US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M • Hacker News Board

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#161

Post by anovikov » Mon, May 04, 2020, 5:39 AM UTC

How likely is simultaneous failure of 9 out of 30 of them? Totally unlikely if you ask me. And some redundancy is built into the system, so it's not like failure of 3 will cause loss of power in 1/3 of the U.S. - most likely none at all (or maybe only scheduled blackouts in peak times in some of the places).

In Cyprus, we had such an event in 2011, when 2000 tons of explosives Russian tried to smuggle into Syria, were intercepted by a U.S. Navy and redirected to be offloaded here (because the ship carrying them was formally registered here and flew a Cyprus flag - really being owned by the KGB), and these explosives went off in the summer heat, wrecking a power station that produced 70% of the electricity here.

We only had about 2 hours of blackout per day and a recommendation to limit a/c use, for about a month.

Power transmission is super resilient and relay protection is a whole science of it's own. Especially in the U.S. when there are many virtually independent, privately owned and loosely interconnected transmission systems, which puts it at a relative advantage.

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#162

Post by JSavageOne » Mon, May 04, 2020, 5:40 AM UTC

benrbray wrote: post #152

s5300 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite tired and ill right now so I'm unfortunately not going to be able to write this out even slightly well... but for some reason, I want to post the thought anyway so I will. (Note: I'm a U.S. citizen) In short: As an engineering student with quite severe chronic illness that also got fucked over by abusive parents/a broken home I couldn't escape even with scholarships... I simply can't come to the moral conclusio…

I've had the same thought and it sickens me that we've come to this point. As someone who has made the transition from teenager to young adult during the Trump era, I feel like I've lost a game I never even had the chance to play. We have clearly gone so far off course but very few seem interested in steering us back to reality (between the impeachment "trial", the primaries, and our handling of COVID-19). After four…

I agree, but at least it seems like we're incrementally moving in the right direction, even if at a glacial pace. The fact that a 27-year old AOC was elected shows that people are fed up with establishment politicians and change is possible (prior to being elected she was a bartender with no money or connections, who ran on a grassroots campaign of being fed up with politicians taking corporate money and serving corporate interests over their citizens, and beat a Democrat who'd been in power for ~15 years).

Once the older generation dies out and the younger generation takes over, we'll start to see some real progress. Imagine where we could be if more of our politicians resembled people like Andrew Yang - young normal uncorrupted people who grew up in the internet generation. The problem is that most of our politicians are too old (average Senator is 61 years old) and are completely removed from the real issues facing Americans.

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#163

Post by closeparen » Mon, May 04, 2020, 5:47 AM UTC

s5300 wrote: post #159

closeparen wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>some drastic form of change and restructuring will have to happen That's how we got this administration in the first place. There is no rule that smashing the system has to leave you with a better one.

You're going to have to specify... You talking like, U.S. declaration of Independence, or more/less recent than that...? While my mind is fuzzier now, I like to think it was a "things change for the better" else - engineers/scientists completely stop giving a fuck about helping the U.S.

Trump's election reflected a popular belief that rule by establishment experts was so intolerable, literally anything else would be better. It was the same passionate, desperate anger, the same "fuck it, let the world burn" strategy, just pointed in the opposite direction.

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#164

Post by JSavageOne » Mon, May 04, 2020, 5:50 AM UTC

nmfisher wrote: post #160

JSavageOne wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize Trump lost the popular vote right? Also due to the electoral college and the winner-take-all way in which voting is designed in the U.S, your vote for president only matters if you live in a swing state. If you live in California or New York, there's basically no point in voting for president because there's such a large Democratic majority and it's winner-take-all.

> You realize Trump lost the popular vote right? I am well aware, but that has nothing to do with the almost half of eligible voters who didn't vote at all. Californians who didn't vote in 2016 (~9m) far outnumber Hillary's margin over Trump (~4.3m). There's only "no point voting for president in California" because 9m Californians don't vote. That's nothing to do with "the system", that's a choice that every single…

> If you live in California or New York, there's basically no point in voting for president because there's such a large Democratic majority and it's winner-take-all.

Winner-take-all in any state that leans predominantly in one direction means that your vote doesn't matter. Unless those 9 million people happened to all be of the Republican party (extremely unlikely), it wouldn't have made any difference had they voted or not. Winner-take-all means all the delegates go to the winner.

It has everything to do with the system. Instead of just preaching that people should vote, maybe take a look at why they aren't. Maybe some don't because they can't get off work and unlike many other countries, election day isn't a national holiday. Or maybe because they don't feel like it makes a difference. If you don't live in a swing state, then one is right to feel like their presidential vote doesn't make a difference because as I just explained, it doesn't, and it shouldn't be that way.

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#165

Post by jessriedel » Mon, May 04, 2020, 5:52 AM UTC

anovikov wrote: post #161

How likely is simultaneous failure of 9 out of 30 of them? Totally unlikely if you ask me. And some redundancy is built into the system, so it's not like failure of 3 will cause loss of power in 1/3 of the U.S. - most likely none at all (or maybe only scheduled blackouts in peak times in some of the places). In Cyprus, we had such an event in 2011, when 2000 tons of explosives Russian tried to smuggle into Syria, wer…

> how likely is simultaneous failure of 9 out of 30 of them? Totally unlikely if you ask me.

