Slashdot Mirror


NERC Releases Interim Report on Aug 14th Blackout

will writes "The North American Electric Reliability Council has released four documents concerning the August 14th power outage power outage in the North East. The blackout investigation homepage lists all NERC's documents relating to this event. Press coverage is at The Washington Post, CNN, and CBS News. The take home message: FirstEnergy did it. The are, of course, denying it." The report is also available at reports.energy.gov. Reader stinkydog writes "According to Yahoo News part of the blame for the big fizzle of 2003 lies with a failing SCADA system, GE's XA/21 power management system. 'Not only did the software that controls audible and visual alarms stop working at 2:14 p.m. EDT, but about a half hour later, two servers supporting the emergency system failed, too.' According to the product specs, it is a Unix system with X Windows."

13 of 426 comments (clear)

  1. Now we know... by zeux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think it's really hard to perform that kind of investigation and looking at the results I think they did a good job making the results widely available. Anyway, it's still unacceptable that such things happens in the most powerful country in the world.

    Flame me if you want but France is known to have one of the best electrical system in the world. The government owns it and some laws do protect the costumer. It allows France to export a lot of power to other European countries thus making a lot of money from it and playing a big role in Europ energy.

    I think France made good choices for power:
    - nuclear (or nuculear whatever). Much cheaper and cleaner than oil. France is very strong on nuclear technology and do export its knowledge to other countries. To date we didn't have any major incident and I think it's pretty secure as long as enough money is spent.
    - public service. There is a law in France stating that every citizen, wherever he lives, as the right to have access to electricity for free. Of course we pay bills but if you live in the country the government MUST bring you access to electricity even if you live far from everything. It's a law so sometimes it's not really followed but most of the time the government sticks to it.

    When I arrived in the USA I was shocked by the poor quality of your electric system. Many outages, expensive bills and thousand of wires in the sky ! I think that it's a very advanced country with an outdated power system. I've seen on the TV recently that many companies as starting to produce their own power. I really think it's pretty bad since the installations needed are dangerous, potentially explosive and very expensive.

    What happened on August the 14th also suggests that a country really depends on its energy distribution system and that it could be, in the near future, target for terrorists.

    1. Re:Now we know... by (startx) · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's all about early adopter. We invested huge amounts of money to wire up the whole country before nuclear was an option, and there's no way we can spend that much again to rip it all out and replace it with newer/better/safer alternatives. Same thing with our telephone system, cable tv, internet, etc. We're trying to squeeze every last ounce of usefulness out of the existing system, while so-called "3rd world" countries are getting the latest and greatest tech because they have no prior investments.

    2. Re:Now we know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      France is known to have one of the best electrical system in the world. The government owns it and some laws do protect the costumer. It allows France to export a lot of power

      So why is electricity so expensive in France? I pay less than 5 cents per kWh. I've seen many apartment buildings in France where the lights aren't on in the hallways because it's so expensive. I've even seen hotels where they keep track of electricity used by guests and bill accordingly.

    3. Re:Now we know... by Ktulu_03 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Both sides are screwing us, in my opinion. The right needs to realize that we must plan for the future to minimize our dependence on oil (especially foreign sources). the left needs to realize that some short-term solutions (more nuclear plants, drilling in alaska) need to take place until the longer-term solutions are in place.

      I also feel that we should use some solar in a reasonable fashion. especially in cities where they are consistently hotter, because of all the concrete. Out in the burbs where I am, I've seen a house that has some PVC pipes and a solar cell on their garage roof, must be some solar water heating system. Every little bit helps.

    4. Re:Now we know... by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One A/C system where I live but no heating devices. In France I had no A/C but a heating device. Quite the same.

      Uh, no. Heating is considerably cheaper to do than cooling, even if you do both by electrical means. In most areas of the world where heating is a concern you don't do it electrically -- because burning gas is much more effective. It's also considerably easier to insulate against cold than it is against heat.

