Smart grid technology is a hot issue on Capitol Hill, but some are raising questions about the idea. In recent days we've discussed the smart grid's potential exposure to worm attacks, consumers' unreadiness for the idea, and whether the whole concept may need a rethink. A Congressional hearing on Thursday surfaced another reason for caution: the smart grid's vulnerability to EMP. "Electromagnetic Pulse" refers to the damage caused in electrical circuits and systems when a nuclear explosive goes off nearby. The electric grid as it's currently constituted is vulnerable to EMP; the further down the road we go towards a smart grid, the more vulnerable it will become. "It makes a great equalizer for small nations looking to stand up to military Goliaths, argues Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (Rep.-Md.), a former research scientist and engineer who has worked in the past on projects for NASA and the military. All one needs to wreak some serious EMP damage, he charges, is a sea-worthy steamer, $100,000 to buy a scud-missile launcher, and a crude nuclear weapon. Then fling the device high into the air and detonate its warhead. Such a system might not paralyze the entire United States, he concedes. 'But you could shut down all of New England. And if you missed by 100 miles, it's as good as a bulls eye.'"
The utilities want the government to foot the bill for them to have modern telemetry as well as a bunch of routine maintenance type of stuff - old transformers rebuilt, etc - stuff that improves their old, core business. Stuff that they've been miserably slacking on for the last 20 years order to pocket more short term profits while their infrastructure rots.
The Big Lie is that this modernization supposedly needs to be done in order for green energy technologies (eg grid interactive solar) to work, when in fact, nothing could be further than the truth. Grid-interactive systems actually RELIEVE load on the grid, and they do it especially at peak hours when AC loads kick in. And it works just great on the plain old dumb grid we have today. They might feel threatened because local generation obviously reduces the amount of energy sold, but it also makes that energy cheaper to sell and distribute because it smooths out the peak loads and reduces average current on long-distance transmission lines.
But the power company has this line that it's making the grid "congested" as if the electrons are trying to go in **ZOMG!** both directions or something! It's a crock of shit - propaganda and political games to try and fleece us of money that should otherwise be spent on deploying modern technologies. Not saying the grid doesn't have its place, on the contrary: grid-interactive is a very elegant solution. But the supposed smart-grid is being pushed in a very underhanded way and it's not at all what people think it is.
Not exactly. Pickens scrapped his windmill plans in texas (or some southern state) because theres no way to get the electricity produced to where its needed. Thus, a new grid is needed for green energy
Pickens didn't really give a hoot about the electricity, he wanted the right of way for the power lines so that he could build a pipeline to get all the water he owns to the major metros where he wants to sell it. "Green Energy" was a screen.
He spent buzillions out of pocket to buy the windchargers, some non trivial amount. Yes, the water delivery right of way issue is also involved, but he also has the water that needs delivering some day.
My guess is eventually they will relent when they really *need* the water in those metro regions, and it will just be more expensive then. His was a damn good idea, replace the natgas used for electricity plants with the wind power. The natgas then can be diverted and goes to fuel fleet vehicles, to keep the conversion costs down (all the same model, etc). The natgas is cheaper to run the vehicles on. Oil cash doesn't have to be exported out of the US so it saves on balance of payment issues. win/win/win/win overall.
Ya, he stood to make some serious dollars on the deal, but so effin what?? Where's the beef there, you work for free or don't expect a return on a lot of investment? Bigass huge projects that succeed *tend to make some bigass dollars*. That's just reality, no different from anything else like that in our world.
He's an old guy, been in the energy biz for a long time, and I saw his plan as something he really thought about, came up with a two birds with one stone deal that would work, FOUR birds really, and he wanted it for a legacy contribution as well. The latter is a guess but bet I am right on that one.
Any random young guy can be scary smart, but it takes an older guy who started out scary smart to see all the angles, because you only get that with a ton of real world experience.
He really does not "need" the money at his level and age. Like Gates going off developing medicine action for africa, something to do while you are already rich, and it is in his level of proven expertise.
As to the water, the southwest is in for real long term drought according to the bulk of the climate guessers, while at the same time demands keep going up. We WILL be building more water transfer pipelines, either now while it is cheaper, or later on when it is way more expensive. No "ifs" about it at all, it is GOING to happen because it needs to happen.
Running the new water pipelines from the same areas roughly where the new electricity (which we will also be needing shortly) will be coming from on the same right of way *made sense*. Doing it in two different right of ways at two different times when they start and stop at the same places roughly is way stupid and short sighted.
