Renewables helping grid reliability

[billvon 2,991]

For a long time we've been hearing about how renewable energy is going to damage or destroy the grid because it's unreliable. "You'll have to build one new power plant for every solar installation!" anti-renewables folks have cried. "[Renewables] create acute and chronic problems for maintaining adequate baseload generation and have impacted reliable generators of all types" according to Rick Perry.

A few weeks ago, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation published a report on grid reliability. And it turns out that renewables are actually improving grid reliability. The biggest threat? Cyberterrorism, of the sort that Trump et al doesn't believe in. After all, Trump asked him about Russia's hacking and he denied it vehemently.

================
Report finds no immediate concerns about grid reliability
Written By David J. Unger
June 22, 2017

Midwest Energy News

The North American power grid is reliable and resilient despite the growth of variable, renewable energy sources as well as an increasing risk of both cybersecurity and physical threats.

That’s the conclusion of a new report by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s (NERC), a not-for-profit regulatory body that oversees reliability of North America’s power system.

“In 2016, there were no reported cyber or physical security incidents that resulted in a loss of load,” the report, released last week, finds. “Nonetheless, grid security, particularly cyber security, is an area where past performance does not predict future risk. Threats continue to increase and are becoming more serious.”

For some, the recent shift in the power grid toward distributed, variable and interconnected power resources has raised concern about maintaining the high level of power quality that North American consumers have come to expect whenever they plug a device into an outlet.

In April, U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry directed the Department of Energy to study “critical issues central to protecting the long-term reliability of the electric grid.” In a memo obtained by Bloomberg News, Secretary Perry wrote that “regulatory burdens” and “federal subsidies” have in part diminished coal-fired power generation and which “create acute and chronic problems for maintaining adequate baseload generation and have impacted reliable generators of all types.”

“A reliable and resilient electric system is essential to protecting public health and fostering economic growth and job creation,” Secretary Perry wrote. “Nonetheless, there are significant changes occurring within the electric system that could profoundly affect the economy and even national security, and as such, these changes require further study and investigation.”

The results of the DOE study are expected to be released in the coming weeks.

NERC’s own findings suggest that – for now, at least – the nation’s power system has been largely successful in adapting to new technologies, shifting policies and fickle market forces.


. . . In Illinois, for example, the state’s two leading utilities have improved reliability while implementing aggressive smart-grid deployment over recent years.

Between 2012 and 2016, ComEd’s outage frequency dropped nearly 34 percent and the duration of outages has been reduced by 48 percent, the company announced in February.

“The smart grid investment has vastly improved the infrastructure of our system,” Terence R. Donnelly, executive vice-president and chief operating officer for ComEd, said in a press release. “On a daily basis and during storms, our customers are seeing less interruption in their lives and their business operations.”

Renewables helping, not hurting

In anticipation of the forthcoming DOE study, some advocates and analysts have defended the power system’s ability to incorporate rising amounts of variable generation and adapt to the erosion of “baseload” sources like coal and nuclear.

A study by the Analysis Group released this week found that advanced energy technologies were making the grid more – not less – diverse and thus reliable.

“These newer generating resources are also contributing to the varied reliability services — such [as] frequency and voltage management, ramping and load-following capabilities, provision of contingency and replacement reserves, black start capability, and sufficient electricity output to meet demand at all times — that electric grids require to provide electric service to consumers on an around-the-clock basis,” said the study, which received funding from the trade groups the Advanced Energy Economy Institute and the American Wind Energy Association. “As a result, increasing quantities of natural gas and renewable generation are increasing the diversity of the power system and supporting continued reliable operations.”

Other, smaller technological advances – both on-the-horizon and online today – have contributed to a smarter and more reliable grid, advocates say.

“Coordination of demand response, electric vehicle charging, and simple upgrades such as thermostats and efficient lighting reduce the stress on the grid, directly and immediately improving reliability,” Mike Jacobs, senior energy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists wrote in a blog post responding to the DOE study. “The utility industry has great potential to improve this sort of interaction with consumers, as well as the game-changing possibilities of battery energy storage."
======================

[billvon 2,991]

And that DOE report mentioned in the above article? Same conclusion.

===========
Renewable Energy Not a Threat to Grid, Draft of U.S. Study Finds
By Catherine Traywick
July 14, 2017, 2:26 PM PDT
Bloomberg'

Wind and solar power don’t pose a significant threat to the reliability of the U.S. power grid, Energy Department staff members said in a draft report, contradicting statements by their leader Rick Perry.

"The power system is more reliable today due to better planning, market discipline, and better operating rules and standards," according to a July draft of the study obtained by Bloomberg.

. . .

The draft report concludes: "Grid operators are using technologies, standards and practices to assure that they can continue operating the grid reliably."

. . .

The career officials at the department found that energy efficiency, battery storage and demand response were helping the reliability of the grid, changing it from the way it had operated in the past, but not endangering the provision of electricity, the May draft showed.

