The future of energy generation and storage

[CanOz]

Utterly amazing.....I'd heard a whisper about that Alcoa thing but I'd no idea the scale of that stuff up....monumental.

 

[orr]

Alcoa are running at 50% ....

Anybody here privy to the price Alcoa pays for the electricity used in the smelter in question???

 

[Smurf1976]

Yes, it looks thus far to be easily the biggest energy-related disaster in Australia since the Longford gas plant explosion in 1998 which left Vic with virtually no gas supply for two weeks.

There are two circuits (transmission lines) supplying Alcoa from the Victorian grid and despite ongoing rumors to the contrary they're pretty efficient (minimal losses) due to operating at 500,000 Volts (high voltage = low current = not much loss, basic electrical engineering principles there).

Both lines individually have sufficient capacity to supply the smelter at full power. So having two lines is a case of redundancy being built-in to the design of the network.

The transmission line was originally built to supply the smelter but later a rather long extension was added to connect SA to the Vic / NSW system (interconnected since the Snowy scheme was built) which entered service in 1990.

I don't have the full details of what went wrong but it shouldn't have happened. Transmission outages for maintenance are necessary from time to time but here in Tas if we were doing something like that with the potential consequences if another line failed then we'd ensure a "return to service" time for the line undergoing maintenance was short enough to avoid a situation where any sort of disaster actually occurs. That means breaking the work into sections such that whatever is being done at any one time can quickly be either finished or put back to it's original condition and the line turned back on. Adds to costs, since that approach tends to reduce labour efficiency, but it's a necessary approach certainly.

Another approach would have been backup from the opposite direction (SA). SA did have sufficient generating capacity available at the time to do that but in short it wasn't running (simply turned off). Hence 20% of SA was blacked out when the fault occurred, that is 20% of SA was being powered via the same line as the smelter, so there was no chance that SA was going to send power back the other way and keep the smelter going. The generating capacity exists but a thermal plant isn't like a hydro plant, you can't just go from a standstill to full output "just like that" and it takes time. It would have needed to be already up to temperature and running to be able to ramp up reasonably quickly.

So far as stopping and starting aluminium smelters is concerned, in short it's a major drama. Bell Bay Aluminium (Tas) took part of their plant out of operation in the mid-1990's for purely economic reasons (couldn't sell all the metal they were producing) and that shutting down took quite a few weeks from memory. They actually shut down half of two potlines (there's 3 in total) rather than completely shutting one on the basis that it would be easier to re-start a line that was already half running. The re-starting also took quite a while (weeks) once they had buyers for the product.

More recently Bell Bay did volunteer to reduce power consumption during the Basslink failure and Tas power supply problems last Summer but were keen to not actually take anything out of service. So they kept everything running, just put less power through and in layman's terms slowed down the whole operation. Power use at the site dropped around 10% with any additional reduction requiring things to actually be taken out of service which they were keen to avoid (and that was avoided, the load reduction being voluntary - not one customer was actually forced to reduce consumption during the problems earlier this year, but if someone was willing to then Hydro was obviously happy to have them do so).

As anyone with a background in safety will be well aware, minor incidents and near-misses need to be taken seriously because they're a warning that things aren't right and that sooner or later you'll have a major incident if nothing is done to change the situation.

Thus far in 2016 with energy we've had the SA system black, other incidents of widespread load shedding in SA, an aviation fuel crisis at Melbourne Airport and now we've done damage (at best, could be bad enough to be literally a write off in the worst case) to a major metal smelting plant in Victoria.

We're now starting to see the sort of things that engineers, tradies and others with relevant knowledge have been worried about for years. We're neglecting to invest in physical infrastructure and we're neglecting the skills required to avoid things going wrong in the first place and to respond quickly when mishaps do occur.

Something's seriously wrong when someone's running a power station (wind farm in SA in this case, but that's a power station of a sort) and doesn't even know about protection and control settings, what they do and how they should be set.

If we continue down this track then it's only a matter of time until something truly major goes wrong.

 

[Tink]

Thanks, Smurf, for keeping us updated in this thread.

I mentioned about Alcoa in another thread, Tisme -

Electricity: price and reliability of supply
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...t=23807&page=2&p=923756&viewfull=1#post923756

 

[Tisme]

Thanks, Smurf, for keeping us updated in this thread.

I mentioned about Alcoa in another thread, Tisme -

Electricity: price and reliability of supply
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...t=23807&page=2&p=923756&viewfull=1#post923756

Thanks Tink.

Whilst I was an integral bit player in the Muja Power Station and Callide I really haven't bothered keeping up with coal powered generation.

Coal fired generation is a dirty business and you (euphemism) take on a smell the longer you are around it. You know your lungs are in danger, it's uber noisy, the whole coal handling system is a rattle and hum and it's not rocket science, being essentially a 150 year old innovation iterated by Werner Siemans, Charles Parsons and Tesla. If it was a locomotive it would be hauling overcrowded rail cars in India.

Having bagged it out, I guess I should also consider that we drive cars that are equally as inefficient as coal fired generators.

