [kiwiclub.org], which does a pretty good job of explaining what happened for those many, many, many months.
I'll leave it to people here to discuss whether it could happen here, but lemme tell you: It has happened, and oh, it did suck.
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
I think we need microwave power from SimCity 2000 (Score:2)
Of course, once the power need it too high for the microwave dish, then you can use fusion power, which is much cleaner than nuclear power which polutes the surrounding air. And fusion plants have no disasters associated with them.
Man, SimCity cities are so much easier than real life... you can just shut off the newspaper and ignore public opinions...
Obvious FUD (Score:2)
As a side effect, the generator companies (who's sales have probably stagnated since Januarty) might get a lift, as will the pyramid schemes based on "geomagnetic home power generation" machines that don't work.
Remember the good old days, when we just thought nukes were going to kill us all? Now it's a different crisis every week, hailed by somebody who wants to sell stuff to us.
Waste water effluent, etc.. (Score:2)
Re:FUD (nt) (Score:2)
The solution to the power problem is simple. (Score:3)
Three words:
Prisoners On Treadmills.
Bowie J. Poag
Re:Waste water effluent, etc.. (Score:2)
Another option, if you can get past the NIMBY, is to build your power plant in your city, and to have utility provided hot water. I think they did this in one town in germany
Re:volts don't kill, amperage kills (n/t) (Score:3)
It only takes a few milli (yes, MILLI) amps to kill you. 100 or so nanoamps can cause serious nerve damage. Your skin usually provides enough resistance to protect you from the occasional causual shock.
The frequency of AC power affects how badly it can hurt you. Less than 100Hz tends to penetrate the skin rather well. Higher frequencies penetrate less -- the current flows over the surface instead of through the flesh. Have you ever played with a Tesla coil? Ever touched a "plasma globe"? I, personally, have touched 37,000V sources (at 25kHz mind you.)
Re:Or can it? - pump storage facility (Score:2)
Re:NIMBY (Score:2)
I actually did this back in '82 (when I was building a new house, and Carter-era tax credits made it more feasible). The power company had to install (at their eexpense) a different kind of power meter to record the power going both ways (though I haven't checked my bill in years to make sure I've been getting my earned credit... dang!)
Details vary by state, but I know NY pays 6 cents/kwh which will hardly make you rich, but helps the system pay for itself . It's pretty much set-and-forget, with an annual mop-down of the teflon-coated solar collectors (which shed snow in the winter, too)
But the real money-saver is solar hot water. It supplements my central heating, and assures that I don't run out of hot water in the morning!
The only complaint I have is that since my house is angled to catch the maximum sun on the back roof, my front yard doesn't get much direct light. The snow in my yard or driveway may not completely melt until 1-2 weeks after the rest of the houses on my street. (which suggest how much otherwise wasted power was harnessed)
Re:NIMBY (Score:2)
And, back on topic, with the nukes out of commission, all those nasty coal plants have been fired up, resulting on Ontario getting the #2 pollution producing state on North America! (yes, Ontario is a province, and I live here, but need to use the word to easily compare to US and Mexico)
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
Living on "Internet" time? (Score:2)
This looks like more hysteria to me, remember back in 96 or so when the internet was going to bring down the phone networks?
So did I, at least SimCity 2000 (Score:2)
Mind Control through power grids (Score:2)
Here's how Power Grid Mind Control(tm) works.
First of all, you'll need the following:
Assembly:
Method:
Conclusion:
The power grid can be very useful in the hands of trained insurgents, but dangerous to the cause of liberation. Use with care!
solar energy... (Score:2)
I remember that there was some experimental home down in Florida that was just a double-wide trailer home with solar panels for singles. They claimed that not only could they run the house off of it, but actually produced more than they used from time to time and would recieve credit vouchers from the local electric company.
This was a while ago, too. I'm sure that the technology is better now. And you could go as far as you want with it. Just a power supplement to try to save a little money when you're running the AC all day in the summer or go full bore and see if you can try to power totally off of it. I wouldn't mind giving the former a try myself if I owned a home.
Recent history of the power consumption mess (Score:2)
From 1994-1996, we were getting lots of experience with software rendering. It was slow, it was annoying, but we were getting good at it. Then the Voodoo 1 became popular, and we had more power than we knew what to do with. So we started writing games specifcially for that chipset, and we just started scratching the surface of what it could do. Then all these other chipsets started getting marketshare, those from Nvidia, those from 3Dlabs, those from Rendition. So we had to give up tuning our code for Glide and got into the whole OpenGL/Direct3D API and driver nonsense that we still haven't gotten out of. Performance was watered down as a result.
Then the Voodoo 2 hit in early 1998. We had to focus on a variety of cards and APIs by then, so we couldn't take full advantage of what it had to offer. If you consider that the coin-op San Francisco Rush was powered by a Voodoo 1, and it surpassed just about everything that was released for the Voodoo 2, you'll get a feeling for how things were. But the Voodoo 2 was cool, so we pushed back into Glide. Then the TNT was announced and gave similar performance. It might have been better on the benchmarks, but our 3D rendering code was getting pretty spread out and API-heavy at that point. We didn't push either card to its limit.
The 3DNow CPU extensions were released, but we ignored them because we had too much else to worry about.
Intel announced their so-called "Katmai" extensions for vector math, which ended up in the Pentium III. Honestly, we didn't have time to listen. Cards and drivers were changing so fast that we didn't want to blow our test suite that wide open. From what I hear, most developers ignored them too. Driver writers didn't, but driver writers were getting a "who cares, when a new card will come out in three months" attitude, so the support was poor to spotty.
