Electricity supply and powercuts

[JGHR]

Water pipes are a little less dangerous than 11kv cables,

 

11Kv cables, or any voltage cable for that matter, either under ground or overhead, do not present any risk which cannot be adequately managed. Indeed underground cables present a lesser degree of risk in that kids cannot fly kites into them, sailors cannot transport tall masted dinghys under them, and crane drivers cannot swing heavy loads into them.

 

From that, you say, then the cables would need to be buried away from the depths required for ploughing and fencing.

 

Well, yes, why would that be a deterrent to laying cables under ground? It is perfectly normal practice, indeed it is a statutory requirement in most modernised countries, to place under ground cables deeper than the depth of a ploughshare

 

Over the years, as the peat moves and breaths it may put pressure on the cable, or anything else buried in it. This can only increase the cost as well.

 

The tectonic plates are also shifting, do you also propose to stop all further development in, San Francisco, Japan, Iceland etc? Your reasoning here is nonsense.

 

I still doubt as to you being able to develop the land it is under. I would imagine that the costs would also be bumped up by land owners.

 

Underground cable routes can be, and are, selected to avoid areas where development is likely. The same argument can be applied to overhead cable routes, you cannot develop below them.

 

As some existing O/H routes would not be able due to bedrock and ice age detritus.

 

More nonsense. They can tunnel through the Alps, and under the English channel, they can also scrape out a cable track a few meters deep. They may choose to select an alternative route to avoid large areas of rock, but rock is not a prohibiting factor. Oh, neither is "ice age detritus"

 

It is always good to have an ideal, but as we know from the telecoms market, there was little interest from the cable companies to put in their green tubes with optical cables in Shetland. The cost to the shareholders has to be looked at as well, no matter your thoughts, they do exist. The money to invest in such a plan would probably have to be borrowed from another project or lender, would the investment really be a sound one to install a more, but not totally secure power system to a few thousand properties.

 

This is the only valid point you have made. Cost is the only reason the transmission network is above ground.

 

The other problem that may be encountered is the carbon costs. Cable production and the installation, including disturbing the peat, may be campaign points, as well as creating underground paths for water to travel faster than it would, increasing erosion, and putting the transmission network at risk.

 

The carbon cost associated with underground cables is much less than over head. Under ground cables do not require steel pylons to be manufactured or forests felled to create the cable support infrastructure.

[JGHR]

then there would be the Volt Drop on these additional lengths.

 

There needs to be a feasible answer to this.

 

 

Would you care to elaborate on your concerns with respect to "Volt Drop" and why you feel it is something which applies more so to cables installed underground. Perhaps I will be able to provide a feasible answer. Electrical engineers have managed to design around voltage drop for years. Just as they have with, reactance, harmonics, non linear loads and any number of other factors which must be considered.

[JustMe]

I assume that SSE will pay compesnation in Shetland as they have done so elsewhere

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150526842631159&id=365599791158

Just one issue with this. In common with other people living in sheltered accommodation in Shetland the council pay my (allegedly) subsidised electric bill and then charge me more than I paid the Hydro in my last home. In a power cut I would suffer but would I be able to claim compensation?.

I'm surprised that they can legally charge you more than the hydro charges them for the electricity you use - you should ask the council for compesnation to be deducted from your bill since it is you that has been inconvienced not the council.

Just to clarify things with my electricity I pay the council a fixed sum each week for "unlimited" electricity and although this is more than I paid the Hydro in my last place this house is harder to heat so I guess that if I do not use more than I pay for at the moment I will when I shake off the natural caution I had about using too much electricity when paying my own bill.

 

As an aside I wonder what "unlimited" might mean in real terms but I doubt if I will ever use enough electricity to find out.

[JustMe]

shetlandpeat wrote

It seems that nowadays, in the light of excessive reliance of electricity for entertainment, folk want the supply network to keep up, but without paying for it. The electricity company is a private business now, and has to be run as such. Again, share holders. I take it there are no shareholders who post here, or do they not want to say.

Speaking for myself but probably expressing the thoughts of many Shetland residents who suffer regular power cuts (not all of which happen in extreme weather) I would like to point out that I am forced to rely on electricity for lighting, heating, cooking, hot water and, in as much as the internet counts as this, communication. And I guess those with mobile phones also rely on electricity to charge the phone and to power the signal masts.

 

Companies like the Hydro make nice profits for their shareholders and, while it could be argued that electricity is an essential and should be supplied by a government company in the same way as Scottish Water operates, I am quite content for shareholders to make a profit from their shares.

 

That does not mean that I think Hydro/SSE should be able to avoid providing a more reliable service in the less profitable (or even loss making) parts of their system. Not 100% reliable. That is clearly something that would be unreasonable to expect but improving the system so that power cuts happen less often and are fixed quicker is possible and in the long run might even be cheaper for the Hydro.

[shetlandpeat]

Ah, pulled apart?

 

If a contractor or A N Other goes through a water pipe, water comes out, a 11kv cable..

 

 

No matter what safety precautions you put in some one may not know them, that was the point there.

 

I can understand 33/66 kV or 123kv and higher, mainly due to the cost of the cable to go through a used field. And you are right, we are trying to find a way to get a safer network at the right cost.

 

The installation of the cables would have to be away from any landslides that could possibly happen. We were talking of finding the most direct route to make it more possible to get the secured network on the Ilses. As you would have read, there are already fears raised about the way the cable may be installed. Peace of mind seems to be required here too. It was just a thought. Keep that in mind.

