On the Reliability of Non-Renewables Energy Production: Texas, June 18, 2023

From WFAA, “Why a Texas nuclear power plant stopped producing electricity Friday”:

A problem at a Texas nuclear power plant Friday caused a sudden dip in electricity supply, forcing the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) to tap a brand new reserve system to stabilize the grid.

Unplanned nuclear outages are rare, and the timing of this incident prompted concern. Texans will likely set electricity demand records twice this week, when temperatures soar to triple digits.

“We need all (generators) showing up for work every day right now,” said University of Houston energy fellow Ed Hirs.

Here is the EIA’s picture of outages on 18th June 2023:

Source: EIA.

Note that the size of the circle is proportionate to generation. Significant? You can see how outages spike relative to usual pattern as a consequence of Comanche Peak, June 17-18.

Source: EIA.

 

 

 

83 thoughts on “On the Reliability of Non-Renewables Energy Production: Texas, June 18, 2023

  1. CoRev

    Menzie, et al, why are there no questions re: grid management with so little reserve that losing a single source jeopardizes the grid? In your example it was a single nuclear power plant, but in Winter Storm Uri it was renewables dropping to ~8% of name plate performance, then cascading weather related failures in the thermal backups. These double whammies caused by weather related failures will be more common as we add weather related sources to the grid.

    BTW, why do you think there is no EIA chart for renewables’ failures, as this chart https://econbrowser.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/nuclear_outages_18jun23-1.png in your article?

    1. Macroduck

      CoVid is at it again, pretending renewables are to blame for the failure of the Texas power grid. Here’s the reality:

      No, Wind Farms Aren’t the Main Cause of the Texas Blackouts

      The state’s widespread electricity failure was largely caused by freezing natural gas pipelines. That didn’t stop advocates for fossil fuels from trying to shift blame.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/17/climate/texas-blackouts-disinformation.html

      And let’s recall that Texas was largely isolated from the grid used by the rest uf the nation (and Canada) in order to avoid environmental regulation.

      1. baffling

        covid insists on blaming renewables. but a simple examination of the data shows that ercot was not relying on renewables during the winter storm. they had adequate coverage from their thermal systems-or so they thought. but the natural gas lines froze, which shut down the remaining natural gas plants that had not already frozen. on top of that, there was a nuclear plant that lost power due to frozen cooling lines. when a plant that provides power to hundreds of thousand of households shuts down, the power loss is immediate. happens with both nuclear and natural gas plants. those are very difficult for an electric grid to balance. renewables do not shut down so quickly, and thus do not create the same catastrophic shutdown event. the texas grid was seconds away from basically blowing up because these sudden imbalances caused the grid to malfunction. imagine a piping system that suddenly had all of its outlets shut down instantaneously. something is going to blow.

        fortunately, texas has responded by providing more power generation, winterizing of its generation systems, and battery backups that act as accumulators to smooth out the power if outages occur. people use voltage regulators at home for the same reason, to protect their sensitive electronic equipment.

        1. Ivan

          Agreee. Changes in output from renewable plants are predictable. So to “blame” an 8% reduction in renewables is just absurd. If the grid is not ready for at least twice of that it is because of leadership to stupid to breathe or to seeks competent consultants. What will take a system down is the failure to have sufficient backups for UNPREDICTED reductions in generations. Well run systems will have backups and backups to backups for reductions that goes way beyond the normal. Unfortunately that costs money so red state and Wall Street run systems don’t have that. The good news is that as we move towards a much larger use of solar and wind we will also be forced to have much more robust backup systems to deal with unusually windless rainy months – those systems will be available when traditional sources such as natural gas and nuclear have one of those “nobody could have predicted” events, and shuts down. The new iron battery technology (at about 1/10’th the cost of lithium batteries), should help us build robust backups for the next NG or nuclear power production “melt down”.

          1. CoRev

            Ivan claims: ” The good news is that as we move towards a much larger use of solar and wind we will also be forced to have much more robust backup systems to deal with unusually windless rainy months – those systems will be available when traditional sources such as natural gas and nuclear have one of those “nobody could have predicted” events, and shuts down. ” Such predictions have been made before Winter Storm Uri’s impact in Texas. Here’s just 1 September 12th, 2019 example: https://www.cfact.org/2019/09/12/dousing-candidates-and-green-new-dealers-with-buckets-of-icy-cold-reality/
            “Like solar panels, wind turbines produce intermittent, unreliable electricity that costs much more than coal, gas or nuclear electricity – once subsidies are removed – and must be backed up by fossil fuel generators that have to go from standby to full-power many times a day, very inefficiently, every time the wind stops blowing. Turbine blades already kill raptors, other birds and bats – perhaps a million or more every year in the USA alone. Their light flicker and infrasonic noise impair human health.”
            and this
            Citizens, newscasters, debate hosts and legislators who are more firmly grounded in reality need to confront Green New Dealers with hard questions and icy cold facts – and keep repeating them until candidates provide real answers. No more dissembling, obfuscation or incantations permitted.”

            Y’ano like some of here are trying to do, instead of the dissembling, obfuscating or magical ritualizing renewables zealots are doing.

            The reality denying liberal mind is an amazement.

          2. baffling

            the smart grid is part of the next evolution. our current grid was built from a 1950’s view of the world. things have changed
            https://www.smartgrid.gov/the_smart_grid/smart_grid.html
            homes will be built with batteries, and will charge during the cheap renewable generation times of the day and then discharge during peak hours. this will reduce peak demand from generation plants, and ultimately reduce the number of generation plants that are required. advances in technology allow us to better time our demand and supply times, to become more efficient. the peak demands that the old grid required are the result of inefficiencies. those spikes are costly, because they require excess generation for about an hour or two, a few times a year. the old grid required a power plant to be built and running during those periods, and effectively shut down the rest of the time. that is very costly production of power. smart grids, along with continued improvements in energy efficiency in households and industry, are the way of the future.

          3. CoRev

            Baffled has another pipe dream, smart grid and smart homes. He is very, very confused mixing terms peak demand with demand spike: ” the peak demands that the old grid required are the result of inefficiencies. those spikes are costly because they require excess generation for about an hour or two, a few times a year….” Peak demand is a daily occurrence, and occurs usually in the early evening as a family gets home form work and school.

            Demand spikes are usually weather related, as in Winter Storm Uri and the recent warm period in Texas.

            his battery solutions does not change either of these. It just temporarily shifts electricity source to batteries. The jury is still out on battery backup, since too many fires have resulted from charging lithium batteries. You want to add houses to cars and scooters to the fire mix?

            The pipe dreaming liberal mind is an amazement.

          4. Ivan

            “the smart grid is part of the next evolution”
            What if every smart meter came with a 2 kWh battery attached, with full control from the utility company. They could use it to smooth out the natural fluctuations in power use. During power failures the companies would tell people that they could either turn everything off to keep the freezer/fridge powered for a long time – or blow it all in a few hours by just going along as usual.

        2. CoRev

          Baffled again claims: “… ercot was not relying on renewables during the winter storm”. but the 2020 ERCOT SARA says this: “Based on the 5th percentile of hourly wind capacity factors (output as a percentage of installed capacity) associated with the 100 highest Net Load hours (Load minus wind output) for the 2015/16-2019/20 winter Peak Load seasons; this low wind output level is 1,791 MW” They were relying on 1791 MWs.

          Yet this chart in the latest attempt to justify Wind and Solar in the ERCOT grid show that output went below the ~2MW planned for significant portions of 2/125 and 2/17. There no question that some thermal backup plants failed, and they compounded an already poorly managed grid into blackouts.

          Why is ERCOT adding expensive unreliability to an fragile grid? Why are you denying this reality?

          The denying liberal mind is an amazement.

          1. baffling

            energy demand when the grid failed was about 70 GW. wind was 1.8 GW, or about 2.4%. over 30 GW of natural gas power was offline because of the storm. that is nearly half of the demand.
            “There no question that some thermal backup plants failed, and they compounded an already poorly managed grid into blackouts.”
            no. they did not compound and already poorly managed grid into blackouts. they CAUSED the blackouts. you cannot manage a grid when nearly half of your power generation capacity, from natural gas, goes offline. covid, you continue to post misinformation on this blog. you should be banned. it is blatant and repeated, and an insult to those on this blog.

          2. CoRev

            Baffled, read the chart here: https://econbrowser.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/1-s2.0-S2214629621001997-gr2.jpg
            It cl;early states ERCOT began blackouts at 1:25 AM on Monday. It even has a line showing this event along with the thermal output and thermal outages. Thermal had already reached its low for the day, and the thermal outages were not yet occurring.

            ERCOT’s management caused the blackouts on 2/15. maybe they were receiving reports of near failures from the thermal community,but they surely were watching the weather forecast for both temperature and wind.

            The chart clearly shows the drop in renewables outputs occurring in advance of thermals failing. Blaming thermal backups to renewables sources while the renewables are dropping to their planned minimum is insane.

            The insane liberal mind is an amazement.

          3. CoRev

            Baffled, the grid did not fail! The blackouts were due management decisions to keep the grid from total failure. The blackouts started at or even before the rash thermal plant closing due to r4enewables falling to and below their planned outputs and weather reports of continuing stressful conditions.