Then more cards, like the GeForce, the Savage, and some from Matrox. All good cards, but only the Matrox supported hardware bump-mapping, the Voodoos still had the best multitexturing support, and the GeForce was the only one with transformation and lighting. We started ignoring most of this stuff, just shooting for decent performance on mainstream cards. Nobody really knew we weren't getting near the performance we could, because fan boys were going crazy and buying new cards as soon as they hit the streets.
Now, in 2000, we have the unfortunate situation of the Pentium III and Athlon being standard in corporate desktop machines, though the whole gig with those chips was the SIMD floating point meant for games, the support that very few game developers bothered with. AGP added more cost and complexity to motherboards, though again that was a gamer thing. And those same machines have 3D accelerators in them, soaking up more power, though once again there's no need. The gamers are happy, but of course they don't want to know that we could probably get better performance out of a Voodoo 2 than a GeForce 2, if we were able to concentrate on that chipset alone.
The end result is a complete mess that nobody's happy with. But what can we do?
Kicking the atmosphere's ass (Score:2)
There are plenty of things that could be done to better manage our power requirements. Take Southern California for instance. There are oodles of noodles of new houses being built out in the desert yet they are hooking themselves up to the same overtaxed power that LA has a hard enough time with, especially in the summertime when all the air conditioners go on in the south western part of the country. I think it'd be a good idea to stick some solar panels on all these new houses, maybe at a discount since the panels are bought and installed in bulk when the houses are built (hey there is even a company that builds microinverters for home solar panels which converts it from DC to AC in unit so every panel ends up spitting out AC instead of DC). This would at least relieve some stress during the most taxing parts of the year. Thats just residential housing. Would it really hurt companies so much to stick solar panels on the roofs of their warehouses. Solar panels also don't need to be the ultra bulky rotating panels we usually think of. Nowadays you can whip out some photovoltaic film that yould be embedded in windows on office buildings and such. We'd have alot more free power all about if cities produced a little bit of power rather than just mooching it. Thats idealistic, I know.
full blackout was just a week :) (Score:2)
Re:The power is going to fail, again??.... (Score:2)
It's a trick I tell ya! They're just a bunch o' starvin' geeks who want to get at our precious canned beans and our womenfolk! Fetch me my shotgun Bessie!
Nuclear Power Plants Do Not Generate Energy (Score:2)
This analysis does not consider disposing of spent nuclear fuels. Obviously, that would make things worse, but since we don't know how to dispose of spent fuels, there is no way to know how much energy it costs to dispose of them!
The SciAmer article was based on research published in another journal. That journal apparently had 14 people referee the paper. Obviously the journal was being exceptionally careful.
The nuclear power industry, ever mindful of its profits, naturally tries to be oblivious to all this.
Re:Q re wind, solar power. (Score:2)
Well, yes, but doesn't the same logic apply to coal burning? We're just moving some matter around and changing some energy states.
> No problem there, we could make up for all those trees we cut down.
Also, perhaps if solar cells soak up the energy that the ground and atmosphere would have otherwise soaked up, perhaps we'll provide some global cooling to offset the global warming?
Lots of arguments sound plausible; I was just wondering whether anyone had actually studied it quantitatively.
--
Re:The Glory of Privatized Hospitals (Score:2)
Guess what? Criminal violence simultaneously reduces life expectancy and increases health-care costs, and the problem can't be solved by changing the health care system.
When adjusted for the affects of criminal violence, U.S. life expectancy is very near the top, and health care costs are rather lower. The rest can be explained by the higher U.S. levels of arteriosclerosis, which is an effect of our having the fattest society on Earth, which is the result of lifestyle choices and affluence. We have the fattest "poor" on the planet.
In short, the factors that make Americans shorter lived and pay more for health care are not because of the health system, but because of other problems in society.
Steven E. Ehrbar
Re:The Great Auckland Blackout in New Zealand (Score:2)
I went to Auckland on travel for work, abot 6-8 weeks after that mess started over there. They were still having problems while I was there. (Yes, it interfered with the meeting a little bit, but not as much as I'd expected.)
It did a couple things for me. First, it impressed me a *great* deal with how well the New Zealanders' can adapt to trying conditions. They went through some seriously difficult times, and kept a good attitude.
Second, it marked the first time I'd ever gone out to a restaurant and had a candle-lit dinner with 7 other guys. Laughed about that for months afterwards.
Tim
Re:Down for a minute, or slow net -- who can tell? (Score:2)
Your thinking of the wrong industry. If VISA rejcets everyone in a minute who is trying to use their card, it really does amount to a large sum of money. Thats before you add in all the labor involved with bringing the comptuers back up.
Re:Obvious FUD (Score:2)
I stand by my comment. This statement from the DoE was intended to scare us into supporting their expansion.
The notion that a rise in computer use will spike power consumption enough this summer to cause nationwide blackouts is hysterical.
Quebec snow storm, 1998 (Score:4)
Granted, this was "act of god" and not over-consumption, but the fragility of the system was belied very quickly.
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
Re:Raise the voltage. Raise the frequency. (Score:2)
There's an "urban myth" of a guy stealing power by placing several large coils in his back yard under a primary transfer line... The power company eventaully sued him.
That's no myth.
Where I live there is a great deal of snomobiling and one of the shacks near here had the entire shack lit from a coil of wire wrapped 'round a PVC pipe and put in a tree near a high tension line. They weren't drawing mega amps or anything, just enough for about six 100W light bulbs. The power company found it but nothing bad happnened, just a warning. It was used for a public "building" and hardly any power was drawn. Hell I bet the inspector used the shack himself while out on his sled. :-)
While it is possible to do this, you have a very poor transformer in action and you need to get quite close to the lines. Three phase power lines don't "leak" much because the lines all magnetically cancel each other out and there isn't much left to induce unless you're up close to the line, but that's not safe in the first place. :-)
Re:Or can it? (Score:2)
Magnetic bearings? Made possible by superconducting magnets? I can see the costs escalate now. Its difficult for the average person to get a hold of even a gallon of liquid nitrogen to make them work.