It's quite possible because their failure probabilities aren't independent. A geomagnetic storm could take most of them out at once. Like respiratory pandemics, this is an event that happens every ~century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_storm

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#166

Post by chipperyman573 » Mon, May 04, 2020, 5:58 AM UTC

s5300 wrote: post #159

closeparen wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>some drastic form of change and restructuring will have to happen That's how we got this administration in the first place. There is no rule that smashing the system has to leave you with a better one.

You're going to have to specify... You talking like, U.S. declaration of Independence, or more/less recent than that...? While my mind is fuzzier now, I like to think it was a "things change for the better" else - engineers/scientists completely stop giving a fuck about helping the U.S.

That's one example of something totally different. In order for this to be the same thing, someone would have to platform on removing the constitution or something

And also there's no rule that says it will get worse, either. When you have competent people making the rules, there's a good chance it gets better

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#167

Post by JSavageOne » Mon, May 04, 2020, 5:59 AM UTC

mrexroad wrote: post #158

JSavageOne wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is largely the democratic system itself. The average U.S. Senator spends 2/3 of their time fundraising during the last 2 years of their term. Half of Congress are millionaires, their salaries are in the 95th percentile ($174k/yr), and they receive world-class healthcare. The electoral college means Trump and Bush get elected despite losing the popular vote. We're limited to a two-party system because thir…

> Yet in 2020 I still have to pay TurboTax to help file my taxes because the U.S. government is too incompetent to make it as easy Normally I’m all about Hanlon’s razor (assume stupidity before malice), but given the absurd amount TurboTax spends lobbying against any meaningful simplification you can’t fully pin place this on gov’t incompetence.

Lobbying definitely plays a huge role in this, and the system there needs to change as well.

But ultimately TurboTax doesn't vote on laws, politicians do. By blaming TurboTax, you're alleviating politicians of their personal responsibility.

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#168

Post by beefield » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:01 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #139

s5300 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite tired and ill right now so I'm unfortunately not going to be able to write this out even slightly well... but for some reason, I want to post the thought anyway so I will. (Note: I'm a U.S. citizen) In short: As an engineering student with quite severe chronic illness that also got fucked over by abusive parents/a broken home I couldn't escape even with scholarships... I simply can't come to the moral conclusio…

That's the plot of "Atlas Shrugged".

Except that it is precisely the opposite in certain important details. John Galt did not want a functioning society funded by money tax^H^H^H stolen from him. He did not want the society to offer medical care or education to "engineering student with quite severe chronic illness that also got fucked over by abusive parents/a broken home" He went to strike and pushed for existing society's destruction precisely because he did not want those.

(On the grandparent, I have to agree that occasionally I feel like the development of society at large is kept hostage by morons. Not only politics, but practically everything seems to be built for the lowest common denominator. It may really be that one day in the future some kind of Galt's Gulch is needed. Only Rand is going to be turning in her grave. If not for any other reason, then because in this gulch the members are pissing on her grave.)

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#169

Post by cglace » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:01 AM UTC

s5300 wrote: post #135

flipgimble wrote: post #99

This article has an unexpected resonance for me after several weeks of pandemic lockdown. Just three months ago I would have laughed it off. Now I am increasingly pissed off. In the US, but I see reflection of this in Europe as well, has allowed irresponsible puerile imbeciles to be elected. These people play games with wealth and power, with no regard to the lives and well-being of the society that pays for it. I di…

Quite tired and ill right now so I'm unfortunately not going to be able to write this out even slightly well... but for some reason, I want to post the thought anyway so I will. (Note: I'm a U.S. citizen) In short: As an engineering student with quite severe chronic illness that also got fucked over by abusive parents/a broken home I couldn't escape even with scholarships... I simply can't come to the moral conclusio…

Good luck with that. There is a very large portion of the population that believe this administration has left the world better than they found it.

Re: US unprepared for an electrical grid collapse, but it costs only $300M

#170

Post by ALittleLight » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:02 AM UTC

nmfisher wrote: post #160

JSavageOne wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize Trump lost the popular vote right? Also due to the electoral college and the winner-take-all way in which voting is designed in the U.S, your vote for president only matters if you live in a swing state. If you live in California or New York, there's basically no point in voting for president because there's such a large Democratic majority and it's winner-take-all.

> You realize Trump lost the popular vote right? I am well aware, but that has nothing to do with the almost half of eligible voters who didn't vote at all. Californians who didn't vote in 2016 (~9m) far outnumber Hillary's margin over Trump (~4.3m). There's only "no point voting for president in California" because 9m Californians don't vote. That's nothing to do with "the system", that's a choice that every single…

What makes you think non-voters would vote much differently than voters? To me it seems like voting is something like a survey, and we have about fifty percent of the population responding. If all non-voters voted, I'd expect roughly equal electoral results.

Of course, you might mean that you just want the half of non-voters who agree with you to vote, but that's a different thing.