Aging coal and nuclear plants have higher maintenance costs and are getting lower payments because of expiring contracts, making them less profitable, the May document says. The profitability of coal plants built in the 1970s and 1980s declined after electricity markets were opened to competition, it said.
==========

[billeisele 130]

Technology advancement is always fun. What is happening with reliability is long term improvement and short term problems. We've got one going now that will be interesting to see how it is solved and who pays for it, the fix will be a few million $$. Until it is fixed the only option is to turn-off the generator.

The utility industry is spending an incredible amount of money adapting to these point-source generators. I'm OK with that but it is an interesting discussion on who should pay for these changes.

One alternative generation proponent has stated, "it's not my fault that you didn't design your system for this." Notice how he has made this personal with the YOU word. How about, "the system was designed to accommodate what was known at the time, we're OK with you adding your generator but it doesn't seem reasonable to expect others to pay for the system modifications required to allow your generator to operate safely."

There are certain costs that can and should be rate-based (shared) by all customers. What we're finding is that the majority of the system modification costs don't benefit the public and thus should be borne by the generator.

The typical response is, "this is just a ploy to make my project uneconomical." The unemotional reality is, "we're unwilling to require other customer to pay the costs (socialize) that a new system causes just so the project can be economical for the owner."

I expect these discussion to become more frequent.

It's interesting how the country is "waking up" to the economic unfairness of net metering. This is a great example of how when you give someone something they don't deserve they think it is theirs forever and get really upset when you try to take it away. There's a big fight ongoing in NC and in other states.

In my area the local co-op's were smart. They never did net metering and starting last year all residential rates are time-of-use with a larger basic facility charge. This is a fair way to allow anyone that wants to use alternative generation, typically solar, to not impact the cost to other customers.

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[Phil1111 1,149]

I can see the fight but net metering should be borne by the consumer, power source and the grid in more or less equal terms.

IMO there are benefits to all.

[turtlespeed 220]

At least we have government sticking their finger in.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 2,991]

Quote

There are certain costs that can and should be rate-based (shared) by all customers. What we're finding is that the majority of the system modification costs don't benefit the public and thus should be borne by the generator.

If the public gets no benefit from the modification, it makes sense to pass the costs on to the generator.

If the public gets benefits from the modification, it makes sense to pass the costs on to the customers.

Quote

In my area the local co-op's were smart. They never did net metering and starting last year all residential rates are time-of-use with a larger basic facility charge. This is a fair way to allow anyone that wants to use alternative generation, typically solar, to not impact the cost to other customers.

That will last until battery systems start with power arbitrage, reducing the costs for TOU customers with such systems. Then the other ratepayers will again complain - "why should they get to pay less for power? Raise _their_ rates!"

Everyone wants the other guy's rates raised; no one wants their own rates raised. It's been that way since utilities became public. (And it's one reason utilities are public to begin with - so people have some voice in their own rates.)

[SkyDekker 1,465]

turtlespeed

At least we have government sticking their finger in.

Ah the beauty of Capitalism.

[billeisele 130]

turtlespeed

At least we have government sticking their finger in.

there is so much BS and just flat out incorrect information along with the typical emotional heart-grabbing statements that this is not worth reading

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[billeisele 130]

billvon

Quote

There are certain costs that can and should be rate-based (shared) by all customers. What we're finding is that the majority of the system modification costs don't benefit the public and thus should be borne by the generator.

If the public gets no benefit from the modification, it makes sense to pass the costs on to the generator.

If the public gets benefits from the modification, it makes sense to pass the costs on to the customers.
***In my area the local co-op's were smart. They never did net metering and starting last year all residential rates are time-of-use with a larger basic facility charge. This is a fair way to allow anyone that wants to use alternative generation, typically solar, to not impact the cost to other customers.

That will last until battery systems start with power arbitrage, reducing the costs for TOU customers with such systems. Then the other ratepayers will again complain - "why should they get to pay less for power? Raise _their_ rates!"

Everyone wants the other guy's rates raised; no one wants their own rates raised. It's been that way since utilities became public. (And it's one reason utilities are public to begin with - so people have some voice in their own rates.)

Yes!!! battery storage is the ultimate game changer, and cost-effective small modular reactors are another game changer. When the technical issues are resolved and the cost low enough either of these will be huge.

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[rushmc 23]

Nowhere in anything you post says Renewables are making the grid more reliable. It does say that utilities are addressing reliability issues caused by Renewables. Same thing the company I am working for is doing. But I got to give you credit, nice spin on your part

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[turtlespeed 220]

SkyDekker

***At least we have government sticking their finger in.

Ah the beauty of Capitalism.

"Nevada Public Utilities Commission"

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[SkyDekker 1,465]

paid by the utility companies to fight a threat to their business.

Like I said, the beauty of capitalism.

[rushmc 23]

SkyDekker

paid by the utility companies to fight a threat to their business.

Like I said, the beauty of capitalism.

You show complete and absolute ignorance of the issue.

The article Turtle linked is very accurate.

You just support the liberal mind set of getting stuff for free.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

turtlespeed

******At least we have government sticking their finger in.

Ah the beauty of Capitalism.

"Nevada Public Utilities Commission"

He does not understand that the Nevada Public Utilities Commission is a government board that regulates for profit utilities.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln