New work in Power gen/transmission?

Date 08-15-2003 17:51

SSBN727

I agree partly with your comments concerning that only a few will profit from the oil. I feel what is neccessary is for governments around the world, to put more emphasis on developing new cleaner technologies to produce and store electricity. However, oil and automobile companies are BIG supporters of the ruling political parties. It is an uphill battle to make real changes.
There is so much energy that the planet provides in the form of solar , wind and tidal. I feel all the money and tax breaks given to oil companies should be invested in these Clean technologies. If humans are capable of putting men on the moon, they certainly have the smarts to harness these other technologies.

well that's my 2 cents worth.

Colin : )

By colins

Date 08-15-2003 18:00

Hi its colin again. I have a question for you SSBN727, your forum name "SSBN727" that refers to a submarine, correct ? Did you serve on this ship, and it what capacity, were you in charge of the boilers or the reactors ?

I do not mean to pry, i am just curious .
If you do not want to tell, that's cool.

Colin : )

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 08-15-2003 19:42

Hello Colins!

To answer your question posed to me about whether or not I served on the U.S.S. Michigan (SSBN727), the answer is no but, Myself and other shipyard workers helped to build this submarine, although I spent alot of time being "borrowed" on alot of the Los Angeles (688) Attack class subs that were in different stages of construction...

Prior to this experience, I did serve in the US Navy on some of the older submarines, and some of the first Los angeles class submarines as an "HT" (Hull technician)... SSBN = Sub Ship Ballistic Nuclear, 727= second of it's class...
SSBN726 (USS OHIO) was the first of it's class, and I worked on that one also!!!
As far as the type of work I performed, well -let's just say that I did a variety tasks, and I'll leave it at that...

As far as the replies for this post is concerned, KEEP-EM COMING!!!!!
I welcome all of the different and opposing views as well as the views that are basically the same...

Respectfully,

SSBN727 Run Silent (although this time I'm LOUD) ... Run Deep!!!!!!!

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 08-15-2003 18:45

Big big topic; You bet your topic rates at the top. Its hard to know what to address tho.

However, lemme say this about that.. you said;

" this nation's ENERGY Department is'nt "REALLY" adressing this problem as it should?"

A national energy department is the problem. Socialisim always fails. The nation did just fine for power before the Energy department was "invented" in the 1970s. The debacle is similar in many aspects to HUD. America was able to build cities (big ones) before the Agency for Housing and Urban Development was created in the 1960s. Capitalistic interests that would and could produce cleaner power are hamstrung by clowns who demand clean emissions that are beyond current technology. Have a look at what Prof. Walter Williams has to say http://www.townhall.com/columnists/walterwilliams/ww20030723.shtml

America leads the world in clean power and clean production. period. Clean means efficient. and efficient means profitable. If the government would keep a hands off attitude (its a dream, they are too entrinched) Power production and manufacturing would produce efficiently or be overtaken by those who do. Capitalisim works. I feel power production and manufacturing are synonomous in many ways, here is an eye opener. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/brucebartlett/bb20030814.shtml

California's energy deregulation failed because their was no deregulation. Clean nuclear power? Forget it in the golden state. Energy producers cannot build in such a restrictive climate.

No one has conspired to hide the secret patent for the effecient seperation of water. I don't subscribe to the "evil corperation" theories. The top universities are all very open about Hydrogen and fuel cell research, and while it would be nice to have a stainless fuel tank we filled with water... that day is long in the future

Lastly, we are in Iraq to kill terrorists. They will continue to sell their oil to France, Germany and Russia as they have for the past decade. The profits from that alone will Build Iraq (not rebuild, for it was never destroyed). Iraq has emmence natural resources and can sustain itself. We did not destroy the nation. We did not bomb Iraq or Afganastan to the stone age. Cities are hardly scratched. What ever physical infrastructure those two nations had before we invaded---they still have. I also hope we get outta there soon, and outta Saudi and Outta Germany and Korea.. At least for the most part.