Even conventional ball bearings are expensive. I work in the maintainance department at work and the mechanics might be very interested in magnetic bearings that just don't fail. We recently replace a set of bearings in a medium sized machine and the bill for the bearings alone was $50,000. Things like mechanical shock, temperature changes, and impurities such as water break the oil film between moving parts and all cause wear. If it moves, its expensive.
And what kind of composites do they use? Carbon-graphite? We use carbon graphite at work for high speed 20 foot bows and when they break due to imperfections and fractures, they rip the housings, wiring, and other things in the machine. They don't turn into hot dust, but chunks and splinters. If you know something that turns into dust, I'd be mighty interested in knowing what it is. The last time one of these bows turned over 2000 rpm, I had to replace the wiring in that machine. No fun.
I still see batteries as a much more viable solution since they are readily available at the local parts store or Walmart down the street. They are also easily charged by commonly available generators that cost less than a few thousand dollars and the makeshift setup through an automobile.
Re:Q re wind, solar power. (Score:2)
Contrary to popular opinion, the unknown is a better choice than certain doom.
Bad Mojo [rps.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Things are getting pretty thin (Score:5)
Interestingly, the western side of the US is projected to have the best power generating capacity while having the least reliable design. Many areas have power grids that aree inherently reliable in design, but have insufficient capacity to meet demand.
-JD
Re:Think about it (Score:2)
Is this supposed to be a joke? Our civilization couldn't possibly survive a significant amount of time with no electricity. No electricity means no refrigeration, no heat, no A/C (ok, so this one isn't so important, at least in places other than Texas
Electricity and technology is so entrenched in our society that to take it away for a significant amount of time would be a complete disaster. Small generators and backup power supplies would only last so long. 150 years ago people knew how to survive without electricity. Now, few people do.
That said, I know that things aren't as bad as this article makes them out to seem. My mother is working for the NSF right now working on redesigning the country's power grids. So she knows all of the inside information, and she doesn't seem to think there's going to be a problem.
--
Re:The obvious answer to NIMBY is to pay people (Score:2)
That would probably work. There would be a big outcry from a minority of people, IE enviormentalists, who can't stand to have their objectives hindered by any means. But I think overall it would be pretty easy to bribe a population given enough money. The problem is the money... Even $1000 a household will still add up to millions. And that may still be less then the amount that you can expect property values to drop... And by paying people anything you're basically admitting that nuclear power is dangerous and you need to compensate the population. This may be a short-term gain but a long-term loss as in the future people will *demand* their bribes.
Life is far easier in SimCity. You don't have to care about the short-term feelings of your population.
ESM [tripod.com] - Simple, easy, system monitoring for Linux/UNIX
Re:Mass Paranoia and Hysteria (Score:2)
But mankind will not be able to survive if it happens! there is no way our weak infrastructure could withstand this possibility!
Sheesh. We've prospered (somewhat) for thousands of years, I don't think capacity of a power grid will hurt much
Thousands of years ago, we didn't have refridgerators.
Thousands of years ago we cooked food differently (no microwaves, no toasters, no electric ranges).
Thousands of years ago we didn't have automated computer systems handling many mundane tasks that most of us have long since forgotten quite how to do.
Thousands of years ago, we didn't have automobiles and traffic control systems.
Thousands of years ago, we didn't have telephones.
Thousands of years ago, we didn't have hospitals so dependent on electronics.
Believe it or not, but a thousand years of technological progress makes a huge difference on the way in which humans can and must live.
As for the 70's, you might want to see what's different between now and then. You might be surprised.
Re:More natural gas plants! (Score:2)
I think a commercial fusion reactor becomes possible between 2015 and 2020.
Re:Volts + Amps Kill (Score:3)
- standard house current 120 volts is enough to mess you up but not kill you
WRONG. It's people like you that end up killing themselves changing a light bulb. If you can feel the shock then it has the potential to kill you. You feel something because there is current crossing nerve endings. Prolonged exposure (more than a few seconds) to 120VAC can (and does) cause second and third degree burns on and under the skin (electrolysis and boiling of the water in the blood and flesh) as well as nerve and tisue damage.If the current flow crosses vital organs, there can be serious organ damage -- including perm. heart arythmia due to pacemaker damage and/or heart muscle nerve damage, kidney failure, reduced lung capacity, and the ever popular "walking funny"... I've had more than enough "training" on the hazards of working with and around electrical devices from my days in high school. (Seeing an idiot "jump" over a set of workbenches after saying "What's th[at?]" while trying to point to an exposed high voltage cap on a color tv picture tube, you come to appreciate some things. Yes, the area was clearly marked and we did tell him to keep the f*** away from it. He was rapidly static-charged to about 30kV (much along the lines of a VanDeGraf generator) -- of course, I was laughing too hard to help him. He was unconscious for a few minutes and his hand and fore-arm was numb for a few hours. Afterwards there was the requisit three tons of paperwork -- the school board can be so demanding when a student almost kills themselves.)
An update (Score:2)
--
A view from the inside. (Score:2)
A bit of background. I work in the Electric Utility industry, so take my comments knowing that bias and that I might have a clue about this stuff. In any event, my comments are my own. My employer doesn't even know I read Slashdot.
Not surprising, actually. However, the reasons for the delays are different for power plants than transmission lines. Power plants are being built these days, as companies react to the incredibly high prices of two summers ago. The market price for energy spiked at about $7-10k/MWh in summer of 1998, in part due to sellers defaulting on energy sales. Transmission lines are very hard to get built, in large part due to the "Not in my back yard" syndrome mentioned by another poster.
