Energy 78, AEMO on the S. Australia blackout last Sept. 28

More on the huge, state-wide blackout for many hours in S. Australia last September 28. There was a storm, strong winds with gust at 100-120 kph, so the wind farms should produce more power, right? Wrong. Wind power suddenly went AWOL. Huge supply deficiency, plus some transmission towers were knocked down. And there was massive power blackouts.

The wind farms shut down their turbines and locked the blades from spinning as there is danger that the blades might go out of control, the turbine can overheat/burn?

SA energy mix is 48% from wind, 34% energy import from Victoria, and 18% from thermal/gas power. Data from the AEMO Report, PRELIMINARYREPORT – BLACK SYSTEM EVENT IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA ON 28 SEPTEMBER 2016.

From The Advertiser, 4 October 2016:

Australian Energy Market Operator Orders 10 SA Wind Farms To Limit Generation After Statewide Electricity Blackout

Paul Starick

TEN South Australian wind farms have been ordered to limit generation in the wake of the disastrous statewide power blackout because the national electricity market operator has declared they have not performed properly.

The state’s biggest wind farm, at Snowtown, is among those which the Australian Energy Market Operator has targeted in its “management and analysis” of last Wednesday’s unprecedented power outage as it gradually restores the power network....

And from The Australian, October 05, 2016:

Green Disaster: South Australian Blackout Due To Loss Of Wind Power

Graham Lloyd

A dramatic, sudden loss of wind power generation was the root cause of South Australia’s state wide blackout last week...

My Australian engineer friend, Bernd Felsche, commented last October 06,

The AEMO preliminary report released yesterday does not state specifically if any wind generators locked; only that the power generated declined over a short period.

The "wind farm" operators ought to be able to tell if their turbines locked up. But they've said nothing … in a week.

As you note; wind power will drop to zero when the turbines lock up; something of which the State government and energy operators must have been aware; but totally unprepared in any event; transmission line failure to the wind generators OR the generators themselves.

South Australia's government hasn't yet announced a Royal Commission into the grid infrastructure (failure). They must do so IMNSHO because the grid structures failed catastrophically at wind speeds well below what they are supposed to survive. Such failures are indicative of a failure of competence or corruption.

From September 28 to October 4, the wind farm operators were silent? wow. Silence is admission that they indeed locked up their blades. I think they were designed for winds of 100 kph max, so when the winds reached 90+ kph, they locked up their blades, zero output.

The irony of wind power -- when there is a storm with strong winds, instead of wind turbines producing more electricity, they instead produce zero. The huge blackout in S. Australia occurred even before some transmission towers were knocked down. Wind power simply went AWOL.

From ABC, South Australian blackout: When the lights go out, it's a sign the electricity grid isn't working well, October 06, 2016:

"Wind presents two engineering problems when it is hooked up to a grid that was designed before it was viable.

First, it is intermittent so all of it has to be backed up by baseload power for those days when the wind does not blow.

Second, for an electricity network to function, demand and supply have to be kept near the perfect harmony of 50 cycles (50 hertz) every second of every day. If the frequency gets out of tune it trips the shutdown switch.

This electrical harmony is called synchronous supply, and thermal power is very good at delivering it. Wind power is asynchronous as its frequency fluctuates with the breeze, so it has to be stabilised by the give and take of other sources of demand and supply."

The endless reminder: Governments should step back from energy rationing and cronyism, telling picking winners and losers, mandating which energy sources should continue and expand and which ones should be curtailed, if not discontinued and killed.
-------------

See also:
Energy 75, the PH solar confederation, electric coops and Meralco, August 01, 2016 
Energy 76, PEMC reply to my article on AEMO, WESM, September 11, 2016 
Energy 77, South Australia's blackout last September 28, October 08, 2016

Energy 77, South Australia's blackout last September 28

A few months ago, the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) warned of blackouts by around 2020 in S. Australia because of its rising dependence on wind power. Well, it already happened. Widespread and prolonged "Earth Hour" in S. Australia last September 28, 2016.

An Australian engineer friend, Bernd Felsche, made this comment when I posted this issue in my fb wall last October 2:

"Note that the renewables crony capitalists and their sheep will argue that the failure wasn't due to wind power which is only true in the context of the failures; the collapse of power transmission lines due to wind.

