News & Discussion: Electricity Infrastructure

[Norman]

Is there any plan to install Tesla powerwalls or something similar at our mobile phone towers and other critical infrastructure?

Most critical infrastructure already has batteries and generators for backup. That includes hospitals and mobile phone towers.

[rev]

Is there any plan to install Tesla powerwalls or something similar at our mobile phone towers and other critical infrastructure?

Most critical infrastructure already has batteries and generators for backup. That includes hospitals and mobile phone towers.

Mobile phone tower backup power is limited at present. What is it 8 hours at most?
These tesla powerwalls or another brand could provide more up time. I read an article about a guy in California who had his power cut due to wild fire risks. He was able to maintain power for 42 hours with a tesla powerwall before power was restored from the grid, and the tesla unit still had 9% charge on it.

https://electrek.co/2018/11/05/tesla-shared-powerbank/

Check this out as well, over in WA.
A dollar a day to be part of a community shared storage solution. Instead of outlaying thousands for your own storage, and then god knows how much more for maintenance or repairs over the life of the unit. Maybe this is something local councils could offer.

[SBD]

Is there any plan to install Tesla powerwalls or something similar at our mobile phone towers and other critical infrastructure?

Most critical infrastructure already has batteries and generators for backup. That includes hospitals and mobile phone towers.

Mobile phone tower backup power is limited at present. What is it 8 hours at most?
These tesla powerwalls or another brand could provide more up time. I read an article about a guy in California who had his power cut due to wild fire risks. He was able to maintain power for 42 hours with a tesla powerwall before power was restored from the grid, and the tesla unit still had 9% charge on it.

https://electrek.co/2018/11/05/tesla-shared-powerbank/

Check this out as well, over in WA.
A dollar a day to be part of a community shared storage solution. Instead of outlaying thousands for your own storage, and then god knows how much more for maintenance or repairs over the life of the unit. Maybe this is something local councils could offer.

I guess the question is how much "we" are prepared to pay for acquisition and maintenance of local backup power for services, and how long those backups need to be able to operate before the grid is restored. The longer we want it to be able to operate without the grid, the more expensive the outlay and maintenance are. Major hospitals and the like have diesel generators, they can run for as long as someone can keep refilling the fuel tank. They also have higher overheads in maintenance to ensure that they start when they are needed.

Most phone towers provide cells that overlap (especially in metro areas), so longer than 8 hours of off-grid operation is only needed for the times when multiple towers could operational except for a lack of electricity (a storm blowing them over or direct sabotage isn't helped by batteries). It's hard for me to imagine that any mobile phone tower has had a history of being without electricity for more than 8 hours often enough to think that it is worth the cost of providing longer backup.

Improving the redundancy and robustness in the grid might be a better way of spending the money to provide for bigger outages. Considerations such as underground transmission lines, and redundant paths. How much do we want to spend on "gold plating" ?

[muzzamo]

It's hard for me to imagine that any mobile phone tower has had a history of being without electricity for more than 8 hours often enough to think that it is worth the cost of providing longer backup.

Some of the remote ones - I would say so - Think APY lands etc. Would take Telstra a fair while to get a tech out there.

[SBD]

It's hard for me to imagine that any mobile phone tower has had a history of being without electricity for more than 8 hours often enough to think that it is worth the cost of providing longer backup.

Some of the remote ones - I would say so - Think APY lands etc. Would take Telstra a fair while to get a tech out there.

They are not on the national/state grid anyway. Do mobile towers in the APY lands lose electricity any more often than the rest of the towns, or would investment be better directed at reinforcing the entire town's electricity supply? If I lived there, I think I would rather the government invest in making my air conditioner stay on than in making sure that I can use my mobile phone to ring someone to tell them the power has been off for more than 8 hours.

[Aidan]

I think it likely that old ones will keep their generators but some new ones will have batteries instead.

