Electrical outages. cyber attacks ?

It is still likely to be 5%, but it shouldn’t include critical infrastructure in the first tranche. In the end of the day, without more inertia, and the nuclear stations being planned will create some additional inertia, the frequency falls off rather rapidly. The incident was interesting, because of the speed of the fall. Normally, voltage reduction would come first, followed by rapid support from pumped storage, however, there didn’t seem to be time for that without automatic demand reduction. 


In in the end of the day, recovering from 5% is a lot easier than recovering from 100%. We have done both in the past, albeit not for many years. Even 100% demand reduction, where the transmission grid remains live is preferable to a true black start scenario. 


We also need to remember that there were trains stuck round the place blocking tracks, where the driver did not have the authority to implement a restart once the traction supply had returned. Allegedly, the restore had to be carried out by a technician, who first had to locate, and travel to the train. There were many lessons to be learned in my opinion, including the accuracy of the press reporting, which seemed a little sensational and over-dramatic, attempting to make a good story. Out of curiosity, did anyone see Sunday’s press release from Ipswich hospital which put the blame for their supply failure (which affected outpatients and x-ray only) on a circuit breaker that did not close to put that area onto the working generators that were already supplying the rest of the hospital. 


Regards,


Alan. 

It is still likely to be 5%, but it shouldn’t include critical infrastructure in the first tranche. In the end of the day, without more inertia, and the nuclear stations being planned will create some additional inertia, the frequency falls off rather rapidly. The incident was interesting, because of the speed of the fall. Normally, voltage reduction would come first, followed by rapid support from pumped storage, however, there didn’t seem to be time for that without automatic demand reduction. 


In in the end of the day, recovering from 5% is a lot easier than recovering from 100%. We have done both in the past, albeit not for many years. Even 100% demand reduction, where the transmission grid remains live is preferable to a true black start scenario. 


We also need to remember that there were trains stuck round the place blocking tracks, where the driver did not have the authority to implement a restart once the traction supply had returned. Allegedly, the restore had to be carried out by a technician, who first had to locate, and travel to the train. There were many lessons to be learned in my opinion, including the accuracy of the press reporting, which seemed a little sensational and over-dramatic, attempting to make a good story. Out of curiosity, did anyone see Sunday’s press release from Ipswich hospital which put the blame for their supply failure (which affected outpatients and x-ray only) on a circuit breaker that did not close to put that area onto the working generators that were already supplying the rest of the hospital. 


Regards,


Alan.