They’re a common sight in industrial areas.

Their orange glow shining onto locked up warehouses.

From atop power poles.

But with no power meter to be found anywhere.

And an answer

Well, I finally found the backstory to these lights in the State Electricity Commission of Victoria’s 1989 annual report, under their list of electricity tariffs – it was a fixed service charge.

Security Lighting (Watchman Floodlighting)

Generally available to all customers, except private domestic premises, for all night security floodlighting of buildings, property, etc.

Initial charge per lamp
$150.50

Charge per month according to Lamp type/size as follows:

125W mercury
$8.75

250W mercury
$15.05

400W mercury
$21.30

150W sodium
$15.00

250W sodium
$18.00

400W sodium
$22.05

*Initial charge covers the provision, erection and eventual removal of the lamp.

The difference between sodium vapour and mercury vapour lamps is the colour temperature – yellow versus blue.

And that led me to Ergon Energy in Queensland, also uses the ‘Watchman’ lighting brand.

Watchman lights are different to street lights. Street lights are used to illuminate public thoroughfares such as streets and roads. Watchman lights can be used for security or safety to illuminate areas such as public parks, private car parks, and pathways.

Watchman lights are installed and maintained by us. We will be able to advise you on the type and size of watchman light you might need once we receive your connection enquiry or application.

Watchman lights are usually connected to our network via an unmetered supply (UMS) connection, meaning it doesn’t need an electricity meter. This is because the electricity usage is predictable or can be accurately calculated without a meter.

And despite the privatisation of Victoria’s electricity network, the ‘Watchman Floodlighting’ name is still used today by Powercor.

Agreement for the Installation of (Watchman) Security Floodlighting

An Installation Charge will be payable for each light prior to installation. This installation charge applies to
each light and excludes ongoing charges applied by the electricity Host Retailer.

LED medium output
$ 2,597.10

LED high output
$ 3,115.20

That’s some massive cost inflation!

So who foots the power bill?

Officially, these lights are considered a “franchise unmetered load“:

electrical installations that are connected to the distribution network without an energy meter and must purchase the energy through the respective local retailers. Examples include bus shelter lights, public phone booths, traffic lights and some public electric barbecues.

Or an “unmetered supply“:

The power supply to lighting is not metered. Instead, distributors bill Council with an estimated average of energy consumption per light multiplied by total number of lights and hours of usage. The estimated average is a scientifically determined standard for each light type, agreed to by the regulator and published in ‘load tables’

So the beneficiary of the watchman lighting has to pay a monthly charge, but can’t choose their energy retailer.

In most cases, you can’t switch retailers with an unmetered supply.

Most unmetered supplies (UMS) are linked to a specific retailer based on location and the distribution patch you’re in. There are some exceptions, for some devices. You’ll need to ask your retailer about your particular UMS device.

But there is an incentive to audit these lamps, as sodium vapour and mercury vapour fixtures are costly to run. In 2020 the City of Merri-bek audited the ‘watchman’ lights paid for by Council, upgrading some lights while removing those no longer needed, achieving estimated savings of $30,000 a year and 100 tonnes of carbon emissions.

Further reading

The ‘Flood Lighting’ section of the Queensland Public Lighting Construction Manual has examples of ‘watchman’ floodlight installs.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Private security lighting on public poles appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

In the beginning, the State Electricity Commission of Victoria (SECV) was responsible for the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity over the entire state of Victoria.^*

(Well, *almost* all of it.)

SECV annual report 1972

But then in the 1990s Jeff Kennett carved up the SECV into a web of different generation, transmission and distribution business – ready for privatisation.

The responsibility for the distribution of electricity to individual consumers was split into five geographic regions – CitiPower supplying the Melbourne CBD; United Energy and Jemena the middle suburbs; and Powercor and SP AusNet from outer suburbs of Melbourne and into the Victorian countryside.

Essential Services Commission diagram

But how do you draw the line between the different electricity distribution businesses?

Map from www.energy.vic.gov.au

You follow the power lines.

Based on how the SECV originally structured their distribution network.

Essential Energy diagram

Zone substations convert electricity at 66kV down to 22kV, and you can hide one on a suburban street – there would be about a hundred of them scattered around Melbourne alone.

But zone substations need to be supplied with power, which comes from much larger terminal stations. You can see their massive 220 kV transmission lines from a mile away, so there are only a dozen around Melbourne.

Which leads us back to the “this pole belongs to [power company]” signs…

Turns out some zone substations have 66 kV power lines that pass pass through areas that belong to other distribution companies on their way to the nearest terminal station, so the signs are needed so the two companies know who is responsible for maintaining a given pole.

And another mess

In the Victorian electricity industry the 1990s reforms there is a second market subject “competition” – multiple energy retailers all competing to sell you the exact same electrons to you, but at wildly different prices.

All electricity retailers in Victoria are required to give consumers a “Default Offer” – a fixed price set by the government which is considered to be reasonable to both parties.

Unfortunately there is one part you don’t get a choice in – each of the five energy distributors set their own ‘daily supply charge’ which all retailers have to pass on to you.

As of 2023 people living in the United Energy region only pay $1.0753 per day to have an electricity connection, while those in the Powercor area get slugged $1.3102 per day.

You’d hate to be right on the boundary of two distributors, and living on the side that has to pay more!

As for a real solution?

The other solution would be to ditch this whole charade of “competition” and just nationalise this mess of separated distribution and retail electricity utilities.

When I first tweeted this back in mid-2022 I was hoping we’d eventually see a political party with the guts to do that, and a few months later, one came close – promising to deliver “government ownership of energy generation”.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post “This power pole belongs to” appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

A mystery

My story starts in April 2010, when I paid a visit to Ardeer to photograph the procession of passing trains bound for Ballarat, and found a row of brand new power poles awaiting the installation of overhead cables.

