New England Burns Jet Fuel To Keep Lights On

First time accepted submitter inqrorken writes "During the recent cold snap, New England utilities turned to an unconventional fuel: jet fuel. Due to high demand for heating, natural gas supplies dropped and prices skyrocketed to $140/mmBtu and prompting the Mid-Atlantic RTO to call on demand response in the region. With 50% of installed generation capacity natural-gas fired, one utility took the step of running its jet fuel-based turbines for a record 15 hours."

Comments

Jet Fuel?

[sokoban]

You mean, Kerosene? I guess Jet Fuel sounds cooler though.

Re:Jet Fuel?

[crmanriq]

From Wikipedia (ya, I know...) on "Jet Fuel"

"Jet fuel is a clear to straw-colored fuel, based on either an unleaded kerosene (Jet A-1), or a naphtha-kerosene blend (Jet B). It is similar to diesel fuel, and can be used in either compression ignition engines or turbine engines. .... if it fails the purity and other quality tests for use on jet aircraft, it is sold to other ground-based users with less demanding requirements, like railroad engines."

So still not much of an event, other than to say "ooh, wow. Jet Fuel."

Re:Jet Fuel?

[icebike]

You might be tempted to believe this was just the usual "Headline Hype" on the part of Forbes.

However, in this case it was an appropriate use of the term since the units fired up were in fact combustion turbines, (jet engines turning turbines), also used on many Navy ships.

As a consequence, the grid operators have resorted to some rather unusual steps. Energy Choice Matters reported today that ISO-New England asked Public Service of New Hampshire (PSNH – a subsidiary of NorthEast Utilities) to operate its entire generation fleet this week to help keep the lights on. This included firing up several infrequently-deployed combustion turbines which ran on jet fuel.

These are usually used as a source of last resort. They are usually avoided even for peaking demand. They are loud, suck fuel like crazy.
They exist for precisely this type of emergency, fuel shortage, scheduled down time of gas fired plants, or any grid failure.

In Alaska where I lived for 30 years, you saw exhaust from the turbines, you knew your next electric bill was going to hurt, because hydro and gas plants were down. You also knew that the LAST backup system was in use, so you stoked up the wood stove and turned off all unnecessary electrical load.

Re:Jet Fuel?

[Anonymous Coward]

suck fuel like crazy

That's not even an understatement. At my utility we have three such units which would only be run on emergency, and we have fairly reasonable storage tanks on site, but once they start running it's only a matter of time before they run out, and tanker trucks can't unload fuel as fast as these things burn it.

Re:Jet Fuel?

[rotorbudd]

"No, they mean kerosene-gasoline blend, more commonly knows as jet fuel."

Jet fuel has no gasoline in it.
In fact most turbine aircraft engines are limited to just a few hours of operation with any amount of gasoline mixed into the fuel.
After that you you get to overhaul the hot-end with the added bonus of tossing some very expensive turbine wheels of blades away

Re:Jet Fuel?

[dbIII]

They are the same thing as in the jets, but since a lot of them are pretty old (but low hours) they are back from when the fuel requirements were a bit lower. Also I suspect a lot of the requirements are related to safety in situations where you cannot park a fire truck on the wing instead of actual engine operating requirements.

burning metric tons of kerosene in large turbine engines won't make for cheap electricity

It's expensive as hell which is why these things are normally a fallback for unusual peak loads.


Some jet engines used for power generation have been adapted to use different fuel sources, such as a little 20MW Avon jet that's running on coal seam gas in one project.

Re:Jet Fuel?

[Runaway1956]

Great post - that little buzzword, "jet fuel" really doesn't mean what the uninformed think that it means.

A couple points:
There are various grades of jet fuel, and those various grades are suitable for a number of uses. Aboard ship, we burned JP4 in our boilers. JP5 would burn just as well, with less soot, but it was more expensive so we always specified JP4 in our fuel requirements.

I've often read stories of aviation facilities rejecting fuel deliveries when it failed one test or other. That fuel is invariable accepted as a lower quality fuel, and used in less demanding aircraft, or used for power generation, or even used for diesel fuel.