This is the real problem. There has been and continues to be very little incentive to build new transmission lines. Remember that in nearly all states (perhaps all, I am only aware of the states where we do business) the Transmission system is not being deregulated. As a result, the owners of transmission systems will only be compensated for their investment via the regulatory process.
Finally, I have to comment on this:
- Byron noted that utilities can promise only 99.9 percent reliability--a figure that translates to about eight hours of blackouts a year--while high-tech firms stand to lose millions of dollars from a blackout lasting just a minute.
Ahhhh, that kind of reliabililty is going to require (at least) on-site back-up generators. One hundred percent reliable == Infinitely expensive."We need 99.9999 percent reliability for e-commerce, and we need more flexibility from regulation to achieve that," he said.
Some (hopefully) useful links:
NERC [nerc.com] NERC was formed following the 1966 Northeast US blackout.
Public Utility Home Page [publicutilityhome.com]
The misc.industry.utilities.electric [digiserve.com] newsgroup homepage.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [ferc.fed.us].
Milalwi
(First time poster, long time reader.)
Re:Volts + Amps Kill (Score:2)
Er, no. "A hell of a lot of amps" will kill you at any voltage, if it goes through your body. It only takes something like 100 milliamps to kill you. As long as you're not grounded, you can grab a 100 kV line no problem, because no current is flowing.
However; more voltage implies more current given the same resistance (Ohm's law). So, a shock (the current) from a 240 V outlet will be twice as bad as from a 120 V line.
Anyway.
Re: Homepower.com (Score:2)
I'm really glad that you pointed out the link to Homepower.com, because one of the things I've been thinking about is how communities can become more self-reliant and how we can eliminate single points of failure.
The power plant, right now, is a single point of failure, which is why it's so detrimental when it fails. Something like electricity has to be distributed.
My vision is a world of self-sustainable, self-governing communities, where worthless buildings such as McDonalds and Starbucks have either been replaced with miniature power plants or torn down to make way for community gardens and agriculture.
But that just might be the anarchist [infoshop.org] in me talking.
One last thing, have any wobblies noticed that the image they use for Home Power is very *very* similar to the IWW sabotage cat?
Compare here [homepower.com] and here. [iww.org]
Michael Chisari
mchisari@usa.net
Re:Raise the voltage. Raise the frequency. (Score:5)
To the best of my knowledge, the choice of 60Hz had multiple factors, but there was no big "switch" from 50 Hz to 60. There are some old systems in the local steel mills which still use 25Hz power, but nothing that runs at 50Hz. Increasing the system frequency requires re-engineering (and most likely replacing) all of the power plant equipment in the country. It's also a bad idea because it would increase the energy coupled to the environment in terms of stray electromagnetic fields, which already play havoc with underground pipes, and which may contribute to cancer, leukemia, etc. (The last point is highly debated lately).
Increasing the voltage in the home requires replacing all the home wiring in the US, for zero benefit, the problem is the big lines, not your house. Higher voltage in the home is an increased hazard, I've survived a few hits of 110 accidentally encountered, I would not have been so lucky had there been 440 volts available to push current through me.
The standard is set, messing with it won't help the supposed problem pointed out in the article.
--Mike--
Re:Privitization is the answer (Score:2)
Why? What is inherently different about building an infrastructure versus exapnding it? Many of the same issues are involved. Either way you've got NIMBY and emminent domain issues. It's like a road. Who the hell is going to build a road, then let everyone drive on it? Infrastructure is one of the few legitimate functions of government. The others are defense and justice.
What America needs is to have more privitised utilities - look at the success we've had with our health service, it is the envy of the world with the best equipped hospitals to be found anywhere. Surely it is obvious that this success could be used elsewhere, such as in an ailing electrical market.
The market isn't ailing. The transmission lines, generating plants and distribution lines are getting old. And now we're allowing these "energy broker" companies to buy, sell and trade power over these same facilities, stressing them even more. It's a wonder we haven't seen more problems. The health care industry is not comparable to the electric power industry and it isn't that our health care system is all that great, it's that the rest of the world sucks more.
Of course, the only real danger here is that the Government will attempt to privatise the industry whilst remaining in control of it through legislation and "industry watchdogs", stifling the benefits that privitisation should bring. As I'm sure all libertarians out there would agree, that would not be a good thing at all for anyone.
You're right but for the wrong reasons. Infrastructure is a legitimate function of government, one of the few. Not all libertarians are anarchists.
The electric power grid problems are not comparable to the Y2K thing. The grid is old. It can't be expanded easily, publicly or privately. And now, the "energy broker" companies are overloading the hell out of it and lining their pockets. Sooner or later, something will give. My advice to everyone reading this is buy a little generator.
Less people and /.ing homepower (Score:2)
The thing that seems to be ignored when talking about power consumtion is part of the equation is ignored. If every human wants to live with 10KwH of electricity, and the number of KwHs is limited, to make the equation balance, the number of people will need to be reduced.
Ebola, war, people jumping out of windows when the Internet stocks they own collapse in price, or when we send off 20% of the population (the telephone sanitizers) can do the job.
Re:The Great Auckland Blackout in New Zealand (Score:2)
//Phizzy
Media's Fanning the Fires... (Score:3)
There is always concern because of the growth in home electronics over the past few years; I'm definitely guilty of adding to the demand... Last summer [pjm.com] caught us by surprise, not because of lack of generation, but because of reactive power modeling errors, but that event, not to mention Y2K, made us take a hard look, and all of our models are correct to the best of our knowledge.
As to the NIMBY phenomena, I point you to our Queue A map [pjm.com] as to where new (planned) generation is scheduled to be built in our zone. Its a double-edged sword; everyone wants the electricity, but noone wants the plant in their county.. But if you put the plant too far away, then you have the added problems with transmission...