Way stupid, and way shortsighted. Those boneheads jumped the shark by not doing it all now while materials are cheaper and there's a glut of non working unemployed construction labor out there. They got handed an incredible deal and blew it!
I give the dude props, he has a logical and well thought out long view, not that lame "this quarter" view or "this election cycle" view that most businesses and politicians have and that we all suffer from constantly.
Which part don't you understand? I'll clarify again.
He has water that is needed or will be needed, plus he invested in a large wind project for electricity, which is or will be needed as well. He doesn't own all the pieces for this project, but enough for a good start, and the plan itself makes several logical points. Right of ways are necessary to move these utility products, so of course the government would need to establish these routes, it's the basic way they are done i
2KW roof-mounted solar arrays? Pretty big roofs, or impossibly-efficient arrays...
Noon sunlight is about 1 kilowatt per square meter, (100 watts/square foot) At 10% efficiency, that means 20 square meters (200 square feet), hardly "pretty big".
That's not really "a new grid" so much as "more of the old grid". Pickens didn't need some fancy computer-controlled smart grid; what he needed were some very long, old-fashioned distribution lines from middle-of-nowhere west Texas to areas where people actually live.
There is confusion (caused on purpose by the pro-oil community) about what we mean by "smart grid". We need a high voltage DC grid to transmit wind energy from the Rockies to New York. This isn't "smart", in fact, it's old dumb technology from the 70's that we've improved marginally. We need this grid so that we can plug any kind of energy generation into it from anywhere, without concern for where it's used. Discussions of a "smart" grid are about a whole other problem - that our current grid is way ou
But the power company has this line that it's making the grid "congested" as if the electrons are trying to go in **ZOMG!** both directions or something!
At least for AC grids in the US, they do go both directions, 60 times every second.
>>>The Big Lie is that this modernization supposedly needs to be done in order for green energy technologies (eg grid interactive solar) to work, when in fact, nothing could be further than the truth. >>>
Well that's the first I ever heard of that. I was under the impression the purpose of a SmartGrid was to turn my home's heater on-and-off remotely. i.e. Centralized control of power demand.
It seems to me the best investment would be a solution that requires NO heating. Like this one: htt [wikipedia.org]
"CFLs have a power factor of around 0.5, which means they use twice as much power as rated. For example a 15 watt CFL uses 15 watts in your home, but then it uses another 15 watts at the central power plant due to the need to "rebalance" the power and restore the PF to 1.0. TOTAL == 30 watts burned"
Can you please elaborate on this point? I'm inclined to call bullshit if for no other reason than that 15 watts used at 110v looks the same regardless of the device using it but I'm willing to give you a chance
A power factor of 0.5 doesn't mean 30 W burned. It means 30 W transmitted across the wire, 15 W burned and 15 W returned to the producer. It means that the wires and transformers must be spec'd for 30 W and that some losses are relative to 30 W, not 15 W. But 15 W means 15 W, otherwise the power companies would be sure to charge you for 30.
15 watts with a power factor of.5 does not mean 30 watts.
it means 15 watts and 25.9 var. Q = P x (tan(arccos(pf)) S = P +jQ so S = 15 +j 25.9 = 30 at 60 degrees kVA.
15 watts at 110V with a power factor of 1, single phase P=IV*cos theta I=.136A
15 watts at 110v with a power factor of.5, I =.27A but you are still only using 15 watts and you are still (as a residential customer) only billed for 15 watts.
That's the deal with power factor; more current for the same power means the infrastructure has to be able to
(I am an electrical engineer, although I don't work in power transmission)
It's not bullshit. As others have said, it's not 30 watts burned, it's 30 watts transmitted. One way to understand this is to imagine what would happen if you hooked an ideal capacitor up to an AC power line. The alternating current would charge and discharge the capacitor, moving energy back and forth. This is called imaginary power. No energy is lost -- only resistive loads dissipate power. However, the capacitive load isn't free fo
I bought a $7 pack of a couple 100watt-equivalent GE CFLs several years ago and i've used them everywhere except my kitchen and they do just fine here in florida even with the humidity and heat of... florida... let alone the shower. They go on, they go off, it takes a couple seconds for them to get to full brightness but they're easily ~60watt incandescent brightness right when they turn on and I haven't replaced any of them in several years despite serious hard use. All of this is anecdotal though and thus
Well I guess you've been lucky then. First I tried Lights of America bulbs, all of which died in my upside-down kitchen lights due to heat. Then I went back to incandescents. Then I found Philips bulbs in Walmart that I decided to try because they are a known-good brand. Well they did last longer, but it didn't take long for them to start flickering when lit and then die completely. I opened them up, and all the caps were leaking fluid - a sure sign of overheating from being placed upside-down. So I'
Stuff that they've been miserably slacking on for the last 20 years order to pocket more short term profits while their infrastructure rots.
