South Australia has no power

[Someone]

Its just the design loads, you can see the wind records for the area:
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/IDCJDW0506.shtml
While other areas of Australia routinely experience 130km/h or occasionally 200+km/h winds and their power infrastructure survives, up on the rapidly rising costs its engineered to fail but fail infrequently.

[GreyWoolfe]

Here in Florida, we have Faulty (Florida) Power and Light.  We are UG here in my subdivision but OH outside of it.  Here during hurricane season, which is also rainy season, power flickers are a normal part of life.  I have 3 APC SmartUPS to keep my office stuff up and running.  Power, however, rarely goes out for any length of time.  The worst was in 2004 when we had 3 hurricanes pass by.  We were without power for about 4 or 5 days.  We have a 6.5kW generator, a camp stove with propane bottles and a portable table with a built in 2 burner propane stove that has a 30 gal tank attached.  There is also a charcoal grill, so food prep isn't an issue.  At least we don't have to worry about cold even though we have 5 seasons-hot, freakin' hot, tourist, hurricane and love bugs(twice).

[SeanB]

Reminds me where I used to stay, which had 2 seasons. Summer: 42C at 1PM and winter : 42C at 1PM. Rain was something that was expected every few years, and which was considered that if it did not rain for 20 years it might indicate a drought.

Currently live at the coast, where I was born. In the middle of a drought, and with water restrictions, but it has been pouring with rain for the last 2 months, just not in the inland catchment areas. Currently this afternoon had very high winds, and now it is a gentle rain, down from the heavy rain of 5PM to 7PM. It will rain all night, like it does most weekends in spring.

[dannyf]

It will be put to test in the next big earthquake. IIRC it's Chinese steel.

Cannot wait for that to happen.

Though with aussie steel, the bridge might have collapsed in anticipation of the earthquake,

Seriously, that's the bay bridge, right? I thought they were trying to fix (rebuild?) it a few years back. an interesting bridge from the city side.

[Cyberdragon]

Guys, why are we still debating this...

Clearly the Iron Giant wanted to eat them but you scared him away so he just left them all knocked over.

[jonovid]

still debating this yp!  

[Rick Law]

...
...
Those who really need Internet service to stay up can't beat satellite, ideally in combination with a more traditional service. Maybe a self contained satellite router with a service geared for emergency use would make a lot of sense? There should be no or very small monthly fee to have the service (the equipment would have to paid for up front) but a substantial fee to actually use it.
...
...

The performance would not be good.  GeoSync satellites is around 20,000 miles up.  One way trip from ground to satellite is 0.11 seconds for photon.  While the speed in terms of Bit Per Second could be high, the latency time would be awful!

[TerraHertz]

https://stopthesethings.com/2016/09/29/another-statewide-blackout-south-australias-wind-power-disaster-continues/
Another Statewide Blackout: South Australia’s Wind Power Disaster Continues
September 29, 2016

Some interesting graphs, and discussion of grid system stability with a mix of synchronous and PEC sources.
First time I've seen that site.
   Stop these things. "We're not here to debate the wind industry, we're here to destroy it!"

Heh. I like it.

Edit to add another article:
http://joannenova.com.au/2016/09/the-south-australian-black-out-a-state-running-without-enough-thermal-reserve-to-cope-with-contingencies/
The South Australian black out — A grid on the edge. There were warnings that renewables made it vulnerable

[zapta]

Seriously, that's the bay bridge, right? I thought they were trying to fix (rebuild?) it a few years back. an interesting bridge from the city side.

It's the cousin of the Golden Gate Bridge connecting San Francisco and Oakland. It has two sections with an island at the middle. The government built a new one in parallel to the old one. Some engineers suggested to keep the old one until after the first earthquake but the bureocrats didn't listen to them. They fixed the cracks above water level because they were easier to fix.

[NiHaoMike]

The performance would not be good.  GeoSync satellites is around 20,000 miles up.  One way trip from ground to satellite is 0.11 seconds for photon.  While the speed in terms of Bit Per Second could be high, the latency time would be awful!

Beats not having connectivity at all! In an emergency, any working way of communication is valuable.

[CatalinaWOW]

...
..

