Live data from Hacker News

NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

utilitydive.com

1–10 of 61 posts

Re: NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

#2
I'm having trouble with the power industry terminology.

I /think/ they mean there's going to be more demand, which could overload parts of the distribution grid, causing its overload protections to trip. Is that right? The solar connection is not clear aside from it contributing more power on the grid when it's sunny.

Re: NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

#3
> But the biggest long-term risk may be the unexpected tripping of solar resources during grid disturbances,

This is entirely the electricity grids own doing. They told everyone who wanted solar that they must use inverters that are super safe and self disconnect if anything unexpected happens. The regulations were written super tight, with frequency limits, harmonic limits, reactive power limits, rate of change of frequency limits, residual current limits, DC injection limits and vector shift detection requirements, presumably because rulemakers were hoping that having a massive thick rulebook would make rooftop solar too expensive. Unfortunately for them, all the complexity is pushed to software, and when that's written once it can be deployed lots almost free.

Fast forward 10 years, and this stuff is widely deployed, meeting all the very strict criteria. Except the grid only stays within those strict limits during the good times. When the grid is stressed, for example low frequency due to insufficient generation, it will go outside the frequency limit, and all rooftop solar generation statewide will disconnect all at once. And now the grid has lost gigawatts of solar production, making a minor incident far far worse. The end result is a cascading failure and within a matter of seconds half the state has a blackout.

Smart rulemakers back in the 2010's would have dropped islanding protection, and vector shift protection (they actively destabilise the network). They would also remove underfrequency protection (again - destabilises the network) and slacken substantially undervoltage protection.

The only protections important to leave in are rate of change of frequency (upwards only), overfrequency, and overvoltage.

What's ironic is there is a more sensible requirement they could have required to make rooftop solar cost more and add substantially to grid stability. They could have required solar systems have a load line equivalent to coal. That pretty much means if the grid frequency decreases, the solar systems must output more power. But solar can't output more power than the sun provides. So in turn, to meet this requirement all solar systems would have to be constantly throwing away say 10% of capacity, so that it could be delivered if and only if the frequency suddenly dropped.

Re: NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

#5

> But the biggest long-term risk may be the unexpected tripping of solar resources during grid disturbances, This is entirely the electricity grids own doing. They told everyone who wanted solar that they must use inverters that are super safe and self disconnect if anything unexpected happens. The regulations were written super tight, with frequency limits, harmonic limits, reactive power limits, rate of change of f…

So noone was bothered to run a simulation to see the second-order effects of their regulations on the grid?

Re: NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

#6

> But the biggest long-term risk may be the unexpected tripping of solar resources during grid disturbances, This is entirely the electricity grids own doing. They told everyone who wanted solar that they must use inverters that are super safe and self disconnect if anything unexpected happens. The regulations were written super tight, with frequency limits, harmonic limits, reactive power limits, rate of change of f…

Perfect comment on the topic. With that said, newer inverters do have “grid fault ride through” capabilities where they will continue to operate during excursions from nominal operating windows, and some regulators are more hip to it than others.

https://www.iso-ne.com/static-assets/documents/committees/co...

https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2019/03/smart-inverter...

Grid forming inverters (versus the traditional grid following) are at the finish line of being proven, and paired with distributed storage providing ancillary services (including frequency response), regulators simply need to be dragged to the present to solve for this (distributed energy orchestration, rapid system segment isolation and recovery during transient events [“self healing” for the marketing folks], etc). This is one of those tug of wars between very conservative regulators and a quickly innovating industry (DER power controls).

https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/articles/powering-grid-for...

https://www.nrel.gov/news/features/2020/renewables-rescue-st...

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/73476.pdf

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=50176

Re: NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

#7

> But the biggest long-term risk may be the unexpected tripping of solar resources during grid disturbances, This is entirely the electricity grids own doing. They told everyone who wanted solar that they must use inverters that are super safe and self disconnect if anything unexpected happens. The regulations were written super tight, with frequency limits, harmonic limits, reactive power limits, rate of change of f…

So noone was bothered to run a simulation to see the second-order effects of their regulations on the grid?

The conversation went something like this: "well as long as all the solar disconnects when we have an emergency, then we are left with a grid without solar. And we already know we can handle that fine".

The rulemakers were expecting solar to be a failure and there to never be anything more than a handful of geeks with it installed. The problems only become major when 1+% of statewide generation is solar. 1% is (very approximately) the amount of generation an electricity grid can suddenly lose without failure.

Re: NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

#8

> But the biggest long-term risk may be the unexpected tripping of solar resources during grid disturbances, This is entirely the electricity grids own doing. They told everyone who wanted solar that they must use inverters that are super safe and self disconnect if anything unexpected happens. The regulations were written super tight, with frequency limits, harmonic limits, reactive power limits, rate of change of f…

Perfect comment on the topic. With that said, newer inverters do have “grid fault ride through” capabilities where they will continue to operate during excursions from nominal operating windows, and some regulators are more hip to it than others. https://www.iso-ne.com/static-assets/documents/committees/co... https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2019/03/smart-inverter... Grid forming inverters (versus the traditiona…

The Enphase IQ8 is now in general release, and is grid-forming.

During sun, a site can island with perfect 60Hz AC power from the ASIC-driven IQ8. No battery –– and certainly no grid –– needed.

Re: NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

#9
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perfect comment on the topic. With that said, newer inverters do have “grid fault ride through” capabilities where they will continue to operate during excursions from nominal operating windows, and some regulators are more hip to it than others. https://www.iso-ne.com/static-assets/documents/committees/co... https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2019/03/smart-inverter... Grid forming inverters (versus the traditiona…

The Enphase IQ8 is now in general release, and is grid-forming. During sun, a site can island with perfect 60Hz AC power from the ASIC-driven IQ8. No battery –– and certainly no grid –– needed.

I spec’d my 21kw system with IQ8+s for this reason. It’s future proofing distributed generation by being software defined (Enphase’s Ensemble system). Highly recommend them to anyone considering residential solar, and go for as big of a system as you can (and your utility will allow, if they limit based on usage history; tell them you’re buying an EV if necessary).

Re: NERC sounds alarm on solar tripping in ‘sobering’ summer reliability report

#10

This is what happens when you have insufficient or no spinning reserve

The Economist had an article on in the May 7th issue with a beautiful picture of inertia storage being delivered.[1]

[1] https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/green-power...

Post reply on HN