I visited again in March 2011, and the poles were still in the same unfinished state.

And again in September 2011.

At the time I didn’t think too much about the power lines, but on closer inspection they were nowhere to be seen! So where did they go?

The backstory

As Melbourne’s west has expanded, so has the load placed on the electrical network that serves it – with Keilor Terminal Station bearing the brunt of demand.

So the Australian Energy Market Operator made the decision that a new 220kV / 66kV terminal station should be built to share the load, located beside the existing high voltage power lines at Deer Park.

As well as a new 66kV / 22kV zone substation to supply the growing suburbs and industry of Truganina.

And a web of new 66kV high voltage power lines to tie together the new and existing zone substations.

Local communities caught unaware

However for the residents of Ridgeway Parade in Sunshine West, the appearance of 66 kV power lines along their street in June 2010 caught them by surprise – leading to work being suspended.

Power struggle in Sunshine and Ardeer on lines
Brimbank Leader
1 June 2010
Andre Awadalla

Sunshine West and Ardeer residents have vowed to fight a move to install new overhead power lines in their area.

And while electricity supplier Powercor says it has temporarily suspended work on the project to listen to community concerns, it maintains the project will go ahead.

Sunshine West resident Larissa Stewart said about 70 residents concerned about the overhead power lines gathered at Ridgeway Parade Kindergarten last week.

“People are very angry that this has proceeded without consultation,” Ms Stewart said. She said residents in and around Ridgeway Pde were worried about the health effects of electromagnetic radiation, the visual impact of the powerlines and property values if the power lines were not placed underground.

“It’s going to devalue the properties in the area, absolutely,” Ms Stewart said.

Derrimut state Greens candidate and former councillor Geraldine Brooks said an unanimous resolution was passed at last week’s meeting that the community wanted the lines placed underground.

Ms Brooks said Powercor had failed to consult with residents and that some of the power poles were only 10m from houses and 8.5m from the railway line, raising safety concerns.

Powercor spokesman Damien Batey said it was “regrettable” that Powercor had not consulted with residents before work began.

He said that was an “oversight”, rather than a deliberate attempt to withhold information.

Mr Batey said work had been suspended “while we work through community concerns”.

But he said that while placing the power lines underground had been considered, it would be “incredibly cost prohibitive”.

Mr Batey also said that a report Powercor had commissioned from an independent consultant showed that there was “a very, very low risk of any health concerns” as a result of the power lines and that any electromagnetic radiation would be “well below” levels of acceptable exposure.

The project will supply power to growing industrial areas in the west and supplement residential power.

With the Brimbank City Council becoming involved in the fight

Powerlines raise ruckus
The Advocate
26 July 26, 2010
Ruza Zivkusic

As Sunshine West and Ardeer residents step up their fight against the installation of new overhead powerlines in the area, an electricity supplier is planning a beautification program to replace trees it removed.

Brimbank Council is negotiating with Powercor to pay $40,000 for street tree planting. The company had removed three trees on Ridgeway Parade because of the risk of them growing into the overhead lines.

Powercor spokesman Damien Batey said the company would present its plans to residents shortly.

Ardeer resident Larissa Stewart yesterday met with concerned neighbours to form an action group to oppose the overhead lines.

Work has been stopped since last month while Powercor conducts consultation. Residents fear electro-magnetic frequency emissions from the lines will result in increased health risks.

Ms Stewart claimed residents’ calls and emails to Powercor were going unanswered. “A lot of us have made multiple attempts to make phone calls but haven’t had any response.

“Powercor has only distributed letters to our residents about their intentions in English, but 90 per cent are from non-English-speaking backgrounds and most are Vietnamese.”

Installation of the lines by Powercor will supply power to Paramount Industrial Park and nearby residential areas. The council last week adopted a report to continue advocating on behalf of the community affected by the proposal, requesting that Powercor minimise the impact of the powerlines on streetscape character through tree planting and alternative route alignments.

But Ms Stewart repeated calls for the lines to be placed underground.

“They wouldn’t have the lines through the eastern suburbs 13 kilometres from the CBD,” Ms Stewart said. “They have put powerlines in an open space area where we used to walk the dogs and the kids and have a little bit of open space.

“We thought we’d buy something we knew. We knew where the railway line was, where the schools and the facilities are and all of a sudden, nine years down the track, our happy little community has an upheaval because of a big organisation.”

Mr Batey said the lines had been designed to ensure an “extremely low” level of EMF emission, representing less than 0.7per cent of the prescribed maximum levels of exposure from the relevant authorities.

“This has been determined through scientifically proven research and validated by independent experts,” he said.

Residents sharing worries about reduced property values and health concerns in a letter to the editor.

Residents call for powerline action
Sunshine Star Weekly
24 August 2010

As concerned residents, we are protesting Powercor’s proposed High Voltage overhead powerline through the suburbs of West Sunshine and Ardeer. To this effect, we would appreciate your support in once again highlighting this urgent matter.

The 66kV powerline, proposed to facilitate the new industrial estate west of the Ring Rd in Ardeer, will both endanger the health of the community and its children and slide the area into an urban wasteland of unsightly powerlines and falling real-estate values, effectively condemning that part of Sunshine and Ardeer into an almost third world environment for years to come.

Powercor’s refusal to recognise the potential dangers of overhead High Voltage power and its refusal to “underground” the line is alarming.

While Powercor supports its intended action by claiming to be guided by World Health recommendations and Australian standards, it refuses to recognise these guidelines as being outdated (1998) and in need of urgent revision.

Recent epidemiological research, including WHO findings, has confirmed an undeniable association between electro-magnetic exposure and childhood leukaemia and many world authorities have both expressed concerns about the current inadequate limits of allowable EMF emissions and called for precautionary measures in the installation of High Voltage power.