      Since I arrived 6 months ago: none in Florida.

      And exactly where do you live in Florida? Most of it has daily thunderstorms. Florida is the lightning strike capital of the world.

      Many places in America still don't have any access to the powergrid. Ok the country is VERY BIG, but hey do you REALLY think it's normal ?

      Yes, I do. Do you realize that France is only a bit bigger than twice the size of Colorado? Or that the US has nearly as many square kilometers of water as France has square kilometers of land? The US has to provide power to roughly 5x the number of people on roughly 20x the amount of land.

      Take a look at Russia, the Ukraine, China, India, or any other large, geographically diverse country. How much of it is wired? Frankly, the US probably has more wired than any other country. Heck, if you want a fun comparison, go look at Canada -- they have communities off the grid too. Sure, they're way the heck up North, but that's where most of the unpowered commnities are in the US too (largely in Alaska, some in the Rockies -- good luck finding anyone off the grid not by their own choice in the Northeast, which is a much more accurate comparison to France).

      France doesn't have to deal with a lot of the issues that the US does. Like ants that will happily chew through electrical insulation (fire ants in the SE US; between that and clay soil it makes burying cable extremely expensive)? No permafrost either. Tornados? Hurricanes? Nope.

      Tell me what to envy to such a system in such an advanced country

      I challenge you to show me another country that has anywhere close to the same issues and is doing better than the US. We could be doing better on fossil fuels (particularly oil -- we have absurd reserves of coal and natural gas; but even for oil we only import roughly twice as much as we produce), and I would certainly like to see the US move back toward nuclear power. But we have some of the cheapest power in the world, and the cost of power is a baseline for everything else in the economy. It's one of the key reasons that we have such a strong economy, and have had one since the advent of industrialization.

    5. Re:Now we know... by zeux · · Score: 2, Insightful
      First of all, thanks for being kind in your answer, it's worth the read and it's not a flame like some other answers to my topic.
      It's also considerably easier to insulate against cold than it is against heat.

      But wait a minute, isn't it the same problem ? When you need to cool the place you need to prevent cold air to go out. When you need heating you need to prevent cold air to go in, right ? I hardly see the difference. I'm ok that it's harder to cool than to heat but are you sure it's a so big difference ?

      Look at that. Do you think the difference between heating and cooling does explain that ?

      The US has to provide power to roughly 5x the number of people on roughly 20x the amount of land.

      Yup, but there are some big spaces uninhabited like in Texas for instance. I'm looking for statistics about percentage of people living in cities because I think France has much more small villages isolated than US. I'll try to find that kind of statistics and post it.

      Take a look at Russia, the Ukraine, China, India, or any other large, geographically diverse country. How much of it is wired?

      Unlike USA, those countries can't really afford it...

      France doesn't have to deal with a lot of the issues that the US does. Like ants that will happily chew through electrical insulation (fire ants in the SE US; between that and clay soil it makes burying cable extremely expensive)? No permafrost either. Tornados? Hurricanes? Nope.

      I didn't know about the ants. I've read a book where the author explains that ants rule the world... BTW, we have some strong thunderstorm in France and some flooding too but our electricity grid uses redundant connections much more than the American power grid so it's rare that we have a problem.
      But we have some of the cheapest power in the world, and the cost of power is a baseline for everything else in the economy. It's one of the key reasons that we have such a strong economy, and have had one since the advent of industrialization.
      I agree on this but what's the point to have cheap power if it fails ? I mean I think you will have more and more problems in the future if you don't upgrade your power grid.

      Thanks
  2. You got it in reverse by just+fiddling+around · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FYI, US governement have been engaged in a nice deregulation wave for 10 years. That deregulation has been poorly tought out, because of a "The Market Cures All" mindset. What did the deregulation bring? Gigantic power outages and California-style power crunches.

    The deregulated US power grid is overstressed, has little or no margin for extra demand, and has outdated and poorly maintained emergency systems. And thanks to Enron and friends, artificial scarceness has been created to crank up prices.