The performance would not be good.  GeoSync satellites is around 20,000 miles up.  One way trip from ground to satellite is 0.11 seconds for photon.  While the speed in terms of Bit Per Second could be high, the latency time would be awful!

Glad you live in an area with good internet service.  Where I live the choices are satellite, DSL at under 100kbaud, POTS at well under 56 kbaud, and on good days 3G cell phone service.  Since I am not a gamer a quarter second of latency is a total non issue.  Download speeds make a Linux ISO a lengthy prospect, but then for anyone not on fiber that is true to some extent.

How good satellite is for disaster situations would depend on the overall system architecture.  Your dish to the satellite would be robust, but if the satellite connection to the internet is within the disaster zone you just have a very long bridge to nowhere.

[johansen]

pick two:

cheap
reliable
green

[bitslice]

and the resultant dampness around the concrete footing that could act as a lubricant, it's not hard to imagine these being yanked from the ground in an extreme weather event.

I'm not a concrete engineer, but I've some building experience and those footings look wrong.

If you are going to have a significant upward pull (like a wind loaded pylon), then you design in a wide horizontal pier at the bottom of your footing, rebar goes sideways into this and ties in with the vertical rebar.
Especially in a clay soil, because when that gets wet you've basically just got gravity holding it down as there's no friction

Those footings appear to have been poured into a tube form (note the ribbing), and appear to have broken part way.
Either way I don't see any rebar, which would have been visible as it would need to stretch as the concrete broke away from it.

If they simply bored a vertical hole and poured concrete down into it, then that's the shittest job I've ever seen.


This is a bit more what it should look like:
(except with more rebar as that is just a footing pier and has zero tensile or lateral force )




and it doesn't.
it certainly shouldn't snap in two like it has.

For radio towers they just dig a massive square hole a couple of metres wide, fill it with rebar like there was a sale on,
then pour in multiple cubic metres of concrete. Nuclear flasks are poverty spec in comparison.


In the UK it's more common to see plinth footings with the tower frame bolted down, rather than embedded into it. that way you can check the entire structure for imminent failures.
Example here:
https://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/300160/427694371/stock-photo-high-voltage-electric-transmission-tower-energy-pylon-427694371.jpg

http://us.123rf.com/450wm/plazaccameraman/plazaccameraman1505/plazaccameraman150500027/40655230-end-of-an-electricity-pylon-that-had-been-sawn-to-facilitate-removal-detailing-the-reinforcing-steel.jpg?ver=6

[HackedFridgeMagnet]

Obviously those piers you show look way better, but it probably just comes down to a cost per km thing.
In this case they were on the wrong side of the risk vs savings ledger.
But remember they run these things for vast distances, so as somebody said before they are designed to fail occasionally.
The storm that caused it was really a freak, as it dumped so much rain and was really windy compared to other storms in that area. 
Somebody said it was a 1 in 50 year storm. Maybe. 

pick two:

cheap
reliable
green

For transmission poles?

[CatalinaWOW]

One of the problems is that weather statistical predictions are so bogus.  We don't have enough history to constitute a valid sample for events on time scales much more than a decade.  There is evidence that the statistics are not Gaussian, but we use a Gaussian assumption because it is easy and we don't have anything better.  Throw any possible effects of climate change on top of that and you might as well use a dartboard.

Areas I have lived in have suffered through one "500 year storm", three "100 year storms" and numerous "50 year storm events".  Either I should start selling lottery advice (don't buy any number I like), or the statistics those weather predictions are based on are very questionable.

Finally, the risk analysis seems flawed even if you trusted the weather statistics.  If this "50 year storm" did indeed exceed the design loads it indicates that they designed for roughly a 50-50 possibility of failure over the operating life of the system.  (Plus or minus 25% or so.  I don't know what the actual design life of the transmission line was, but it seems unlikely that it was less than 25 years, and could easily have far exceeded 50 years.)  If the operator is held liable for damages due to this design defect the savings will seem paltry indeed.

[tautech]

One of the problems is that weather statistical predictions are so bogus.  We don't have enough history to constitute a valid sample for events on time scales much more than a decade.  There is evidence that the statistics are not Gaussian, but we use a Gaussian assumption because it is easy and we don't have anything better.  Throw any possible effects of climate change on top of that and you might as well use a dartboard.