As for the length of outage they can stay up for, that will depend on the size of battery/fuel tank and the rate as which power is used. How long it works for a guy in California is totally irrelevant.

[zippySA]

I find the current debate on electricity infrastructure in this country fascinating. Seems the entire focus is on 100% reliability (i.e. available 100% of the time) - when in fact, even mission critical systems and those that plan and design them avoid 100% (absolutism). We don't seem to have any discussion about "what are we willing / truly need to pay for?". Excepting emergency and life support systems etc (which typically has n+1 or n+2 etc redundancy built-in anyways - I personally would be happy living as I did growing up - accepting that on peak periods (Feb heat waves) that load shedding will occur as it did through the 70/80's of my childhood - each district was shut for a short period, enabling the whole system to remain functional.

Given the new generations typically live on battery operated devices, and refridgerators and houses can survive 30min (including TV!) without power - shouldn't demand management be more of a topic? Why do we always need to "build more, build bigger, build better" when surely we can "be smarter, make more with what we have" - seems to me a longer term solution.

[Aidan]

I find the current debate on electricity infrastructure in this country fascinating. Seems the entire focus is on 100% reliability (i.e. available 100% of the time) - when in fact, even mission critical systems and those that plan and design them avoid 100% (absolutism). We don't seem to have any discussion about "what are we willing / truly need to pay for?".

We don't have anywhere near 100% reliability yet. Even if we never do, we should aim to reduce the unreliability by at least an order of magnitude. Blackouts are costly for businesses and annoying for residents.

Excepting emergency and life support systems etc (which typically has n+1 or n+2 etc redundancy built-in anyways - I personally would be happy living as I did growing up - accepting that on peak periods (Feb heat waves) that load shedding will occur as it did through the 70/80's of my childhood - each district was shut for a short period, enabling the whole system to remain functional.

I'm glad someone remember how unreliable it was back then — everyone else seems to have completely forgotten! Back in 1988 when I first came here, they seemed pretty common. But considering we have batteries now, we should be able to avoid load shedding except where there's a major technical fault.

Given the new generations typically live on battery operated devices, and refridgerators and houses can survive 30min (including TV!) without power - shouldn't demand management be more of a topic? Why do we always need to "build more, build bigger, build better" when surely we can "be smarter, make more with what we have" - seems to me a longer term solution.

Most NBN connections don't have battery backup. But LOAD SHEDDING IS NOT DEMAND MANAGEMENT (it's what happens when demand management fails). So yes, demand management should be used more - but not at the expense of reliability.

[rev]

It's hard for me to imagine that any mobile phone tower has had a history of being without electricity for more than 8 hours often enough to think that it is worth the cost of providing longer backup.

Some of the remote ones - I would say so - Think APY lands etc. Would take Telstra a fair while to get a tech out there.

Yeh that’s what I was sort of thinking of partly, for example if there was a bush fire and areas lose power. It’ll be days before power and other services are restored if there’s a really bad fire. They keep saying extreme weather and natural disasters will intensify and be more frequent, so shouldn’t we be preparing for the worst case?
What happens in Adelaide if another super cell with cyclonic conditions blows through like it did when the whole state was blacked out? Are we prepared to keep the power on? What if a bigger storm hits us? If they are correct and severe weather will become more extreme and frequent.

It’s the year 2018, we are almost into the second decade of the new century. Shouldn’t we expect in the 21st century for a small city like Adelaide that we will have the ability to keep the power on for several days if transmission lines are brought down or power stations knocked offline?

Those industrial Tesla storage units like the one in WA in the link I posted would be good? I’m sure they could make them bigger so a few hundred or thousand properties can be connected.

[rev]

I think it likely that old ones will keep their generators but some new ones will have batteries instead.

As for the length of outage they can stay up for, that will depend on the size of battery/fuel tank and the rate as which power is used. How long it works for a guy in California is totally irrelevant.