            Next time you lie or repeat the lie that thermal plants caused the blackouts, remember Menzie’s chart https://econbrowser.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/1-s2.0-S2214629621001997-gr2.jpg and the location of the line showing when ERCOT began blackouts (1:25AM on Monday 2/15 to prevent grid collapse). That was BEFORE thermal plants reported outages and renewables had fallen through the latter half of 2/14, and stayed near or below the planned MINIMAL outputs for the next 3 days.

            But, that’s just what the data says.

            The denying liberal mind is an amazement.

          4. baffling

            covid, the grid did fail, just not catastrophically. when you have unanticipated and uncontrolled blackouts, that is a grid failure. and when ercot began to institute blackouts, the thermal plants were beginning their cascade of shutdowns. when that occurred, the renewable were exceeding expectations, outputting twice as much power as was expected by ercot. renewables were EXCEEDING EXPECTATIONS when the grid began to fail and blackouts commenced. every independent and unbiased assessment of the situation has shown this to be the case. links have been provided on this site, repeatedly, and you continue to promote misinformation because the truth runs counter to your narrative.

        1. baffling

          interesting. many Iines in the presentation are related to natural gas system failures. I didn’t notice them blaming renewables for the failure, like our misinformation chief covid likes to parrot.

    2. pgl

      Leave it to CoRev for a lot of distracting questions. Hey CoRev – start your own blog if you will. I’m sure all your fellow Climate Change deniers will get a kick out of your BS.

      1. 2slugbaits

        pgl Hey CoRev – start your own blog if you will.

        As it happens, at one time CoRev did have his own blog in which he tirelessly made a fool of himself regarding climate change. At this point his refusal to acknowledge the obvious truth about climate change is due to pure personal vanity. If you’re a conservative you never want to admit you were wrong about something. It’s seen as a sign of weakness. Hell, even Ron DeSantis’ campaign motto is “Never Back Down” (presumably even if you’re wrong). In CoRev’s case he spent so many decades of his life arguing against the reality of manmade global warming that his ego could not stand admitting he’s wrong. It would mean his whole life’s project was meaningless.

        1. Macroduck

          “It would mean his whole life’s project was meaningless.”

          Yep. That’s what it means.

        2. CoRev

          2slugs, i still have a blog where I keep several data representations for posterity. Y’ano like the actual OFFICIAL data showing the prior 16 year pause in temperature increases. It’s my personal version of a snap shot as the OFFICIAL data changes daily. BTW there is a current pause that exceeds 8 years. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/05/the-new-pause-remains-at-8-years-10-months/

          Please show me where I have ever argued against “manmade global warming”? Instead I have identified the several clear sources of “manmade global warming”. Y’ano like UHI, poor station siting, changing land use, etc. Many of these cause compound, but what my arguemts have been are against the blind religious manmade global warming zealots claims. Y’ano, like ALL increases in CO2 are manmade, that CO2 is the control knob for ?climate change?, and that mitigation efforts like use of renewables will in any way effect average global temperatures.

          These latter arguments are supported by the manmade global warming zealots failure to calculate the temperature change from their implementations.

          The failed understanding of the basic issues is an amazement of the liberal mind.

    3. ltr

      These double whammies caused by weather related failures will be more common as we add weather related sources to the grid….

      [ This is an important worry, but incorrect. Adding weather related sources to an energy grid as China vividly shows means adding a range of sources to the grid along with Ultra-High Voltage transmission lines, so that energy sources can be switched and transmitted seamlessly as conditions change. China just added hydro-energy-storage and transmission capability to an important solar installation in Israel. A typical energy project in China will involve solar, wind, hydro and UHV transmission. Hydrogen is being added to the mix now that the technology for green hydrogen production and delivery has been perfected. ]

    4. ltr

      Paul Krugman, with other prominent Western economists, has complained bitterly about excessive investment by China. However, much of Chinese investment is precisely what is necessary to prepare for climate change. That the critical importance of climate change investment should be turned away from by a Western economist is startling to me. China, for instance, will have invested about $270 billion just in water conservancy projects in 2022 and 2023, and in anticipating the need in meeting an El Nino cycle, China actually serves as a model in investing.

      1. pgl

        Where did Krugman do this? Look – JohnH’s attacks on Krugman are all dishonest. Do not follow this worthless troll down the rabbit hole.

        1. JohnH

          China is totally justified in making massive investments in clean energy, not only to address climate change but also to achieve energy independence.

          But pgl can’t respond to issue at hand. He can only attack…falsely claiming that I attacked Krugman on this issue!

          1. pgl

            Another dishonest and pointless comment. Do you wake up every morning asking how many times can Jonny boy make a total jerk out of himself or what?