However, an electrical power grid is usually able to "recover" within minutes to deliver whatever available power to priority consumers. And there was the potential of significant capacity via the Heywood connector to coal-powered generation in Victoria. However; that connector "tripped" due to the surge in demand that it "saw".

Wind power failed to provide to the grid because there was insufficient rotating inertia for them to synchronise. Reports indicate that the gas-fired power station at Pelican Point was started from cold to provide that inertia; which would account for the hours of delay before some power was restored. Wind power could not be utilised until it could synchronise to the frequency and phase of a much larger generator.

It seems that the entire South Australian electricity supply grid has been mismanaged for decades.

The transmission towers that collapsed apparently did so in winds that they should have withstood. Nearby wind turbines did not even shut down due to excessive winds (sustained above 90 km/h), so wind speeds could at first glance not have exceeded the design wind speeds for the towers. Let's hope that the evidence isn't destroyed before there's an official inquiry.

Adding to that, it is well known that wind power requires a minimum of 90% of spinning reserve. That reserve was substantially provided by the interconnectors to Victoria. The loss of the Heywood connector might have been averted by faster circuit protection to shed non-essential loads in the Adelaide area.

The transmission map (see https://www.electranet.com.au/what.../solutions/network-map/ ) indicates that there are 4 lesser (132/66 kV) power transmission lines parallel to the main 275kV one in the Blyth/Melrose region where most, if not all of the tower collapses were reported. While those resources present some potential for re-routing power, it quickly gets complicated and expensive. That Northern transmission line exists originally to connect to the now demolished (in the week prior to the blackout) coal-fired power stations at the Northern end of the Gulf.

South Australia's power generating capacity is not reliable, lacking sufficient spinning reserve to fill the loss of capacity in wind power generation. The grid is neither robust nor resilient.

No lessons have been learnt from the experience in Germany where the mixing of unreliable, unpredictable power generation with conventional power generation on the grid makes the reliable generating capacity unstable.

South Australia has experienced what it's like to power a State on virtue signals alone."

From some news reports:

"So we end up not achieving our emissions targets or, if we do, we do it at even higher costs than is necessary and in the meantime there could even be a risk of blackouts," report author Tony Wood said.

In the spotlight is a single winter's night in South Australia, when the wholesale price leapt from a year-long average of $60 a megawatt hour to $9,000 MWh.

The causes are complex, but the Grattan Institute followed a trail that began with the Renewable Energy Target (RET), which mandated 23.5 per cent of electricity be drawn from renewables by 2020." – Sept. 25, 2016 http://www.abc.net.au/.../sa's-power-price-spike.../7875970

"Loss of available power from transmissions lines feeding the region from other states coupled with South Australia’s ill-considered climate change energy policy of forced shutdown of the states operating coal plants to promote heavy use of renewable energy created this latest power debacle.

Last July the state barely averted energy black outs when reduced outside electrical energy supplies forced huge and costly purchases of needed power to restore electrical system reliability." https://wattsupwiththat.com/.../entire-state-of-south.../

From the Grattan report, 40 pages long:

"3.4 Wind and solar PV can affect system security

The increased penetration of renewables does not just have potential implications for the NEM in terms of price signals for new investment. It can also have consequences for the security and stability of the electricity system.

The frequency at which the electricity system operates needs to stay balanced. Balance is easier to do with fossil fuel and hydro power stations than with generation such as wind and solar PV. This is because wind and solar do not operate at the same frequency as the electricity system. Wind turbines, for example, generally rotate according to the speed of the wind, rather than the frequency of the system. On this basis, wind and solar are described as providing asynchronous generation." http://grattan.edu.au/.../09/877-Keeping-the-lights-on.pdf

Governments should stop politicizing and intervening too much on energy policies.
---------------

See also:
Energy 74, Mindanao business opportunities via coal plants, July 13, 2016 
Energy 75, the PH solar confederation, electric coops and Meralco, August 01, 2016 
Energy 76, PEMC reply to my article on AEMO, WESM, September 11, 2016

Energy 76, PEMC reply to my article on AEMO, WESM

The Philippine Electricity Market Corp. (PEMC) replied to my article in BWorld, Brownouts, coal power and electricity market, August 17, 2016, below.

  

Dear Editor: We are writing in reference to a column written by Mr. Bienvenido Oplas published on 17 August 2016 entitled, "Brownouts, coal power and the electricity market".