Other ISO's:
California [caiso.com]
New England [iso-ne.com]
New York [nyiso.com]
Keep in mind that the CNET article was entirely about CalISO (which is only a few years old and not as developed yet as the east coast) which is only one piece of the entire puzzle. And I'm sure "HomePower" thanks you for the free advertisement, but I hope next time you at Slashdot try to cover the other angles in the story first, other than the pop-answer. Rememeber, one Nuclear plant generates over 1100 MW of power, thats 1,100,000,000 Watts, or about 167,000 times the output of the lead article on HomePower, and those people are the exception, not the rule.
-- Scott
Oh, btw, if it gets back to me, I'm not an official representative of PJM LLC. Thats what Customer Relations is for.
Power Grid (Score:2)
Generation is being built at crazy rates right now, much of it expected to be online next summer.
Now I would agree with the transmission problem, currently do to regulation there is no money in transmission lines. An entity must charge its cost for the usage of its transmission lines, so their is no real incentive to build transmission lines. Especially when putting a 385 thousand volt line through the back of someones yard tends to upset them. And then there is the time and money involved in the simulations, studies, etc of the effect of the line on flows around the grid.
The answer? Perhaps deregulate transmission? Of course when you do, and until enough is built, there would probably be more unreliability in the grid. Nearly every day since the beginning of the summer season we see TLRs (Transmission Line Relief) for our purchases/sales of power on the grid.
Maybe the government needs to build transmission to help ensure reliability, leaving marketing of power to the private sector.
Of course, all this deregulation that is occurring within the industry isn't helping things. Senators/Representatives are creating laws for issues which they have no real understanding.
I don't know, but I bet this gets fixed before complete deregulation throughout the US occurs simply because leaving a customer in the dark means losing a customer to someone else.
But hey.. deregulation means cheaper power! Yeah right.. I have my job because of deregulation, and more jobs are being created because of it, which means more overhead. And the accounting process is going to get much more complex. Just imagine.. You used to buy power from Company A, but company B gave you a cheaper rate. So company b builds a line to your house to give you their power right? Nope, they just send the power through company A to get to you. So, now company A charges company B some $$$ value for the use of their line. Now somebody has to account for all that mess.
And what about the meter reading? Does company A read the meter, or does company B have its own meter readers?
I think the result will be much like the telephone industry. Prices haven't gone down (at least, my phone bill hasn't) but services have certainly shot up.
By 2 cents... sorry.
Re:Power use growth (Score:2)
I haven't kept up with recent developments, but when last I knew the situation well, they made a lot of money selling their excess capacity to other utilities who didn't predict the trends as well as they had. I'm fairly certain they're on the ball, and can keep the 'trons flowing.
--Mike--
Privitization is NOT the answer (Score:2)
Actually, privatization is also part of the problem.
A large number of utilities are moving toward power brokerage in their business focus, and away from power generation.
As the industry is being deregulated, there is more money to be made buying surplus power (really, the RIGHTS to power, at a time when there is a surplus) and then re-selling it on the spot-priced market (at a time when there is a defecit of power). Think: Electricity day-trading; Power arbitrage.
Existing power utilities are dropping expensive upkeep on older generating plants, and just letting the plant run down until they officially "sunset" it. Actually, many of them are for sale right now! As the CNET article mentioned, they aren't building new generating plants.
And just as we are seeing with telcos, there are more and more 3rd parties and middle-men moving in to make money on "market inefficiencies". They aren't creating new power, only buying existing power at a lower cost and re-selling it at a higher cost. If the consumer and the broker are the ones reaping the financial reward of this more efficient market, then the generating utilities are the ones who are paying for it. In this case, it IS a zero-sum game.
Here is where a comparison to telcos falls apart. Ameritech likes brokers because if demand increases, they can just build new facilities to meet the demand. Brokers help them sell MORE service. (Don't even get me into a discussion [slashdot.org] about the quality of service 3rd parties typically provide.) People don't protest the construction of a new phone switching station in their neighborhood. Hell, most folks don't even KNOW what that boxy building with no windows behind the supermarket IS. Not so with coal/oil/trash-burning power plants. Or a new dam on the river that will make a lake out of a couple of small towns. Or a nuke plant.
Virginia Power doesn't like brokers. They want to BE a broker. The costs of being a generator are just too great, especialy now in a broker's market where wholesale power margins are too tight. Better to slowly abandon the facilities and make money from pushing paper.
July, 1998 was hot summer. A number of power companies had plants out of service for maintenance (and Y2K remediation). Demand shot up with the temperature. Electricity that had been previously trading on the spot market at around $0.03 to $0.05 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) soared to $7.00 per kWh. That's an increase of greater than 14,000 percent! Illinova Power (Illinois) lost an entire year's worth of profits in one week. FirstEnergy (an energy trader with no generators of their own) was also harmed because other power-generation companies defaulted on their delivery contracts. (Source: New York Times, July 7, 1998 "Demand Surge Costs Utilities Huge Loses on Open Market". Archived article for $2.50 [qpass.com])
Here's a fictional example to show how unregulated markets can hurt consumers:
PowerCo operates two 500MW plants (Alpha and Beta) near the City of Ciudad. There is a transmission line into Ciudad; it has a 100MW capacity. Ciudad can use it to import power from elsewhere on the grid to supplement what it can buy from PowerCo. This helps out on hot summers. Ciudad has a fairly consistent demand for 1000MW.
The current price for elextricity is $0.05 per kWh. Both plants are operating at capacity; Ciudad isn't importing any power over the transmission line. Each plant costs $20,000/hour to run at maximum capacity, but at $0.05/kWh, they are each pulling in $25,000, so PowerCo is making $10,000/hour profit. So far, things are hunky-dory.