As for TFS, the reference to " an unconventional fuel" is completely off target. Following the links, one discovers that the generation plants have turbine powered generators ready to go online at a moment's notice. There is nothing "unconventional" about their use, other than the economic pressures which dictated their use. It is simply unusual for jet fuel to become more available and/or economical to use than natural gas. In short - the generation companies were ready at a moment's notice to fire up these jet fuel generators, which really are quite "conventional".

Re:Jet Fuel?

[fnj]

What is the primary difference between gasoline, and any diesel or kero fuel? Gasoline is explosive, whereas all of the heavier oil fuels burn instead of exploding. Just about the last thing that any operator of an oil based combustion engine wants, is an explosive fuel. Gasoline will readily destroy any of those engines in pretty short order.

Complete and utter bullshit. Ever heard of detonation? An atomized near-stoichiometric gasoline-air mix, port-injected and then compressed in the cylinder, burns smoothly under proper conditions in a gasoline (spark ignition) engine, and detonates loudly and roughly when improper conditions are allowed to occur. In a diesel (compression ignition) engine, the fuel is SUPPOSED to burn promptly at the instant of injection. It CAN'T burn any more quickly than it is injected, and the injection is controlled. The precise profile of the burn is controlled by the profile of the injection. Modern diesels have several injection events (up to a dozen or so) spread out in time for each cylinder cycle. If you inject gasoline or kerosene instead of diesel fuel, it doesn't "explode" any more or less than when you inject diesel fuel. Or you can inject peanut oil.

The reason pure gasoline or a high percentage of gasoline as fuel is destructive to modern diesel engines has everything to do with the extremely high pressure injection system and next to nothing to do with combustion. The injection pump and injectors are designed for the specific lubricity characteristics of diesel fuel. Change that to gasoline and you will quickly destroy thousands of dollars' worth of parts. Heck, even too high a percentage of biodiesel is destructive to modern designs. Usually anything over 5% bio will void the warranty.

You (DISCLAIMER!) put either gasoline or diesel fuel in a (SMALL!) open container in a cool, well ventilated area, and try (CAREFULLY!) to light it with a match, and the first thing you may find is that it is difficult or impossible to light it that way. If you put a wick in it, you can light either one easily, and they BOTH burn completely controlled, just like an alcohol lamp. If you atomize any of them, gasoline, diesel fuel, or alcohol in air and light the mixture, they will ALL explode.

Gasoline has a much lower flash point than the others. All that means is that a dangerous vapor can form around an open container if not adequately ventilated, and that vapor if ignited can explode. For gasoline, the flash point is far below room temperature, and actually below even very cold winter temperatures - excluding arctic circle and beyond at their very coldest.

The autoignition temperature of gasoline (280 C) is actually a little HIGHER than #2 diesel fuel (256 C) and substantially higher than jet fuel (210 C) and kerosene (220 C), but the flash point is much LOWER than any of them.

The state of the diesel art circa 1980 was much more forgiving. The owners manual not only allowed mixing up to 10% gasoline with the diesel fuel to prevent gelling, it specifically allowed for using a mixture of gasoline and fresh straight 10 weight motor oil as an alternative fuel when nothing else was available. They would also run just fine indefinitely on 100% biodiesel, or even a variety of unprocessed vegetable oils.

Even my 1999 VW was run by me for a substantial period of time on both 20% biodiesel and straight 100% biodiesel with no ill effects whatever (although by that time anything over 5% was disclaimed by VW)

Invisible Hand

[Mateorabi]

So this wasn't an equipment failure requiring a backup, but just market price fluctuation: The cost of natural gas per Watt generated went above the cost per Watt of the fuel for the backup generators, due to the high demand for natural gas as demand rose as temperatures fell. Sounds like Econ 101.

1. Why didn't the wholesale electric prices rise in tandem with the gas price to keep generation economical? Capped by fixed residential rates?

2. Why didn't the generators use the derivatives market to hedge against spikes in gas prices so they'd be able to keep buying as demand/price rose?

Re:Invisible Hand

[khallow]

2. Why didn't the generators use the derivatives market to hedge against spikes in gas prices so they'd be able to keep buying as demand/price rose?

I don't know. But this was allegedly predicted by analysts.