    In a nutshell, you pay more and get less(safety, avaliability, quality) than when the market was regulated. Ain't The Market grand?

    Electric power is a basic necessity(in our post-industrial world), and should be managed by the state, just like water works and law enforcement.

    --
    You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
    1. Re:You got it in reverse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Look at Texas for a model in deregulation. Their energy prices are low, and they have a 20% surplus on even the hottest days in summer. Texas, BTW, has its own power grid separate from the other main grids in the US.

      Deregulation can work, but as you seem to imply, only if it is properly thought out. This is a very rare occurance in politics and government.

    2. Re:You got it in reverse by Vainglorious+Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Electric power is a basic necessity...

      Absolutely, and it's interesting to note that planned US spending on electrical infrastructure to 2005 is 71 cents per American per year. Meanwhile, the US gov. plans to spend $255 per citizen in Iraq! (Health spending plans are also illuminating : $38 per capita on hospitals in Iraq versus $3.30 in the US).

      If I was a US citizen, I would be furious about this failure to invest my tax dollars in my own country's infrastructure.

      --
      My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
  3. Who cares about the OS or the provider? by swordgeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First of all, let's be perfectly clear on this.

    Any carefully managed OS (inluding Windows) can be stable and predictable.

    Any badly managed OS (including Unix) WILL be unstable and unpredictable.

    Got it? Good.

    Now as far as pointing fingers at the guilty parties, understand that the infrastructure is really at fault far more than any individual company. Look at this from a broader perspective: One company was able to take down how wide of an area? The whole system is too fragile, too interdependent, and maintained too close to full capacity. Worse, there's absolutely no incentive for a company to maintain a large reserve capacity, since it costs a lot, and brings in no extra income.

    But of course when it happens the next time (and make no mistake--it will), we'll have another commission to once again figure out the single company that broke a rotten and unstable infrastructure, instead of fixing the root problem.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  4. It's deregulation by laird · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "It's all about early adopter. We invested huge amounts of money to wire up the whole country before nuclear was an option, and there's no way we can spend that much again to rip it all out and replace it with newer/better/safer alternatives. Same thing with our telephone system, cable tv, internet, etc. We're trying to squeeze every last ounce of usefulness out of the existing system, while so-called "3rd world" countries are getting the latest and greatest tech because they have no prior investments."

    I disagree completely -- until the US deregulated, we had an extremely reliable power system that was able to expand dramatically for many decades to keep up with demand while keeping prices low. Then some lunatics convinced enough people that it was a good idea to make power companies unregulated monopolies (i.e. they were no longer required to invest in maintenance and infrastructure, or to maintain excess capacity to cover emergencies or power spikes, and removed the cap on profit margin), after which the power companies did what you'd expect -- raised rates like crazy while slashing spending on infrastructure maintenance and expansion. The result is that a bunch of investors and CEO's made tons of money while the capacity and quality of service that they provided suffered. The problem was not just the big outage -- the number of instabilities in the power grid that didn't result in actual outages has been increasing dramatiaclly for decades.

    See http://www.ncpa.org/iss/ene/2003/pd081503a.html for some more info.

    Who do I blame? The politicians who allowed themselves to be bought off (or conned) by the power companies, to the detriment of the entire country.

  5. Re:What caused the boxes to crash? by AJWM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do we really care how the box crashed?

    If we don't want it to happen again, yes we do. It was more than one box, which points to something more systemic than a random hardware glitch or failure.

    --
    -- Alastair
  6. Blame Canada by ablair · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Looks like the headline-grabbers like Pataki and Bloomberg, amongst others, now have little to say about their quick denouncements of Canada for the whole power mess. Interesting that this is the same reaction pattern for the current Canadian internet pharmacy spat, where FDA commissioners are now publicly alleging Canadian drugs to be unsafe. Is 'mouth off first and ask questions later' now an official US political strategy?