Beta plant breaks down. Ciudad is now buying 500MW from PowerCo (getting it from Alpha), and supplementing that with 100MW from the transmission line. Ciudad is still 400MW short, and will probably send kids home from school and give city workers the day off, plus a few regional brown-outs to conserve power. It costs PowerCo $5,000/hour to pay the interest and salaries for Beta, even when it is broken. The shortage of available power raises demand for electricity and with it, the price.
Here is a quick table of power prices and the amount of profit PowerCo makes with Beta shut down:
Price - $/kWh Profit - $/hour
$ 0.05 $ 0
$ 0.075 $ 12,500
$ 0.10 $ 25,000
How soon do you think PowerCo is going to repair the broken Beta plant? Anyone with an MBA will tell you that the goal is to maximize profits, not sales.
This kind of scenario was prevented when power utilities were regulated for the public good. PUCO's required that utilities supply all the power that the public demands, fixing sales volume. They also fixed price and profit levels. Not so in this (admittedly simplistic) completely open-market model.
All of that was a long-winded way for asserting this:
In the current climate, there is little business incentive to increase the supply of power. It is too expensive to build and run generators. They are dirty, and people do not want them built near them. The expense to make them cleaner is far too great to appeal to most power companies in an unregulated industry. The demand is increasing; there is no question about that. With supply and demand out of balance, prices (and profits) will increase. Power brokerage is where the money is. Existing power companies' move away from generation toward brokerage will decrease the supply.
Watch for more blackouts!
Soylent Green (Score:2)
. . . Soylent Green . . .
Yes, it's made of people, but it may prove to be one of mankind's greatest conributions! Forget donating your loved-one's body to science -- donate them to the power grid! What better way for the voluntary self-extinction people to off themselves than being processed into a vat of green goo, to be turned into paper, plastic or fuel!
---
icq:2057699
seumas.com
Price gouging (Score:2)
I'm not positive, but I'd bet utilities have insurance for this type of thing. In any case, the high costs represent a free exchange in a fair market, which the utility can capitalize over the rest of the year. The utility doesn't suddenly bill people for 10x what they usually pay for electricity.
The high prices make it worthwhile for the small power developers to invest in building mini-plants. Without them, we'd have a lot more outages.
You're right about nuclear, but it'll never happen in the US. The French did nuclear right, but they seem to accept it over there. We build every plant unique, so the design and certification costs were outrageous. The French standardized and planned things much more effectively, but they're also nationalized.
"What I cannot create, I do not understand."
It's already private (Score:2)
There is some fear-mongering here. The fact is that there is plenty of electricity in most markets throughout the year. It's only peak demand periods, like we get in cities during a heat wave, that overload the system.
The article is correct about the price of energy increasing exponentially during these peak demand conditions. That is why many small private power companies are building gas turbine plants which can be started in about 20 minutes to meet peak demand. These micro-plants are idle most of the time, because they are less efficient than conventional plants and therefore unprofitable to operate when the price of electricity is at a normal level. But at peak demand, the price increases by one or two orders of magnitude, and these microplants become very lucrative.
These microplants are being built as fast as good locations can be found. The developers are targeting locations that can serve the largest peak demand nodes. Better than any government regulations, private industry is going to supply the electricity that we need. It may be a few more years before the capacity is there to prevent blackouts altogether, but the power industry is working very hard to solve this problem.
Incidentally, the increase in demand from computers is not seasonal, so it isn't contributing significantly to this problem. The power industry has expanded capacity gradually over the past 100 years to keep pace with steady demand. Unlike having your AC or lighting down for a few hours once a year, however, companies can't afford to have their computers go down, but they are not causing the power problem, they just feel the effects.
"What I cannot create, I do not understand."
Re: Homepower.com (Score:2)
You can't have any sort of "governing body" regardless of size, and anarchy. Anarchy is the lack of any sort of government, large or small, no leadership, no order. It's pure chaos. There's no way you can really be an anarchist and want "small self-governing communities". It should be "Every man for himself" in your eyes, if you really are an anarchist.
If you had taken the time to read the FAQ that I had linked, you would realize that you are completely incorrect. You are confusing anarchism with nihilism. A community which is directly-democratic, egaliatarian, and non-coercive, is self-governing and yet still anarchistic (ie, "No Rulers").
Honestly, don't make a statement like the above until you've actually educated yourself. Anarchism is a very substantial political belief that has a long and diverse history.
Damn idiots.
My sentiments exactly. Now go read the FAQ. [infoshop.org]
Michael Chisari
mchisari@usa.net
Re:The Great Auckland Blackout in New Zealand (Score:2)
FALSE
My step-dad works at a supermarket as store manager and I can say with authority that if the grid dies, the food will not. These are critical infrastructure things - there are multiple generators at each store designed to keep power to the refridgeration 24/7 in the event of an outage. Will those systems survive a prolonged outage? No, of course not. No system can without a supporting network of people maintaining them and refueling. However, I am confident that the critical infrastructure where I live (Minneapolis, MN) is secured - ie, we will not be eating our shoes a month after the power goes out.
The Glory of Privatized Hospitals (Score:2)
Fact 1: America is rated like 10th or 11th on the average life expectancy amongst nations.
Fact 2: America spends WAY more than any other country in the world on medicine.
Maybe doctors looking for big paychecks are envying the U.S., but all things considered I'd rather get a little more bang for my buck.
Oh, incidentally, I firmly believe that quality of life is a far greater concern than length, but I see no indication that quality of life has been made better by the health care system in this country.