Furthermore, while Powercor claims that “undergrounding” is too expensive and that regulations require it to pursue “the lowest cost options”, it turns a blind eye to the costs imposed on the community through devaluation of homes and environment and potential medical costs in treating EMF induced leukaemia, not to mention the emotional cost of suffering, sickness and loss of loved ones to cancer.

One can only ask the question: what price do we place on human life? For a multi-national company with huge yearly profits, it seems that safeguarding the health of our children and environment is far less important than protecting profits.

As a major utility and licence holder, Powercor owes the community a duty of care. We plead that Powercor reconsiders its options and exercises a more precautionary attitude by “undergrounding” the line.

Elizabeth and Micheal Kononada,
West Sunshine.

And unhappy with the alternative options presented by Powercor.

Powercor’s options fail to allay fears
The Advocate
27 September 2010
Monique Ebrington

Brimbank residents marched to Parliament House last week to protest against alternatives offered by electricity distributor Powercor.

More than 25 Ardeer and Sunshine West residents took part in the protest, which followed a community meeting of residents, councillors, local MPs and Powercor representatives on September 14. The meeting came after lengthy consultations with residents concerned about the potential impacts of new above-ground powerlines on their health and on house prices.

Rather than the initial plan to run above-ground powerlines along Ridgeway Parade in Ardeer, Powercor put forward three alternative options to residents.

Powercor spokesman Hugo Armstrong said the alternative choices were “the only realistic options to solve the issue”.

The options are a change to the route of the overhead powerlines, an increase to the height of the structures, or for the lines to be placed underground. Ardeer resident Larissa Stewart said residents were “unhappy” at the options presented to them.

“Absolutely none of the alternatives have Powercor fully funding the project,” Ms Stewart claimed. “Powercor is a privately owned company that reports to shareholders. They are asking the council to fund infrastructure that’s going to return funds to private shareholders.”

She said Brimbank was a community that desperately needed funding for other services.

“I think one of the reasons the community is so passionately against it is because it takes money away from a community that doesn’t have a lot.”

A Powercor spokesman said that due to regulations, Powercor could fund $2 million towards the underground option and Brimbank Council or residents would have to fund the remaining $900,000. He said the other options did not require co-contribution. “We simply cannot underground every powerline in the state and expect our customers to absorb those costs.”

The existing powerlines servicing Ardeer and Sunshine West are operating at 30 per cent above the optimal load.

Powercor said residents could expect power outages over summer if a new high-voltage circuit was not provided to the region.

But somewhat surprisingly, a year later residents got the underground power lines they wanted, thanks to extra funding from the state government.

It’s power to the people
Brimbank Weekly
22 November 2011
Benjamin Millar

Ardeer and Sunshine West residents have successfully campaigned for high-voltage powerlines to be placed underground, proving people power can prevail over corporate giants.

Families gathered at Ardeer Community Park on Saturday to celebrate their win following the completion of recent major works in the area.

Geraldine Brooks, of the Ardeer and Sunshine West Powerlines Action Group, said the controversial 66,000-volt powerline proposal was sprung on the community by electricity distributor Powercor without concern for residents’ health and visual amenity.

“Sixty-six thousand-volt powerlines through our community would have exposed families to high electromagnetic field levels,” she said.

Residents learned of the lines only when Powercor began erecting poles on Ridgeway Parade early last year.

“We found that completely unacceptable and made sure the proponent, Powercor, got this message loud and clear throughout a year of community meetings, protests, letter-writing, petitions and publicity,” Ms Brooks said.

Following pressure from residents and Brimbank Council, the State Government’s Powerline Relocation Committee agreed in June to help Powercor fund the $2.8million project.

The underground lines will supply power to Paramount Industrial Park in Deer Park and nearby residential areas.

Western Metropolitan Greens MP Colleen Hartland said the campaign was a great example of people power. “This community forced a multinational company to back down – it just goes to show what can be achieved when the local community works together.”

Footnote – another struggle

Hot on the heels of the fight against high voltage power lines, in 2013 the residents of Ridgeway Parade had a new project on their doorstop – Regional Rail Link.

They were worried about the increased number of trains using the existing railway.

Rail noise.

Tall noise walls along the rail corridor.

And delays to road traffic at the Fitzgerald Road level crossing.

And so formed the “Fix the Links Residents Rail Action Group” to campaign for their interests.

Group for rail link but want proper planning
Sunshine Star Weekly
30 October 2012
Vanessa Valenzuela

More than 100 angry Brimbank residents rallied at Ardeer Station last weekend, calling on the Regional Rail Link Authority to postpone construction work on the multi-billion dollar project.
The ‘Fix the Links’ Residents Rail Action Group voiced their concerns about an increase in noise, pollution and traffic congestion in the area as a result of the Regional Rail Link.

Brimbank resident Maurice Sibelle said the group wanted the rail link to go ahead, but were asking the authority to address their concerns before commencing construction work.

“There are some misconceptions in the community that we are opposed to the Regional Rail Link but we are not,” Mr Sibelle said.

“We want to present to the community and all interested parties that there is an intelligent response to what the government is doing and they are rushing ahead with this project.”

“Our fear is that it will take so long to adopt the policy that the RRL will be finished and the money will be spent, and we will be left with is the problem that is still there, and there is no plan to fix it,” he said.

Greens MP Colleen Hartland said there are a number of serious and significant community concerns regarding the Regional Rail Link that need to be addressed.

“I share the key concerns of the community and the Fix the Links residents group – noise, diesel pollution and access issues at rail crossings,” Ms Hartland said.

“Noise and diesel pollution concerns have been raised by communities all along the rail corridor from West Melbourne all the way to Deer Park, and these concerns are justified.