 

You can still use the land below an overhead, I have seen it and I am sure you have, as you will probably know, you will not be able to use underground cables in all cases, ----->>>>

 

keep in mind about the cost and trying to get a secure network to Shetland, these will probably be the times O/H are still used, because of the costs, as the more direct the route, the cheaper it may become to get, but you may have read too the comments about the amount of blasting required to fit a pole. Any diversion will add to the cost and of course, take longer for the shareholder to profit from.

 

Forrests, in Shetland? The wooden poles currently used would be fine and probably have been replaced with live trees with modern projects, I can imagine the uproar fitting your steel pylons when wooden ones have worked for so long. Cable manufacture involves all sorts of processes, I am sure you would notice the difference between a 500M drum of ariel conductor and a 500M drum of even single phase underground cable.

You would then need to dig a trench for the whole length of the buried cable route, to bury the cable.

 

Volt drop, for LV/HV networks it has to be considered, but we were talking about removing the more direct O/H network for one that may not be able to get to a remote area over the hills but an extended length to go around the roads, it was a thought, it happens in small factory layouts, when we did install these points for machines, we had to up the cable capacity, to lower the resistance so as to lower the V.D. it was the possibility of additional costs. Phase correction may be the answer in some cases, but is it really the cheaper option regarding powering up Grannies cooker? To top that, the pole mounted step down would now have to be enclosed in a secure building, along with any power factor correction device. Something else I just thought about. You would now need insulated OCBs and isolators, generally these are done with mineral oil to extinguish the arc and reduce size, their maintenance can take a wee bit longer.

 

Tunneling through Ronas Hill may put off shareholders from the investment, although you are correct in most of what you say, I was trying to keep it "local" that is exploring how the Utility company can be encouraged to install and finance such a network for all of Shetland so Shetland can have a secure network.

[George.]

As for cooking, I have never understood why they build houses without fire places for a real fire, considering the amount of cuts at this time of the year. Fires work outside too for cooking, perhaps a good ole Blazing Saddles campfire and bean fest.

 

I've got a beautiful fireplace here. Unfortunately, they blocked it off before I arrived so it's less use than a chocolate watch.

 

The question now is, "What complete fool took away the fireplace when the electricity supply is unreliable, leaving you cold and in the dark?"

 

Goodness, Hjaltland Housing Association Ltd do a form of job, don't they!!!

[JGHR]

Ah, pulled apart? <...... reams of waffling gobbledygook snipped......>

 

 

If you don't want your uttering "pulled apart" don't post a pile of ill informed junk on subjects about which you, quite clearly, have only a limited understanding at best.

[shetlandpeat]

I will keep that in mind, many thanx for your considered opinion. It is of great benefit.

 

Though ending on an insult tends to concentrate minds on the insult. well done. I take it your not a teacher, they would try to educate without ridicule. Everything is possible that I mentioned, and what you mentioned. To say it is not would be wrong. At least I took the time to address all your points. No doubt you will have something to say about that too.

 

I still have the same opinions, that, to encourage the network to be upgraded to a 100% safe network, the project would need to be carefully considered. Only replacing O/Hs that have a track record of failings and/or transient faults. You will still keep some O/Hs as the cost of blasting and cutting bed rock to a couple of metres would make the project more expensive.

 

In reality, I do not think anyone will build on mine or your specs. Though this is just a hypotenuses of thought which of course can be made smaller to incorporate the whims of the shareholder and the practicalities, if it ever happens. It really is all made up until it happens.

 

Here is a happy face

 

[stilldellin]

It is fairly obvious now with global warming kicking in that faults on the hydro overhead network in Shetland can only get worse, the more gales the more salt in the air resulting in more faults. It is only when the gales are accompanied by heavy rain that saves the day on many occasions.

The same problem used to be here in Shetland with the telegraph/telephone overhead lines. On many an occasion it was simply a case of waiting for the rain, however with high voltage hydro lines an " earth path " simply follows the salt path and " burns " its way to the ground taking the pole with it.

This is Shaetland !

[JGHR]

 

Though ending on an insult tends to concentrate minds on the insult. well done.

 

What is it that you find insulting?

 

 

I still have the same opinions, that, to encourage the network to be upgraded to a 100% safe network, the project would need to be carefully considered.

 

What exactly is unsafe about the network as it currently stands. The issue is with reliability not safety.

 

In reality, I do not think anyone will build on mine or your specs.

 

You are half right here, I very much doubt if anyone will build anything on your specification, however a great number of electrical construction projects have certainly been built or modified to meet my specification.

[shetlandpeat]

I have not provided any specs, really, a safe network does not just mean it ain't dangerous.

 

So, now, how would you then upgrade the networks, where I was thinking to provide a safe and or secure supply, which is what we were talking about, oooh so serious.

 

How would you convince someone to spend the millions required, but I would still use wood and not those metal things you seemed to think Shetlands upgrade requires.

 

All negative.... no +ves.

 

Should not be any as it is AC. Sine off.

[Ladylady]

deleted

[jps]

I assume that SSE will pay compesnation in Shetland as they have done so elsewhere

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150526842631159&id=365599791158

Just one issue with this. In common with other people living in sheltered accommodation in Shetland the council pay my (allegedly) subsidised electric bill and then charge me more than I paid the Hydro in my last home. In a power cut I would suffer but would I be able to claim compensation?.

 

Has anyone heard if there is compensation being offered for the powercut?

[stilldellin]

^ Spokesperson for the Hydro on radio Scotland tonight said they were looking at compensating any consumers with over 48 hour outages....

[George.]

Goodness, how generous of them