The only thing the power companies have been slacking on is building power stations, due to economic and regulatory factors that are only partially in their control. Old transformers don't need to be "rebuilt" -- they require almost no maintenance and have life expectancies of decades. The technology for those hasn't changed in a hundred years. Power lines likewise have a low maintenance cost and the technology hasn't changed. Modernization for them has largely been adding power meters that "phone home" wir
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Saturday July 25 2009, @02:47PM (#28820943)
In the documentary film Escape from LA, Snake Plisskin (who I thought was taller) shuts down the entire world with an EMP allowing Latin American countries to invade the US.
Actually he first shut down the ships the South Americans were using with the "Sword of Damocles" weapon, thus leaving them trapped on the high seas. And then he pushed the button that fired the weapon over the ENTIRE PLANET. Which is why the presidents daughter, who is about to be electrocuted for stealing the weapon in the first place says "I can't believe he really did it. He shut down the earth."
So while you had the right idea, you had the wrong scale. Snake shut down all the world to give a giant fin
Carbon dust, preferably something that drifts easily, probably something on a nanoscale like carbon nanotubes. That will damage all kinds of electronics. Many Air Force military communications and computer facilities near flight lines have vents to cut off outside air. They're used mostly for when a plane crashes and burns though it can afford minimal protection against NBC's.
Yeah because a sea worthy steamer, scud missile launcher and crude nuclear weapon are so easy to come by. Not saying the smart grid doesn't have other problems but it is far from easy to do serious EMP damage.
Yeah because a sea worthy steamer, scud missile launcher and crude nuclear weapon are so easy to come by. Not saying the smart grid doesn't have other problems but it is far from easy to do serious EMP damage.
Well at least on purpose, all you really need is one good sized CME, Coronal mass ejection, [wikipedia.org] which happen about every 50 years so we're due for one. Of course about every 500 years we get a big one, one that will make the Amish look high-tech afterwards, the last one was in1859;
The solar superstorm of 1859 was the fiercest ever recorded. Auroras filled the sky as far south as the Caribbean, magnetic compasses went haywire and telegraph systems failed....
During solar storms, entirely new problems arise. Larg
The ship, or boat, is no problem at all. A tugboat and a garbage scow will accomodate a scud missile - you don't need anything massively huge, like the USS Enterprise. Some private yachts are big enough for the purposes being discussed here. Stability isn't a big issue here, where the goal is to lob a package somewhere/anywhere near a city. Of course, a larger, more stable weapons platform would be desirable, but people work with what is available.
The launcher isn't that big a deal. Iraq has a surplus a
I recall that there were some briefcase nukes that came up missing in the old Soviet Union.
You mean you recall hearing one of the myths about there being suitcase nukes. (read truth here)
The key flaw in the mythology is the "minor" flaw that fissionable material in a device that small would decompose in a matter of months. Even if there were such devices, their warheads would now be all but useless.
I remember reading this prophecy in Patch Tuesday School when I was a child:
Longhorn 6:8 -
"I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Bill, and Balmer was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by acquisition, lock-in and proprietary-standards, and by the wild clippies of the earth."
It always freaked me out that this might come to pass.
All one needs to wreak some serious EMP damage, he charges, is a sea-worthy steamer, $100,000 to buy a scud-missile launcher, and a crude nuclear weapon
I'd imagine a lot of Evil Plans have that one basic requirement.
All one needs to wreak some serious EMP damage, he charges, is a sea-worthy steamer, $100,000 to buy a scud-missile launcher, and a crude nuclear weapon
I'd imagine a lot of Evil Plans have that one basic requirement.
Most likely. I find it hard to panic about any evil attack plan when step 1 is "Have the ability to wipe a major city off the map." If you can do that one, you'll probably just wipe a major city off the map, rather than attempt to jury-rig your city-wiping technology to do something else.
Clearly you're not an evil genius. The best way for one to demonstrate ones genius is to have an overly complex and convoluted scheme to get what you could've gotten 6 scenes ago via a simple handgun.