North for the Oil I say. for now it can be gotten cleanly and without mangling the environment.. Let's just get busy and lay the pipe!

Woooh that was a ramble..

enjoy

Lawrence

By MBSims

Date 08-15-2003 19:15

This is an interesting topic for a welding forum. But since you need electricity to weld and welding is what keeps us employed, it is definitely within the scope of the forum.

I can't see where the Energy Department has any real authority to make things happen, like building new plants or transmission lines. The whole system is kind of hamstrung by the way it's been set up. The power companies have federal regulations they must meet with regard to transmission and generation. These are controlled by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). But, new transmission lines or generation plants cost money, and utilities must borrow that money. But, they are not always guaranteed they can recover their cost because the individual state public utility commissions (PUC) must approve the recovery of that cost in the electricity rates. The PUC also regulates the return on equity (or profit) that a publicly owned utility may receive. Anything over that return gets returned to the customers. And the banks don't want to lend money to build new capacity if the PUC is not likely to permit the utility to recover the cost. Under those circumstances the interest rate gets increased to cover the risk and that makes it harder for the utility to justify the expense. It's a revolving door that has no way out.

So, the utilities get caught in the middle between state regulators who want to control electricity costs, and federal regulators who want to ensure a reliable source of electricity. An usually, it's the utility who gets blamed when there is not enough power, not the regulators. However, it appears that California Gov. Davis may pay for the state regulators role in their energy crisis.

Marty

By dee

Date 08-15-2003 21:44

Marty,

Everything I try to say sounds like it's coming from a crack-pot.
In my experience, the nature of systems and infrastructure of our country are determined four or five decades before they start to become recognizable reality, and those in a position to know are rarely in a position to discuss it. It's a little scary when we hold a short-sighted view on national events in an international economy where our leaders and legislators are taking profit from foriegn interests, and I doubt if money like Ted Turner, or even Bill Gates, is troubled by it.

How to put things back right probably includes taking a long view, driving far ahead of the vehicle, playing the other man's pieces more turns into the game, or however you would describe paying close attention to the implications of our actions and policy.

What I see is encouragement to create our own power on-site, soon, or sooner yet. I believe we all might realize a strategic advantage, perhaps, and maybe even some economy from abandoning the vulnerability and inefficiency of the [antiquated] transmission system. The FERC & PUC and guberment in general have certainly created the need and motivation for such.
Perhaps I give engineers too much credit for intelligence... I'd say we're in the dawn of the wireless age, and "thats-that"... they know what they've built and how it will perform under accurate projected rates of consumption, or else I'm wrong.

And as for fighting terrorists, Lawrence, thats a roger. Saddam violated his parole when he abandoned the terms of the peace treaty from his invasion of Kuwait... where's the confusion and debate?

Well, fellas, I havn't changed the world yet so...
regards
d

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 08-15-2003 20:45

Hello Again Lawrence!
Your comments are interesting to say the least...
I agree with alot of what you said...

However, I want to know when will the american people see that we're getting a (ROI) return on our investment!!!

I ask this because, we cannot replace all of those who paid with the ultimate sacrifice!!! Nor can we spend ourselves to the point of such an increased deficit that our successor's to this great nation, will have to work, and sacrifice sooo hard in order to reduce it, if they can...
I also ask this because when one asks anybody that's supposed to know the "PLAN" for Iraq in the so-called post-war era, nobody that should know what the "PLANS" are, is willing to SPECIFICALLY, and in DETAIL, lay out those "PLANS" to the American people!!!
The same goes for the plans or policies with regards to our nation's future energy needs, and how both the utilities, and government are going to meet these needs...

Information Technology grew because of the developing need for the growth of this industry, why ca'nt we do the same for the energy industry???

Just look at the impact it'll do for the economy if we have all of those future tradespeople, technicians, and engineers comfortable in knowing that they will be working to increase the efficiency, and reliabilty of our energy producing, and delivery systems... Just think about all of those people finding new jobs in this undertaking!!!