Areas I have lived in have suffered through one "500 year storm", three "100 year storms" and numerous "50 year storm events".  Either I should start selling lottery advice (don't buy any number I like), or the statistics those weather predictions are based on are very questionable.

Finally, the risk analysis seems flawed even if you trusted the weather statistics.  If this "50 year storm" did indeed exceed the design loads it indicates that they designed for roughly a 50-50 possibility of failure over the operating life of the system.  (Plus or minus 25% or so.  I don't know what the actual design life of the transmission line was, but it seems unlikely that it was less than 25 years, and could easily have far exceeded 50 years.)  If the operator is held liable for damages due to this design defect the savings will seem paltry indeed.

We can analyse this back and forth but at the end of the day interstate power pylons are critical infrastructure and just shouldn't fail. Period.

The owner (state or private) can attempt to shift blame to the conditions at the time but they are just trying to save their own skin from a public lynching.
Bring it on, we need some entertainment. 

[bitslice]

Obviously those piers you show look way better, but it probably just comes down to a cost per km thing.
In this case they were on the wrong side of the risk vs savings ledger.
But remember they run these things for vast distances, so as somebody said before they are designed to fail occasionally.

Roughly the foundation cost (going on a radio tower) is $15K,
the tower, installation, design etc maybe $85K, plus $random for tea and biscuits.

I'm suggesting a slightly different concrete form (+$200?), an addition of 4m² of concrete ($400), and $100 of rebar. So an additional 0.7% on material cost. (figures wildly speculative,but you get the idea)

I'd really like to see the design spec for this,
clearly they've looked at every other standard pylon foundation design throughout the entire world, but instead have gone for a slightly upscaled version of my neighbours garden fence foundation   

(Note that his blew down in the last storm, but mine uses a simple 1 foot pier and didn't - because, physics  )

The storm that caused it was really a freak, as it dumped so much rain and was really windy compared to other storms in that area. 
Somebody said it was a 1 in 50 year storm. Maybe. 

We'd need a weather geek to chime in really, but from a 10 second uninformed look at Australia's historical cyclone wind speeds, this didn't sound like anything too apocalyptic?
Possibly on a par with European storms even? yet our foundations are spectacularly rebar-'tastic, and importantly, we don't have entire countries (and a $$$ 24/7 steel industry) hanging off the bum-end of one single pylon run.

Looking at the materiel cost vs predicted fuckups per year + black swan events + jet fuel/steel beams, I'd have hoped someone would suggest the atypical garden fence post design was reckless and to just cut back on tea and biscuits.

Actually this has happened in the UK, a freak snow load slightly bent a steel pylon somewhere up in North Scotland back in 2013, last time it happened was in 1987. Although even if the entire Goldsmiths University Gender Studies student body declare our pylons racist and colonially oppressive, they are not going to be uprooted

[Someone]

Obviously those piers you show look way better, but it probably just comes down to a cost per km thing.
In this case they were on the wrong side of the risk vs savings ledger.
But remember they run these things for vast distances, so as somebody said before they are designed to fail occasionally.

Roughly the foundation cost (going on a similar radio tower) is $15K,
the tower, installation, design etc maybe $85K, plus $random for tea and biscuits.

I'm suggesting a slightly different concrete form (+$200?), an addition of 4m² of concrete ($400), and $100 of rebar. So an additional 0.7% on material cost. (figures wildly speculative,but you get the idea)

I'd really like to see the design spec for this,
clearly they've looked at every other standard pylon foundation design throughout the entire world, but instead have gone for a slightly upscaled version of my neighbours garden fence foundation   

(Note that his blew down in the last storm, but mine uses a simple 1 foot pier and didn't - because, physics  )

You should get a job as a contractor and bid on the projects then since you're so confident of sourcing concrete for a remote area job at city rates. Also note that some transmission runs are more than 50 years old and could have been built to different risk assessments planning that they would be upgraded or replaced (and then weren't).

The storm that caused it was really a freak, as it dumped so much rain and was really windy compared to other storms in that area. 
Somebody said it was a 1 in 50 year storm. Maybe. 

We'd need a weather geek to chime in really, but from a 10 second uninformed look at Australia's historical cyclone wind speeds, this didn't sound like anything too apocalyptic?
Possibly on a par with European storms even? yet our foundations are spectacularly rebar-'tastic, and importantly, we don't have entire countries (and a $$$ 24/7 steel industry) hanging off the bum-end of one single pylon run.