“Electrifying the line and running modern electric trains would resolve both of these issues to a large extent.”

Brimbank Council’s General Manager of Infrastructure and Environment Paul Younis said council would seek to facilitate consultation between the Regional Rail Link Authority, ‘Fix the Links’ and other residents relating to concerns about the railway corridor between Sunshine and Deer Park.

“Council continues to play a strong advocacy role on behalf of the community in order to realise optimal community outcomes from the Regional Rail Link project,” Ms Younis said.

“Further consultation is planned once the Department of Transport’s Draft Passenger Rail Infrastructure Noise Policy is finalised at the end of the year.”

A spokesperson for the RRL said the project will continue to comply with all relevant environmental legislation, standards and guidelines, including those on noise and air quality.

For more information about the ‘Fix the Links’ action group visit fixregionallraillink.blogspot.com.au

But this time around, the state government was not on their side – they built the massive steel noise walls along the rail corridor anyway.

And the level crossing at Fitzgerald Road was left untouched, despite the massive delays to road traffic caused by the extra trains now passing through it.

A situation not addressed until 2020, when the Fitzgerald Road level crossing removal project was given the go ahead.

Footnote: a few more gory details

The two underground feeders are ‘SU024’ and ‘SU032’ – running 2.861 kilometres and 3.319 kilometres respectively.

In 2015 the Sunshine zone substation served by the underground power lines was itself upgraded.

Sunshine zone substation refurbishment

Sunshine Zone Substation (SU) supplies electricity to over 25,000 customers including domestic, commercial and industrial in the Sunshine, Ardeer, Deer Park, Laverton North, St Albans, Caroline Springs and Derrimut areas.

In response to the existing SU transformers nearing end of life and additional load requirements brought on by new data centres in the area, Powercor commenced a program to refurbish and redevelop the zone substation over the 2012 to 2017 period.

The SU zone substation comprised four transformers and outdoor discrete HV switchgear. Two transformers are in service and a group of two smaller transformers are available for contingency operation. The transformers have no voltage regulation and are of limited use. All transformers at the station are aged and in poor condition.

The HV switchgear (outdoor circuit breakers) are aged and also in poor condition. The HV bus structure is currently supported as a long term temporary measure with scaffolding. Other station components including the capacitor banks, buildings and fences are in poor condition.

To finalise the redevelopment of the SU zone substation, Powercor needs to decommission and remove two of the old transformers and associated equipment. This is contingent upon the establishment of Deer Park Terminal Station (DPTS) to enable load transfers.

As part of the works for the new Deer Park Terminal Station.

Powercor undertook a joint Regulatory Test with Jemena Electricity Networks and the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) to address a system limitation at the Keilor Terminal Station (KTS), and on the sub-transmission lines from KTS that serves the Melton (MTN), Sunbury (SBY) and Sydenham (SHM) zone substations. SBY and SHM are zone substations for Jemena.

The final report was published on 1 May 2012 which recommended the construction of a new terminal station at Deer Park (DPTS). The regulatory test demonstrates that the works are prudent and efficient and that the option selected maximises the net economic benefit to consumers. Other key elements of the report include:

• construction of 66kV sub-transmission lines from DPTS to a new zone substation at Truganina (TNA);
• construction of 66kV sub-transmission lines to transfer the existing MLN zone substation to DPTS, relieving constraints at KTS. As part of this work, the existing KTS to MLN and MLN to SBY
66kV sub-transmission lines will be reconfigured to bypass MLN and establish a KTS to SBY2 line. This maintains the required third supply to the SHM and SBY 66kV loop exiting KTS, which also
supplies Gisborne (GSB) and Woodend (WND) zone substations; and
• construction of 66kV sub-transmission lines to transfer existing Sunshine zone substation (SU) to DPTS, relieving constraints at KTS. As part of this work, the existing KTS to SU2 and SU to
Sunshine East (SSE) 66kV sub-transmission lines will be re-configured to supply SSE via its own loop from KTS.

With the upgraded distribution network commissioned in 2017.

Powercor diagram

Further reading

• Ardeer – West Sunshine Powerlines Action Group
• Fix Regional Rail Link residents group

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Ardeer, Sunshine West and high voltage power lines appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Nicole Cleary photo via The Age

On the trail

The massive pylons and quad bundle conductors look just like those on the 500 kV twin circuit Moorabool-Portland transmission line I wrote about the other month.

I’ve been a fan of this transmission line for years.

The lush green grass suggested dairy country around Mortlake, not the wheat fields of the Pleurisy Plains.

But there was one big clue – the pair of transposition towers in the background.

A transposition tower is a transmission tower that changes the relative physical positions of the conductors of a transmission line in a polyphase system. A transposition tower allows these sections to be connected together, while maintaining adequate clearance for the conductors. This is important since it distributes electrical impedances between phases of a circuit over time, reducing the problem of one conductor carrying more current than others.

Double-circuit lines are usually set up with conductors of the same phase placed opposite each other. This reduces the reactance due to mutual inductance; the reactance of both circuits together is less than half that of one circuit. For example, a section of a line may be (top-to-bottom) phases A-B-C on the left, also phases C’-B’-A’ on the right. The next section may be B-C-A on the left, also A’-C’-B’ on the right. Therefore, the rotation on each side of the tower will be opposite.

But would a set of transposition towers be big enough to spot on Google Maps?

And away I go

My initial theory was that the photo couldn’t be taken *that* far from Melbourne or off a main road – normal people don’t go driving for hours down bush tracks just to photograph power lines – so I made a virtual visit to the Moorabool Terminal Station outside Geelong.

Google Maps

My first location of note on Google Maps – a hub of activity outside Cressy, where the transmission lines were being repaired.

Google Maps

Six pylons came tumbling down to earth in January 2020 following extreme winds.