If the PUC's are the ones that are standing in the way of progress then let's tell our elected officials that we wo'nt stand for it!!!

My Grandmother who was from Cuba, used to say to me: "It does'nt cost you anything to dream" may she rest in peace!!!
I truely believe that, and I also believe if we put in the best effort possible, we can surely make our dreams become a reality!!!

I do'nt think that this is a "Utopian" concept at all! I too do'nt believe in socialism for it has proven itself not to work...
However, I do believe in public/private partnerships especially in this vital matter...

I just wish that when both the government and the industries (Corporate America) says they're going to do something about whatever the problem may be, they really do something about the problem!!!

Anyway, I'll defer myself from any more comments because after all, I started this post to read about your opinions, and views about this critical issue...

Respectfully,

SSBN727 Run Silent... Run Deep!!!

By dee

Date 08-15-2003 23:02

ssbn
I learned in the military that there are two subjects best avoided... politics and women... but it's great that we can talk about politics freely in this country, even after we're married. (now THAT'S a scary thought!)

Public education was what might have been, at the time the concept was begun, (by DeWitt Clinton, I believe) described as an innovation...our constitutional provision for the "common good" is somewhat less than precise when compared to its intent for "national defense". If there's anything to justify a deficit it probably isnt medicaire prescription plans, space exploration, transportation, education, wellfare, medical care, or clean air as much as it is protecting Americans from outside threats... and we'll remain free only as long as we're willing to pay the price for it. Is there disagreement over the value of the merchandise, or the bargaining process? The price hasn't changed in over 200 years.

Finally, industry itself can, and does, do a superior job training workers to meet their standards.

Anyway, it's allways interesting to read what you have to say. I look forward to posts from experienced people such as you who seem to know what they're doing. I have great respect for your knowledge and your opinion. This was just my humble O as food for thought. Be advised, if nominated I will not accept, if elected I will not serve... the only thing I'm running for is the door 'soon as I get off the soapbox.

regards
d

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 08-18-2003 15:06

SSBN,

Regarding ROI, (return on investment). When it comes to the situations involving military action overseas in the last decade. I can't see one. to be blunt, thats why they call it sacrifice. I'm glad I'm not in the position to weigh the lives of American soldiers against the lives of forign nationals who would die if a monster is left in power.

I like your grammys idea of dreaming. One of mine is that those nations we have been involved with militarily will somehow find a way to govern themselves with autonomy (without us) and in such a way as to avoid the genocidal activities so common in the region.

Information technology grew out of peoples garages and continues to grow in "geeks" laptops. However, one cannot develop an Clean Nuclear plant in ones garage, High power lines are feared to make tumors blossom from folks heads so we cant have any more of those either. I guess we can dream of somebody actually developing cold fusion in a garage, but I'm not holding my breath.

I agree we need to persuade those in elected authority to do the will of the public or make them walk the political plank. Unfortunatly when things go wrong politicians have a great talent for putting up smoke screens. Here is a relevant example. Bush-Enron, the term Bush-Enron is a new addition to our lexicon, seen in newspapers and protest signs. Well the fact of the matter is that the CEO of Enron did indeed pay for two presidential inaguration galas and slept many nights in the Lincoln bedroom. The only thing that makes this information provocative is that it was all done for President Clinton, during his watch! Misdirection when things go wrong is nothing new, and unless the public is wary its hard to know who is responcible for anything and therefore difficult to know whose arms need twisting.

I do think the balence between environmental stewardship and progress in energy and industry is a very hard one to strike. Both sides have valid concerns.

Great Discussion.

Lawrence

By dee

Date 08-19-2003 05:38

Lawrence,
A word about cancer's link to high power lines. Seems the last I heard there was a link associated with downwind populations of people, somewhat like nucular fall-out... the suggestion being the ionization, like air-cleaners advertised on TV, causes particles to cling to opposite charged objects, such as home furnishings where they can be cleaned, or human respiriatory tissue, where they can tenaciously cling, be absorbed, and cause trouble.
The thought is there are carcinogenic particles all around us, and over time the human body has developed a relatively effective means of dealing with particulates under normal circumstances; unfortunately the ionization of these particles puts the body's systems at some kind of disadvantage.

