Modern Solutions Power Systems Conference Notes
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6, 2012
WELCOME AND CONFERENCE OPENING
Opening Presentation – Ed Schweitzer
Schweitzer talked about how in the golden age of utilities, there were probably three safe things to do
with your money that had little risk of loss–store it under your mattress, invest it in government bonds,
or buy utility stocks. Recently, he called Northern Trust Bank, a respected Chicago institution just blocks
from where we were, and asked what advice they would have for an investor regarding utility stocks
today. They said that utility stocks should be “significantly underweighted” in someone’s portfolio.
Schweitzer expressed concern for financing of projects, for the ability of utilities to raise needed capital,
and discussed many reasons for why it’s hard for them to raise capital, why they are not viewed as a
solid investment (one of which is uncertainty in government regulations).
His talk started with describing Samuel Insull’s work and philosophies, which were fundamental to
centralized power stations, diversified load, funding and financing a capital intensive industry, and the
need for a regulated monopoly as the most efficient societal cost-benefit balance.
Schweitzer’s talk was full of vivid, practical analogies and examples. For example, it takes about one 8 oz
cup of oil or coal to make 1 kilowatt hour of power for about 10 cents. About 16 60-Watt light bulbs
turned on for one hour would use 1kW/hr. Everyone can understand that. He was speaking to how
remarkably efficient and cost effective, electric power is, and that is why it is so fundamentally
necessary to society.
He emphasized, similar to Robert Bryce on Wednesday, that where there was reliable and affordable
electric power; there was economic development, prosperity, and growth.
How did things get messed up? Schweitzer talked about FERC Order 888, the de- or re-regulation of the
utility business, the splitting of generation, transmission, and distribution assets. He used a quote of
Adam Smith’s, “…the interested sophistry of merchants…” Self-interest, greed, and special interests
have led to many things that have eroded our industry (be it deregulation, renewable mandates, etc.).
He commented that he was a free market advocate. Interesting that if we believe so strongly in free,
open, and fair markets, WHY did regional franchises work so well, continue to drive prices down, provide
the most reliable electric power grid in the world? One reason was Insull’s advocacy of constant
downward pressure on price. Not through competition, but through efficiency, economies of scale, and
regulation.
One very thought-provoking point he made…in most smart grid projects today, a utility will install a
“smart meter” and/or provide emails, tweets, text messages, and website reminders hours in advance
that tell them of real-time price discounts, request them to change their demand or consumption, etc.
1
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
For example, I may receive a text message saying to not use power from 2 to 7 p.m., that the rate will be
more, so that would lead me to run the pool pump later, turn the thermostat up, defer clothes drying
until late at night, etc. Schweitzer asked the question, do we really want to manage, from our smart
phone, a 20 cent per hour commodity? That was a very eye-opening image for me. I checked my bill
when I got home. In the summer months, our electric bill may be as much as $180/month. That’s
$6/day, or $0.25 per hour. A quarter per hour—for reliable power, anytime and in any quantity I need.
Now let’s say I defer a load of clothes, etc. Maybe I save 20%? We’re talking about one nickel for about
a 5 hour period . . . I’ve saved a quarter that day. How much time, effort did that take? How much did I
have to change my habits, my schedule, etc.?
Schweitzer brought us back to the beginnings of the industry . . . a brilliant marketing campaign in the
1950s and 1960s that personified the industry’s customer service with Ready Kilowatt. “…I’m always
there, with power to spare, I’m Ready Kilowatt!” said the ad. This was in a period when utilities were
trying to increase demand—the use of electricity with a vast array of new appliances and machines. It
worked. Electric use skyrocketed. Electric appliance development skyrocketed. And in the 1960s and
1970s, utilities built power plants and infrastructure to match. Contrast that today with headlines –
ERCOT forecasts there may be slimmer margins than required by their operating guide. We had rolling
blackouts a year ago in winter and summer, and most utilities are pushing “demand-side management”
(a very politically correct term for reducing or deferring customer load). This is a stark contrast to
Ready’s jingle.
General Session Executive Forum—CEO Perspectives on Challenges in the Electric Power Industry
Moderator: Edmund O. Schweitzer, III Ph.D., President, Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, Inc.
Panelists:
Bob Yeager, President, Emerson Process Management
Terence Donnelly, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Commonwealth Edison
Paul Barham, CPS Energy
Noel Schulz, IEEE PES President, Paslay Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Kansas State
University
Trip Doggett, President and Chief Executive Officer of Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT)
Mark Carpenter, Senior Vice President, Transmission Grid Management and System Operations Officer,
Oncor
Schweitzer: What’s different today compared to 30 years ago?
Yeager: More automation and control for advanced temperature control.
Schweitzer: How does an owner get paid back for additional stresses and costs?
Donnelly: Intermittent generation is paid by the “cost causer,” though there’s a move to socialize that
2
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
cost. Big wind farms in the shadow of nuclear plants worry that at night when there is light load when
you don’t need the wind power; today there are light-load criteria on the interconnection—constraints
developing because of the immaturity of the interconnections. Constraints are light load constraints, yet
drive investment based on what happens at night! The beginning of how to figure this out, renewable
portfolios and everything. Engineers will figure it out through controls and the like, but these are some
of the strange dynamics right now.
Schweitzer: How do you think customers’ perspectives have changed over 30 years in terms of how they
view ComEd?
Donnelly: Customers expect lights to never go out! Expectation higher, a lot of which is driven by data
communication. Storm response issues are at a new level; nobody wants to be out more than three
days. Put our money where our mouth is and put profit penalties in place if we don’t make our goals.
Profit: make sure there is a steady incentive to recover costs. Tried to move the paradigm of 30 years
ago—cost plus—to investment and benefits of accountability and recovery.
Carpenter: Various kinds of customer segment. High end customers: today much higher requirements
for power quality; they also have energy management systems that “game our rates” the best that they
can. It’s just a fact, neither good nor bad. It’s driven by money. Another segment wants to have all
communication by cell phone – outage info, restoration time. Another segment that just wants a person
or they’re a bad company. Price is the most important to some people; others price is not as important.
Doggett: Different levels of sophistication and you have to deal with all of them. Started out in a
vertically integrated utility then moved into a deregulated arm. ERCOT is probably the most deregulated
company in the world. Too far into the conservative realm 30 years ago; but today, the real focus is to
do things much smarter; most sophisticated companies can tell which fuse you’re behind when you call
or can tell because of your smart meter that your power is out. Focus is on technology to do things
smarter today…we just have to be careful not to let the pendulum swing too far the other way.