      2. Macroduck

        Apples and oranges. The fact that China has invested in renewables does not mean China hasn’t over-invested in general. Heck. China has recently constructed more coal-fired generating capacity than the rest of the world combined, and ltr keeps trying to paper over that fact by chanting “renewables, renewables, renewables.” It’s just her latest “China GOOD!” trick.

        I don’t know whether Krugman has made the point that China has engaged in a lot f mal-investment, but I would assume he has, because it’s true.

        1. JohnH

          Is Ducky suggesting that China should not make massive investments in renewables? How would that help anything?

          And why is the US investing so little in solar? Does Ducky agree with that?

          And if China can be criticized for investing in coal, why can’t the US be criticized for investing in fracking? Ducky seems to be spewing the usual double standard–China’s investment in fossil fuels is bad, bad, bad; the US’ good, good, good. China’s massive investment in renewables is a nothing burger, but the US’ significantly lower investment in renewables is to be cheered. Sounds like propagnda to me!

          1. pgl

            China’s consumption of coal is 5.9 times US consumption of coal. A fact that little Jonny boy never bothers to address.

          2. pgl

            “And why is the US investing so little in solar?”

            Utter BS. Now your buddy CoRev says we are investing too much here. OK he is a lying idiot. You are too.

          3. baffling

            “And why is the US investing so little in solar? ”
            well, according to covid that is to the case. his argument is we are investing too much.

            “why can’t the US be criticized for investing in fracking?”
            not sure where you have been for the past decade, but they have been criticized for fracking. quite a bit. so why make such a false statement?

        2. CoRev

          Blaming ltr is hypocritical, since he ” keeps trying to paper over that fact by chanting “renewables, renewables, renewables.” It’s just his latest “liberal/Biden energy policy GOOD!” trick.”

          The hypocritical liberal mind is an amazement

          1. pgl

            Excuse me? You think you are in agreement with ltr? No little lying troll – she is kicking your end on this issue.

      3. ltr

        1. Paul Krugman, with other prominent Western economists, has complained bitterly about excessive investment by China.
        2. Paul Krugman, also, made a point of insulting James Hansen, the superb climate scientist, in the New York Times.

        1. Ivan

          Why are you failing to provide links for these postulates?
          Are the links with the full story not supportive of the narratives peddled?

          1. pgl

            Her comments about James Hansen shows she never did bothered to understand that discussion. We have pointed this out to ltr but as usual – she ain’t listening.

    5. ltr

      “These double whammies caused by weather related failures will be more common as we add weather related sources to the grid….”

      https://news.cgtn.com/news/2023-07-04/China-to-double-wind-solar-capacity-by-2025-leading-energy-transition-1l9QP6UTxUA/index.html

      July 4, 2023

      China to double wind and solar capacity by 2025, leading the energy transition
      By Djoomart Otorbaev

      China is expected to double its wind and solar capacity by 2025, and achieve the goal of producing 1,200 gigawatts (GW) of solar and wind energy generation by 2030, five years ahead of schedule, a new report has found. Such an outstanding fact prompts reflections on the main trends in the development of the Chinese electric power industry.

      Simple calculations showed that even with the annual commissioning of 570 GW of wind and solar power capacities achieved in the previous Five-Year Plan period (2016-2020), China will reach 1200 GW of capacity in 2026, four years earlier than planned. An idea of the scale of new capacity additions can be seen by comparing the total installed wind and solar capacity in the top six countries following China, which was 537 GW in 2020.

      According to the National Development and Reform Commission, a new model based on large-scale “clean energy bases” will be applied to accelerate the commissioning of fresh wind and solar capacities. By 2025, these bases, located in deserts and other barren lands, will host about half of the new wind and solar power plants.

      Such bases will be spread over huge areas, and each cluster will be a gigawatt-scale project connected to consumers by powerful transmission lines. The concept grew out of similar “coal bases” developed in 2011-2015 and 2016-2020, many of which are in the same less-developed northwestern provinces. These areas will also house the “support” coal-fired power plants to stabilize and support the electricity supply….

      Djoomart Otorbaev is the former prime minister of the Kyrgyz Republic, a distinguished professor of the Belt and Road School of Beijing Normal University.

    6. Anonymous

      here is a book recommended to me by a nuke engineer* friend from college days which were 10 years before 3 mile island:

      Shorting the Grid: The Hidden fragility of Our Electric Grid

      https://www.amazon.com/Shorting-Grid-Hidden-Fragility-Electric/dp/1735358002 $9.99 0n kindle.

      it goes in to how electric demand is “auctioned on the spot”

      warning it is recommended by an engineer!

      after 3 mile island my friends had no new designs to work, most kept reactors running.

      whoever runs the auction facility and does not have resources…… to tap?