ABC News photo

The outage shut down the Portland aluminium smelter, until temporary repairs were completed to allow power to be restored.

The Standard photo

Then off across empty plains until Lismore – where I found two parallel single circuit pylons.

Google Maps

But this wasn’t the transposition towers I was looking for, but somewhere I’ve been meaning to visit in person – the spot where the 500 kV line crosses over the single circuit Ballarat to Terang 220 kV line.

Google Street View

As I continued west, the paddocks started to turn green, and I found another place I’m yet to visit – Mortlake Terminal Station.

Google Maps

And the fossil gas fired Mortlake Power Station that relies on it.

Origin Energy photo

And finally something that matched what I was looking for – a pair of single circuit transposition towers in the middle of a twin circuit transmission line, outside the locality of Willatook.

Google Maps

Following Google Street View along Malseeds Road found the transposition towers.

Google Street View

But given the transmission line turns to the right before reaching the transposition towers, I needed to head west – Willatook-Warrong Road was the next road to take.

Google Street View

Now to see if it was the same set of pylons.

Nicole Cleary photo via The Age

And boom .

Google Street View

A match!

And one last detail

The little sign in the background of the original photo looked like a ‘Danger: Gas Pipeline’ sign, but the only gas network diagrams I could find lacked sufficient detail to confirm.

AEMO gas pipeline network map

And over at Open Infrastructure Map the only feature at the location was the 500 kV transmission line I’d been following since Moorabool.

Open Infrastructure Map

So an adventure for another day.

Further reading

Some more detail on the 2020 transmission line pylon collapse at Cressy.

• AEMO Preliminary Report – Victoria and South Australia Separation Event – April 2020
• AusNet Services cost pass through application – July 2020
• Energy Safe Victoria incident report – November 2020

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post On the trail of a high voltage transmission line appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

In the beginning

The very first power stations in Victoria were small affairs, operated by an multitude of private companies, burning black coal imported from New South Wales.

City of Melbourne Art and Heritage Collection – image 1088291

But as the reliable supply of electricity grew more important, this reliance on imported fuel became untenable, so the State Electricity Commission of Victoria was established to exploit the brown coal reserves of the Latrobe Valley for base load power generation.

Photo via Yallourn Association

With additional peak load capacity provided by hydro-electric generation – first from Kiewa and Eildon, and later the Snowy Mountains hydro-electric scheme.

While at the same time, the scale of brown coal fired power stations also grew, leading to bigger and bigger holes in the Latrobe Valley.

Hunting hydrocarbons in Bass Strait

The hunt for offshore oil in Australia commenced in 1960, when BHP started exploring the waters of Bass Strait, but it was natural gas they found in February 1965. Development of the offshore platforms commenced.

And by March 1969 the first gas arrived at the onshore gas processing plant

Minister for Fuel and Power, George Oswald Reid, was excited about the new fuel.

The discovery of natural gas opens up far-reaching possibilities for Victoria, but it would be premature for me to forecast its precise effect at this stage. Natural gas is a very attractive fuel for power generation because it is clean and convenient to use. Natural gas could be used by burning the fuel in gas turbines in which the turbine is turned by hot gases instead of steam in the same way as in a jet aircraft engine. This type of machine is particularly suitable for quick starting and short period running.

And saw it’s limits.

I have already explained its possible use for peak load generation, and it will suffice here for me to mention the tremendous quantity of gas which needs to be proved before it can be effective for base load use. To supply a station of 600 to 700 megawatts capacity, it would be necessary to have available reserves of 150 million cubic feet a day for 30 years or 1.5 million million cubic feet in all. This represents about five times the present consumption of manufactured gas in Victoria and is more than the total capacity for the first Gippsland shelf field.

But the State Electric Commission of Victoria was facing a different problem – peak load capacity.

For the past ten years and up to 1974, most increments to peak load capacity have been provided by hydro-electric generation, first from Kiewa and Eildon, and more recently from the Snowy Mountains hydro-electric scheme.

The planned development of the Snowy project is due to be completed in 1974 and, as there is limited scope for further hydro development in Victoria and at Snowy, except perhaps for pumped storage type schemes, it will be necessary to consider installing thermal plant to meet this section of the demand.

So the discovery of natural gas had come at an opportune time.

Enter Newport Power Station

With an existing briquette fired power station at Newport reaching the end of its economic life, and abundant natural gas now available, the State Electricity Commission had a plan – build a 1,000 MW gas fired power station on the site.

SECV artists impression – NAA item ID 8295158

It would be flexible enough to follow the load curve compared to the brown coal fired power stations, and adaptable from peaking to near base loads. Authorisation was given in 1971, with completion expected by 1976 for the first 500 MW unit, and 1978 for the second.

SECV artists impression – NAA item ID 8295157

But the usage of ‘premium’ natural gas to generate electricity was attacked by many, including Val Doube, Member for Albert Park.

Many examples show that human beings are inclined to rush into situations and then find that they must take the most expensive steps to repair the damage they have done. In Victoria we have a new toy – natural gas – and we propose to burn it in the most wasteful fashion to manufacture electricity.

In this power station it is proposed to burn more of this precious resource than is burnt in all the factories and homes in Victoria. This is a most wasteful proposition. It is not as though the sources of energy available to use were inexhaustible. Many countries are confronted with severe problems because of the obvious limits to the energy available from fossil fuel. Even though we appear to be rich in resources for the moment, it is our duty to use them carefully.

If natural gas were properly used, there would be a much better return from its energy. Only 38 per cent of the potential energy of natural gas will be available as electricity from Newport. Much of the rest will be wasted in that it will be used for cooling and similar purposes.