Barham: Wide spectrum of customer desires. Low cost and reliability are seen as a right; today’s
customers are looking for other services like phone-based info (think of how phones have changed!) so
what the utility provides is headed down the same road. Some customers don’t want to change their
service from a higher rate out of convenience; their bill is not painful enough to push them over the
hump. Municipally owned means that CPS doesn’t have retail choices. Lots of data centers, so power
quality and reliability are a totally different realm.
Schweitzer: The DoD is a really tough customer. You have a major defense, load, Paul – what’s the
relationship like?
Barham: We have several major bases in San Antonio and are involved with the military on those bases.
The DoD has some directives around reliability and renewables; we’re working to partner with them to
accomplish their goals. Bases are a microcosm.
3
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Schweitzer: How have students changed and what are the expectations from recruiters?
Schulz: Customers are very well connected. The amount of information is different; all sources are
treated as equal. If a movie star says one thing and an engineer another, people will believe the movie
star! By not standing up and talking, we’re not heard. We have an educational responsibility. Today’s
customers are more skeptical because they have more information. You could get a free thermostat in
Kansas, but people didn’t want the power company to know how much power they’re using. Students
today are balancing how to save the world with “what’s in it for me?” Kids are extremely connected: lots
of multitasking. Make sure kids can use these skills in the work world! More and more people want to
be connected.
Schweitzer: What do you recruit for?
Yeager: Need good electrical and mechanical engineers and computer scientists. Not always the most
exciting career. IT’s a hard sell: we’re competing with Google and Twitter and so on. Gen Y kids are very
interested in moving their careers. Now we have a lot more job descriptions so there are a lot more
promotions… Also, kids today want access. We’ve instituted mentoring programs; Bob mentors now too.
Senior management does it too. Attrition was as high as 19 percent; if they don’t see where they’re
going they’ll leave. Had to change whole attitude. Also industry is aging. Fifty percent of Pittsburgh HQ is
over 50 years old. Good because they have lots of skills but what happens in ten years? So we need to
bring people in and keep them and retain them.
Doggett: We recruit interns every year. Target specific universities and have about 20 interns. They want
the attention! Trip goes by and personally greets them because that’s that they want. Retention is really
the issue. They enjoy their work because it’s exciting and challenging. But we’ll bring them in, they work
two years and then go somewhere else. So we let them move around, promote them frequently, and
provide work life balance.
Schweitzer: Thirty years ago a student graduating in power would have a good background in the basics.
How has coursework changed?
Schulz: There are a lot of changes. Our industry is now diverse. We need power but also controls, signal
processing, computer engineering, computer science, communications. Computer engineering is a draw.
EE has diversified and students are graduating with fewer hours of instruction. My dad is an EE, and now
I say the same thing as he does! They don’t do the math; they use their calculators and so on. Only
about 1/3 of schools have a required power class for EE. More students are deciding to study power
because of increase in renewables, because that’s where the jobs are and because there are
scholarships. Power electronics has had a big increase in the last 20 years. Students are broader and
thinner; that’s why a master’s degree is often times a good idea, to get some depth.
Schweitzer: What has happened to “courses that don’t trust”?
4
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Schulz: In EE they continue to be the base. There are a lot more applications. They want to know why
before they do the calculations. More computer simulation for visual representation where we might
have earlier done an equation. Same with circuits: computer simulations.
Carpenter: Go back 30 years and what was taught in school and then what happened in the utility. Most
engineers never touch the stuff that they didn’t learn about, like stability studies. Fundamentals are
taught well, and we can teach them the additional stuff. Tool set of 30 years ago: you had to be a PhD to
do a transient study. Today you can do this with basic training.
Donnelly: Engineering disciplines have diversified. Good talent is coming out in the disciplines…they’re
just broader fields so people are less deep. Get the engineers working everywhere, not just engineering!
Get engineers on the customer end, the regulatory end, on cross functional teams, so that they all work
together. Tremendous benefit of these teams. Alliances with other companies will emerge. Not sure
who with, but engineers forging relationships with other companies in addition to traditional
relationships will motivate engineers.
Schweitzer: What would happen if ComEd ran the Little Bill ad on TV today?
Donnelly: I don’t know what would happen. I know that in terms of connecting to consumers that we
need to connect through channels that consumers use every day and that’s the Internet. Not totally sure
what customers want whether it’s more control or more information, the first challenge is getting on
the right channels of communication.
Schweitzer: What’s wrong with Little Bill today?
Barham: What Reddy and Bill were saying is that we have great service so you should use electricity!
Electricity as a service is a given…the message is different and there’s a struggle internally with the right
communications channels, with all of the electronic media and modes. Our messaging is more around
information around programs that we’re offering that offer something to the customer in terms of
home energy management like thermostats, the availability of usage information, etc. Each of these will
interest different customers at different levels. Things like electric vehicles: are customers interested in
charging stations are one of the things that utilities are looking at. Do you wait til people are screaming
or get ahead of it? Staying up on consumer needs is a challenge.
Doggett: Reddy was more about shifting away from gas in the home to electricity. Today focus is more
about shifting load off the peak, for example. Weather in Texas last summer resulted in tremendous
response from the public. Today’s customer is sophisticated.
Schweitzer: BG&E used to get on radio and TV to ask customers to turn down the AC so that they could
avoid brown outs. The message years ago was clear… Insull and Reddy had a clear message, so I’m
challenging you a little…
Carpenter: Load growth plus increasing cost make Reddy a little less relevant. The cost has turned.
5
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Donnelly: Insull got a lot of things back then including the rate case! Guess we have him to thank about
that. He was a visionary in many ways. A lot of the initial assumptions have flattened out, though. We
don’t have the kind of load growth now that drove cost down. That’s why a lot of utilities are struggling
in the rate case base. That’s why a lot of utilities are trying out a different model of added value.
Electricity is still the most undervalued product – we all know that – compared to TV and cell phone. The
Insull model just isn’t sustainable given today’s investment and accountability results. How do you prove
benefits to the consumer? That’s the big question for ComEd today.
Schweitzer: What would the next personification be today?
Barham: Transformers! It’s a multitude of things. The expectation is for lowest cost. What else can you
provide me (customer) so that I can reduce my rates through controls that I have in my house? The
other thing is the expectation of customers around the source of power? For the customer perspective,
at least in San Antonio, customers expect renewable energy. Customers support the 100kW investment
in renewables…and this is a challenge of ERCOT.
