NERC 2023-2024 Winter Reliability Assessment

[mikesim]

The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) has released their winter reliability assessment. As our electrical grid becomes increasingly challenged by age, consumption and the changes in dispatchable power sources it depicts the likelihood of power shortages during the winter heating season. As you glance through the report, you can indentify the area where you live and see how robust your power generation capacity is. Also, you can see how reliant your area is on dispatchable fossil fuel generation and how difficult it will be to replace these sources with renewable resources in the time frame promised by the politicians. You will find particular illuminating the Variable Energy Resources chart on page 43. It depicts the expected power output of the three major renewable sources wind, solar and hydro vs their "nameplate" power output. Nameplate output being the maximum output under ideal conditions vs expected or real world output. As an example. my assessment area is SERC-Central. In this area, the nameplate output of installed wind turbines is 28MW while the expected output is 8MW or 28%. The nameplate output of installed solar is 774MW while the expected output is 230MW or 38%. The nameplate output of installed hydro is 4967MW while the expected output is 3315MW or 67%. Find your area and see where you stand.

Report (nerc.com)


Mike

 

[ARKNT]

So far I am fairly pleased with electrical power stuff here. For instance, I sure get more bang for my buck on my electric bill than TV, phone, etc.
Of course, reliability is everything. A power outage changes a person's mind pretty fast. Esp in deep cold or hot, steamy summer.

Arknt

 

[dnktng]

You linked last years WRA. I think this is what you wanted to link for the 2023-2024 WRA.

The nameplate output of installed hydro is 4967MW while the expected output is 3315MW or 67%

The term for this seems to be similar to Capacity Factor. Every generation station has a Capacity Factor for a given time. For example, if a generating station has the Max (Nameplate) output of 1000MW and it makes 1000MW all year it has a capacity factor of 100%. If it ran at 1000MW but for only 1/2 the year it 50%. If it ran at 500MW for the whole year it would also be 50%.

Nukes generally run full load for long periods and generally have the highest Capacity Factor. Wind and Solar may have a nameplate of 1000MW but can only do that when the wind blows or sun shines, so it's almost impossible for a 1000MW nameplated solar or wind generation unit to achieve a 50% Capacity Factor for an entire year. There are sunny and windy seasons, and then there are not so sunny and not so windy seasons.

If you wanted to replace a 1000MW coal plant with wind you would likely need about 2000-2500MW nameplated wind generation to achieve an equivalent MW output for the year onto the grid, and you only get power when it's blowing, not when it's needed, and that is not the same thing. Add some batteries, then we're getting somewhere.

 

[rc_heli_nut]

I can't even recall last time there was an outage here in northern IL. Most of the power in the region I live comes from the nuclear facility in Byron, IL. But there's new solar farms and wind turbine projects popping up all over area. Can't complain at all.

 

[mikesim]

You linked last years WRA. I think this is what you wanted to link for the 2023-2024 WRA.

Durn! I read the report earlier on my phone and then when I wanted to link it to my post here on my PC I wasn't paying to close attention, mea culpa. Thanks, I fixed it.

Mike

 

[RedLdr1]

I see my region, SERC-SE, is still using coal for over 20% of it power needs. With the two new reactors coming on line at Plant Vogtle in theory that number should go down.

I do know everyone's electric bill is going up at least 10 percent a month to pay for the projects cost over runs, $20 Billion dollars, building the damn things. Georgia Power could screw up a bowl of corn flakes and the federal and state agencies let those clowns finish building the reactors after GE, the prime contractor, quit during the project. See Here if you want to read a story of corporate gross incompetence and political "good old boy" backroom deals. By the way there are no new nuclear plants under consideration in the USA currently due to the issues with this one.

 

[Yoda]

The New Mexico Public Regulation Commission is not allowed by law to take into consideration any “renewable” power sources when determining base load generation capacity.

Sensibly so.

The sun doesn’t shine 24 hours a day, and the wind doesn’t always blow.
Yet, every power consumer EXPECTS that the power will flow to their home 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Without fail.

Therefore, the PRC only considers coal, natural gas and nuclear generation when meeting the base load of the state. Renewables just aren’t reliable enough.

 

[Yoda]

Interestingly, living in a very remote area served by a rural electric COOP, we have a less than reliable source of juice. Especially in the winter.
During last week’s 8 inch snowstorm, our 20 kw Cummins LP genset ran for 25 hours while the utility searched for and repaired the downed power lines. Kept everything humming.
Of course, we heat with wood, so not going to get cold anyway.

 

[mikesim]

The New Mexico Public Regulation Commission is not allowed by law to take into consideration any “renewable” power sources when determining base load generation capacity.

Sensibly so.

The sun doesn’t shine 24 hours a day, and the wind doesn’t always blow.
Yet, every power consumer EXPECTS that the power will flow to their home 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Without fail.

Therefore, the PRC only considers coal, natural gas and nuclear generation when meeting the base load of the state. Renewables just aren’t reliable enough.

This is a very sensible and realisitic approach that all regulators should emulate.

Mike

 

[RedLdr1]

This is a very sensible and realisitic approach that all regulators should emulate.

Not a bad list at all. But they can go ahead and remove nuclear from the list as it is not financially viable. And getting past all the NIMBY and ecological issues to build one will make a lot of lawyers richer. They are already dealing with those issues with the nuclear waste site they to build.