---
Potato Power (Score:2)
--
Donald Roeber
Put out that desktop campfire (Score:2)
In fact it'd be even nicer to see systems in place to shut down workplace desktop computers automatically after hours (this can be a security feature too). The relief on the power grid might even offset the increased usage when people arrive home at six o'clock and start using all those temperature controls and home appliances (including, obviously, their home PC). This obviously doesn't solve the problem in a world with more and more computers and finite power reserves, but it'd be nice to see only those ones that are in use receiving power, and the bonus is that teaching an overall energy ethic scales automatically with each new device.
(This message required 75 Joules of hydroelectric energy and one bagel to compose)
How much power does a PC pull? (Score:2)
Camaron de la Isla [flamenco-world.com] 'When I sing with pleasure, my
Re:Waste water effluent, etc.. (Score:2)
Then you can stock species that will enjoy the warm water, and species that don't won't move in.
This has worked very successfully in Oklahoma, for instance. The fishing at the Konawa plant is awesome.
--
Power use growth (Score:2)
Here in Illinois, ComEd has been overbuilt by a large margin (or merely conserative, if you ask me), and have already handled loads (back in the 90's) that supposed watchdog groups said wouldn't happen until until the year 2017. It was fun to watch the system generation numbers go past 17 Gigawatts. ;-)
The Y2K hucksters had me almost convinced... but not this time. The sky isn't falling.
--Mike--
More natural gas plants! (Score:2)
I think it's time we build more natural gas electric generating plants.
The reason is simple: you can get methane, ethane and propane from almost any hydrocarbon source. Provide the incentive to create plants that can convert coal to the natural gases I mentioned and the USA could easily generate a LOT more electric power quickly.
People forget that natural gas burns far more cleanly than gasoline, diesel or coal, and in fact a number of cities have converted their public transit buses so they use compressed natural gas (CNG) as fuel. (The best example of this I know of is Sacramento's Regional Transit, which has very few diesel-powered buses left.)
Here in the Bay Area, there are folks who think the new CNG-powered power plant south of San Jose, CA is going to be a problem. Unfortunately, they conveniently forget that because CNG burns so cleanly, the effect on air pollution will be extremely miniscule, to say the least.
In short, with clean-burning natural gas plants out there, we can buy time until more advanced technologies such as improved solar power plants, improved wind generators, and eventually fusion power comes on line. IMHO, the day that fusion power plants become practical is the day the energy crisis is effectively OVER; there is enough deuterium in seawater to cover the current energy worldwide energy demand for the next one BILLION years (I kid you not). Since fusion plants will not have any emissions, our biggest source of air pollution--powerplant smokestack emissions--will be gone; we also don't have to worry about spent radioactive fuel rods because the radioactive byproduct of deuterium fusion reaction is tritium, which also can be used a fusion fuel.
Re:Power use growth (Score:2)
Re:So did I, at least SimCity 2000 (Score:2)
Re:Or can it? (Score:2)
What about trusty old chemical storage batteries? I have a rather healthy marine battery connected to my UPS supply. A voltmeter on the computer tells me when a battery needs to be swapped. Two other batteries are connected through jacks to allow hot swapping of batteries if a blackout ever gets to be more than several hours. Not only is my computer system supplied by this power, but my entertainment, and lighting in this room.
If the power ever fails in this house, I might have to put the jumper cables from the car or motorcycle to keep the lights and other stuff on here.
Fix the problem elsewhere (Score:2)
For example, what if e-commerce corps started investing in new power plants? Fortunately, the curent energy limits aren't fundamental problems like the speed of light or the minimal thinness of a silicon wafer; they can be solved in a fairly linear fashion simply by doing more of the same. With the assurance of backing from big computer firms, it would be easier for municipalities to issue bonds, thus improving the speed with which new facilities could be built.
Of course, I'd rather see a decrease in power consumption, and computer businesses can help too. Aside from hardware manufacturers making their own products lower-power (Crusoe, anyone?), the computer industry could fund public-service campaigns to decrease energy waste. They could even fund R&D in other high-energy-consumption industries. air conditioning [doe.gov] uses up 13% of residential power. I'm not sure how that figure compares to the 12% of all national power that goes to computers, as cited in the CNET article, but it's clearly a big chunk. If making more efficient air conditioners could free up more power-space for computers, perhaps that's something the computer people should be pushing forwards.
- Michael Cohn
volts don't kill, amperage kills (n/t) (Score:2)
Re:NIMBY (Score:2)
If there's a color that people don't mind being surrounded by (besides blue), it's green.
Re:NIMBY (Score:2)
Bad Mojo [rps.net]
Re:The Great Auckland Blackout in New Zealand (Score:2)
But a whole lotta fuckin' goin' on.
Wanna bet they have a Y2K baby boom?
--
Re:Maybe we should ... (Score:2)
For what it's worth, I have a G4 at home - and it consistently runs between 75* - 82* F - a pentium can fry an egg
ls:
Privitization is the answer (Score:4)
This sort of thing just goes to show why the whole concept of a public utility is severely outdated and needs to be replaced. Government interventionalism worked back in the days of building an infrastructure, but it invariably fails when it comes to maintaining and expanding a service.
Privatised utilities can offer a far superior service to consumers given the competition built into the free market socioeconomic model, and the privatisation of utilities in countries like the UK has been an unqualified success for both consumers and utilities, allowing people to choose exaclty who offers the best deals on their gas, electricity and so on.
What America needs is to have more privitised utilities - look at the success we've had with our health service, it is the envy of the world with the best equipped hospitals to be found anywhere. Surely it is obvious that this success could be used elsewhere, such as in an ailing electrical market.
Of course, the only real danger here is that the Government will attempt to privatise the industry whilst remaining in control of it through legislation and "industry watchdogs", stifling the benefits that privitisation should bring. As I'm sure all libertarians out there would agree, that would not be a good thing at all for anyone.