This why I, Senator John W. Dismal of the State of Confusion, am sponsoring the Amish Computing Initiative Bill which seeks to establish funding for non-electronic computing using bovine technology. I've been told we can achieve 100 Mega cow-flops per second with massive parallel-processing grain-fed logic mechanisms, called 'herds'. Those crazy wonderful inventive Amish in my district. In addition, the computers can provide some mighty fine ice cream. America does not have to be dependent on a grid that
Another possibility: Swine Flu will kill 50% of the American population, and energy scarcity or pollution will be a thing of the past. Virtually overnight our energy usage & greenhouse gas would drop by half.
In other words, overpopulation is our primary pollution problem.
It's not hugely surprising to me that there might be issues with a more complex grid, as with a more complex anything, even short of vulnerability to an EMP attack. If there are automated systems, that's automated systems that could fail, or could operate in unintended ways. There's just more stuff that has to go right; more control systems that must be robust under various conditions; more dynamical-system states that need to be understood and designed for.
Traditionally, we've only worried about the chaos that would be caused by blackouts -- failures on the electricity supply side; and about attacks on the grid via hacking or things like EMP.
However, we are distributing more and more intelligence to households. Countless billions of intelligent devices exist and they are increasingly networked.
The metaphor for reliability of electric supply is "keeping the lights on" so consider the vulnerability of billions and billions of intelligent light bulbs (Why
The scenario suggested is stupid and unrealistic: if you're gonna hit a nation with an EMP nuke, exactly what are ya gonna do when the effect wears off, hmmmm? You'd better be equipped to INVADE on the heels of that EMP blast, otherwise you'll still be toast soon enough.
I can see that individual smart grid components may be more vulnerable to EMP, but overall shouldn't a smart grid be more resistant to having nodes removed from it? Our current grid doesn't deal with imbalances very well - often causing outages in areas which could technically get power, but where it can't be delivered because of archaic grid deisgn. Remember the Northeast blackout in 2003 [wikipedia.org]? I'm thinking that an EMP may physically damage our current grid technology less, but the effect across the system w
Forget the E bomb... How about we get a couple of guys with a pickup and a couple of hundred bucks of steel pipe from Home Depot... they drive around flinging the pipes into transformer substations....
"Security" is a lie. There's always a way around whatever protections you can put in place, and the false protection is often extremely expensive while the workaround is usually cheap.
Get some medical isotopes. Spread them around the downtown core. Tell the press that you have laced the area with dirty radioactivity and they, the press, will do the rest.
I actually worked with nascent smart grid technologies in the late 1990s. We wrote energy monitoring software for mid-size and larger enterprises. They have time of use rates and so understanding how to do peak shaving was very beneficial to them and they would wind up investing considerably to bring their demand down. These systems are usually pairs with SCADA systems that intimately wire up their processes and with all of that comes a certain amount of redundancy. The thing is though, if the control systems were to go offline, they could certainly still continue.
The question is put, do you need to have telemetry on residences? I would say the answer is no. Well in the late 1990s a load recorder by itself would set you back about a $1000 and then you needed either a network jack and a phone line to talk. I would be shocked if the same hardware could not be put together for a fraction of that, and I'd bet that a utility could get a smart meter at the residence for not that expensive in hardware cost. The real cost is the labor of the electrician to install it. This is a skilled job and its going to take some money to pay some guy to be out there for an afternoon wiring up a load recorder at your house. Then from there, the load recorder would have to attach to your communications infrastructure, and what might that be? Well, it could piggy back your internet by being its own wireless, it could plug into your POTS, it could have its own cell line (and boy that would drive costs up). The central software to manage all of that is there.
And so, after the utility spends millions of bucks installing all these meters on residences, what will they find? They already -KNOW- that the number 1 predictor of consumer electrical demand is the degree day. Seriously, go have a look at the temperature curve for the last 90 days, and compare that to the spot energy price for the last 90 days. They are going to be almost identically the same shape...
One has to wonder, if there is not a simpler way to get consumers to peak shave. Perhaps the easiest thing might be to have a collective energy bonus. Basically, if the utility does not have to fire up its oil units on it a hot day, and can avoid running spinning reserves, there's a certain amount of give back they can profitably put on the table to get people to not use so much power. So what they could do during summer months is basically calculate a collective credit, where, if a region meets a certain usage reduction goal, everyone gets some amount of credit back on their bill. From there consumers could, instead of spending energy dollars on metering, could spend things on actually valuable peak shaving products, which no doubt the utility and its local energy services partners would be more than happy to sell, to make this an economical deal for everyone. With a collective energy bonus, you get most of the benefits of a peak shaved grid, but without having to actually build one.
