Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 357 posts

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#291

Post by PeterStuer »

WWLink wrote: post #108
meroes wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a technician for xfinity in the bay area and NIMBYism a huge part too I would say. Huge portions of Mill Valley especially on and around Mt Tam had such bad poles and vegetation. Only the last 3 fire years did anything. But literally nothing gets approved besides exact replacement. Nothing gets put underground, or rerouted because (as I understand it) mostly NIMBY groups. And I believe ATT ultimately owns most o…

Man, I can't imagine anyone NIMBYing new power poles lol. Old poles get scary, especially when they start leaning over. And then when AT&T was mounting giant ass DSL VRADs on poles too lol. I'd be out there cheering on the linemen for replacing the old junk. :D

Depends. New poles proposed often carry not just electricity, but also a cellular station, 2 or 3 cameras, 'smart' blazing bright led street lights going on and off at irregular times and 1 or 2 sizable led advertizing displays constatly adapting their messages to perceived passers by.

I can definetly see how replacing a lowly old pole with one of these annoyance towers can lead to strong opposition even for those not having 5G scares.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#292

Post by henearkr »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #133
davisr wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they're not entirely wrong about the 5G. I understand many in this forum won't agree with me. From https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no... > We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe > The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National T…

Even if Moskowitz has a point, it is difficult to take him seriously when he associates himself with "Physicians for Safe Technology", a group which maintains the belief that Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a real thing. It is not. It has no scientific basis and is not a recognized medical condition. https://www.who.int/peh-emf/publications/facts/fs296/en/ High levels of RF exposure can of course do damage, in th…

All is not just about energy absorbed or burns. There are reports of the space between cells becoming larger (less inter-cellular adhesion) because of RF, and this led to the conclusion that the blood-brain barrier was weakened due to some kinds of RF. I've not dig too much in the subject, but I understand that a leaky BBB would increase inflammation in the brain and penetration of many molecules (including carcinogenic).

I don't know why all the rebuttals focus on energy absorption and absence of ionizing frequencies. Seems like the mechanism of toxicity, if any, has nothing to do with that.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#293

Post by beders »

davisr wrote: post #124
paloaltokid wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh god...Marin NIMBYism is really crazy when it comes to that stuff. And there's a lot of conspiracy theory / 5G type stuff that goes on as well. Strange to think that many of the folks who live there are in charge of a lot of the companies on HN (or are senior execs there).

Well, they're not entirely wrong about the 5G. I understand many in this forum won't agree with me. From https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no... > We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe > The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National T…

Coulomb barrier - how to overcome it with radiation like that? Exactly, not at the energy levels a cell phone user is subjected to. Why isn't that the end of the story?

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#294

Post by tux1968 »

newguy1234 wrote: post #90
aaomidi wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Percentage isn't the issue. Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant provides the base power usage, which isn't the issue that's causing the blackouts. Looking at raw percentage numbers for blackouts is wrong because this is an issue of not having enough capacity during peak, which nuclear doesn't solve.

The issue that is causing the problems is peak demand hits around 5:30 pm....exactly at the same time when solar supply is dropping rapidly. We need natural gas peaker plants that basically fire up to bridge the gap during the night. Every now and then we might get bailed out if wind is strong that day but that's not something you can build a reliable grid on.

Would it be crazy to suggest that everyone change the workday so that peek demand happens when solar is still operational?

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#295

Post by beders »

kryogen1c wrote: post #154
nimbius wrote: post #3

as someone who apprenticed as a lineman briefly, this isnt at all unexpected. Just because you have generating capacity, does not always mean you have capacity in the duty cycle for your transmission infrastructure. Many substations are older, and were never designed to handle high duty and load during climate-change driven weather events. These substations suffer from underreporting as they often dont have remote mo…

> Wild claims related to electromagnetism what follows is speculation, so you can grab your pitchforks if you want but it will be a hollow victory. I've always been suspicious of the claim that EM fields have zero effect on human beings, especially near high-volts lines. It doesnt seem possible. Our bodies function based on electrical signals and many cellular mechanisms are mediated with ions. do we have a list of a…

Another useful thing to understand is the energy required to overcome the Coulomb barrier and contrast that with energies 10 cell phones in your pocket would emit.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#296

Post by duhuh »

bgorman wrote: post #284
rbanffy wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's clear not enough is being invested in schools, in particular the science curriculum.

Enough is being invested, it is just being spent extremely poorly. No country gets less per dollar on education than the US. A good start would be supporting school choice so the public school's monopoly and cost structure can be challenged.

Like the choice we all have in healthcare? No thanks

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#297

Post by sharpneli »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #175
leni536 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it should. Heat expansion should slightly increase the diameter.

Not if the length increases to counteract it.

It doesn’t ”counteract” it. All dimensions increase based on the same coefficient. Same percentage increase on all axis.

See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_expansion and check the coefficient of expansion.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#298

Post by Gibbon1 »

rbanffy wrote: post #168
meroes wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a technician for xfinity in the bay area and NIMBYism a huge part too I would say. Huge portions of Mill Valley especially on and around Mt Tam had such bad poles and vegetation. Only the last 3 fire years did anything. But literally nothing gets approved besides exact replacement. Nothing gets put underground, or rerouted because (as I understand it) mostly NIMBY groups. And I believe ATT ultimately owns most o…

I can't imagine what makes someone object to moving cables underground.

They under grounded the utilities in my neighborhood. Took them about 3 years total. I'd wake up to the sound of guys jackhammering outside my window. For a couple of months contractors were using the spot in front of my house to stash their metal plates.

I think it was worth it. But there are crankypants types that hate any change because it's change.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#299

Post by fragmede »

bob1029 wrote: post #176
newguy1234 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue that is causing the problems is peak demand hits around 5:30 pm....exactly at the same time when solar supply is dropping rapidly. We need natural gas peaker plants that basically fire up to bridge the gap during the night. Every now and then we might get bailed out if wind is strong that day but that's not something you can build a reliable grid on.

Ercot had this problem last year WRT to over-reliance on wind generation capacity. At one dire point we had 90 minutes of $9/KWh rates and the utility was looking to roll blackouts. I paid $200 for 1 day of electricity and I pulled my breaker about halfway through the worst part. I know people who got hit with nearly 4 figures for a single day of usage. I don't have problems with renewable energy in principle, but un…

It is politically infeasible to do anything with Nuclear power but the technology potentially exists (eg thorium reactors). In this era where punditry is as good as expertise, however, nuclear power plants that failed safe would be looked as the "unsinkable" Titanic was, in hindsight. On top of that, the Fukushima nuclear disaster set the nuclear industry back decades.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#300

Post by fragmede »

tln wrote: post #68

The article ends with: “If there’s really a problem and not just the ISO jumping the gun, it’s going to manifest tomorrow,” Mr. Marcus said. “Tomorrow evening, the wolf arrives.” What is that referencing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf
Post reply on HN