Schweitzer: Our industry needs investment. How has that changed? How are we going to honestly
attract capital?
Yeager: A lot is regulatory driven. A lot of the NERC CIP cyber issues force utilities to spend a lot of
capital. The more regulations and less free economy today mean that a better, less restrictive energy
policy from DC would result in more investment where utilities really wanted to invest instead of where
they have to. That would make the stock go up.
Schulz: $100M investment by KS legislature to increase the number of engineers in the state by 50
percent in (X) years. It’s matched with industrial funds. ARRA funds caused utilities to wait—utilities
didn’t want to be the beta tester of a new product. Need to communicate so we can use best practices
and invest dollars wisely – communication and dissemination of information are crucial.
Donnelly: Go back to the regulatory model. We have to make the case that the old models worked for
the 20th century; they don’t work today in terms of long term capital perspectives today. Need to get
people to realize that today’s system is outdated and needs updating. We need a new model to do this.
With this comes economic development. We need to deliver benefits to consumers, provide reliability,
and recover costs. It’s time for a new model (referring to the penalty model). The old models of 8 to 10
percent load growth just aren’t there. Need to change the model to get capital investment—it’s not a
silver bullet but it’s a different way. A new, stable regulatory environment; a growth strategy for the
long haul make Exelon stock attractive. There are setbacks along the way like with the regulator.
Carpenter: We happen to be in a fairly favorable regulatory market today. Your regulator really
determines how you run your business. We’re in a good spot because in the TX market we are strongly
encouraged to invest; we put our Transmission plan investment in the rate plan twice per year! The
budget is trued up between cases. We are encouraged to build a robust transmission system…but that’s
6
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
not true in the rest of the country! If you want the biggest bang for the buck, spend a little more on
distribution and basic tree trimming…but that’s not what our regulators and customers want.
Schweitzer: What would you like to see happen going forward in this industry to make it better than
ever?
Barham: More certainty around regulation. How can we in our industry provide an environment that
encourages innovation, investment in new technology? Because we’re such a capital intensive industry,
it requires a lot of money and risk. So how can we encourage efficiencies, demand side programs, etc?
Doggett: My real challenge is resource adequacy. I disagree with your concern on demand response. I’m
really focused on demand response across the peak. If the public recognized that our whole
infrastructure is built across a few peak hours, we could shave load at peak through smart, automated
systems that don’t require customer intervention…that’s the smart thing to do.
Doggett: What concerns me most is the compliance world we’re building for ourselves. Compliance
doesn’t equal reliability! If we spend all of our time checking boxes we’re going to miss out. Regulation
and laws are fine, but we’re overzealous with compliance activities. We need to make sure that we have
ways to manage generation, like wind power. Everybody would like wind to be dispatchable. It’s not
reality. But customers want higher penetration of renewables. So as engineers we need to find better
more sophisticated ways to dispatch these things.
Carpenter: Concerned that we are too focused on compliance rather than thinking about what the right
thing is to do.
Schulz: Utilities, universities and manufacturers need to stick together in the good and bad times to
ensure that we have a workforce. We also need to think long term, which is where universities can help.
SEL support for training and for R&D is appreciated. We need more of these partnerships to prepare
students for the challenges of today and tomorrow. Another is professional development. Things are
moving so fast that we can’t keep up. Organizations like PES are trying to provide that. We need to do
standards quickly, which requires both vendors and utilities…so that a particular vendor can’t bias the
standards. So get involved in committees and standards development.
Donnelly: Agree with everything said, and want to say on the record that he agrees with more tree
trimming. Many international cities have more expensive but better power systems than we do.
Partnerships like Noel mentioned both with vendors and with agencies and departments will enable
companies to integrate technologies; it’s not just about counting meters. The customer needs to be able
to see the value so that they know what they’re getting for their money.
Yeager: Regulation changes and innovations. In PA we love coal! The current regulation on coal – I
understand the environmental perspectives— coal has to be part of the energy balance in the future.
Current regulation is too egregious. With regards to innovation: virtual power plants in a single work
7
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
station, plus thermo modeling, and you can do at-desk modeling. This releases innovation. We need to
blend IT technology to make people more innovative and to improve plant performance.
Schweitzer: You’re a brave guy to mention coal! I watch coal trains pass through…but the coal trains are
taking coal to China. We’re all breathing the same air so we need to get this CO2 stuff figured off.
From the Audience:
Audience member: Why can’t we get the message across to the general public to the general industry
that we produce electricity at less cost than 100 years ago! Why does AWEA do a good job but we can’t?
Yeager: People don’t understand. They take it for granted. For young people especially, we need to take
the technology that’s associated with other industries and adapt it to our industry to make it more
glamorous so that we can recruit.
Barham: As a muni, we get attention when things don’t go as we want them to. The expectation is that
we have low cost power, but if a reporter can dig up something that makes a headline, they do.
Fourteen percent of CPS gross revenue goes directly to the city budget, which reduces the city tax
burden as a whole. It’s hard to glamorize what people expect, but easy to make a headline.
Doggett: Discussion about switching provider to cut costs. He pays about 3 times as much for his cell
phone!
Schulz: Also a paradigm shift. In the past, not being noticed was good. Today, we need to take the
opportunity to package our message. You can work in power and you can work with cloud computing.
For a lot of us the packaging part isn’t something that we’re comfortable with. We need to get the word
out in lots of different ways, and not just with bad news. Get more engineers into politics! Help make
sure people don’t take it for granted.
Audience member: I see that we have a desperate message, but I think it’s to regulators, government,
and universities rather than consumers. There are a lot of new challenges coming at us, and we don’t
have the engineering resources—both engineers at the desk and in the field – and I think we need to tie
the messages to the interesting challenges that affect the power that civilization depends on. We need
the right investment, people, and regulations…which is where the next Reddy Kilowatt message might
be.
Barham: Agrees that the challenges are where the excitement is for engineers.
Carpenter: Smart consumption needs to be built in.
Donnelly: One theme ComEd is emphasizing is pulling employees together so that they succeed in
communication, reliability, and choice.
Audience member: We are all here for reliable, affordable power! What I don’t understand is how
8
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
utilities fall short in educating our politicians! Green power mandates cost money – let people know
how much better power they get and for how much money they save from burning coal. Also, I think
nuclear is the future! Please comment.