      1. baffling

        texas runs a deregulated electric market. it is not set up to require electric supply, only to incentivize supply with profit. there is no penalty for going offline, other than lost profits. that needs to be changed in the texas market. it requires texas republicans to modify their deregulated system somewhat.

    7. d w

      interesting, but wrong i was there in February of 2021. seems that about %40 of the gas power plants failed, and then there was a shortage natural gas that took out some more plants. also seems like during the winter months that renewables arent normally operating and producing their normal amount of power, but they werent expected too. but the natural gas, coal, and nuclear plants were producing as they normally do. mostly cause natural producers and plants were prepared for that weather. and renewables werent either. now, oddly enough over in Europe that use (all but coal) to generate electricity they never have this big a problem generating power and you go up to Canada and the northern states, you dont see the same sort of power outrages that Texas had, but then i suppose they expected it to happen, and planned accordingly.
      course the state took prompt action to address the problem
      nah, they didnt. and it has been a near thing in 22, and now 23, where the power wasnt on. and now only because renewables were available did the state avoid another major outrage

      1. Ulenspiegel

        “now, oddly enough over in Europe that use (all but coal) to generate electricity they never have this big a problem generating power.”

        We have the same issue to a lower extent: French NPPs or some German base load power plants have to reduce generation due to lack of cooling water, in winter 2011/12 the situation was very critical and olny solved by a lot of german wind power. Winter 2022/23 was no real issue, due to a good wind power generation and low demand for heating electricity in France – that was luck.

        Fun fact: The German electricity generation became even more reliable with a higher share of RE generators. And “large-scale” outages were a result of transmission line issues, e.g. switsching of a line without re-checking that the (n-1) rule is still working, or result of burning transformators.

  2. CoRev

    I love the faith-based belief shown by this article. But in the real world we have this: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/05/does-wind-intermittance-over-short-hourly-periods-gives-a-clearer-picture/ Does Wind Intermittance Over Short Hourly Periods Gives a Clearer Picture
    Which refines the actual wind intermittency issue for Oz, and need to be defined in shorter periods to size determine duration needs for wind backup. It’s another example of how using averages can be very deceptive and dangerous. Intermittency for renewables is an ongoing expensive and growing problem for grid managers as renewables are added. Just look at Texas. BTW, these direct costs are not included in the oft cited LCOE.

    But in the world of economics we have this simple calculation for wind:
    “Nameplate/capacity factor = true cost.

    As capacity factor goes to zero, true cost of intermittentcy goes to infinity.”
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/05/does-wind-intermittance-over-short-hourly-periods-gives-a-clearer-picture/#comment-3744637

    1. pgl

      Dude – your blogger friend has been exposed to be a serial liar. The real world? Excuse me?

    2. pgl

      “The long-term picture is not much better. The Australian power price history has a close correlation with the penetration of intermittent generation into the system.”

      Energy prices started going up around 2005? And that is blamed on wind? I guess your lying blogging friend never heard of the commodity boom? As in oil prices, coal prices, and even uranium prices going up a lot.

      Did you not know this CoRev? If not – you are dumber than we give you credit for.

      1. pgl

        I live in Queensland, Australia. Until 30/6/23 our power bill for general usage was 25.559 Aus cents per kwh. On the 1/7/23 it jumped to 31.724 Aus cents per kwh a rise of about 24%. This is up from about 19 cents per kwh a few years ago. The long-term picture is not much better. The Australian power price history has a close correlation with the penetration of intermittent generation into the system.

        Oh no – the rise in Australian energy prices has nothing to do with the price of coal in Australia?

        https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCOALAUUSDM
        Global price of Coal, Australia

        Around $50 a ton in 2005 and near $180 a ton now – not a big difference in CoRev’s confused world!

  3. baffling

    according to covid, these thermo outages are a result of renewable energy on the grid. it is all renewables fault.

    i will remind everybody, a SUDDEN loss of power for hundreds of thousands of households has a dramatic impact on the electric grid. this is unplanned. these are the types of blackouts that ultimately cascade through the power grid. wind, solar and battery backup were available to compensate for this failure.

    this failure is different from declining output of renewables, which occurs gradually through the day (or night) and is predictable. a modern, smart grid, can contain these types of changes in electric generation so that it does not cascade through the grid.

    when the texas grid froze a couple of years ago, it was from thermal plants (natural gas, coal and nuclear) that stopped SUDDENLY, and created an unstable grid that failed, nearly catastrophically. that does not typically occur from renewable sources of electricity. so when fools on this blog talk about reliability, or lack thereof, please keep in mind the difficulty posed by sudden losses of thermal generation on the grid. it causes a lot of problems, that renewables and batteries have bailed out, since the natural gas failures of a couple of years ago. good thing the state of texas has enhanced its renewable and battery portfolio since that failure.