A central challenge is that - especially in New England - most power generators do not contract for firm gas pipeline capacity under their unilateral control and instead rely on "if and as available" gas non-firm capacity, or, in some cases, capacity held by third parties. Pipeline capacity has routinely been added to meet the needs of gas customers who desire firm service and are willing to execute firm contracts for such service.

The majority of gas-fired power generators in New England opt for non-firm gas transportation services. The generators have long observed that the electric market does not provide the proper incentives to encourage them to contract for firm transportation. NGA has encouraged the development of solutions to this power market dilemma, which causes uncertainty for the entire regional energy market.

So apparently, pipeline capacity is built based on "firm capacity" contracts, but the peaking load generators don't have the incentives to purchase those contracts.

Re:Invisible Hand

[rmdingler]

FTA: Natural gas is classified as a 'just in time' fuel delivery system.

This anomaly was preceded by huge increases in the underlying natural gas spot market price, in perfect timing with the additional cold bestowed on the region by Polar Vortex storms.

Surely, speculators didn't drive up the price of a commodity right before the storm hit?

Re:Invisible Hand

[Rich0]

Why didn't the generators use the derivatives market to hedge against spikes in gas prices so they'd be able to keep buying as demand/price rose?

Well, they might very well have had hedges to allow them to buy at normal prices, but then they're left with a choice - take that super-expensive gas that they can buy and burn it, or turn around and sell it to somebody else at market price and burn something else. If they can get more selling the gas than it would take to fuel their generators with jet fuel, then they're going to sell the gas and buy jet fuel.

Just because they have the option to burn gas doesn't necessarily compel them to do so...

Re:Invisible Hand

[Attila Dimedici]

Surely, speculators didn't drive up the price of a commodity right before the storm hit?

Yes, it would have been much better for DEMAND to drive up prices right after the storm hit so that consumers would be unable to see the price rise coming and reduce their reliance on natural gas and suppliers would be unable to increase production to meet (and profit from) the increased demand (perhaps by rerouting from other areas which would not need the natural gas as desperately). Yes, that would be much better. ?s

Re:Invisible Hand

[Animats]

Ah, the "markets will fix everything" (but didn't read the linked article) types.

Wholesale electric prices did rise, to about $950/MWH, for about half an hour around 5 AM EST this morning. That didn't last long. It's now around $150/MWH. The price goes up and down by a factor of 3 or so in a normal 24 hour cycle.

There's hedging going on in power, natural gas, and weather. But it doesn't affect the amount of generating capacity online on an hour by hour basis.

Read PJM 101 to understand how this works. Electric power in the PJM region is normally driven entirely by markets. However, PJM grid control in Valley Forge, PA can order "non-market actions" to keep power on, and generating companies (which are not all utilities) are obligated by their contracts with PJM to obey those instructions or pay huge penalties. PJM doesn't do this often. Yesterday and the day before, though, were bad days. Both days, there were Max Emergency Generation alerts . The longest was from 19:19 EST on Thursday to 08:45 Friday. That's because some generating capacity was down, and peaking plants had to be used to make up capacity. That's part of what peaking plants are for.

Wind power didn't help. Wind power was at a low when power was most needed. Even with wind farms spread over many states, wind power in the PJM area goes up and down over a 4x range.

(Sometimes power is really cheap. The price can even go negative. Load varies over about a 3x range during a normal day, and around 2-5 AM, it's at minimum. All the plants that burn fuel shut down first. Much of PJM's power comes from Ontario Hydro, and when they have too much water in their reservoirs, they have to let some out through their generators. So they continue to produce power even if the price they're being paid briefly goes below 0. Adjusting the output of nuclear plants is slow, and they'll also sometimes generate even if it costs them. The wind farms usually prefer to shut down rather than pay, and so, late at night, sometimes the giant wind turbines feather their props and slow to a stop.)

Re:Invisible Hand

[icebike]

Not to mention that storing enough gas on site to run a generation facility is pretty much impossible and dangerous.

Even spec prices don't do you any good unless you have a direct pipeline to the source. Most places are on the large pipe network, and there is no way you can blindly pump gas in form your spec source and expect it to arrive ONLY at the those sites with spec contracts.

