^You are talking off of assumptions, not experience. You could have checked just a little first, the link below an example of digital products that have been being installed in US nuclear plants for over that last 20 years. These systems don't need to be installed in containment where radiation levels are high, relay based controls are already installed in low rad environments.
In addition, many US plants have installed digital control rod drive control systems. Once again, those controls are not located inside containment. You can walk right up to them, as most all controls, while the plant is running full power.
You are still missing my point. Not all systems are the same, every grid has its unique requirements. There is no single 'grid leveling' set of requirements. Will Tesla batteries work for this use, yes, probably, but there could be a lot more significant challenges than you might expect. There is risk and Musk is the type of guy willing to sell something that is not fully baked yet.
It is 'part' of a reasonable way to measure size, but 100 MWh doesn't mean you can supply 100 MW of power. It might supply 10 MW for 10 hours. You need more info to know the capabilities.
“We’re moving to a point where a major attack like this is very, very possible,” Antova said. “Once you’re into the control systems -- and you can get into the control systems by hacking into the plant’s regular computer network -- then the basic security mechanisms you’d expect are simply not there.” - https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
The fact that he said 'the plant's regular computer network' tells of his ignorance to the architectures of nuclear station control networkS (not one), and then the isolated controls as well. This guy has never set foot in a nuclear plant. Also, he should be specific about which 'basic security measure' he claim are not there, because there are in reality many basic security measure "there". That's easy stuff to say when you want attention, and quite vague to evade criticism.
Hah, you call that bailing! Back in my day bailing meant a day in field behind a trailer. Now you snowflakes wanna lay around on the couch eating Doritos and call it bailing, well, maybe think about where those Doritos come from and get up off your asses and do something hard and rugged!
^actually, it wasn't even necessarily on the admin network at the plant offices, all we know it was the admin network of the company that owns the plant.
it's cheaper to have them internet accessible. That's the basic problem with nuclear power. It's perfectly safe if you take all necessary precautions. But sooner or later some small government types come in, convince everyone they can cut their taxes by being every so much more efficient as a private company, take over and find running a nuke plant is _hard_. Like, really hard; and finally they start cutting corners and running the plants longer than they're supposed to.
Until you can convince upwards to 90% of the population that having a nuclear power plant run by the lowest bidder is a bad idea I'm gonna oppose nuclear.
First, they are not internet accessible. Not sure why you think they are other than gullible acceptance of a misleading headline. Furthermore, they are not run by the lowest bidder. But hey, maybe you could help write more misleading headlines, you seem to have the knack.
It also helps the headline hypers that the level of ignorance and fear due to massive mis-perception or risk of anything 'nuclear' or "radioactive' is high in the general population. Even many otherwise smart educated people tend to completely fail when quizzed on those risks.
Headline says the power plants were targeted, summary says the companies were targeted.
The headline is BS. The Wolf Creek plant controls were not involved at all, just the corporate business network which is completely separate. The headline intentionally implies something that didn't happen.
This is the advantage of the vintage of the U.S. nuclear fleet. The vast majority of the control systems, and just about all if not all safety-related control systems are electromechanical. There's nothing digital.
There are plenty of digital controls in nuclear plants. Yes, there is also a lot of older relay technology as well, but plants have been upgrading controls for quite some time. Critical safety systems are still mostly non-digital because of difficult licensing process for upgrade to digital, but that is also changing.
Are the control systems at plants not isolated from the outside world?
If not, why not?
It seems obvious that they should be.
Yes, they are isolated. But articles like this tend to hint that plants are hacked when in reality only the corporate business lans are involved in the attacked, not the isolated control systems. But headlines aren't so exciting if they reflect reality.
AR isn't really a great experience when viewed through a cell phone screen. Once AR goggles and software are good enough we might see some 3D AR experiences that become compelling and take hold. But I'm not sure the market won't be more suited to utility than gaming. I can imagine lots of cool things, but it may all just wind up being more novelty.
Fascinating, Your engineers would have a short time on the job compared to the ones I've worked with. Yours is like the guy who drove around a lot of barriers and road closed signs to plunge off a bridge that was no longer there because his GPS told him to. http://www.nydailynews.com/new... . No, not everyone is like that.
I think you are misinterpreting my point. A Tesla engineer is not going to perform a detailed analysis of the Australian grid requirements unless he is directed to by the people that pay him. They actually have other stuff to work on, believe it or not. If you think that selling doesn't often happen before the required engineering in many cases, you haven't been around much.