If natural gas were used directly in homes and factories, 70 per cent of its potential energy could be used. There is a potential shortage of fuel in the world, and the energy and heat potential of natural gas should be used in the way I have suggested. That would extend the life of the existing wells.

But the State Electricity Commission had a bigger problem with their Newport project – an emerging green movement opposed the construction of a power station in the middle of Melbourne, and sympathetic trade unions placed green bans on the project, stopping construction.

To resolve the deadlock, in 1973 state government tasked the newly-formed Environmental Protection Authority to conduct a public inquiry into the project. After a number of public hearings and appeals, in April 1977 the Newport Review Panel submitted a final report, concluded that only one of the two 500 MW units should be built.

Work on the power station was restarted by union workers, despite the work bans still being in place, with the project completed by mid-1980, and delivering power later that year.

Emergency generation at Jeeralang

With construction of Newport Power Station delayed, the supply of electricity to the growing state of Victoria was placed at risk. In mid-1977 the State Electricity Commission recommended the installation of 200 MW of gas turbines in the Latrobe Valley, with a new power station able to be imported and assembled within two or three years, despite their smaller capacity and higher fuel costs meaning they were best suited to supplying short duration peaks.

The four Siemens Industries V93.1 open-cycle gas turbines entered service in early 1979 at a cost of around $30 million.

But with power shortfalls still forecast, in 1977 the State Government convened the Emergency Gas Turbines Inquiry, which recommended a second batch of gas turbines should be installed at the Latrobe Valley site, but equipped with water injection equipment to reduce emissions. This block of three Alstom Atlantique MS-9001 open-cycle gas turbines went into service in 1980 at a cost of around $35m

Today known as the Jeeralang Power Station, the gas turbine are used as a peaking facility during periods of peak demand, as well as a black start facility to restore power to the grid in the event of major system failure.

Towards a coherent policy

In 1985 the Victorian Government released a policy statement titled ‘Victoria’s Energy: Strategy and Policy options’, which touched on the use of natural gas for electricity generation.

Victorian Government policy at present prohibits the use of natural gas for electricity generation in the new power stations. However, SECV has proposed that new gas turbine generators be considered for use as a contingency measure if electricity load growth is higher than planned for.

In considering the mid-term options for power development, the Government has re-affirmed its desire to avoid planning on the basis of commitment to new gas fired power stations. The use of additional gas turbines beyond those already installed at Jeeralang should also be unnecessary if present efforts to more flexibly program construction have the desired result. Should an unexpected surge in demand or delay in construction emerge, then the Government would re-examine this issue.

Major expansion of the usage of natural gas would have significant impacts on the lifetime of gas supply developed from reserves in Bass Strait. While it is not possible to quantify impacts, one general effect will be to provide encouragement for gas explorers to discover and prove up further deposits of natural gas. The Victorian region. generally acknowledged to have a good prospectivity for gas, but most exploration at present is concentrated on oil because the existing gas market is well supplied by known gas fields.

A position reinstated by the Natural Resources and Environment Committee in their April 1988 report “Electricity Supply and Demand Beyond the Mid-1990’s“, who examined the use of natural gas for power generation in great detail.

The supply options originally proposed by SECV for consideration by this Inquiry for the period beyond the mid-1990’s did not include gas fired developments. Present Victorian Government policy prohibits the use of natural gas for electricity generation in new power stations. The Committee wrote to SECV requesting that information on gas fired options be included in SECV evidence.

Additional gas fired generating plants could be of the open cycle combustion turbine type (like Jeeralang), or combined cycle plants where the high temperature exhaust gases from one or more combustion turbines are fed into a heat recovery boiler driving an additional steam turbo-generator. SECV evidence indicated that gas fired steam cycle plant (like Newport D) has neither cost nor efficiency advantages over the newer technology combined cycle plant, so this plant configuration was not pursued further.

The location of gas fired plant is more flexible than that of brown coal fired power stations which are normally sited close to their associated mines because of costs and difficulties associated with long distance transport of brown coal. Suitable gas turbine sites would normally be located in the vicinity of an existing gas pipeline and high voltage transmission line.

The capital cost per unit of output capacity of open cycle gas turbine driven generating plant is substantially lower than that of other forms of thermal power generating plant. SECV’s estimates indicate that the capital cost per unit of power generated for gas turbines would be about half that of a Loy Yang B or Oaklands unit and less than a third of the cost of any other brown coal fired unit.

When used for peak and intermediate load duty, gas turbines are more economic than the higher capital cost coal fired plants. The addition of further gas fired plant to the Victorian system to meet future load growth, could therefore be economically desirable, subject to the future cost and availability of natural gas.

Nevertheless, it could be expected that some reductions in the cost of electricity supply would be available from 100-200 MW of additional gas fired capacity, even at significantly higher gas prices. This possibility deserves further attention from SECV, whose evidence has concentrated on large (500 MW) blocks of gas fired plant.

A spanner in the works

In the 1980s the focus switched to the Loy Yang complex – the biggest project the State Electricity Commission ever attempted, with a total of 4,000 MW in brown coal fired generating capacity spread over four 500 MW stages, at a cost of around $5.5 billion in 1984 prices.

The first power at Loy Yang ‘A’ was generated in 1984, with the last of the units being brought online by 1988. By this time the electricity industry in Victoria had changed, and work on the next stage at Loy Yang ‘B’ stalled for a number of years, as a new focus on energy conservation reduced overall electricity demand, and questions were asked in government as to the cost efficiency of the SECV and brown coal power generation in general.

It took until 1993 for this situation to be finally resolved, when 1000 MW of the Loy Yang ‘B’ plant was cancelled, in the midst of the Kennett Government breakup of the State Electricity Commission into an array of distribution, retail, power generation and transmission companies.

David White, Shadow Minister for Energy and Minerals, attacked the disaggregation of the generating system in a 1995 debate.