In a weird way, EMP attack sounds like a back-up plan some guy living under an active volcano would use if his main plan were thwarted. More realistically, I can it as something a well established nation state might consider, as in:
"We're at stage 5 of an escalating situation, leading towards what looks to be a possible all out nuclear war. If we use a nuke, but set it off in space and only knock out the enemy's civil power grid, is that something we can sell to the UN nations as a measured response that di
Smart Grid is a scam (Score:5, Insightful)
The utilities want the government to foot the bill for them to have modern telemetry as well as a bunch of routine maintenance type of stuff - old transformers rebuilt, etc - stuff that improves their old, core business. Stuff that they've been miserably slacking on for the last 20 years order to pocket more short term profits while their infrastructure rots.
The Big Lie is that this modernization supposedly needs to be done in order for green energy technologies (eg grid interactive solar) to work, when in fact, nothing could be further than the truth. Grid-interactive systems actually RELIEVE load on the grid, and they do it especially at peak hours when AC loads kick in. And it works just great on the plain old dumb grid we have today. They might feel threatened because local generation obviously reduces the amount of energy sold, but it also makes that energy cheaper to sell and distribute because it smooths out the peak loads and reduces average current on long-distance transmission lines.
But the power company has this line that it's making the grid "congested" as if the electrons are trying to go in **ZOMG!** both directions or something! It's a crock of shit - propaganda and political games to try and fleece us of money that should otherwise be spent on deploying modern technologies. Not saying the grid doesn't have its place, on the contrary: grid-interactive is a very elegant solution. But the supposed smart-grid is being pushed in a very underhanded way and it's not at all what people think it is.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not exactly. Pickens scrapped his windmill plans in texas (or some southern state) because theres no way to get the electricity produced to where its needed. Thus, a new grid is needed for green energy
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Pickens didn't really give a hoot about the electricity, he wanted the right of way for the power lines so that he could build a pipeline to get all the water he owns to the major metros where he wants to sell it. "Green Energy" was a screen.
It was both (Score:5, Insightful)
He spent buzillions out of pocket to buy the windchargers, some non trivial amount. Yes, the water delivery right of way issue is also involved, but he also has the water that needs delivering some day.
My guess is eventually they will relent when they really *need* the water in those metro regions, and it will just be more expensive then. His was a damn good idea, replace the natgas used for electricity plants with the wind power. The natgas then can be diverted and goes to fuel fleet vehicles, to keep the conversion costs down (all the same model, etc). The natgas is cheaper to run the vehicles on. Oil cash doesn't have to be exported out of the US so it saves on balance of payment issues. win/win/win/win overall.
Ya, he stood to make some serious dollars on the deal, but so effin what?? Where's the beef there, you work for free or don't expect a return on a lot of investment? Bigass huge projects that succeed *tend to make some bigass dollars*. That's just reality, no different from anything else like that in our world.
He's an old guy, been in the energy biz for a long time, and I saw his plan as something he really thought about, came up with a two birds with one stone deal that would work, FOUR birds really, and he wanted it for a legacy contribution as well. The latter is a guess but bet I am right on that one.
Any random young guy can be scary smart, but it takes an older guy who started out scary smart to see all the angles, because you only get that with a ton of real world experience.
He really does not "need" the money at his level and age. Like Gates going off developing medicine action for africa, something to do while you are already rich, and it is in his level of proven expertise.
As to the water, the southwest is in for real long term drought according to the bulk of the climate guessers, while at the same time demands keep going up. We WILL be building more water transfer pipelines, either now while it is cheaper, or later on when it is way more expensive. No "ifs" about it at all, it is GOING to happen because it needs to happen.
Running the new water pipelines from the same areas roughly where the new electricity (which we will also be needing shortly) will be coming from on the same right of way *made sense*. Doing it in two different right of ways at two different times when they start and stop at the same places roughly is way stupid and short sighted.
Way stupid, and way shortsighted. Those boneheads jumped the shark by not doing it all now while materials are cheaper and there's a glut of non working unemployed construction labor out there. They got handed an incredible deal and blew it!
I give the dude props, he has a logical and well thought out long view, not that lame "this quarter" view or "this election cycle" view that most businesses and politicians have and that we all suffer from constantly.
Parent
hmmm (Score:3, Interesting)
I'll ignore the smarmy insult...
Which part don't you understand? I'll clarify again.