Yeager: Public opinion has swung in favor of nuclear power. There are four nuke plants in process right
now. There’s also the small modular reactor option. In the next ten years, sentiment and technology will
continue to change.
Donnelly: Exelon is the biggest nuke producer in the U.S. Clearly a lot of support. With regards to the
earlier comment, need to emphasize to politicians that interconnection and not just renewables are
critical for investment.
Schulz: As engineers, we assume that if we make a logical argument, people will understand that. Polls
and public aren’t always logical. There are also different interest groups. Don’t sit back and let the
attacks come…show how regulations and rules affect pricing.
Carpenter: Fracking changed the landscape. If we can bust the storage problem and get economical
storage, every complaint about intermittencies goes away.
BUSINESS FOCUS
SAFETY
Speakers/Panelists:
Gary Braman, The International System Safety Society
Mary Capelli-Schellpheffer, CapSchell, Inc. and Loyola University
W. Mack Grady, Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin
Ron Schwartz, SEL
Bill Cook, San Diego Gas and Electric
Hector Altuve, SEL
Braman: It is important to have processes that define safety standards.
Capelli-Schellpfeffer: There is time before and after an event that affects how we view the safety
process. Focus on the human factors related to an event.
Grady: A grid that works properly improves our safety.
Schwartz: Safety processes are important; you must make safety a priority.
Cook: Focus on reducing the risk of fires to improve safety. They have taken several measures to reduce
fire danger, metal poles, tree trimming, faster protection, …Public outreach is also important; they will
intentionally turn off the power at times to prevent fires.
9
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Questions:
How do you justify the expense of a fire safety system?
It is a low probability high consequence situation; they need to take action to prevent the small number
of fires that may be caused by their system.
You have to strike a balance between the cost and the benefit of a program like fire prevention.
They see the fire risk as the single largest risk to their company; they treat this is a risk management,
insurance comes into play too.
What are the recommended readings or information for human factors and how to prevent mistakes?
Mary responded with comments about how the human brain works. Employees may make choices
based on their impressions of a process or communication from management.
Is arc flash being implemented at a much higher rate than in the past?
Industrials are implementing more arc flash than utilities. Lower voltages are a big concern, especially
voltages, such as 600 V.
TECHNICAL FOCUS
TRANSMISSION
Speakers:
Michael Thompson, SEL
Bogdan Kasztenny, SEL
Advancements in Transformer Protection
—Michael Thompson, SEL
The 51P element is not required for transformers on transmission level; the thermal protection element
affords better adaptive protection for the transformer under overload conditions. For distribution
transformers this function can be used as a backup in the event of a breaker failure.
Calculating a transformer’s top oil temperature and hotspot temperature was not as accurate as when
measuring these quantities; therefore, to obtain an accurate representation of the aging of a
transformer and the degradation of its insulation, it would be best to measure the quantities than
relying on a model of the transformer to calculate them.
For uninterruptible processes, it is best to oversize the transformers rating by a factor of 2, so that in the
event of a failure there is no interruption of the supply. With real time monitoring, this over
dimensioning factor could be reduced to 1.5 times
10
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Advancements in Line Protection
—Bogdan Kasztenny, SEL
Single-pole tripping and reclosing reduces the impact of a SLG fault on the system, by allowing the
remaining two phases to still transmit power and keeping the terminals of the lines in synchronism.
Single-pole reclosing reduces the impact on rotating machines.
Single-pole tripping allows for adaptive reclosing, accelerating reclosing when the fault has cleared and
preventing reclosing and thereby reducing the impact to the system should the fault still be present.
Single-pole tripping and reclosing should be a serious consideration in upcoming transmission and
subtransmission projects, since its benefits outweigh its initial costs.
One question/comment involved whether it’s a good idea to apply 51P elements to transmission
transformers. The participant indicated that is very non-selective and he has redundant relaying and
breaker failure to cover uncleared faults. He suggested that thermal protection was adequate. Another
participant said that it is necessary for distribution due to failed relay or breaker concerns. Another
participant indicated that both were correct. At transmission levels, it may not be necessary, but at
distribution levels it is.
One question/comment involved whether composite measurements of health were possible. Is it
possible to combine thermal aging and through fault and gas analysis? The discussion revolved around
how accurate the measurements were and how they combine to create the general health of the
transformer. I indicated that one expert said that the number one problem with monitoring is turning
data into actionable information.
This gentleman also remarked that “hot spot” temperature is more meaningful than “oil temperature.”
One participant commented that he was from an industry with continuous processes that could not
stand interruptions. Their practice was to put in two times the transformer capacity required so that a
single failure would not result in a loss of supply. The discussion revolved around that this practice
managed risk by conservative over building. That, real-time thermal monitoring could possibly manage
risk so that the over capacity factor could be reduced to 1.5 instead of 2. This discussion started around
transformer life expectancy and how to measure this.
BUSINESS FOCUS
CYBERSECURITY DEFENSES
Speakers/Panelists:
Edmund O. Schweitzer, III Ph.D., SEL
Rhett Smith, SEL
11
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Joshua M. Axelrod, Ernst & Young, LLC
Kevin Novak, Northern Trust Company
Steve Locke, Northern Trust Company
Carol Hawk, Ph.D., U.S. Department of Energy
Wes Speed, Oncor
Schweitzer: Question for Josh: What do you think that you and our mom’s would think about Dale?
Peterson/Digital Bond did with publicly disclosing vulnerabilities of vendor’s products.
Axelrod: Initial intention was to work with vendors. No response from the vendors that were contacted.
DB was frustrated, so they decided to publish the information. Josh believes that this was intended to
“shock” the industry.
Schweitzer believes this was a method to promote their business. Schweitzer points out that many of
these vulnerabilities neglected the fact that the application/installation sits within layered
communications model within a secured location, etc. etc.
Smith points out that the responsible action is to not go public, but to work with the vendors and the
end users for disclosures of security information. Ten to twelve years ago this was more common
practice to get the vendors (Microsoft as an example) to respond.
Schweitzer: How do we get the shy guys to talk?
Locke: Are we connected into the U.S. Treasury, etc., etc. Bank system has the ability to tie into secret
security quickly for issues, as an example. Schweitzer mentions that we have some relationships to use
in this manner as well.
Axelrod: Complete integration of security into the cost, maintenance, and operations instead of being a
bolt-on after the fact consideration.
