SA Towers |
There has been a media frenzy – mostly from Newscorp
commentators – about how the “Greenies’ were responsible for the South
Australian power outages.
Let's forget for a moment that the Greens aren’t in power in
SA, and have never made energy policy there.
To argue that the ratio of renewables to coal powered generation in SA is responsible, we should at least read the only report available as this is written on the causes of the problem.
To argue that the ratio of renewables to coal powered generation in SA is responsible, we should at least read the only report available as this is written on the causes of the problem.
My reading revealed a
couple of interesting facts.
The first is that any report of the sequence of events
claiming that the wind generators dropped out before the pylons went down is
wrong.
From the report –
The weather resulted
in multiple transmission system faults. In the short time between 16:16 and
16:18, system faults included the loss of three major 275 kV transmission lines
north of Adelaide.
Generation initially
rode through the faults, but at 16:18, following an extensive number of faults
in a short period, 315 MW of wind generation disconnected (one group at
16:18:09, a second group at 16:18:15), also affecting the region north of
Adelaide.
Now I’ve never been much good at using 24-hour time – it was
always a pain in the arse when I was a Nasho, but I’m pretty sure that 16:16 is
two minutes before 16:18 – correct me if I’m wrong.
So the wind generators disconnected after the transmission
towers went down, not before. That contradicts what has been reported in much
of the Murdoch media.
Sequence is important. I discovered this when I had an unauthorized discharge
with my SLR in Vietnam, when I cocked the rifle before removing the mag, and then
pulled the trigger to show the weapon was cleared. It wasn’t.
So we’ve established the sequence (towers down first – wind generators
off line a few minutes later).
WA Towers (Barrow Island - Cyclone Olivia -1996) |
What the AEMO* report doesn’t say is why the
generators tripped. I’ve heard reports (interviews with engineers) that it was
down to bad programming – we’ll eventually know when the final report comes
out.
Now let’s look at those towers in the illustrations. The SA towers were pulled
out by the roots. The West Australian ones deformed. Accepting that the wind
velocities were much greater in West Australia (Barrow Island, Cyclone Olivia –
1996), a reasonable conclusion is that the WA towers were of better quality
than the SA examples.
One major difference between the two states is that the SA
infrastructure was privatized in 1999. West Australia’s is still in public
hands. Remember how the LNP lost an election in Queensland around that issue?
Remember also that
poor maintenance on a privatized Victorian power network was the triggering
event for the 2009 bush fires in that state. Remember the class action and the
multi million payout?
It’s a reasonable conclusion that the parlous state of
the SA infrastructure is a consequence over time of its privatization in 1999.
The 23% increase in tariffs is also an outcome of that same privatization. There’s
much more money in tariffs than maintenance.
Perhaps electricity consumers in SA should go to class
action.
The most revealing extract from the AEMO report is this – The
event resulted in the SA regional electricity market being suspended.
Now that explains a lot..
To AEMO, it’s a “market”. I suspect the electricity
consumers in SA have a different idea. They probably regard it as a service.
And the Newscorp reporting? Perhaps the answer lies here
(excuse the pun).
*Australia Energy Market Operator
*Australia Energy Market Operator
1 comment:
Nice post
this may also ad to the mix!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/19/proprietary_software_not_intermittency_blacked_out_south_australia/
Post a Comment