Former SEC executives have said that the lack of overall planning for the expansion of the generation system would leave consumers at the mercy of the private entrepreneurs, who may or may not respond to pricing signals in the marketplace. They were referring to the major issue of security of supply. Under the government’s proposal the brown-coal fired power stations, the hydro stations and the gas-fired power stations will be broken up and sold at some stage in the future.

At some stage in the future we will need further generating capacity. For 75 years planning for the emergence of the new generation capacity has rested with the SEC. It has planned and submitted to various parliamentary committees its proposals for the expansion of the generation system. In the past the SEC submitted plans for consideration by the former Public Works Committee prior to environmental effects statements and prior to the establishment of a new brown-coal fired station.

Landing some prophetic words.

The retired SEC engineers are saying that there is no provision under the state-owned enterprise model for the emergence of the prospective brown-coal fired power station but there might be the prospect of the emergence of a natural-gas fired power station similar to Jeeralang and Newport if BHP or CRA or a similar company is so moved.

However, there is nothing intrinsic or evident in the government’s proposals to suggest how a new brown-coal fired power station might emerge, given that the gestation period from initial planning and design through to construction, completion and operation could be a period of not less than 5 and probably up to 10 years. The government is saying that the free play of market forces will see the emergence of that investment and that prospect. At the moment there is no evidence to support that proposition.

And something that only rusted on fossil fuel proponents would say today.

At some stage in the future Hazelwood will be retired – it is not far away – and there will be a need for an additional prime brown-coal capacity.

Into the new world

In 2001 the first new power station opened in Victoria under the new structure – the 300 MW Valley Power Peaking Plant. Located next door to Loy Yang power station with six 50 MW open-cycle gas turbines, the plant is now owned by Snowy Hydro.

Google Maps

The same year the 94 MW Bairnsdale Power Station opened, with two GE LM6000PD open-cycle gas turbines owned by Alinta Energy.

AGL opened the 160 MW Somerton Power Station in 2003, with four 37.5MW GT-1 Frame 6B open-cycle gas turbines.

Snowy Hydro opened the 320 MW Laverton North Power Station in 2006, equipped with two Siemens V94.2 open-cycle gas turbines.

Origin Energy opened the 556 MW Mortlake Power Station in 2012, featuring two Siemens SGTS 4000F open-cycle gas turbines.

Origin Energy photo

And the what-ifs

In 2008 Santos proposed a 1500 MW combined-cycle gas turbine power station at Shaw River, north of Port Fairy, but cancelled the project in 2010 following the cancellation of Australia’s emissions trading scheme.

AGL proposal for a 500-600 MW open-cycle gas turbine peaking power station at Tarrone in Western Victoria was approved in 2012, but has been paused due to a lack of certainty in the electricity market.

And finally, in 2019 APA Group had their 220 MW gas turbine plant at Dandenong underwritten by the Federal Government’s Underwriting New Generation Investments (UNGI) program. Stage 1 comprises 12 fast start gas-fuelled reciprocating engines, with stage 2 proposing an additional six generating units.

Sources

• HR Nicholls Society – The Newport Power Station: A History of Conflict (Jack Johnson, OBE)
• Natural Resources and Environment Committee – Electricity Supply and Demand Beyond the Mid-1990’s: part 1, part 2
• SECV annual report – 1972
• SECV annual report – 1977
• SECV annual report – 1978
• SECV annual report – 1979
• SECV – Report on Proposed Extension to the State Generating System – Yallourn W Power Station units 3 and 4
• SECV – Report on Proposed Extension to the State Generating System – Loy Yang Project

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post A history of gas fired power generation in Victoria appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Photo by Webaware, via Wikimedia Commons

The story starts with the construction of Liddell Power Station in the Hunter Valley by the Electricity Commission of New South Wales (Elcom). The first of four 500 megawatt generators was completed in 1971, followed by two more in 1972, and the fourth in 1973. The complex was the first major power station in New South Wales to be built inland, and at the time of its completion was the most powerful generating station in Australia.

However a few years later all was not well at Elcom – maintenance on the generating system was being deferred, and the massive scale of new power stations left the system without reserve capacity should any of the units go off line.

This came to a head when in March 1981, when a stator winding fault at Liddell took one of the units out of service. Initially the Snowy Mountain Scheme was used to supply peak electricity load, but an ongoing drought had reduced the amount of water available, which led to the introduction of power restrictions in late June.

In November 1981 the situation worsened, when two more generators at Liddell suffered identical stator winding faults, with further power restrictions imposed for twenty days in December 1981, and twenty-six days in March-April 1982.

Canberra Times – 1 April 1982

Leaving both industry and households in the dark.

In one day of power rationing to industry it was estimated that 253,000 workers were stood down after 7,000 factories closed at a cost of $25 million to NSW industry.

Householders were restricted to half the normal lights on in a house, no air-conditioning, no radiators and, despite possible health risks, only two hours a day for filtering swimming pools.

To fill the gap, 300 MW of gas turbine generators was hurriedly acquired.

Twelve 25MW gas turbines were purchased by the Electricity Commission of New South Wales in 1982 to assist in meeting demand during the electrical energy crisis in that year resulting from the failure of alternator windings in three generating units at Liddell Power Station.

The units were connected to the State network in April, May and June, 1982. Total capital cost was $89 million. Two units are located at Bunnerong, two at Port Kembla, four at Eraring and four at Koolkhan near Grafton.

All gas turbines were used during the energy crisis in the period April to September, 1982. Operating times totalled approximately 5,000 unit hours, 85 per cent of the energy being generated using natural gas at Bunnerong and Port Kembla.

That were expensive to run.

For statistical and costing purposes a fuel consumption of 8.3 tonnes of distillate per hour is an average value recorded for each gas turbine when operating at full load.