That's exactly what I was thinking when I started reading your post. As I recall, it was proposed to be quite a large amount, like almost half the price. It would have increased the cost of those TDK Silver 6 packs I'd buy.
I agree it is semantics. But what will be delivered is a bunch of separate (multi cell & module) batteries with separate chargers in separate enclosures. Not one big battery assembly with one charger.
They actually used the term kilowatt hours? Something is very very off there.
Why is that? Kilowatt hours is how electrical energy use is billed (at least in Australia) and I just pulled out my last bill and can see I used around 2200 kWh for last quarter, so around 24 kWh per day so it's a convenient unit for comparison. Unless you're thinking of seeing batteries quotes in Ah which doesn't mean much without knowing the nominal voltage.
Batteries like this are typically sized and sold in 'amp-hours' along with a discharge time rating. Like you say, KWH means little on its own. Batteries require a number of other specs to tell you if it suits the purpose. For example, a battery might supply fewer KWH on a given charge with a faster discharge rate than a slower one.
A 9 volt battery is a group of cells in one enclosure. The Tesla product will be many batteries in many enclosures, and with separate chargers as well.
Well you better go tell Mr Musk! Some random guy on Slashdot can save the day again by giving all of the engineers and scientists working for him some really basic information that they no doubt have completely overlooked.
Actually I would not be surprised. Engineers will only look at something if assigned to do it. There actually have been similar mistakes made by battery product engineers in the past. Does Musk already have the requirements specification from the utility? I doubt it.
Slashdot Mirror
^You are talking off of assumptions, not experience. You could have checked just a little first, the link below an example of digital products that have been being installed in US nuclear plants for over that last 20 years. These systems don't need to be installed in containment where radiation levels are high, relay based controls are already installed in low rad environments.
http://www.westinghousenuclear...
Here is one on the Oconee Reactor Protection digital system, other plants are in the process of planning protection system digital upgrades;
http://www.power-eng.com/artic...
In addition, many US plants have installed digital control rod drive control systems. Once again, those controls are not located inside containment. You can walk right up to them, as most all controls, while the plant is running full power.
You are still missing my point. Not all systems are the same, every grid has its unique requirements. There is no single 'grid leveling' set of requirements. Will Tesla batteries work for this use, yes, probably, but there could be a lot more significant challenges than you might expect. There is risk and Musk is the type of guy willing to sell something that is not fully baked yet.
It is 'part' of a reasonable way to measure size, but 100 MWh doesn't mean you can supply 100 MW of power. It might supply 10 MW for 10 hours. You need more info to know the capabilities.
“We’re moving to a point where a major attack like this is very, very possible,” Antova said. “Once you’re into the control systems -- and you can get into the control systems by hacking into the plant’s regular computer network -- then the basic security mechanisms you’d expect are simply not there.” - https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
The fact that he said 'the plant's regular computer network' tells of his ignorance to the architectures of nuclear station control networkS (not one), and then the isolated controls as well. This guy has never set foot in a nuclear plant. Also, he should be specific about which 'basic security measure' he claim are not there, because there are in reality many basic security measure "there". That's easy stuff to say when you want attention, and quite vague to evade criticism.
Hah, you call that bailing! Back in my day bailing meant a day in field behind a trailer. Now you snowflakes wanna lay around on the couch eating Doritos and call it bailing, well, maybe think about where those Doritos come from and get up off your asses and do something hard and rugged!
^actually, it wasn't even necessarily on the admin network at the plant offices, all we know it was the admin network of the company that owns the plant.
it's cheaper to have them internet accessible. That's the basic problem with nuclear power. It's perfectly safe if you take all necessary precautions. But sooner or later some small government types come in, convince everyone they can cut their taxes by being every so much more efficient as a private company, take over and find running a nuke plant is _hard_. Like, really hard; and finally they start cutting corners and running the plants longer than they're supposed to. Until you can convince upwards to 90% of the population that having a nuclear power plant run by the lowest bidder is a bad idea I'm gonna oppose nuclear.
First, they are not internet accessible. Not sure why you think they are other than gullible acceptance of a misleading headline. Furthermore, they are not run by the lowest bidder. But hey, maybe you could help write more misleading headlines, you seem to have the knack.
Its not a 100MW peak plant. They said 100 MWh, which is not fully clarified as to how that is rated. Plus, it only appears to have a 5-10 year life.