Looking at the materiel cost vs predicted fuckups per year + black swan events + jet fuel/steel beams, I'd have pointed out the garden fence post design was reckless and to just cut back on tea and biscuits.

Actually this has happened in the UK, a freak snow load slightly bent a steel pylon somewhere up in North Scotland back in 2013, last time it happened was in 1987

Australia is BIG

Some parts of the country have cyclones on a 10-20 year basis, and some are dead quiet. Some parts get several meters of snow load annually and some get no precipitation for years.

These storms followed on from flooding of the region, areas seeing more than their annual average rainfall in just a day or two, but don't let that get in the way of your ramblings.

[dannyf]

The "quality" aussie pylon has such a tiny concrete foundation that I should call my mailbox post as "huuuuuugely superior",

Really, it looks like that thing was designed for 5mph wind max.

[bitslice]

You should get a job as a contractor and bid on the projects then since you're so confident of sourcing concrete for a remote area job at city rates.

(figures wildly speculative, but you get the idea)

 


The real issue here is probably the over reliance on wind power,
so again back to politicians polishing their green credentials without actually asking anyone if it was stupid or not.

[Someone]

You should get a job as a contractor and bid on the projects then since you're so confident of sourcing concrete for a remote area job at city rates.

(figures wildly speculative, but you get the idea)

 


The real issue here is probably the over reliance on wind power,
so again back to politicians polishing their green credentials without actually asking anyone if it was stupid or not.

If the grid went down without interruption to its transmission infrastructure you might have a point, but when multiple parts of the transmission mechanically fail from act of god the power source is largely irrelevant. Yes they could have been built to withstand more abuse, but they weren't, ZERO to do with renewables.

[bitslice]

If the grid went down without interruption to its transmission infrastructure you might have a point, but when multiple parts of the transmission mechanically fail from act of god the power source is largely irrelevant. Yes they could have been built to withstand more abuse, but they weren't, ZERO to do with renewables.

Have a look at what TerraHertz posted

Putting up a few pylons overnight is doable, but restarting a power grid with wind power is not,
just as you can't plug a fridge into a solar panel and expect it to work.

All power generation is not the same, wind power has significant technical limitations that affect its capabilities.

[Someone]

If the grid went down without interruption to its transmission infrastructure you might have a point, but when multiple parts of the transmission mechanically fail from act of god the power source is largely irrelevant. Yes they could have been built to withstand more abuse, but they weren't, ZERO to do with renewables.

Have a look at what TerraHertz posted

Putting up a few pylons overnight is doable, but restarting a power grid with wind power is not,
just as you can't plug a fridge into a solar panel and expect it to work.

All power generation is not the same, wind power has significant technical limitations that affect its capabilities.

You're completely full of rubbish, the grid was back to the majority of its demand for that time of day within 6 hours:

The next day they rode through in very normal circumstances with the renewable resources unaffected. Thats a pretty amazing feat to clear the faults and return service so quickly before replacing the downed transmission. After a major failure the blackstart procedure is complicated, but it worked fine in this case despite relying solely on gas (no other plants are available in the state once the interconnector drops them off the NEM). I'm not the only one impressed, the mainstream media and power experts are singing the praises too.

The SA grid has issues, but none were exposed in this event, and in fact many of the doubters are being proven wrong about the resilience and stability of the SA grid.

[bitslice]

You're completely full of rubbish

Take it up with the source quoted then?

The SA grid has issues, but none were exposed in this event

Wind turbines turn off during a storm, how is that of any use?
Solar is great too, just not at night

[Someone]

You're completely full of rubbish

Take it up with the source quoted then?

The SA grid has issues, but none were exposed in this event

Wind turbines turn off during a storm, how is that of any use?
Solar is great too, just not at night

You're the one without sources, the slew rate of renewables was not unusual and not associated with the failure. All data at this point is that the transmission failures caused enough perturbation for the interconnector to trip, the renewables turning off during the storm was accommodated and didn't contribute to the failure. Feel free to come up with anything else, but back it up with data. Armchair experts like you are trying to make this into something it isn't.