Schweitzer: Issue with regard to the utilities moving slower…the need for government to step in.
Axelrod: Sometimes you need an actual event to help quantify costs when a cybersecurity event occurs.
Schweitzer: So how come we can quantify the fines associated with non compliance for cybersecurity
policy?
Locke: Risk modeling process. Hypothetical analysis of certain assets can help quantify.
Schweitzer: We have an actual event (theoretically, if NY Times article is accurate): the U.S. has used a
cyber attack.
Locke: We know the US has a dept. for this. We know that China has 2,000 people working on cyber
warfare.
12
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Novak: There is a way to identify the threat, just not how, when, and what.
Locke: Getting a cyber attack is as simple as a virus opened in an email.
Novak: Use of rights management to prevent access or removal of data.
Schweitzer: Carol pointed out that control center is separate.
Audience member: Need to quantify the threat is critical. At some point do you see us taking into
account the substation environment vs. the corporate LAN? Embedded vs. Windows, etc. Regulatory
seems more “one size fits all” vs. taking into consideration the uniqueness of the application.
Locke: Reinforces the above statement.
Schweitzer: Preference to TDM vs. Ethernet.
Hawk: Monitor for abnormal information/activity and flag it.
Smith: We engineer our systems; we know what the products are supposed to be doing. Therefore,
monitor this activity, and look for outliers, lock down what we know is supposed to occur, and block
everything else (white listing).
Axelrod: Quantification; monetary loss, frequency of occurrence. Define the risks. Focus on these.
Schweitzer: How do you respond to the fear mongering (FUD)?
Focus on the engineering, the science, and not the hype.
Employee threat assessment?
Novak: Yes, we have to consider internally as well.
Axelrod: Personnel is reviewed, both for intentional as well as human ‘dumb’ factor type issues.
TECHNICAL FOCUS
DISTRIBUTION
Speakers:
Karl Zimmerman, SEL
David Dolezilek, SEL
Daqing Hou, SEL
Armando Guzman, SEL
Yanfeng Gong, SEL
13
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
1. Distribution Protection at Transmission Speeds
—Karl Zimmerman, SEL
Key Message: Improve reliability by clearing faults in less than 6 cycles. Reinforces the comment made
by Oncor's Mark Carpenter early in the day on voltage sags of only 15 percent on >4 cycles causes his
customers problems.
The discussion focused on cost/benefit analysis and customer value. The audience agreed that for
critical loads systems like I-drive are the best solution, but it is hard to quantify the ROI. The utilities
justify the expense by keeping customers satisfied.
2. Improve Reliability Through Distribution Automation
—Dave Dolezilek, SEL
Key Message: Use communications to reduce outage times and increase system situational awareness.
The discussion focused around interoperability of different vendor’s products. Who is responsible to
make it all work?
Can mesh network radio systems for AMI also do Distribution Automation and Teleprotection? Who is
responsible to make the systems work?
3. Detecting High-Impedance Faults
—Daqing Hou, SEL
Key Message: High impedance faults on multi-grounded systems cannot be detected by standard relays
(system imbalance is too high)
Discussion: Can we use PMUs to detect downed conductors?
Existing Hi-Z fault detection techniques do not detect many faults, but are valuable. The audience
encouraged us that more research and testing is warranted. Utilities take the problem very seriously
and their lawyers are heavily involved.
4. How Well Do You Know Your Loads?
—Armando Guzman, SEL
Key Message: We now have techniques to measure load characteristics. By measuring the load
impedance, we can make informed decisions about peak shaving and conservation voltage reduction.
Discussion: Greg Hataway from Power South shared how his cooperative customers are VERY interested
in measuring their loads to know how to do peak shaving to save significant money on the price the
cooperative pays for bulk power.
The audience asked how much utilities can vary voltage levels and still be in compliance with voltage
level regulations (answer ±0 10%).
14
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
5. Where Is the Fault?
—Yanfeng Gong, SEL
Key Message: Locating distribution circuit faults much more complicated than transmission, but we now
have the tools to locate distribution faults very accurately and very rapidly.
Discussion: A few audience members mentioned that they have systems in place that are working well.
They mentioned it is important to get accurate feeder models and to spend the effort to maintain the
databases to keep the system operational.
THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2012
BUSINESS FOCUS
RELIABLE ENERGY
Speakers/Panelists:
Eli Nelson, SEL
Ron Schwartz, SEL
Kfir L. Godrich, Hewlitt-Packard Company
Jim Bowen, Saudi Aramco
Dan Kimmel, ARKEnergy, LLC (for Lew Weingarth)
Tom Leeming, ComEd (an Exelon Company)
Charlie Henville, Henville Consulting
Summary From Panel Presentations
Godrich—Data Center Perspective:
Huge Growth—Estimated up to 31 Gig watts of load worldwide and increasing
Reliability—Focus on topology and equipment, also on how they do the computing. With certain
applications may be able to swap computation between facilities if failure occurs. In those cases the
computing part of the datacenter improves reliability greatly.
Efficiency—Using different technologies like Redstone server using cell phone chips to decrease load.
Bowen—Oil and Gas (quotes are Jim Bowen’s):
“Reliability = Safety for us.”
“We want to get to where our breaker doesn't have to operate. . .” - w.r.t. monitoring equipment, and
predicting maintenance, etc. Gave example of breaker monitoring and looking at DC voltage and current
signature to predict when breaker needs lubrication. Jim pointed out – “This feature should be in a
relay.”
15
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
“Everything we are trying to do is to get us to where we have a red, green, or yellow light. . . ” - w.r.t.
automation, and the need to change data to actionable and useful information.
“We need to pay attention to how younger people learn. . .” Gave example of using YouTube for
instructions and training.
Low voltage MCCs are a huge part of the investment, and they are interested in getting as much data
from these as possible.
Kimmel (for Lew Weingarth)—Offshore
Training and human error is biggest part of reliability in offshore, vessel world. Need training.
Summary of Discussion and Takeaways From Session
Human training is a huge factor. All panelists recognized this as a major component to reliability and
large portion of discussion focused on this.
ComEd—Role of Energy sources
Still working on connecting intermittent sources. Wind is growing and coal is retiring, trend appears to
be continuing. Have solutions (like SVCs for dynamic voltage response), etc., but as renewable
penetration grows and coal shrinks, we will continue to need learn and adapt.