He has water that is needed or will be needed, plus he invested in a large wind project for electricity, which is or will be needed as well. He doesn't own all the pieces for this project, but enough for a good start, and the plan itself makes several logical points. Right of ways are necessary to move these utility products, so of course the government would need to establish these routes, it's the basic way they are done i
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
2KW roof-mounted solar arrays? Pretty big roofs, or impossibly-efficient arrays...
Re: (Score:2)
2KW roof-mounted solar arrays? Pretty big roofs, or impossibly-efficient arrays...
Noon sunlight is about 1 kilowatt per square meter, (100 watts/square foot)
At 10% efficiency, that means 20 square meters (200 square feet), hardly "pretty big".
Re: (Score:2)
That's not really "a new grid" so much as "more of the old grid". Pickens didn't need some fancy computer-controlled smart grid; what he needed were some very long, old-fashioned distribution lines from middle-of-nowhere west Texas to areas where people actually live.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There is confusion (caused on purpose by the pro-oil community) about what we mean by "smart grid". We need a high voltage DC grid to transmit wind energy from the Rockies to New York. This isn't "smart", in fact, it's old dumb technology from the 70's that we've improved marginally. We need this grid so that we can plug any kind of energy generation into it from anywhere, without concern for where it's used. Discussions of a "smart" grid are about a whole other problem - that our current grid is way ou
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
At least for AC grids in the US, they do go both directions, 60 times every second.
Re: (Score:2)
But - how did they TRAIN all those little electrons to do that? A flea circus must be easy by comparison!
Re:Smart Grid is a scam (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
>>>The Big Lie is that this modernization supposedly needs to be done in order for green energy technologies (eg grid interactive solar) to work, when in fact, nothing could be further than the truth.
>>>
Well that's the first I ever heard of that. I was under the impression the purpose of a SmartGrid was to turn my home's heater on-and-off remotely. i.e. Centralized control of power demand.
It seems to me the best investment would be a solution that requires NO heating. Like this one: htt [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A power factor of 0.5 doesn't mean 30 W burned. It means 30 W transmitted across the wire, 15 W burned and 15 W returned to the producer. It means that the wires and transformers must be spec'd for 30 W and that some losses are relative to 30 W, not 15 W. But 15 W means 15 W, otherwise the power companies would be sure to charge you for 30.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
15 watts with a power factor of .5 does not mean 30 watts.
it means 15 watts and 25.9 var.
Q = P x (tan(arccos(pf))
S = P +jQ
so S = 15 +j 25.9 = 30 at 60 degrees kVA.
15 watts at 110V with a power factor of 1, single phase
P=IV*cos theta I=.136A
15 watts at 110v with a power factor of .5, I = .27A but you are still only using 15 watts and you are still (as a residential customer) only billed for 15 watts.
That's the deal with power factor; more current for the same power means the infrastructure has to be able to
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
(I am an electrical engineer, although I don't work in power transmission)
It's not bullshit. As others have said, it's not 30 watts burned, it's 30 watts transmitted. One way to understand this is to imagine what would happen if you hooked an ideal capacitor up to an AC power line. The alternating current would charge and discharge the capacitor, moving energy back and forth. This is called imaginary power. No energy is lost -- only resistive loads dissipate power. However, the capacitive load isn't free fo
Re: (Score:2)
I bought a $7 pack of a couple 100watt-equivalent GE CFLs several years ago and i've used them everywhere except my kitchen and they do just fine here in florida even with the humidity and heat of... florida... let alone the shower. They go on, they go off, it takes a couple seconds for them to get to full brightness but they're easily ~60watt incandescent brightness right when they turn on and I haven't replaced any of them in several years despite serious hard use. All of this is anecdotal though and thus
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well I guess you've been lucky then. First I tried Lights of America bulbs, all of which died in my upside-down kitchen lights due to heat. Then I went back to incandescents. Then I found Philips bulbs in Walmart that I decided to try because they are a known-good brand. Well they did last longer, but it didn't take long for them to start flickering when lit and then die completely. I opened them up, and all the caps were leaking fluid - a sure sign of overheating from being placed upside-down. So I'
Re: (Score:2)
Stuff that they've been miserably slacking on for the last 20 years order to pocket more short term profits while their infrastructure rots.
The only thing the power companies have been slacking on is building power stations, due to economic and regulatory factors that are only partially in their control. Old transformers don't need to be "rebuilt" -- they require almost no maintenance and have life expectancies of decades. The technology for those hasn't changed in a hundred years. Power lines likewise have a low maintenance cost and the technology hasn't changed. Modernization for them has largely been adding power meters that "phone home" wir
It's true, I saw a documentary (Score:3, Funny)
In the documentary film Escape from LA, Snake Plisskin (who I thought was taller) shuts down the entire world with an EMP allowing Latin American countries to invade the US.
