Nuks and the Grid: "Smart Grid" Verses Smart Grid Design

A computer simulation of a nuclear dominated grid is not nearly as urgent an issue as the computer simulation of of a renewables dominated grid. We know that reactor generated power is reliable enough that a nuclear dominated grid will be at least as reliable as the present 20% nuclear grid. A sophisticated, multi-demintional computer model or modeling tools would still be of great value in designing a nuclear dominated grid. Questions such as new reactor location and size, and effects on grid could be modeled for answers. A modeling tool would be valuable for determining the most cost effective grid upgrades.

Grid reliability managers acknowledge that many improvements in the existing electrical transmission system are required to maintain over all system stability, and to serve new customers. Required improvements in the existing grid are estimated to cost somewhere in the $100 billion range. Many grid improvements are require whether or not renewable penetrate deeply into the grid.

Nuclear Green favors the use of local rather distant generation capacity, because reliance on local capacity decreases grid complexity, and thus is consistent with reliability. Eric J. Lerner states:

. . . limited use of long-distance connections aided system reliability, because the physical complexities of power transmission rise rapidly as distance and the complexity of interconnections grow. Power in an electric network does not travel along a set path, as coal does, for example. When utility A agrees to send electricity to utility B, utility A increases the amount of power generated while utility B decreases production or has an increased demand. The power then flows from the “source” (A) to the “sink” (B) along all the paths that can connect them. This means that changes in generation and transmission at any point in the system will change loads on generators and transmission lines at every other point—often in ways not anticipated or easily controlled . . .

Accounts of the August 2003 blackout in the North East suggest the fragility of the grid, especially when stressed. Yesterday I noted that renewables dominated transmission system holds the potential for disaster, and its reliability cannot be judged without sophisticated multi-demintional modeling tools. Yet renewables advocate, using the slogan, "smart grid," are touting just such a questionable grid expansion. The "Smart Grid" slogan should not be associated with the most urgently needed grid upgrades and improvements, however. Indeed much of the so called "smart grid" investment has nothing to do with the use of electronic management tools in grid management tasks. Rather proposals for the direction of massive amounts of electricity from remote wind and solar facilities to consumers hundreds and even thousands of miles away. The "smart grid" can up the cost of transmission system improvements to as high as two trillion dollars.

Clearly then managing grid upgrade costs will be a significant future tasks for grid modeling tools, whether or not a renewables dominated grid is ever built. Construction of a nuclear dominated grid, while offering a low cost alternative to a renewables dominated grid, still is likely to strain financial, materials, and labor resources for some time to come. Grid improvements must be prioritized, because we may not be capable of doing everything at once. Rather that building many large new transmission projects, a more economical approach to new power construction would use existing grid resources when ever possible, until construction peaks. Some less urgent but still desirable grid improvements should be deferred until the construction of post-carbon generation capacity decreases. Sophisticated modeling tools will help in determining priorities in transmission system improvements.

What we need is not just a smart grid, but smart grid design, that focuses on making intelligent choices about both generation capacity and the electrical transmission system.

Renewables and Simulating the Post-Carbon Grid

No one knows how much a renewable post-carbon grid would cost, but renewable advocates like Greenpeace, and Rocky Mountain Institute, and the proposed Google Clean Energy 2030 plan, all seem to think it will be cheap. However it is impossible for any planner to know if an all renewable grid will work, and if it will work, how much an all renewables grid would cost.

There are fundamental questions about the cost and reliability of an all or mostly renewables grid that cannot be answered without and adequate computer simulation too, and such a tool is not available now, nor will it be for some time to come. An Argonne National Laboratory Report from the December 2008 National Power Grid Simulator Workshop, offers a realistic picture of the current status of renewables based grid planning. For example renewables planners often offer massive expansions of the electrical transmission system as a remedy for grid reliability problems created by renewables. The report states:

The national power grids are composed of many components, each with its own range of vulnerabilities to both natural and man-made events. The most apparent components are the transmission lines that stretch unprotected across open countryside. Natural threats to these lines include wind, ice storms, and fires; potential man-made threats include rifle fire, bombs, chaff, and aircraft collisions. Isolated power line outages can be quickly repaired. The disruption of large numbers of lines or those located in special locations (e.g., across rivers and wide gaps), however, can be time-consuming to resolve. . . . Renewable power genera- tion depends largely on local conditions (e.g., wind or sunlight availability). The best locations for production are often not where the greatest power demands are. Power transmission, then, could be a limiting factor in the growth of distributed, renewable energy generation.

The report also states

Tools are needed to simulate large additions of renewable and distributed power to the grids. Models must deal with the intermittency of these sources, optimize the transmission and resource mix, quantify important metrics (e.g., economics, security, and environmental impact), and assess alternative solutions.

Yet no research tool currently exists which would permit anything like adequate research on the national transmission system that would be required by a mostly renewables generating system. Despite the lack of a research tool that would determine the practicality and cost of an all renewables electrical transmission system, renewables advocates continue to assure us that electrical transmission reliability posses no problem for a future renewables based grid. Would a future renewables based grid be stable? The report states,

There is, in general, a lack of a simulation capability and associated data for national-level studies. For instance, large-scale dynamic transient stability models do not exist, though large-scale linear load flow models do.

The report also notes

Power grid models can be classified along three dimensions: operations, planning and evolution, and disruptions. . . . Most models today are limited to a single axis of this taxonomy. The three dimensions described above, though, are not independent. Issues raised along one dimension (e.g., an evolution toward more renewable energy generation) affect issues along the other axes (e.g., changing the consequences of a wide-area weather event).

It is clear then that plans for a renewables dominated grid are highly premature in the absence of a tool or tools that can accurately asses the reliability and cost of such a grid, and compare that assessment with an assessment of other options, for example the modeling of a nuclear dominated grid. Some assessments suggest that the cost of a nuclear electrical generation system, often said to be high, might be actually far lower than the cost of a renewables dominating electrical system.