 

[SirRumpole]

I'd be interested to hear Smurf's thoughts on this

Basslink: Power bill questions as Hydro Tasmania mulls buyout, regulation options for underseacable

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-07/hydro-tasmania-mulls-takeover-of-basslink/8100378

 

[sptrawler]

Thanks Tink.

Whilst I was an integral bit player in the Muja Power Station and Callide I really haven't bothered keeping up with coal powered generation.

Coal fired generation is a dirty business and you (euphemism) take on a smell the longer you are around it. You know your lungs are in danger, it's uber noisy, the whole coal handling system is a rattle and hum and it's not rocket science, being essentially a 150 year old innovation iterated by Werner Siemans, Charles Parsons and Tesla. If it was a locomotive it would be hauling overcrowded rail cars in India.

Having bagged it out, I guess I should also consider that we drive cars that are equally as inefficient as coal fired generators.

So what was the area of coal generation, you had a bit play in? It may give some weight to your area of expertise and credibility to your posts.

Why would Alcoa shut down one of its production trains, when a feeder line is shut down?
One would assume both feeders are capable of supplying full plant capacity.
Alcoa would not reduce output, when it is paying for reliable supply, why would they?

 

[Smurf1976]

I'd be interested to hear Smurf's thoughts on this

It's a complex problem but at this stage what's being done is pretty simple.

Basslink is privately owned an unlike most transmission is unregulated. That means that costs are recovered by what the customer (in practice that's Hydro Tas) is paying for the use of it and are not simply passed directly to consumers as is done with a regulated network asset. There's some complexity in those arrangements but that's it at a basic concept level.

As an analogy it could be compared to a toll road (unregulated) versus every other road that is funded via taxation. If you're the one paying a lot of $ for the toll road then you'd certainly benefit if you could find a way to get all motorists to share the cost.

Hydro's relationship with Basslink is, to be polite, "strained" (to put it mildly) and so Hydro has decided to look at the options. Seek to have it regulated? Buy it outright? Renegotiate the contract? Or is it best to just carry on business as usual?

Since this is a financial issue rather than a technical one, Basslink will transmit power exactly the same regardless of who owns it, Hydro has brought in external consultants to provide advice on the best way forward. In the meantime it's business as usual.

The recent six month outage of Basslink (itself a contract breach) added to the relationship strain but it's no secret that things weren't great well before that. With that saga having cost Hydro $140 million and the reality that Victoria is about to become critically reliant on supply from Tasmania during demand peaks, now is an obvious time to have a look and see if there's an option to pass some of the cost on to Victorian consumers (regulate the link) or what else could be done.

At a broader state political level, it's a case of Victoria being about to need it but at present Tasmania foots 100% of the bill. Historically that wasn't the case, Victoria didn't really need it as such, it was just a case of Hydro Tas being in the national market for commercial reasons and for physical supply to Tasmania. But now that Victoria actually needs it, rather desperately so, well there's a logic that says Victorian power consumers could cough up some $.

A counter argument is that when Vic actually needs the power and has no alternative, well Hydro sure isn't going to be giving it away. But then it could be said that AGL or Origin won't be giving it away either, hell no they won't, and they are using regulated networks for which they don't directly pay the cost.

Not directly related to Basslink but something to note is that with the closure of Hazelwood being imminent, we're about to be in a situation where in the context of supply to Vic and SA on high demand days we'll have AGL, Origin, Engie, Energy Australia and others each having a "can't do without us" market position. Needless to say I don't think anyone's expecting prices to drop.

 

[sptrawler]

I guess Tasmania, could be self sufficient with hydro and fossil fuel backup, if it wasn't exporting to the mainland?

 

[Smurf1976]

Why would Alcoa shut down one of its production trains, when a feeder line is shut down? One would assume both feeders are capable of supplying full plant capacity.

2 x 500kV lines involved and they're major bulk transmission between Vic and SA (lower voltage on the SA side so some transformers involved) with Alcoa basically tapped off that interconnect.

That's a simplification but basically how it is. Lines first built to supply the smelter, then just a few years later extended to link into SA's grid.

One line in Vic was out for planned maintenance and then the other one failed. End result was a total loss of power to Alcoa which after a few hours lead to the aluminium solidifying - and that's about as big a disaster you can have at an aluminium smelter short of someone dropping a few bombs or a sinkhole swallowing the place.

Once the metal goes cold it ends up with an electrically insulating layer over the top and no way of conducting electricity into the pots to heat them up again and melt the metal. Solution = jackhammers at best, demolish the potline at worst. Seriously big $ there in either case.

Both lines individually have sufficient capacity to supply Alcoa in full.

As for shutting down, that's the crux of it because it takes rather a long time to shut production at a plant like that in an orderly manner. By the time the power's off it's way too late and then it's just case of either get it back on in time or suffer the damage that has occurred.

 

[Smurf1976]

I guess Tasmania, could be self sufficient with hydro and fossil fuel backup, if it wasn't exporting to the mainland?

Technically straightforward, we ran a reliable grid without being connected to anywhere else for 90 years after all so it's a question of economics and politics.

 

[sptrawler]

2 x 500kV lines involved and they're major bulk transmission between Vic and SA (lower voltage on the SA side so some transformers involved) with Alcoa basically tapped off that interconnect.