    1. CoRev

      Baffled has his sequence and his causes wrong. he claims: “… thermal plants…stopped SUDDENLY, and created an unstable grid that failed, nearly catastrophically. that does not typically occur from renewable sources of electricity.” Except ERCOT records show that renewables’ production fell to ~8% and that their current estimates are based upon 30% production. Not only fast but lengthy renewables’ failures stressed the grid until the thermal sources also WEATHER stressed began to fail.

      Really poor planning an management by ERCOT due to focus on renewables, a minority source, and less so on thermals, the majority source.

      The psychotic liberal mind is an amazement.

      1. pgl

        You write a lot of babble but once again you failed to address his point. JohnH may be pathetic but dude – be happy that you have become far worse.

      2. baffling

        renewables were not expected to contribute 30% during the winter storm. you are repeating a fallacy, again. you need to deal with reality, not a made up world covid.

        1. CoRev

          and often expected to produce less during Summer heat waves. They’re called weather stressors to the grid, and their impacts increased with the addition of weather realated sources.

      3. CoRev

        Baffled, even Menzie’s chart refutes your contention: “Not only fast but lengthy renewables’ failures stressed the grid until the thermal sources also WEATHER stressed began to fail.” https://econbrowser.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/1-s2.0-S2214629621001997-gr2.jpg

        Note the blue line dropping near midday 2/14 and thermal plants outages starting early 2/15. Renewables dropped hours before thermals began failing, but the key piece of information is that ERCOT began blackouts BEFORE the thermal failures. Hoe can those nonexistent failures have caused the Texas blackouts? Repeating a claim when the data is completely different is just another form of insanity

        The confused and insane liberal mind is an amazement.

  4. pgl

    ‘A spokesperson for Vistra Energy confirmed Sunday that Comanche Peak’s Unit 1 reactor “safely and automatically shut down” Friday after a non-nuclear equipment issue involving a feed water pump. “Our teams worked diligently to assess and fix the equipment and were quickly able to get the unit back online,” Meranda Cohn said. Unplanned nuclear outages are rare, and the timing of this incident prompted concern.’

    Nuclear power has its advantages but there are dangers. Thankfully they did shut this down. Good luck at safely getting back online.

    1. ltr

      https://news.cgtn.com/news/2023-05-13/How-Hualong-One-reactors-are-being-built-faster-better-in-Zhangzhou-1jMgjD5EO5i/index.html

      May 13, 2023

      How Hualong One nuclear power reactors are being built faster, better in China’s Zhangzhou
      By Cao Qingqing

      Hualong One, China’s homegrown nuclear power reactor design, is recognized as one of the world’s most advanced third-generation nuclear power units.

      Two Hualong One demonstration projects, one in China’s Fuqing City and the other in Pakistan’s Karachi, were completed in 2022 and have been operating well since then.

      Chinese engineers are now working to build Hualong One reactors in a faster and better way in Zhangzhou in southeast China’s Fujian Province, so as to further improve its cost efficiency, quality and overall competitiveness.

      More Hualong One reactors to be built in Zhangzhou

      Six Hualong One units, each with an installed capacity of over 1 million kilowatts, are set to be built at the Zhangzhou nuclear power plant. And additional sites are reserved for two more units.

      The construction of Unit 1 started in October 2019 and that of Unit 2 began about a year later in September 2020. Unit 1 is scheduled to be completed by October next year, while Unit 2 will be finished by 2025.

      The construction approval for Units 3 and 4 were granted in September 2022, which will commence later this year.

      The whole project of eight units, scheduled to be completed by 2035, will be able to generate 72 billion kWh of electricity per year upon completion.

      The project is owned and operated by CNNC-Guodian Zhangzhou Energy Company, a company jointly created by China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) and China Guodian Corporation.

      Faster, better construction through innovation ….

    2. ltr

      https://news.cgtn.com/news/2023-05-07/China-s-1st-Hualong-One-nuclear-power-project-passes-acceptance-tests-1jBsQtg0xWg/index.html

      May 7, 2023

      China’s Hualong One nuclear power demonstration project passes tests

      The demonstration project of Hualong One, China’s homegrown third-generation nuclear power reactor design, passed the final acceptance tests on Friday, the China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) announced.

      The project includes two reactors – Unit 5 and Unit 6 – at Fuqing Nuclear Power Plant in Fuzhou City, southeast China’s Fujian Province.