Well it is relevant in the sense that technology now exists to ensure power is maintained for several days, whereas our mobile phone towers have backup power for only 8 hours.

The whole system should have severa layers. Be it increased backup power at key sites like the towers, or as many homes if not all homes with their own power walls or communities connected to backup power like the WA example I posted.

The internet plays a big part in everyone’s daily lives now. It’s only going to become more relevant with the “internet of things”. If my house doesn’t have power, my phone should still be able to connect to the internet with 4G and soon 5G, so as to keep up to date as much as possible with events and getting relevant information out to people.

[SBD]

It's hard for me to imagine that any mobile phone tower has had a history of being without electricity for more than 8 hours often enough to think that it is worth the cost of providing longer backup.

Some of the remote ones - I would say so - Think APY lands etc. Would take Telstra a fair while to get a tech out there.

Yeh that’s what I was sort of thinking of partly, for example if there was a bush fire and areas lose power. It’ll be days before power and other services are restored if there’s a really bad fire. They keep saying extreme weather and natural disasters will intensify and be more frequent, so shouldn’t we be preparing for the worst case?
What happens in Adelaide if another super cell with cyclonic conditions blows through like it did when the whole state was blacked out? Are we prepared to keep the power on? What if a bigger storm hits us? If they are correct and severe weather will become more extreme and frequent.

It’s the year 2018, we are almost into the second decade of the new century. Shouldn’t we expect in the 21st century for a small city like Adelaide that we will have the ability to keep the power on for several days if transmission lines are brought down or power stations knocked offline?

Those industrial Tesla storage units like the one in WA in the link I posted would be good? I’m sure they could make them bigger so a few hundred or thousand properties can be connected.

I think we kind of agree...

My point is that if any of those wide-scale things happen, like a bush fire or storm taking out a significant quantity of infrastructure, then I think that it is somewhat arbitrary whether the mobile phone towers continue to function much after 8 hours. I don't know what the cost would be for the government to declare them to be "essential services" and fund for the phone towers to be equipped and maintained to provide 48 hours of off-grid operation. I don't know what it would cost to create more redundant transmission links to get power from generators by more routes, and I don't know what it would cost to put at least some of the key transmission lines underground where fires and storms can't reach them.

The storm a few years ago did not damage (much?) of the generation infrastructure of any kind (not even the wind turbines that I heard of), but it damaged some of the transmission network, and protective circuits tripped out to avoid electrical damage to the generators (including interconnectors). I suspect that putting a few more of those transmission lines underground might be a more cost-effective increase in reliability to the things that most customers care about than providing batteries and generators at each mobile phone tower. I remember shops complaining about having to throw out refrigerated and frozen food, the lights were off, and the lifts didn't work a lot more than I recall them complaining that their battery-powered 4g mobile data EFTPOS terminals couldn't connect to the network.

If we consider that the current system is not reliable enough, then let's focus on making changes that improve the situation the most, not just the one with the biggest headline. "five nines" reliability (available 99.999% of the time) means a system can be unavailable for a bit over 5 minutes per year. That is not enough to allow SAPN to fix a stobie pole after a truck hits it. If we relax the requirement to only providing 99.9% availability, then it can be over 8 hours per year unavailable. That's a LOT less on-call technicians we have to pay to sit round playing Candy Crush until something bad happens.

[Aidan]

If we consider that the current system is not reliable enough, then let's focus on making changes that improve the situation the most, not just the one with the biggest headline. "five nines" reliability (available 99.999% of the time) means a system can be unavailable for a bit over 5 minutes per year. That is not enough to allow SAPN to fix a stobie pole after a truck hits it. If we relax the requirement to only providing 99.9% availability, then it can be over 8 hours per year unavailable. That's a LOT less on-call technicians we have to pay to sit round playing Candy Crush until something bad happens.

Are you referring to minimum reliability? Or average reliability? It makes a very big difference! Also, does it include scheduled outages? Or is it unscheduled only?