Henville—Role of Protection and Control:
Related to reliability and performance—discussion on voting schemes versus traditional redundant
relays –
Schweitzer: Remember you taught me: “I would rather be slower and right than fast and wrong.”—
Schweitzer to C. Henville.
Also on distinction between “primary assets” (power system equipment) and “secondary assets”
protection and control system) and their actual importance versus their perceived importance.
TECHNICAL FOCUS
COMMUNICATION
Speakers:
David Whitehead, SEL
Ken Behrendt, SEL
Ken Fodero, SEL
Tim Tibbals, SEL
Rhett Smith, SEL
16
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Chris Anderson, SEL
Affordable Communication for Protection and Control
—Ken Behrendt, SEL
Behrendt asked who read the self-study material. No hands up. We should be reminding people about
the format of this conference (study, before, short presentations, lots of discussions).
Audience member: How do trees interfere with unlicensed radio channels? Ken explained the line-ofsight cone and relative immunity to obstructions. We should have mentioned monitoring as a tool to
deal with creeping issues such as tree growth in the communications path.
Audience member: What is the impact of NERC CIP on the communications technologies? Ken brought
up actual case of a user worrying about 87L data being intercepted and used to change relay settings.
Pointed to difficulties in having a meaningful discussion and the need for user education.
A follow up question on encryption. Ken explained we have multiple solutions, either add-ons or built-in
for state-of-the-art encryption.
Smith: Application security is an important aspect of security in addition to just securing
communications link.
Behrendt: Considering cost per Mbps of bandwidth, fiber optics is the most cost-efficient technology.
Considering the total installed cost—unlicensed radio is the most efficient.
Behrendt surveyed the audience for type of channels used for protection. Very few indicated leased
circuits and microwave, large based on power line carrier and fiber users.
Audience member: How about cell phone modems? Discussion started long the line of SCADA and
engineering access.
The Evolving Communications Network—TDM and IDP
—Ken Fodero, SEL
Fodero polled the audience often on various aspects of communications and their roles. However, his
presentation took almost the entire time slot leaving only few minutes for Q&A.
Audience member: Which is better for PMU data?
Fodero: PMU data are time stamped, easing the need for deterministic communications and favoring IP
networks especially because of their point to multipoint capabilities. At the same time, if PMUs are used
for protection and control, latency will become very important favoring TDM networks.
Audience member: How different are network failover mechanisms in TDM vs. IP?
17
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Fodero explained that the IP networks need a few seconds to purge the old network configuration and
re-learn the new network topology while new TDM systems can self-heal in 5ms regardless of the
network size.
Audience member: What happens when the “data pipe” in the TDM network is overloaded?
Fodero explained that by design data will be dropped, but the excessive traffic will not affect other
services (“pipes”). This is the key advantage of implementing IP networks over the TDM technology. As a
result, one needs to allocate bandwidth to the TDM “pipe” carefully to make sure critical data is not preempted under network overload conditions.
Best Practices for Ethernet Substations
—Tim Tibbals, SEL
Tibbals (Q): The person explained they implemented 61850 GOOSE with VLAN tags – was it good
practice. Tim stated that VLANs are very advisable as they direct traffic and prevent network overload.
VLANs also prevent overload of the receiving IEDs because they are not bombarded with all the GOOSE
messages (Dolezilek).
Audience member: Are we ready for Sample Values (SV) in protection?
Tim answered that in his opinion we are not. Too early. There is some experimentation but no actual
projects. Dave Whitehead added that pieces of technology are there and are not difficult (sample and
packetize the data), but the challenges are in network performance and operational concerns. Tim
added that 100 Mbps network that are prevalent today cannot handle SV data for real large stations.
Practical, Compliant, and Affordable Cybersecurity
—Rhett Smith, SEL
Smith opened asking questions related to Wed panel on cyber security. This worked well.
Audience member: Do we believe the risk is real? Most said yes. Do we believe we are going to be
attacked so? Many said yes.
Audience member : Are we happy with information sharing about the threads (gov, NERC)? Many said
no.
Smith: We can be much more secure in substation application than in the corporate networks. This is
because of the nature of substation applications. Let us leverage this!
Audience member: SEL makes great relays. Will relays take themselves out of service upon the cyber
attack?
18
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
A: Firmware malware will be caught. If comm. signals are the concern—you need to protect the
network.
Audience member: Read only access via hardware jumpers?
A: We have a lot of methods to provide this function.
Comment, Dave Whitehead, SEL: We have many access modes, password protected. Option to control
the role o individual ports. The person insisted on having a mechanical means to ensure no
communications.
Smith explained architecture of having data copy and prevent direct human access to IEDs.
Schweitzer reminded the history beyond the second level access. We were pro-active a long time ago.
Explained the approach with modems disconnected with contacts. The person insisted on having
solutions that resonate with nontechnical management. [We need cybersecurity solutions that are
simple to explain and resonate with non-technical management.]
Question, Ed Schweitzer, SEL: What are the practical solutions you use?
A: disabled trip commands on relays (from SCADA).
Practical Password Management
—Chris Anderson. SEL
Many customers are evaluating central password management solutions. They became available in the
last year or so. SEL is on the right track with our solutions.
Audience member: What do we do in emergencies?
A: Our password management system is built to account for failure modes such as loss of
communications to the central location.
Audience member: Frequent password changes upset applications that need to know the passwords
(com processors for example). How do we deal with this?
A: We take advantage of the substation system—we designed it and it is relatively static. This allows us
to control credentials well, including applications that need to know IED passwords.
BUSINESS FOCUS
19
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
WIDE-AREA PROTECTION AND CONTROL
Speakers/Panelists:
Roy Moxley, SEL
Dave Angell, Idaho Power Company
Juergen Holbach, Ph.D., Quanta Technology, LLC
Mark Simon, ComEd (an Exelon Company)
W. Mack Grady, Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin
Angell presented on the Jim Bridger RAS. Some business statistics:
1. Took 4 years to develop the RAS (2005–2009); however, this is compared to the 10–12 years
expected to place a new line. The line they are presently working on, for this area, was started in
2007. It’s a 300 mile long line and there is still no permit.
2. A 500 MW trip of generation costs $40K–$70K if restored immediately. If the trip causes the
generator to go offline for a longer period, it could cost up to $1 million.
3. The RAS cost around $3 million initially, and $6 million total to date. This compares to a
transmission line with a cost of $1.5 to $2.0 million per mile.