      The passing of the tests on Friday was the final step that marked the completion of the project, which signifies that China’s nuclear power competency now ranks among the world’s best, the CNNC said.

      The construction of Fuqing Unit 5 started in May 2015 and that of Unit 6 began in December the same year. Unit 5 entered commercial operation in January 2021 and Unit 6 in March 2022.

      Currently, the two units can generate 20 billion kWh of electricity annually.

      “The project has best performance in terms of the construction period, cost-efficiency, operation safety and quality among all demonstration projects of third-generation nuclear power units worldwide,” Song Lin, general manager of CNNC Fujian Fuqing Nuclear Power Co., Ltd, told CGTN in an interview….

      1. baffling

        that is a lot of power that suddenly went offline, and stayed offline for a couple of days. not an insignificant event. for a nuclear power plant, that is not a minor issue.

  5. pgl

    “Almost immediately, the grid manager deployed a new backup power system. This ERCOT Contingency Reserve Service depends mostly on battery storage, allowing the state to tap long-lasting electricity soon after an unexpected problem.”

    Battery storage? And CoRev told us this would never work. Do check the link in this paragraph for how this service works and its limitations.

    1. CoRev

      Ole Bark, bark, why did you ignore this additional data? “This emergency electricity is only available for up to 15 minutes, though.” Yup, used for 1/4 hour emergency loss only.

      1. pgl

        I asked people to read the link so I’m not ignoring anything troll. But wow – CoRev finally read a worthwhile link. Miracles happen.

      2. Macroduck

        So, if cascading failure across the gridis a risk, having a quarter of an hour of power available on demand seems pretty important. I had assume CoVid understands this cascading failure problem, since he pretends to inow Oh, So Much! about the power grid. Apparently, that was a mistaken assumption.

        1. Ivan

          You nailed it. Short term instant replacement keep the melt-down from happening while other replacements are put in place. Your expectations of CoRev understanding things and having a desire to seriously debate an issue (rather than just throwing out words that sounds smart to stupid people) is a clear failure on your part. That clown would rather look like he no smarter than a 5’th grader than revise his favorite narratives – and he think he is on Fox where he can get away with it.

          1. CoRev

            Ivan and McQuack, now you believe: “Short term instant replacement keep the melt-down from happening …”? Battery backup as now available in Texas is teen tiny fraction of supply and worse available for a teeny tiny portion of the duration, and you believe that’s a solution for supply failures?

            In the real world it is calculated that it would take 4-5 times the current level of renewables to replace current thermal sources, AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, this new level of renewables would still require thermal backups which would equate to ~90% of its new output.

            The renewables insanity just won’t stop.

            The insane liberal mind is an amazement.

          2. pgl

            “That clown would rather look like he no smarter than a 5’th grader”

            I know a lot of 11 year old kids who are ten times smarter than CoRev could ever be.

          3. baffling

            covid does not want to acknowledge this short term issue, because it undermines his entire argument. covid would rather you build a new natural gas power plant that can instantly turn on for those 15 minutes, and then sit idle for the rest of the year. extremely costly.

            smart grids integrate supply, demand and backup to smooth out the curve and eliminate these inefficiencies. the spikes are a problem. and we have various levels of solutions to address these spikes. some of you already do a similar thing at home, when you use a power strip with surge protection to eliminate the major spikes of voltage. and if you upgrade to a ups, you get the added benefit of maintaining power during brief loss. and you can upgrade more, and get a voltage regulator that minimizes damage to sensitive electronic equipment. our future smart grid will be similar, but on a larger scale. it is the way of the future.

            not sure why somebody like covid is so against this future, as he will be dead and buried before it arrives. let those who will live in that world make these decisions. odds are he has another coronary event in the next year, so why should he impact what the world will be like in five years time? selfish.

    2. ltr

      “Almost immediately, the grid manager deployed a new backup power system….”

      There are a range of energy storage and back-up facilities, from battery, battery-flow, pumped-storage along with Ultra-High Voltage transmission networks to deliver stored energy. However, there is now Chinese developed green hydrogen production, storage and long distance transmission as a backup power system.

    1. pgl

      A bigger picture? Funny you cannot be bothered what this weird map even shows. Or is this how you get your wife all lost when driving across the country?

  6. pgl

    Ben & Jerry’s v. Kristi Noem on Mt. Rushmore. Ben & Jerry’s has got this one right.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/noem-hits-back-at-ben-jerry-s-over-stolen-mount-rushmore-message/ar-AA1dw7i1?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=9553ce0ff6724e478ddadc4525844d26&ei=13

    South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) hit back at Ben & Jerry’s over the company’s call for Mount Rushmore to be returned to Indigenous populations whose land was “stolen” by the U.S. government. Noem said in an interview on Fox News that she will not listen to “a bunch of liberal Vermont businessmen who think they know everything about this country and haven’t studied our history.” The ice cream company, which is based in Vermont and was founded by Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, posted on its website on Independence Day that the United States must return the “stolen indigenous land.”