[SBD]

If we consider that the current system is not reliable enough, then let's focus on making changes that improve the situation the most, not just the one with the biggest headline. "five nines" reliability (available 99.999% of the time) means a system can be unavailable for a bit over 5 minutes per year. That is not enough to allow SAPN to fix a stobie pole after a truck hits it. If we relax the requirement to only providing 99.9% availability, then it can be over 8 hours per year unavailable. That's a LOT less on-call technicians we have to pay to sit round playing Candy Crush until something bad happens.

Are you referring to minimum reliability? Or average reliability? It makes a very big difference! Also, does it include scheduled outages? Or is it unscheduled only?

The way people carry on in newspaper comments and even in this forum gives the idea they expect five-nines availability for every customer, including scheduled outages! But they want it at the cost of a couple of blokes in a ute going down to Mitre 10 to pick up a bit of wire or gaffer tape to fix the problem.

[PeFe]

Now a Canadian battery manufacturer is setting up in South Australia (following a Chinese company doing the same thing)
The South Australian's government battery subsidy scheme has been the catalyst for that.

Hopefully the Canadians and Chinese will follow the Sonnen example of making Adelaide the headquarters for the Asia/Pacific region of their companies (well maybe not the Chinese comapny)

I have tried to find out more details of these developments but it is hard to get behind the News Corp/Advertiser pay wall.

From Mirage News

Canadian battery developer switches on in Adelaide

Canadian energy storage firm Eguana Technologies is the latest global innovator to invest in South Australia’s booming battery sector under the Marshall Liberal Government’s Home Battery Scheme.

The $12 million investment will see the company, in partnership with its partner company LG, assemble and manufacture its cutting-edge Evolve home energy storage system here in Adelaide, creating up to 200 new jobs over the next three years.

Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment David Ridgway said it’s another major coup for South Australia and comes on the back of German energy storage giant sonnen and Chinese battery manufacturer Alpha-ESS committing to manufacture and assemble their batteries in Adelaide.

“I’m pleased to welcome Eguana as the latest international company to invest in South Australia,” said Minister Ridgway.

“Based in Calgary, Eguana Technologies designs and manufactures high performance residential and commercial storage systems, so to be able to bring their skills and technology to South Australia is a significant win.

Ful article : https://www.miragenews.com/canadian-bat ... -adelaide/

And an article about the Chinese battery manufacturer.

https://www.pv-magazine-australia.com/2 ... me-scheme/

[Llessur2002]

I have tried to find out more details of these developments but it is hard to get behind the News Corp/Advertiser pay wall.

Solar home battery firm Eguana to set up in Adelaide, bringing 200 jobs

Canadian energy storage company Eguana Technologies is coming to Adelaide with plans to create 200 jobs, as it aims to capitalise on the State Government’s home battery scheme.

Eguana estimates its $12 million investment to assemble and manufacture its battery and storage system, Evolve, in SA will deliver the jobs boost over three years.

The company is one of three from which South Australians can purchase subsidised batteries until an exclusivity deal ends on December 31. The others are global giant Sonnen and Chinese firm Alpha ESS.

The Government’s $100 million home battery scheme provides grants of up to $6000 for 40,000 households to purchase batteries. Additional low interest loans are available for buying batteries and solar panels.

Eguana spokesman Brent Harris said SA’s requirement for smart batteries was the “first of its kind” and the company was pleased to be setting up in the state.

Trade and Tourism Minister David Ridgway said it was a “major coup” for SA to attract another leading international battery manufacturer.

“Based in Calgary, Eguana Technologies designs and manufactures high performance residential and commercial storage systems, so to be able to bring their skills and technology to South Australia is a significant win,” he said.

“Since we announced the Home Battery Scheme, we’ve had fantastic global leaders such as Eguana knocking on our door to be a part of the largest rollout of home batteries in the world.”

From: https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sou ... 8a0838fdfe