daz on Nostr: Understanding energy grids: When new developments such as industrial complexes and ...

Understanding energy grids:

When new developments such as industrial complexes and subdivisions are proposed a key component is their electrical supply.

Engineers involved in the design process will make many assumptions on the maximum demand expectation of the final installation.

Many assumptions are made at this stage of the design, often using a variety of design metrics.

Engineers then, being engineers, will add a safety margin to these estimated demand calculations to ensure they have enough headroom for error.

The situation they want to avoid is underestimating the expected demand.

Underestimating can lead to disastrous and expensive remediation works in the future.

Large installations will inevitably end up with at least one or multiple transformers, typically ground mounted for new subdivisions.

The developer will put in an application with the network provider stipulating the installation requirements to gain a cost for connection.

As the engineers have often over engineered their expected demand, this expected demand informs the rest of the design:
- The size of cables
- The maximum length of cable, which informs how many transformers are needed and their locations.
- The size of the transformers
- the number of LV circuits at each transformer.
- and the total expected billable demand.

The network operator then has to use this information to assess the connection point to see if there is enough capacity in the network to support the requested demand.

Each connection assessment is assessed from the substation supplying the electrons, through the feeder conductors/cables, accounting for existing demand, peak demand limits, alternate tie points and network contingency plans.

Network operators are often heavily regulated entities with rules around what they can and cannot charge in regard to electricity supply.

An internal design is completed with network upgrade estimates.

These designs and their associated network upgrade costs are run through an internal price-book to determine what percentage of the upgrade costs the applicant will need to pay.

If there is a “shared network benefit” in upgrading the backbone conductor, the applicant only contributes a portion of this cost. After all, why should they pay for a whole network upgrade, right?

They will also receive a discount based on projected future revenues? How much is the entity likely to receive based on their usage to help offset the initial cost of network upgrades? This also makes the cost of new connections affordable for new customers?

There are three evident flaws in this approach:
1. Engineers over design, therefore the designed upgrades to the network and costs incurred to the entity to provide the requested supply is often above and beyond what is needed.

2. Customer know how to cook the books. “Yes, that high powered motor will run at full load 24hrs a day 365days of the year”. Because if I know I get a discount on future expected revenue, I will overestimate my future usage. regardless if I actually do it. There is no follow up

3. These network upgrades are usually carried out before the customers expected commissioning date as supply is needed before they finish their subdivision. They’ve often only paid an application and initial connection charge due the reasons listed above…

..yet the entity has had to carry out the upgrades.

It is quite common for these projects to fail multiple times before finally proceeding to final build.

Sometimes the upgrades and expenses have already been realised to the entity. Sometimes these projects kick off again, sometimes they don’t. It is often years in between.

Grid operators would benefit greatly by integrating or partnering with operators of a fleet of portable flexible demand customers.

Customers that can mobilise within strategic parts of the network to soak up excess demand capacity that has been expensed to the network due to failed projects or over design.

Customers that can also turn off in the event that a significant network constraint exists. A faulty underground cable where we need to tie 2 feeders together but lack the network infrastructure to cater for the entire load of both feeders, we can ramp down our new flexible demand customers

Portable customers that can be installed at the new project site and create billable demand until projects are finished. They are then picked up and moved to the next location

Scalable demand customers that can soak up even the smallest excess capacity from as little as a kw right up to 10s of megawatts.

Such a customer sounds too good to be true. Surely such a customer doesn’t exist or it would be oversubscribed.

Such a customer does exist, they are called #bitcoin  miners.

It involves a paradigm shift for grid operators. But the realisation when it does occur will be a total game changer for how grids operate.

If you can obtain an audience with your local member of government, grid operator, utility engineer or other significant decision maker who needs to hear this message I would be more than happy to get involved in the conversation.

DMs open.