    Ben & Jerry’s noted the history of the land that became Mount Rushmore, which had been called Tunkasila Sakpe by the Lakota Sioux that lived near there in the Black Hills. The federal government signed treaties with the Lakota and other tribes after decades of fighting to give them an area of 35 million acres that included the Black Hills. But the government broke those treaties after gold was discovered, and settlers rushed into the area, the company recounted. The Sioux, a group of tribes that came to be known by that name, were then forced to move to smaller reservations in a different location.
    Ben & Jerry’s also noted that the Supreme Court ruled in 1980 that the land was stolen and awarded the tribes financial compensation, but the tribes have refused it as they only want the land back.

  7. Macroduck

    Off topic, recession hand-wringing –

    CNBC has the willies over the drop in commodity prices as a prelude to recession:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/06/a-global-commodities-rout-is-fueling-fears-of-a-bleak-economic-future.html

    CNBC’s concern isn’t consistent with history; commodity prices often peak during recession, and commodity price decline is certainly not reliable as a leading indicator of recession:

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=16Onr

    The peak in commodity prices a year ago would be consistent with the U.S having slipped into recession 15 months ago, maybe, but not in coming months. At this point, commodity prices are a better soft landing story than recession story.

    Meanwhile, back to my current hobby-horse – ADP shows roaring job growth, but with several sectors shedding jobs. Construction is now adding jobs pretty rapidly, and housing starts recently rose strongly. Factory construction is off the charts but factories lost jobs in June. If various sectors contract at different times, this cycle may avoid a broad simultaneous decline in activity that is the definition of recession.

    1. pgl

      Does anyone at CNBC remotely get cause and effect. Yes if we had a financial market meltdown like we had in late 2007 a recession might lower the demand for commodities. But if an increase in commodity supplies lowered their prices, one would think this might raise aggregate demand.

      Why is why I had to stop listening to the goofballs on CNBC. The ones at MSNBC are bad enough.

    1. pgl

      Using his veto power, the governor increased the amount of money K-12 schools can raise per student by $325 per year until 2425. In the vetoes, Evers took the $325 per year increase applied to the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years, deleted the “20” and a hyphen to make the end date “2425.” In total, Evers made more than 50 line-item vetoes to the budget, labeling the Legislature’s version “imperfect and incomplete.”

      Now that’s long-range planning!

  8. ltr

    CoVid is at it again, pretending renewables…
    CoVid is at it again, pretending renewables…
    CoVid is at it again, pretending renewables…

    covid insists on blaming…
    covid insists on blaming…
    covid insists on blaming…

    [ Selected Europeans in the 1930s, would liken a people to a disease. I would not have thought this was still possible. ]

    1. baffling

      well, this is likening a specific PERSON. once again, insinuating racism when it does not exist. ltr is a propaganda machine.

      1. CoRev

        Baffled, racism is just another form of prejudice. Y’ano know like this comment: “…as he will be dead and buried before it arrives. let those who will live in that world make these decisions. odds are he has another coronary event in the next year, so why should he impact what the world will be like in five years time? selfish.”

        Wishing death: “odds are he has another coronary event in the next year,…as he will be dead and buried…” and “selfish” are confirmations of an extreme level of prejudice.

        Some how those statements appear close the banning level if not just early pubescence immature.

        The unthinking, prejudiced liberal mind is an amazement.

        1. baffling

          covid, I never wished for your death. you are making up a strawman.

          on the other hand, I did make a comment on probability. you are old and have already had a coronary event. every day puts you closer to death, probably within a year or two of today, and that time period gets shorter each day. this is a reality, not a wish. it may be a dark comment, but there is no racism, prejudice or any other nefarious way to describe those statements. they are accurate.

          in my opinion, since you will be dead sooner rather than later, I would rather you have little to no impact on any decision making that would impact the world five years from now, or beyond. to insist that you should have that impact is selfish, because you will not be there to deal with the ramifications of your incorrect decision making. I don’t want to have to clean up your mistakes after you are dead, covid.

          1. CoRev

            Bwaa ha ha! ” every day puts you (EVERYONE) closer to death, “, but you then claim it is just probability and not WISHFUL THINKING. Yor can be funny.

            Wishful and funny liberal mind is an amazement.

    2. Noneconomist

      BREAKING NEWS: CoRev Subject of Racist Attack!
      More details on the news at 5.

Comments are closed.