We note the persistent claims made in your column that Philippine Electricity Market Corporation (PEMC) is exactly replicating the Department of Energy's (DOE) efforts to push for more renewable energy (RE) resources into the system. It was also averred in your column that "since PEMC continues to be a government controlled

corporation, can we expect PEMC to be more independent, more candid, in assessing the harm, actual and potential of more REs in the WESM and grid stability?"

In addressing these claims, you used the example of the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) in its initiative to conduct reliability studies. It must be pointed out that the AEMO is not merely a market operator but also a power systems operator that provides critical planning, forecasting, and power systems information. Thus, it can conduct studies on the impact of withdrawal of coal-fired generation capacity cognizant of its responsibility in maintaining the reliability of the Australian power

grid. In contrast to the Australian structure, PEMC acts only as the Market Operator responsible for the governance and operations of the WESM. The function of maintaining the security, reliability and integrity of the power grid is lodged with the System Operator. Against this context, it is grossly inaccurate to claim that PEMC is expected to study the impact of influx of RE resources in the grid.

With regard to the claim that PEMC is pushing for more RE resources in the WESM as a result of its study on "merit order effect" (MOE), this is a non-sequitur. The study published in our electricity journal focused on the impact of FIT incentives based on

the actual generation of FIT-qualified resources in the WESM as a result of priority dispatch accorded by Republic Act No. 9513 otherwise known as the RE Act of 2008. The MOE of the possible lowering of energy prices in the electricity bourse is no form of endorsement of RE resources on PEMC's part. In the study, the impact of MOE on the market affects only those distribution utilities and directly-connected customers that purchased from the market and does not necessarily translate to the direct lowering of retail rates for end-users because of the FIT. The initiative of PEMC in conducting studies and analyses affecting market outcomes is without partiality to any resource.

Lastly, we wish to point out that PEMC remains a private corporation and not a government-controlled corporation. We recognize the DOE's role in the policy oversight of the WESM operations as envisioned pursuant to relevant laws and

regulations.

We understand and appreciate your pursuit of balanced reporting and as such, we deemed it necessary to address the assertions made in your column.

In the interest of unbiased journalism, we request that you allow us to air our side by publishing this letter in your paper, as is and sans comment.

Respectfully yours,

Atty. Phillip C. Adviento,

Manager, Training and Communications

The Philippine Electricity Market Corporation (PEMC) is a non-stock, non-profit corporation which was incorporated in November 2003 upon the initiative of the Department of Energy (DOE) with representatives from the various sectors of the electric power industry to be the governance arm of the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM). The WESM began Commercial Operations in Luzon in June 2006 and in the Visa yas in December 2010. In June 2013, PEMC launched and integrated the Retail Competition and Open Access (RCOA) into the WESM. The WESM is a centralized venue for buyers and sellers to trade electricity as a commodity where its prices are based on actual use (demand) and availability (supply). The WESM was created by Republic Act 9136, the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA) of 2001. This provided for the establishment of an electricity market that reflects the actual cost of electricity and lowers its price through more efficient production through competition.

--------------

See also:

Energy 72, FIT-eligible solar plants in the Philippines, June 22, 2016 

Energy 73, Comments to DOE draft Department Circular on RPS, June 27, 2016 

Energy 74, Mindanao business opportunities via coal plants, July 13, 2016 
Energy 75, the PH solar confederation, electric coops and Meralco, August 01, 2016

BWorld 79, Brownouts, coal power and the electricity market

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last August 17, 2016.

Brownouts, actual and potential, have returned to some areas of Metro Manila and surrounding provinces in the Luzon grid over the past two weeks. This is unfortunate because electricity demand has somehow declined because of the colder, rainy season and more power plants have been added to the grid.

  

This rare event was caused by heavy stress in the Luzon grid as a result of the unscheduled outage of several coal-fired, hydroelectric, oil, and geothermal power plants in the grid, many of them are already ageing. Among these coal plants were (a) 382 M-W Pagbilao’s unit 2 (U2), (b) 122 M-W South Luzon Thermal’s U1, (c) 140 M-W Southwest Luzon’s U2, and (d) 60 M-W Limay Cogen Block 5.