It also helps the headline hypers that the level of ignorance and fear due to massive mis-perception or risk of anything 'nuclear' or "radioactive' is high in the general population. Even many otherwise smart educated people tend to completely fail when quizzed on those risks.
That might be a valid thought if there were actually a nuclear plant attacked in this case, but there wasn't , just a completely misleading headline.
Headline says the power plants were targeted, summary says the companies were targeted.
The headline is BS. The Wolf Creek plant controls were not involved at all, just the corporate business network which is completely separate. The headline intentionally implies something that didn't happen.
This is the advantage of the vintage of the U.S. nuclear fleet. The vast majority of the control systems, and just about all if not all safety-related control systems are electromechanical. There's nothing digital.
There are plenty of digital controls in nuclear plants. Yes, there is also a lot of older relay technology as well, but plants have been upgrading controls for quite some time. Critical safety systems are still mostly non-digital because of difficult licensing process for upgrade to digital, but that is also changing.
Are the control systems at plants not isolated from the outside world?
If not, why not?
It seems obvious that they should be.
Yes, they are isolated. But articles like this tend to hint that plants are hacked when in reality only the corporate business lans are involved in the attacked, not the isolated control systems. But headlines aren't so exciting if they reflect reality.
AR isn't really a great experience when viewed through a cell phone screen. Once AR goggles and software are good enough we might see some 3D AR experiences that become compelling and take hold. But I'm not sure the market won't be more suited to utility than gaming. I can imagine lots of cool things, but it may all just wind up being more novelty.
Fascinating, Your engineers would have a short time on the job compared to the ones I've worked with. Yours is like the guy who drove around a lot of barriers and road closed signs to plunge off a bridge that was no longer there because his GPS told him to. http://www.nydailynews.com/new... . No, not everyone is like that.
I think you are misinterpreting my point. A Tesla engineer is not going to perform a detailed analysis of the Australian grid requirements unless he is directed to by the people that pay him. They actually have other stuff to work on, believe it or not. If you think that selling doesn't often happen before the required engineering in many cases, you haven't been around much.
I just don't see how this is any different than recording songs from the radio or recording shows on TV. It's perfectly legit.
Recording something you are receiving has generally been OK'd in the legal arena. Distributing that copy hasn't.
Anyone remembers the cassette tax?
That's exactly what I was thinking when I started reading your post. As I recall, it was proposed to be quite a large amount, like almost half the price. It would have increased the cost of those TDK Silver 6 packs I'd buy.
Indeed. It's effectively acting as a peaking plant. An extremely responsive one.
And an extremely expensive one
I agree it is semantics. But what will be delivered is a bunch of separate (multi cell & module) batteries with separate chargers in separate enclosures. Not one big battery assembly with one charger.
They actually used the term kilowatt hours? Something is very very off there.
Why is that? Kilowatt hours is how electrical energy use is billed (at least in Australia) and I just pulled out my last bill and can see I used around 2200 kWh for last quarter, so around 24 kWh per day so it's a convenient unit for comparison. Unless you're thinking of seeing batteries quotes in Ah which doesn't mean much without knowing the nominal voltage.
Batteries like this are typically sized and sold in 'amp-hours' along with a discharge time rating. Like you say, KWH means little on its own. Batteries require a number of other specs to tell you if it suits the purpose. For example, a battery might supply fewer KWH on a given charge with a faster discharge rate than a slower one.
instant power on tap.
That's my point. A certain discharge rate is determined by the grid requirements. Requirements that likely nobody had provided yet.
Also, would it be all that bad for Tesla if they were late? Imagine the headline, "Tesla gives away largest battery in the world!"
Then you have Mr. Musk with a big grin on his face on TV saying something like, "Yes, it's true.
Investors might not be happy when they are already bleeding capital.
A 9 volt battery is a group of cells in one enclosure. The Tesla product will be many batteries in many enclosures, and with separate chargers as well.
Well you better go tell Mr Musk! Some random guy on Slashdot can save the day again by giving all of the engineers and scientists working for him some really basic information that they no doubt have completely overlooked.
Actually I would not be surprised. Engineers will only look at something if assigned to do it. There actually have been similar mistakes made by battery product engineers in the past. Does Musk already have the requirements specification from the utility? I doubt it.
No, it is separate groups of cells in separate batteries. With separate chargers as well.