Re:It's true, I saw a documentary (Score:4, Funny)
I heard he was dead.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Actually he first shut down the ships the South Americans were using with the "Sword of Damocles" weapon, thus leaving them trapped on the high seas. And then he pushed the button that fired the weapon over the ENTIRE PLANET. Which is why the presidents daughter, who is about to be electrocuted for stealing the weapon in the first place says "I can't believe he really did it. He shut down the earth."
So while you had the right idea, you had the wrong scale. Snake shut down all the world to give a giant fin
electromagnetic pulse bomb (Score:5, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_bomb [wikipedia.org] It's scary brilliant how they convert explosive energy to electromagnetic. It's also far easier to build than any nuclear device.
An EMP weapon is the greater threat (Score:2)
An even easier hack (Score:3, Interesting)
Carbon dust, preferably something that drifts easily, probably something on a nanoscale like carbon nanotubes. That will damage all kinds of electronics. Many Air Force military communications and computer facilities near flight lines have vents to cut off outside air. They're used mostly for when a plane crashes and burns though it can afford minimal protection against NBC's.
All one needs... (Score:2)
Yeah because a sea worthy steamer, scud missile launcher and crude nuclear weapon are so easy to come by. Not saying the smart grid doesn't have other problems but it is far from easy to do serious EMP damage.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah because a sea worthy steamer, scud missile launcher and crude nuclear weapon are so easy to come by. Not saying the smart grid doesn't have other problems but it is far from easy to do serious EMP damage.
Well at least on purpose, all you really need is one good sized CME, Coronal mass ejection, [wikipedia.org] which happen about every 50 years so we're due for one. Of course about every 500 years we get a big one, one that will make the Amish look high-tech afterwards, the last one was in1859;
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The ship, or boat, is no problem at all. A tugboat and a garbage scow will accomodate a scud missile - you don't need anything massively huge, like the USS Enterprise. Some private yachts are big enough for the purposes being discussed here. Stability isn't a big issue here, where the goal is to lob a package somewhere/anywhere near a city. Of course, a larger, more stable weapons platform would be desirable, but people work with what is available.
The launcher isn't that big a deal. Iraq has a surplus a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I recall that there were some briefcase nukes that came up missing in the old Soviet Union.
You mean you recall hearing one of the myths about there being suitcase nukes. (read truth here)
The key flaw in the mythology is the "minor" flaw that fissionable material in a device that small would decompose in a matter of months. Even if there were such devices, their warheads would now be all but useless.
Electronic Armageddon? (Score:2)
Longhorn 6:8 -
"I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Bill, and Balmer was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by acquisition, lock-in and proprietary-standards, and by the wild clippies of the earth."
It always freaked me out that this might come to pass.
oh is that all? (Score:5, Funny)
All one needs to wreak some serious EMP damage, he charges, is a sea-worthy steamer, $100,000 to buy a scud-missile launcher, and a crude nuclear weapon
I'd imagine a lot of Evil Plans have that one basic requirement.
Re: (Score:2)
All one needs to wreak some serious EMP damage, he charges, is a sea-worthy steamer, $100,000 to buy a scud-missile launcher, and a crude nuclear weapon
I'd imagine a lot of Evil Plans have that one basic requirement.
Most likely. I find it hard to panic about any evil attack plan when step 1 is "Have the ability to wipe a major city off the map." If you can do that one, you'll probably just wipe a major city off the map, rather than attempt to jury-rig your city-wiping technology to do something else.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
El Reg piece (Score:4, Insightful)
Alternative Computing Resistant to EMP (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Another possibility: Swine Flu will kill 50% of the American population, and energy scarcity or pollution will be a thing of the past. Virtually overnight our energy usage & greenhouse gas would drop by half.
In other words, overpopulation is our primary pollution problem.
surprised it's only come up now (Score:2)
It's not hugely surprising to me that there might be issues with a more complex grid, as with a more complex anything, even short of vulnerability to an EMP attack. If there are automated systems, that's automated systems that could fail, or could operate in unintended ways. There's just more stuff that has to go right; more control systems that must be robust under various conditions; more dynamical-system states that need to be understood and designed for.
What is surprising to me is that I can't actually
Risks can shift (Score:2)
Traditionally, we've only worried about the chaos that would be caused by blackouts -- failures on the electricity supply side; and about attacks on the grid via hacking or things like EMP.