That's a simplification but basically how it is. Lines first built to supply the smelter, then just a few years later extended to link into SA's grid.

One line in Vic was out for planned maintenance and then the other one failed. End result was a total loss of power to Alcoa which after a few hours lead to the aluminium solidifying - and that's about as big a disaster you can have at an aluminium smelter short of someone dropping a few bombs or a sinkhole swallowing the place.

Once the metal goes cold it ends up with an electrically insulating layer over the top and no way of conducting electricity into the pots to heat them up again and melt the metal. Solution = jackhammers at best, demolish the potline at worst. Seriously big $ there in either case.

Both lines individually have sufficient capacity to supply Alcoa in full.

As for shutting down, that's the crux of it because it takes rather a long time to shut production at a plant like that in an orderly manner. By the time the power's off it's way too late and then it's just case of either get it back on in time or suffer the damage that has occurred.

I was a shift electrician in a blast furnace, in the mid 70's, same issue you kept it running or someone was called in to get it running.
The point I was trying to make was, someone indicated Alcoa should have backed off production, when a feeder line was out for maintenance.
That IMO was a dumb statement, as it defeats the purpose of dual redundancy.

 

[sptrawler]

Anyway back to batteries, the stumbling block of mankind. IMO

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-08/vanadium-battery-solar-energy-storage/8094376

One statement from the article below.

"A commercial lithium-ion battery might have a life of between five to eight years, [whereas] you're looking at a vanadium flow battery that might have a life of about 20 years," he said.

"It is able to run and cycle far more frequently without any damage to that cell over a long time.

 

[SirRumpole]

Anyway back to batteries, the stumbling block of mankind. IMO

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-08/vanadium-battery-solar-energy-storage/8094376

One statement from the article below.

"A commercial lithium-ion battery might have a life of between five to eight years, [whereas] you're looking at a vanadium flow battery that might have a life of about 20 years," he said.

"It is able to run and cycle far more frequently without any damage to that cell over a long time.

So , who are the vanadium miners ?

Geoscience Australia data indicates that Australia has the world's fourth largest vanadium resource.
As of Jan 2011 Australian ASX listed companies have ~ 11.4 million tons of vanadium metal equal to 42.25 million tons of V2O5 according to figures collated by Australian Shares.com

http://www.australian-shares.com/vanadium-australia.html

 

[sptrawler]

So , who are the vanadium miners ?

Yes and no doubt we will give the vanadium away, same as all our other minerals.

 

[nioka]

Technically straightforward, we ran a reliable grid without being connected to anywhere else for 90 years after all so it's a question of economics and politics.

As I understand it, this came to an end when the "save the Franklin" movement stopped further hydro storage and the deal involved taking (expensive) power from the mainland. Big brother politics ?

 

[Smurf1976]

As I understand it, this came to an end when the "save the Franklin" movement stopped further hydro storage and the deal involved taking (expensive) power from the mainland. Big brother politics ?

In short the community / politics decided that hydro was off the agenda not just with the Franklin but also at literally every other possible site of any significance (in terms of power output). In some cases the conservation boundaries were drawn just few metres upstream of viable dam sites to ensure that outcome.

No interest in reigniting that debate here. It was done to death a third of a century ago and has simmered beneath the surface ever since. All I'll say on that is that Hydro itself is no longer in the dam building business, the entire construction workforce and infrastructure is all gone years ago.

Meanwhile the Greens themselves did actually use the slogan "clean green Hydro" for political purposes, a point that didn't go unnoticed by many.

Talk to most involved from back then and they'll tell you the same thing - regardless of which side they were on at the time, they see both sides now. It's shades of grey not black and white. As someone who goes bushwalking, and yes I've been in the SW, I share that view.

From a practical perspective, with hydro off the agenda and demand exceeding capacity it was a case of looking to alternatives. Most, including conservationists, assumed that would mean a coal-fired power station in Tasmania but in practice Basslink and gas were cheaper options so that's what was done. Basslink always was intended to be a net importer despite exporting to Vic during the peaks.

That said, from a technical perspective it's certainly possible to run an isolated grid in any Australian state. The only reasons not to do so are political or economic but technically it's very doable. Tasmania was separate until 2006, SA was separate until 1990 and WA and NT are both still not connected to anywhere else today.

Anyway, for anyone in Tas who finds themselves needing something to do over Summer we've come up with a nice new touring route via the original Great Lake power scheme. This won't be officially launched until next year but the road signs are up and here's a link to the brochure:

http://www.hydro.com.au/system/files/www.hydro.com.au/Highlands_Power_Trail/HPT_Brochure_WEB.pdf

 

[SirRumpole]

Power grid in need of multi-billion-dollar upgrade to safeguard future energy supply, report finds


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-...-multi-billion-dollar-upgrade:-report/8111468

 

[drsmith]

It was only a few short years ago that the public debate was about having gold plated it.

 

[SirRumpole]

It was only a few short years ago that the public debate was about having gold plated it.

I think the "gold plating" was the poles and wires, ie the distribution network, not the generators.