---
Jon E. Erikson
NIMBY (Score:5)
The biggest problem is the persistant NIMBY (Not in my backyard) attitude of people. There is no way you are going to be able to build a new power plant in city limits. People will protest no matter how good it may be for others. This means the power plants have to be built relatively far away increasing losses through transmission and the chance of outages.
Secondly other types of large scale power projects, for instance nuclear reactors and hydroelectric dams, are almost impossible to build because of enviornmental/political reasons. No matter how clean nuclear power may be (you have to remember that Chernoble was a horrible design along with inept staff) provided it's well run (look at the system France uses and the Candu reactors used in Canada) political reasons have killed almost all new reactor projects.
This leaves a whole lot of alternative power. But even then people don't like the idea of wind power, too noisy, and would probably protest against solar a bit too. (uses up a lot of space and doesn't look very good) And then you have the fact that wind and solar are relatively expensive and unreliable. There are efforts in place to promote them, in some places you can pay extra money to have your electricity generated from alternative power sources, but those efforts will need to be scaled up a lot before they are realistic alternatives. Of course with the fuss over nuclear and hydroelectric alternative power may be a very realistic alternative...
Re: Low Power Sloutions (Score:2)
2. The iMac uses a Rage128, which needs no fan. However, you are correct that for 90% of the population, 3D graphics chips are a frill. Offices can save money by purchasing custom-made 3D-free PCs. And of course, 3D free notebooks last longer on the battery.
3. LCD monitors can become very large without using much power. The Apple Cinema Display takes only 50 watts or so and is 17x11 inches. Now if reflective LCDs (think Game Boy Color) come back in style, we could see wall-sized monitors that take under 100 watts.
The Diesel in the parking lot (Score:2)
Fixed gas-turbine installations are common. Stanford University has its own power plant, installed in the 1980s and recently expanded. Those usually run full time, unlike the Diesels.
Q re wind, solar power. (Score:2)
If we tried to run our whole society off wind and/or solar power, would there be any adverse environmental effects simply from the sheer amount of energy taken out of the system?
Has anyone ever done the calculations? Or is this just another one of our "think it will be OK" decisions, mess to be cleaned up later?
--
Volts + Amps Kill (Score:5)
My favorite visualization of this is to imagine a table with a weight on it. The volts is the height of the table, the amps is the mass of the book. The bigger the weight or the higher the table, the more it is going to hurt if you it lands on you.
At standard house current 120 volts is enough to mess you up but not kill you (assuming you don't lower resistance by dunking yourself in salt water first). At around 240 volts though there is a problem in that the current can cause arythmia in the heart which is very bad.
In fact, you are actually better off at higher voltages to some extent. If you get hits at say 440 or higher, it will stop your heart, but it will likely start up right away. At some point the voltage gets high enough that it won't restart on its own.
---
Re:Raise the voltage. Raise the frequency. (Score:3)
As of fall 1989, no new nuclear plant had been granted an operating license since 1974. The NRC grants 30 year licenses after which the reactor is supposed to be decommisioned -- all fuel is removed, the core is drained and the containment building housing the core is filled with cement. However, the NRC, is what I've long thought to be the stupidest thing in the world, has relicensed several of the >30yr old reactors. [After 30yrs of exposure to high levels of neutron and other radiation, the reaction vessel is no longer steel.]
Re:Q re wind, solar power. (Score:2)
Bad Mojo [rps.net]
Solar cells are dirty to make (Score:2)
The only problem that I have with solar power is that while the energy source itself is clean, the process to make solar cells is very expensive and harmful to the environment in itself. I don't remember the exact figures, but it takes something like 10 years of clean energy production for a solar cell to "make up" for the environmental damage caused during its production.
In case it is not blatantly obvious, I am not an engineer. Someone with hard numbers back me up (or even better, contradict me!) here.
- Rev.Think Conservation and Energy Efficiency (Score:5)
Aside from being full of interesting DYI projects
for the tinkerer, there are real solutions in
there for someone who seriously wants to break
their reliance on the grid.
More importantly, though, is that Slashdot is much
more foreward-looking then the rest of the press
out there. Most of the time, journalists look
at the power problem and report "We need more
power plants, more lines, and cheaper fuel". Rare
is the day when someone in the press says "There
are serious alternatives to builing large
generating plants out there".
People already have the legal right, in many
states, to produce electricity and put it back
on the grid. Were everyone to put a panel or
two on their rooftop, you'd knock off your own
reliance on the grid and reduce demand. If
people use higher efficiency electrical components
or simply didn't do things like leave their old
refrigerator on in the shed during the summer so
that the compressor runs all day (or build a
styrofoam 'cozy' around it), then demand would
go down or at least stabilize.
But you never hear about these because the
utilities want you to think that there is only
one way and one place where you can and should get
power. You don't have to be a nut to do lower
your dependency, and you don't even have to do
all that much or give up anything you're used to.
So Kudos to Slashdot for raising awareness!
Or can it? (Score:2)
"Can't" or "isn't"? How long until every office building has an enormous capacitor for a roof?
We need Doc Brown (Score:2)
Steve
Just hike the prices, let supply/demand handle it (Score:2)
I learned everything I need to know from simcity (Score:4)
Re:NIMBY (Score:2)
(uses up a lot of space and doesn't look very good)
It doesn't have to use all that much useful space though. People would be more likely to accept it if the mirrors were mounted on top of a parking structure or on the tops of nearby buildings. (I'm talking about a solar boiler for a steam turbine based generator).
Solar alone is expensive because of the need for energy storage. Solar can be a cheap way to help with peak loads though. Summer seems to be the main time for brownouts due to air conditioners being used. The output of a solar plant will closely correspond to air conditioner demand.