A university (or college, I cannot be precise) is continuing a study on the theory. What I do know about it is the statistics do seem to link cancer to weather patterns around the power lines... it's a fact that it was reported some time ago, but I dont know the university involved in the study, nor do I know the disposition, but it may be a phenomenon we all might want to keep in mind...

regards,
d

By MBlaha

Date 08-19-2003 11:40

Very good question SSBN. While I hate to be a Mr. agreeable, I have to agree with you on all aspects of this topic. This question is realy quite intense and it will be on my mind all day long now. I am going to ponder the thoughts you have raised to the surface and will respond tomorrow.

Thanks for giving me a great amount to think about.

Mike

By Niekie3 (***)

Date 08-19-2003 17:26

Hi ssbn

Being from South Africa, I have merely been watching this post with interest, rather than becoming involved. Having thought about it though, I thought that maybe I could say something about our situation regarding electrical utilities and compare it to yours. There may be some value?

We also have power failures, but they are typically limited to single suburbs within large cities, or entire towns. I can not remember ever experiencing a power failure that affected an entire "large" city, and certainly never an entire state (we call them provinces) or half the coutry!

Does this mean that we have a better electrical infrastructure or technical people than the USA? I believe not. The significant difference is that we have a centralised electricity supply utility. (ESCOM) It is a parastatal that supplies the electricity to everyone on a national grid. It also supplies electricity to neighbouring states.

I know that from a "free market" perspective this is bad news, but maybe from a reliability perspective it is not so bad to have a single organisation with a single set of standards and ways of doing things.

Just to address the "free market" issues, I can say that SA has some of the lowest cost power in the world. Mostly coming from coal powered stations. (We also have a single nuclear station and a number of hydro stations.) They have been talking of privatizing ESCOM, to address the whole free market issue. Personally I am not sure if moving from a state owned monopoly to a private monopoly makes much sense, but it is all part of the politics.

In summary, I believe that in a large integrated system that does not get managed centrally, as is the case of the utilities in the USA, there are too many variables to ensure high reliability. I do not believe that upgrading equipment is the real answer. (Although it may help.) Rather, there needs to be a re-think about the control structures.

Maybe some people from other countries can give us feedback on how their systems operate and the success, or otherwise, of their power utilities.

Regards
Niekie Jooste
Fabristruct Solutions

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 08-19-2003 19:57

Hello Niekie!

Very interesting observations!!! Thanks for your input!!!
South Africa's system sounds alot like the Texas grid...

In a country as vast as the United States is, one would wonder why out of the fifty states that make up this great land of ours, only one of those states has their own "Electrican Grid" for the most part... Our current president so eloquently articulated those two words on his ranch during the first day of North America's Largest Power Failure!!!

Yeah, I know I'll get some flak about the above paraphrasing but, hey!
All of the media, both liberal, and conservative covered the presidents comments that day!!! I'm merely repeating a small portion of it...

We do have to discuss this issue of great importance to all of us because of the work we do!!! I mean, just think about not improving our current system as far as reliability, and capacity is concerned!!!
If we do'nt improve our current system, just think of the rest of the manufacturing jobs this country will lose because, another country or countries will be able to facilitate the cheap, reliable, and ever growing capacity to companies that are searching for that kind of environment to work in!!!

Respectfully,

SSBN727 Run Silent... Run Deep!!!

By dee

Date 08-24-2003 08:57

SSBN
Its not the cost of power but the availability of it which should be the major issue... the cost of labor, consumables, and power, in that order, typically add up to the cost-per-pound of filler deposited on a weld job... labor is the oerwhelming commodity pricng the US out of competition with developing countries. I'm not really sure the size of SA electricial grid compares to the logistical issues, complexity, and size of ours, but it's something to look into... and unless we're carefull, the cost of the plant facility itself may easily climb to #2 in the formula.