However, we are distributing more and more intelligence to households. Countless billions of intelligent devices exist and they are increasingly networked.
The metaphor for reliability of electric supply is "keeping the lights on" so consider the vulnerability of billions and billions of intelligent light bulbs (Why
And they laughed when I put ... (Score:2)
Scared of shadows? (Score:2)
Let's not do anything then 'cus somebody may decide to break it.
What a pathetic world view.
Who the hell cares if the grid is down, the EMP pulse will have fried all electronics in the area anyway.
The suggested scenario is stupid! (Score:2)
The scenario suggested is stupid and unrealistic: if you're gonna hit a nation with an EMP nuke, exactly what are ya gonna do when the effect wears off, hmmmm? You'd better be equipped to INVADE on the heels of that EMP blast, otherwise you'll still be toast soon enough.
Are you listening, Lichtenstein?
FUD? (Score:2)
I can see that individual smart grid components may be more vulnerable to EMP, but overall shouldn't a smart grid be more resistant to having nodes removed from it? Our current grid doesn't deal with imbalances very well - often causing outages in areas which could technically get power, but where it can't be delivered because of archaic grid deisgn. Remember the Northeast blackout in 2003 [wikipedia.org]? I'm thinking that an EMP may physically damage our current grid technology less, but the effect across the system w
A crude nuclear system? (Score:4, Insightful)
Forget the E bomb... How about we get a couple of guys with a pickup and a couple of hundred bucks of steel pipe from Home Depot... they drive around flinging the pipes into transformer substations....
"Security" is a lie. There's always a way around whatever protections you can put in place, and the false protection is often extremely expensive while the workaround is usually cheap.
Security Theater at it's finest...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Boy that's just all sorts of wrong. (Score:4, Informative)
I actually worked with nascent smart grid technologies in the late 1990s. We wrote energy monitoring software for mid-size and larger enterprises. They have time of use rates and so understanding how to do peak shaving was very beneficial to them and they would wind up investing considerably to bring their demand down. These systems are usually pairs with SCADA systems that intimately wire up their processes and with all of that comes a certain amount of redundancy. The thing is though, if the control systems were to go offline, they could certainly still continue.
The question is put, do you need to have telemetry on residences? I would say the answer is no. Well in the late 1990s a load recorder by itself would set you back about a $1000 and then you needed either a network jack and a phone line to talk. I would be shocked if the same hardware could not be put together for a fraction of that, and I'd bet that a utility could get a smart meter at the residence for not that expensive in hardware cost. The real cost is the labor of the electrician to install it. This is a skilled job and its going to take some money to pay some guy to be out there for an afternoon wiring up a load recorder at your house. Then from there, the load recorder would have to attach to your communications infrastructure, and what might that be? Well, it could piggy back your internet by being its own wireless, it could plug into your POTS, it could have its own cell line (and boy that would drive costs up). The central software to manage all of that is there.
And so, after the utility spends millions of bucks installing all these meters on residences, what will they find? They already -KNOW- that the number 1 predictor of consumer electrical demand is the degree day. Seriously, go have a look at the temperature curve for the last 90 days, and compare that to the spot energy price for the last 90 days. They are going to be almost identically the same shape...
One has to wonder, if there is not a simpler way to get consumers to peak shave. Perhaps the easiest thing might be to have a collective energy bonus. Basically, if the utility does not have to fire up its oil units on it a hot day, and can avoid running spinning reserves, there's a certain amount of give back they can profitably put on the table to get people to not use so much power. So what they could do during summer months is basically calculate a collective credit, where, if a region meets a certain usage reduction goal, everyone gets some amount of credit back on their bill. From there consumers could, instead of spending energy dollars on metering, could spend things on actually valuable peak shaving products, which no doubt the utility and its local energy services partners would be more than happy to sell, to make this an economical deal for everyone. With a collective energy bonus, you get most of the benefits of a peak shaved grid, but without having to actually build one.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference being that sea-worthy steamers, scud-missile launchers and crude nuclear weapons are all existing technology.
Also, $100,000,000,000 for an inertial damper? Man, they're going cheap these days.
Re: (Score:2)
In a weird way, EMP attack sounds like a back-up plan some guy living under an active volcano would use if his main plan were thwarted. More realistically, I can it as something a well established nation state might consider, as in:
"We're at stage 5 of an escalating situation, leading towards what looks to be a possible all out nuclear war. If we use a nuke, but set it off in space and only knock out the enemy's civil power grid, is that something we can sell to the UN nations as a measured response that di