4. Question from audience about the capital asset value of transmission lines vs. RAS. The
utilization of a line due to wind is so small that it becomes difficult to justify new lines for that
source.
Holbach, Quanta Technology, presented on wide area control schemes:
1. Advocated fully redundant systems.
2. Calculated system latencies and approximated at around 100 ms.
Simon, ComEd
1. Reviewed the history of communication groups at ComEd.
2. Noted differences in terminology and requirements of traditional comms vs. what substations
require.
Grady, University of Texas Austin
1. Sees ±60 degrees of angle shift due to wind.
2. Discovered a 0.067 Hz oscillation in 2009 from the wall outlet that was traced to a generator
valve problem.
3. Discovered possible market-induced power system oscillations.
Wide-Area Protection Exercise. Six teams participated, which was approximately 25 people.
20
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
The advantage was offered that synchrophasers give continuous data that would be more reliable than
existing real-time line rating systems.
TECHNICAL FOCUS
RELIABLE PLANT POWER SYSTEMS
Know Your Motor: Using Data to Improve Protection, Performance, and Control
—Lee Underwood, SEL
People are using start report data and event reports for commissioning and troubleshooting.
People are using motor loading data for feed back into closed loop control systems.
Enhanced Load Transfer Schemes
—Mike Collum, SEL
People are using SELOGIC and programming their own transfer schemes.
Event reports help commission and troubleshoot schemes.
Improving Reliability of Supply to Critical Loads
—Scott Manson, SEL
There was no discussion after this session.
Scott emphasized that blackout protection is a revenue protection scheme.
Described 3S, separate, survive, synchronize.
Practical Solutions for Aurora, Mark Zeller.
People are using both physical and communications security.
At least one person mentioned that they had implemented SEL’s HMD logic.
Arc Flash, Veselin Skendzic.
Some people evaluate energy levels if primary systems fail and faults are cleared by backup relaying.
Defense in depth is a good idea. Use arc-flash relays, bus differentials, and/or arc resistant switch gear.
Audience member: One of our motors was tripping. We thought that there was something wrong with
the relay. We used the motor start recording to find out that the motor had the wrong specifications
and we changed the motor.
Audience member: The SEL-710’s motor start reports helped us to find out that the motor was not
properly re-wounded. We also use the start reports to improve relay settings. The relay oscillography is
great. Relay reports are very useful for commissioning.
Audience member: We use the TCU to determine how far is the motor from tripping.
Audience member: We installed a 480 V bus transfer scheme. The commissioning went OK, and the
motor trip later due to 1000 A overload.
21
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Audience member: We want to use a SEL relay on a dead power transfer application. Can I use the
synch element for this application?
Answer: No.
Audience member: Is there mechanical interlock when there is a transfer after a fault?
Answer: No, the transfer takes few cycles and the return to the original feed can take from minutes to
hours.
Audience member: Do you have a scheme that returns the load to its original source after a load
transfer?
Answer: No, usually the transfer scheme does not return to its original source automatically.
Audience member: I used the 351-7 in an application with an alternative source, implemented the
scheme in logic, and the scheme is working perfect.
Final Remarks: Study your application before you decide which transfer scheme to use.
Audience member: Are there recommendations on generator or motor size?
Answer: No, some people have mentioned 10 MW.
Audience member: This is crazy stuff. Has this happened before? No, just a demo. The recommendation
is to build smart security boundaries and do not use HMDs.
Comment, Mark Zeller, SEL: NERC is not grading your solution. They will verify that you had
implemented a plan.
Audience member: We implemented the simple solution that you mentioned using relay logic.
Comment, Ed Schweitzer, SEL: Be sure that the cure does not create other problems.
Remarks: No need to buy a dedicated relay for this application.
Audience member: Is the loop sensor better than the point sensor?
Answer: Yes, using bare fiber.
Audience member: Can I use local bus differential as a backup?
22
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
Answer: Yes, cost should not be a limitation; you can have two levels of protection.
Audience member: What shall I use: arc resistance gear or AFD?
Answer: Use both.
Audience member: Do we have to consider back-up protection for AF studies?
Answer: Yes. You also can use energy diverters and fault current limiting breakers.
Audience member: Can I use the sensor for outdoor applications?
Answer: AFD was not intended for this application.
Audience member: What happens if the sensor is damaged during the arc condition?
Answer: Our system works.
Audience member: What happens if the fiber is damaged?
Answer: The relay has built in diagnostics. We also use hardened fiber.
FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 2012
BUSINESS FOCUS
ECONOMICAL SOLUTIONS
Speakers/Panelists:
David Costello, SEL
Nancy Hindman, SEL
Mark Carpenter, Oncor
David Dolezilek, SEL
Scott Milanowski, Oklahoma Gas and Electric (OG&E)
Hindman introduced the session by speaking about SEL’S company’s values, PQFIDS, and employeeownership model. Tying this into the economical solutions theme, she asked, “How do we resolve
seemingly conflicting goals of a ten-year unconditional warranty, putting downward price pressure on
ourselves, and offering outstanding (and free) technical support with maximizing profit and shareholder
value?” She said SEL takes the long-term view, not looking to immediate or short-term fixes or profits or
23
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
benefits. She played the ESOP video. One of the best quotes in that film is from Dave Dolezilek, who said
“It’s not about the stock price, but what the stock represents . . . a company . . . that is making electric
power safer, more reliable, and more economical.” Hindman spoke to purpose, and how important that
is—this theme would be echoed in other presentations in the session.
Carpenter on Building and Operating Systems Better. Carpenter spoke about some specific projects at
Oncor that he’s led, including wholesale electromechanical relay upgrade with microprocessor-based
relays, developing a misoperation reporting/tracking metric mechanism so that they could focus on root
cause and improve reliability, and an advanced automated metering system. His company not only got
good, but GREAT, at doing these things. Their misoperation metrics became an IEEE standard
methodology. In replacing panels, their costs and timeframes (12 hours or less outage) truly impressed
utility management and engineers in the audience. The metering system collects 15 min usage data
from 2.7M customers; some unexpected benefits from their advanced metering system—they poll the
meters, and by doing so, are able to repair and restore service to 25% – 50% of outages without
receiving a single telephone call from customers (meaning they are fixing the problem before the
customers even know). In all his innovative projects, some common leadership threads, reasons for
success, and recommendations surfaced. First, they are meticulous about developing standards, and
then building exact copies; they don’t just do something to do it. They get it right, and then duplicate it
hundreds of times. Carpenter said, “Begin with the end in mind.”