Don' lets go overboard in overreaction and fix it too good. The top of the "Cost vs Effect" curve should be the target.
regards
d

By BillC

Date 08-19-2003 18:34

Great topic. I think that we already have the technology to become largely energy independent, at least as far as electricity. The US Navy has many nuclear power plants floating on and under the ocean that are safe and reliable. I envision a grid of these small nuclear power generators throughout America. Kind of like the internet, a redundant, mulit-path source of electricity.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 08-19-2003 19:23

Hello Bill C.

The emerging fuel cell technologies are pretty impressive too!!!
Deploying these independant distributed power sources coupled with solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, and other forms of energy systems including the very safe and reliable US Navy designed Nuclear power plants will definitely get us off our dependency of imported oil!!!

ALL we need is the will to implement and deploy these technologies on a "Manhattan Project" level, once and for all!!! What we do'nt need is alot of talking (I'm guilty as charged) or fighting (special interests or going to war) about it!!!

Even the environmentalists need electricity to make, and type their speeches, and hold their press conferences or to call the politicians!!!
Hey wait a minute! So do these politicians for that matter!!! What a concept!!!

Whoops there I go again!!! I'll try to stay neutral on this thread but, I guess for myself, that must be wishful thinking...

Respectfully,

SSBN727 Run Silent... Run Deep!!!

By boilermaker (**)

Date 08-21-2003 15:06

My two cents....SSBN, I agree with everything you have said so far, and want to add something else... The other night when this all unfolded, I was listening to the news, traffic, and weather station, WBBM, Chicago...They had a so called "expert" on power transmission and so-on and she said the weirdest thing...In short, she eluded that nuclear plants were the most vunerable because they need the electricity coming in to operate. Well she was partly right. When nuclear units are shut down, they do need the incoming electricity for shutdown cooling, fuel pool cooling and reactivity control devices, but when they are running they turn some of the outgoing power around no farther than 100 yards from the generator and bring it right back in to run everything..The chances that any Nuclear Utility had a unit offline for any reason other than a turbine or reactor trip is highly doubtful..Noone refuels a reactor in the summer! Most people know that you have to be able to send the power somewhere, but that's why nuclear units are able to be put on a "hot standby", which means they are still fissioning, but the generator doesn't have to be synched to the grid to supply. I firmly believe that nuclear power is the way to go, but extremely cost prohibitive in this day and age of governmental regulation. I live in a state that has 11 operating reactors and 3 shutdown and being mothballed...That's a total of 7 nuclear facilities. I think that the public of Illinois wouldn't go for another reactor, even though eventually everyone will need more power. Utilities don't want to spend money on transmission, but somewhere, someone has to come up with the capital to help utilities out..IE..The Federal Government.
Respecfully, JW

By MBSims

Date 08-21-2003 22:29

The "expert" was right, but I don't think she conveyed the whole story. Each nuclear site does need incoming power to startup and function during maintenance/refueling outages, but they all have a backup source in case there is a loss of offsite power. Usually they use several redundant marine-type diesel generators that must start up and carry a load in a matter of seconds. Some also use gas turbine generator units. There are also battery systems that are used to achieve safe shutdown if there is no power source at all. And there are backup supplies for the backup supplies. Also, reactivity is controlled by cooling water flow in addition to the control rods, so a loss of power to the coolant pumps reduces reactivity and the control rods are automatically inserted to achieve complete shutdown. So, while the backup systems are challenged by a loss of offsite power, I wouldn't say the nukes are "vulnerable".

Marty

By dee

Date 08-24-2003 09:06

Marty,
I tend to share your reaction to the description, but I gotta add that the hand writing is on the wall... nukes are history... on account of the sensitivity of the waste. ESPN TV has the system at their studios (a guy in the basement on a bycycle powered generator) which, if we're not carefull, we'll all be employing soon.
d