Its easier to just add a fuel surcharge to the end user's electric bill. Which is exactly what happens in most places.

Re:Invisible Hand

[foobar bazbot]

This ain't any "Econ 101" "supply & demand" thing. There's plenty of natural gas around to the extent that it just get wasted:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com...

Natural gas? Cheap and abundant.
Natural gas in pipelines flowing to New England power plants? Not so much.

If you don't understand how that would make a difference, it's likely you never took this Econ 101 you speak of. (That, or perhaps you think pipelines work by magic, and any mass flow rate through any size pipe is feasible from both engineering and economic perspectives? To put it in Ted Stevens-like terms, pipelines are like the internet, not like a truck.)

Not to say the natural gas market in New England is, or bears particularly close resemblance to, the elegant, efficient resource-allocation method modeled and taught in Econ 101, but your attempt to use the practice of gas flaring as evidence that there wasn't a genuine scarcity of usable natural gas in a certain place and time discredits you by revealing a serious failure in competence and/or honesty. (I wouldn't claim to know which.)

Importance in diversity of energy sources

[acidradio]

In recent years there has been a movement to quickly shutter "old" power plants that run on fuel sources like coal, oil and other less environmentally friendly fuels and totally replace them with natural gas plants. Natural gas has come way down in price also which helps force that along. But what happens when supplies of natural gas either radically go up in price or become limited due to some other distribution problem? It's a good thing that they had these peaking units ready at the standby along with a sufficient amount of fuel.

Where I live (Minneapolis) a number of the local coal power plants have been completely converted to natural gas. There is still one large coal-fired plant though north of town (Xcel Energy's Sherco) that is not viable to convert to natural gas at this point and still runs on coal. Sherco was the quintessential baseload coal fired power plant cranking out 2400MW through three units. It has now be relegated to being a peaking unit for the most part, turned up and down as necessary. Recently one of the three turbines violently shattered, had to be rebuilt and was offline for many months. Sherco is the kind of power plant that was meant to be fired up and ran continually for a couple of years without downtime and without significant variation in the throttling/output. I can only speculate but I don't think that treating it like a peaking plant and constantly varying the output is good for it... and a number of other similar power plants around the country.

In other words...

[MrLogic17]

During peak load, the utility ran peaker plants. This isn't unusual.

Now, running a high cost peaker for 15 hours, that's noteworthy.

The gas probably just wasn't there.

[zippthorne]

NE is violently opposed to building any energy infrastructure.

For instance the Weaver's Cove LNG terminal proposal in Fall River, MA was ultimately shot down because regulators believed there wasn't enough demand for natural gas in NE, despite the region having one of the highest prices for natural gas in the country. Apparently price is not an indicator of demand.

Fall River is also in the process of shutting down a coal power plant (which the local residents are apparently dancing with glee over, despite the two huge cooling towers they made them build recently) , which is presumed to be replaced by natural gas capacity elsewhere in the region.

Re: What the heck is RTO?

[Orne]

Regional Transsmission Organization. After the deregulation of the bulk electric system, these companies are given the responsibility of monitoring high voltage transmission reliability. They commonly are also Independent Service Organizations, which operate regional wholesale electric markets.

[OT] mmBtu?

[multi io]

Due to high demand for heating, natural gas supplies dropped and prices skyrocketed to $140/mmBtu

Off-topic question: Do these people actually invent new units of energy for each application?

Wikipedia

A BTU is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of 1 pound (0.454 kg) of liquid water by 1 F (0.56 C) at a constant pressure of one atmosphere.[1] As with calorie, several BTU definitions exist, which are based on different water temperatures and therefore vary by up to 0.5%.

The unit MBtu or mBtu was defined as one thousand BTU, presumably from the Roman numeral system where "M" or "m" stands for one thousand (1,000). This is easily confused with the SI mega (M) prefix, which multiplies by a factor of one million (1,000,000). To avoid confusion many companies and engineers use MMBtu or mmBtu to represent one million BTU.

Somebody must have thought really long and hard to come up with that stuff.

Re:SR-71 = JP8

[stjobe]

SR-71 = JP8

No, the Pratt & Whitney J58 engines of the SR-71 ran on JP7, a fuel specially made for those engines and that aircraft.