Dolezilek on Communicate with Confidence: Exploring the Economics of Fiber and the Requirements of
Merging Information Technology (IT) and Operational Technology (OT) Networks. Dolezilek focused on
differences between IT system requirements, and OT system requirements. He merged this into a
discussion on how traditional systems are built, and different options moving forward, including using
fiber Ethernet. He played the EVN video that shows the dramatic installation experience in Vietnam,
with huge savings in copper and dollars. Carpenter pointed out that EVN isn’t as efficient as U.S. crews,
that 120 days to install copper wiring for an upgrade project is very slow compared to U.S. crews.
Nevertheless, if you take the EVN numbers as an absolute savings for them (and theoretically equally
applied to anyone, with their own costs and time as a baseline), it’s dramatic. I think Dolezilek did a
good job tying his talk into previous speakers, including Robert Bryce, who mentioned Vietnam in his
keynote and Mark Carpenter (with respect to the need to test, train people in new skills, etc.). He spoke
to purpose being important also, that you must start a project, a design, with the right hypothesis
(speaking to IT being focused on getting messages or data from point A to B dependably, no matter the
speed, versus OT needing speed, determinism, 100 percent availability, etc.).
Milanowski on Overcoming Hidden Challenges in New Technologies and Architectures. First, Milanowski
spoke about OG&E’s history of innovation, and led into their smart grid project. He supported
Schweitzer and others’ points that the grid has been amazingly smart for quite some time. He pointed
out how key great vendor relationships and partnerships were, of which Schweitzer Engineering
Laboratories was a great example. He had a great quote—vendors sell hotdogs; they want partners.
Why are they trying to reduce demand through Smart Grid? Wouldn’t that reduce revenue and profits?
24
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
(Answer = yes, some) Tying into Robert Bryce’s talk, they had plans for a 950 MW coal unit, all but a
done deal in their mind. Their public utility commission said no. So, the uncertainly in the regulatory
environment drove them to invest in wind and natural gas, and to try to reduce peak to try to defer
investment in peaking units. Assembling great teams, having executive support, and having excellent
communications (with internal groups, with customers) were cited as key ingredients to their projects
success.
Panel—Constant Improvement Is Key to Profitable Business. Panelists were asked about details of some
of their projects, about how they cost justified (ROI) certain projects, etc. Some common high-level
themes emerged from all of the talks, and Q&A. Doing things right, not just different, and standardizing
(repeating a proven, good design hundreds or thousands of times) allows you to benefit from economies
of scale and innovation. Replacing old relays with new relays wasn’t done on an ROI-alone basis, and
reliability/smart grid/distribution automation projects weren’t either. Many other things came into play.
Beginning with clear goals, the end in mind provides a focus and determinism needed for projects, and
companies, to be successful. Having clear and consistent purpose was a consistent message in not
allowing projects, or companies, to stray, to get distracted.
TECHNICAL FOCUS
WIDE-AREA PROTECTION AND CONTROL
Panelists:
Edmund O. Schweitzer, III Ph.D., SEL
W. Mack Grady, Ph.D., SEL
Juergen Holbach, Ph.D., Quanta Technology
Bahman Hoveida, OSI
Greg Zweigle, SEL
Schweitzer: Overview of topic, Decentralized will usurp centralized schemes, constant P loads a greater
challenge; use recipes for control, review of existing schemes.
Grady: Texas Synchrophasor Project, wall outlets, system events analyzed (loss of generator, angle
changes), noted damping of angles.
Holbach: Redundancy.
Hoveida: Next 5 to 10 years, hybrid between estimation and measure, >10 years, PMUs should be fully
available and deployed.
Q&A
Question on information transfer time—today’s state estimator time—5 minutes—synchrophasors will
25
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
improve by one to two orders of magnitude (60 to 100 msec on Schweitzer/Holbach’s presentation,
Mexico 75 to 92 msec)—good enough to make decisions.
Zweigle: E.g., voltage stability—1 min, rotor angle must be better.
Operator control vs. automated control, more can be automated.
Question on time-coordinated protection –
Schweitzer: Communications available such that no fault need to be cleared by time-delayed tripping.
Question on expanding Texas project: Grady planning to expand network in Dallas and Houston,
Nebraska, Washington—challenge appears to be in handling amount of data, zooming in on local
problems require more PMUs closer to the sources. New installations in Oklahoma.
Hoveida: Less PMUs is better from a math standpoint.
Schweitzer: Station checks can be performed to verify voltages in commissioning.
Regulation vs. Technology—Greatest impediment, regulations applied to PMUs deter deployment.
Panel: Start using the data, challenge politicians or regulators.
What about distribution applications—VR controls, recloser controls, angle provides better information
than frequency, Challenges with distribution (Mack): 1) more noise, PMU smoothes data, 2) feeder
angle variances, “net 30” degrees difference, talk to grid operators to get a state estimate at a given
time, then calibrate PMUs accordingly.
PMU advantages articulated by engineer: Blackout analysis, system “MRI,” model validation, FERC:
NERC/CIP cybersecurity may be required, depending on what it is used for.
Panel: Future—Centralized data will give way to distributed data, use more “micro-grids.”
Question on utility exchange of data.
Holbach: NASPI has defined some rules for building way to share data.
Audience member: How to deal with communication system limits to meet with ISO data demands.
Panel: Negotiate with ISO, use what we have, localize.
26
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.
BRAZILIAN ELECTRIC ENERGY INDUSTRY MODEL:
Protection, Control, and Monitoring Requirements for Fostering Responsible Competition
Jorge Miguel Ordacgi
Ordacgi describes the Brazilian power system. Fifty three percent of the system is still protected by
electromechanical relays on systems of 138 kV and above. We need to set goals for system
improvement; we can’t just watch the system and hope for improvements. When upgrading to modern
digital relays, they cannot just be a replica of the EM relay. We need information to the right people not
just data. We should start with the end in mind.
Questions:
How do we share information more effectively?
More interaction between industry and society, the conversation cannot be limited to administrative
and technical groups.
How do you manage the automatic control vs. operator control?
Some things can be automated but operators are still involved, there is a balance.
27
The intent of this document is to capture the spirit of the discussions at this conference. These notes
represent our notetakers’ best efforts to record the participants’ questions, answers, and important
points. They may contain incorrect attributions or misquoted statements.