A Penny Gold software program.Pls Help Me! Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : A Penny Gold software program.Pls Help Me!

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: E. Charters who wrote (41)	1/1/1998 11:37:00 PM
From: John Fairchild	Read Replies (1) of 83

The computer can lay blame. Our shift performance is monitored by a tracking program which counts system security limit violation duration and frequency. All phone conversations are recorded and logging of events are specific to the individual coordinator. In order to achieve economic dispatch, system facilitities are maximized. That means riding limits instead of sitting miles from them. A little Trivia for you EC. In your part of the country in Timmins you guys are often only one contingency away from total collapse in that area (ever been underground when the AC is interupted). North of Barry and West of Sudbury it gets way to expensive to operate the system to respect recognized double element contingencies. North of Sudbury well, we don't even respect the most significant singles. That being the single 500 kv line to the rest of the world. Overnight or during low hydraulic inflow conditions generation is reduced down to levels on Moose such that loss of the 500 kv tie will cause the area to collapse. The good thing is it will go down clean as all area generation will be rejected by special protection initiated by the contingency. If the generators were not rejected then equipement damage could occur from severe frequency and voltage excursions within the undergenerated island. To limit the probability of the local area collapse we have a lightning locator protection system which is extremely accurate (MNR uses it to assist in forest fire detection). If we observe an electrical storm with strikes approaching 40k of the 500 kv tie then we will declare high risk for the area and bias generation off of economic dispatch so that the area can survive the contingency. Usually we are lucky and make the moves in time but success rate of area survival even when set up to respect the contingency could be better.This is probably a lot more than you wanted to know. Back to how the watchdog program monitors our performance. If we went through a shift without system violations then that would mean we are operating very conservatively and were not maximizing economic dispatch ie reducing sales or purchases to neighboring utilities or reducing internal economics. Unfortunately the machine does not know when you are operating conservatively and wasting money but it does know when you are violating limits which is unavoidable consequence of operating close to limits. The system is dynamic and load swings occur all the time plus security interface limits are buffered with a margin of safety (except for Timmins ha ha) So the end result is do a good job riding the limits and suffer some marginal sysem security limit violations to maximize economics and have the performance monitor record the violations. Or, operate the power system ultraconservatively and waste rate payers money (me) but have no performance record violations. The computer sees the lazy approach as a good thing. There of course is a third scenario that Captain Kirk used but I would not call it a choice. Change the rules - fool the computer. Manually adjust limit parameters in the security application program so you never appear to be in violation. Buy from LG2? Currently we borrow energy from Quebec storages during high cost production periods and replace the energy off peak or during lower cost Ontario production periods. HQ gets a healthy premium on the energy banking. Lots of money made/saved by both parties. They of course are always trying to figure out how much cash they can get from us thus they are always coming up with a multple options in an attempt to measure pain. Its a fabulous game where often we accept the pain and pay more from some one else to avoid showing our cards. The other way too. Buy from a third party to replace the bank because you don't have cheap generation when you should (during low demand period) but you don't want them to know that. That is another story and a business unit I left behind or should I say did not care to follow doun town. Office Christmas parties - Have not been to one ages. Way to much kissing going on. Computers have their place and are good at well defined chores. But even with the horsepower we have at the control center we still do evacuation procedures several times a year where we leave the $150 million dollar bomb resistant, bullet proof hiding place and take control of the power system from the back up control center which has a couple of old strip charts and a rudimentary generation control facility. We still operate the system very close to maximum limits with the aid of hand held calculators. Its are way of saying that people control the system the not the computer. Unfortunately the Nuclear plants don't have the option. They must shut down during duplicate computer failures due to regulations. It is ironic that the operators are not trusted to control the reactor at steady state power levels with both computers down but the rule itself will create a higher risk scenario by forcing the operators to upset the units reactivity levels during manual shut down procedure. Got to end this thing, sorry for going on and on. John

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next