Among the hydro plants were (a) 50 M-W Angat Main U4 and (b) 180 M-W Kalayaan U1. Then 83 M-W from Makban Geothermal and 280 M-W from Malaya Thermal U1. Almost 1,300 MW of power went on unscheduled or unplanned outage, plus power plants on scheduled or planned maintenance shutdown.

The newly-commissioned wind and solar plants in Luzon cannot and will not be able to fill up the power deficit. If the wind DoEs not blow, wind power is zero; if it is night time or day time but very cloudy, then solar power output is zero or very low.

This situation again highlights the need to continue building new coal and natural gas plants. The proposal and lobbying by certain sectors and environmentalist groups to discontinue building new coal plants and build only intermittent renewable energy (RE) plants like solar and wind is not wise. The Philippines’ fossil fuel consumption remains among the lowest in Asia’s emerging and developed economies plus Australia.

(Correction:  the last 2 columns are for oil, unit in million tonnes, not mtoe)

Last Aug. 11, 2016, the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) released its 2016 Electricity Statement of Opportunities (ESoO) report and it highlighted the growing importance of network and non-network developments to secure future electricity generation. Notable in its report is this warning,

“AEMO has modelled the impact of withdrawing a further 1,360 MW of coal-fired generation capacity to meet the COP 21 commitment under AEMO’s neutral scenario, with results suggesting potential reliability breaches occurring in South Australia from 2019-2020, and New South Wales and Victoria from 2025 onwards.”

“Reliability breaches” is a technical term for power outages or blackouts. And AEMO projects that it will take place in three to four years from now. Replacing coal power with additional RE capacity will not compensate for the loss of coal capacity.

AEMO was candid enough to categorically warn about the dangers of cutting coal power and pushing more renewables into the system. This candor is good because it will prepare both power suppliers and consumers of what’s going to happen few years on the road.

One explanation for such candor by AEMO is its independence from the government as the latter pushes for more REs.

In contrast, the Philippine Electricity Market Corporation (PEMC), AEMO’s counterpart here as electricity market operator, is government-dependent. It is headed and chaired by the DoE (Department of Energy) secretary and many board members are from the government, like the National Power Corp. (NPC), National Transmission Corp. (TransCo), and the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corp. (PSALM).

Since the DoE is the main implementer of RE Act of 2008 (RA 9513), DoE is naturally pushing for more intermittent REs into the system and that is what PEMC is exactly doing. The latter for instance produced a study in November 2015 saying that REs that are priority dispatch at the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM) have created the “merit order effect” (MOE) in reducing the market clearing price (MCP) at WESM.

MOE can also be realized via more and cheaper conventional plants like coal rather than expensive and intermittent REs. With conventional plants, there is no need for additional ancillary costs.

So, since PEMC continues to be a government controlled corporation, can we expect PEMC to be more independent, more candid, in assessing the harm, actual and potential, of more REs in WESM and grid stability?

The most logical answer is no. The DoE cannot contradict itself, say that REs are necessary and say at the same time that REs are dangerous to the customers’ pockets and the stability of the national grid.

So the important implication here is that the independent market operator (IMO) as clearly stated in the EPIRA (Electric Power Industry Reform Act) some 15 years ago and now represented by PEMC, should be independent from government like AEMO. The DoE secretary and all other government energy agencies, including those in the “advisory” capacities, should get out of IMO or PEMC board.

Having less government intervention in the energy sector in general and the electricity market operation in particular is pro-consumer. Just give the consumers more choices, no or little coercion and they will choose the least costly, the more stable and reliable energy source.

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the head of Minimal Government Thinkers and a Fellow of SEANET and Stratbase-ADRi. minimalgovernment@gmail.com

Mr. Oplas has written about the PEMC, renewable energy, and related issues in his previous columns. To read his pieces entitled “State dependence of Philippine electricity market” and “Renewable energy, expensive electricity, and the merit order effect,” please visit these links http://goo.gl/r0XaLt, http://goo.gl/Hf6DRg, respectively.

-------------- 

See also:

BWorld 58, INDCs and PH energy realities, May 14, 2016 

BWorld 63, Can renewables only power the PH and Asian markets? June 10, 2016 

BWorld 66, Renewable portfolio standard and electricity prices, June 26, 2016 
BWorld 70, Wind power firms corner billions of FIT money, July 09, 2016
BWorld 76, Solar can never power the PH and Asia, August 06. 2016 
BWorld 78, If the US becomes protectionist, who loses? August 11, 2016