The gas turbines at Bunnerong and Port Kembla use natural gas as fuel and for these units the gas consumption is 15.0 MJ/GWh.

In 1982 the cost of distillate was $267 to $3 10 per tonne. These values have been used to calculate a distillate fuel cost of $88 per MWh.

Under the current gas contract, fuel cost when burning natural gas is $84 per MWh for units at Bunnerong and Port Kembla.

The cost of running a gas turbine at full load (25 MW) for one hour is:
(a) natural gas fuel – $2,100 on current gas price.
(b) distillate fuel – $2,200 on 1982 fuel price. $3,875 on 1986 replacement fuel price.

With power restrictions finally averted by the commissioning of the first 660 MW unit at the coal fired Eraring Power Station in March 1982.

Photo by Nick Pitsas, CSIRO, via Wikimedia Commons

So what happened to the gas turbines?

After the power crisis had ended, some in parliament thought they should be sold off.

In 1982, in a panic move after the blackouts of 1981 the commission, at the Government’s insistence, purchased twelve gas turbines at a cost of $130 million. These turbines are not in use, have never been used and have no use, because they are too costly to operate.

The turbines should be sold to recoup the $130 million paid for them. The excuse that the turbines are to be used for a black start is not acceptable. It is absolute nonsense to give that excuse, and the Minister well knows it.

But Elcom did make use of the gas turbines in times of peak demand.

During autumn 1983 the natural gas turbines at Bunnerong and Port Kembla were operated due to reduced water storages in the Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Scheme as a result of a prolonged drought. Operating hours totalled approximately 1,700 unit hours.

In addition, gas turbines have been operated for brief periods, as follows:

• Koolkhan to assist with a local supply problem in April 1984.
• Bunnerong and Port Kembla to assist the State Electricity Commission of Victoria following plant failures in that State.
• At all locations on one day in March 1983, as a result of loss of thermal generating plant due to switchboard flashovers.
• At all locations for three days during February 1986, during the coalminers’ strike.
• For one hour each month as a test on performance.

The units installed at Koolkhan have allowed deferment of some 330 kV transmission line projects in the area north of Armidale, with resultant cost savings of about $2 million.

Capable of generating at full load within 12 minutes of start-up, the turbines were seen as ideal emergency backup despite average annual maintenance costs of $3,200 per unit, which saw Elcom redeploy them to other parts of the network.

A review has been undertaken of the need to retain the gas turbine units.

Present forecasts of load growth indicate that there could be a need for the installation of additional combustion turbines towards the middle of the 1990’s and at this stage it has been decided not to sell any of the gas turbine units.

The benefit to the Commission of relocating gas turbines on the State grid would far outweigh the return obtained by selling this plant.

Action is in hand to relocate the Bunnerong units to the Upper Hunter district to provide “black start” capability for Liddell and Bayswater Power Stations, and it is proposed to relocate the Port Kembla units to Broken Hill as emergency standby supply in case of any failure in the transmission system.

The two units at Bunnerong Power Station were removed by 1984, and recommissioned between the Bayswater and Liddell Power Stations in 1988. They passed to Macquarie Generation as part of the breakup of Elcom, and remain in service today as the ‘Hunter Valley Gas Turbines’ owned by AGL Macquarie.

Google Earth 2020

The two units at Port Kembla were also relocated as planned to Broken Hill, being recommissioned in 1989.

Today it serves as a backup electricity supply to the isolated city of Broken Hill, should the single 220 kV transmission line be down for maintenance or an unplanned outage.

Google Earth 2020

Four gas turbines at Koolkhan fill a similar role, supplying to the far north coast of NSW should there be an outage on the 330 kV line from down south. Around 2000 Elcom successor Pacific Power decommissioned the gas turbines, which were sold off and exported to the USA. The site now lays empty.

Google Earth 2004

And finally, the four turbines at Eraring. They were passed to Elcom successor Eraring Energy, which operated two units as the ‘Northern Gas Turbines’ until they were decommissioned in 2001.

The site is now empty, but Eraring Energy did commissioned a 40 MW rated ‘Emergency Black Start Gas Turbine‘ in 2007 to meet the same role.

Google Earth 2020

Footnote: modern day equivalents

During the 2017-18 summer the Australian Energy Market Operator hired 105 diesel-powered generators that were setup at the Energy Brix Power Station site in Morwell, to supply up to 110 MW of electricity to Victoria in an emergency. They were never used, and did not return.

Aggreko Australia photo

In 2017 the South Australian government did something similar, purchasing nine new aero-derivative turbines to supply up to 276 MW of electricity to the state. After laying idle during the 2017-18 summer, they saw first use in January 2019, only be be sold to the private sector later that year.

South Australian government photo

Footnote: how did I get here?

The genesis of this post was a simple train photo, captioned “8119 and 8131 unloading at Eraring Power Station Coal Loop. 29 January 1994“.

To which someone replied:

Four 25mw diesel turbines just right of centre. I worked on some electrical modifications to these in about 1981.

And so I went this rabbit hole.

Sources

• Electricity Commission Gas Turbines Legislative Council Questions on Notice (1 February 1987)
• N.S.W. Power and the on/off Resources Boom Jim Falk and Graham Larcombe, Journal of Australian Political Economy (1983)
• Development of a Comprehensive Decision Making Framework for Power Projects in New South Wales Ayse Topal (2014)
• Inquiry concerning alleged inadequate maintenance procedures by the Electricity Commission at Liddell Power Station New South Wales Ombudsman (1983)
• The Electricity Commission of New South Wales and its place in the rise of centralised coordination of bulk electricity generation and transmission 1888 – 2003 Kenneth David Thornton (2015)
• Lifting power rationing does little to relieve the gloom Canberra Times (1 April 1982)

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Backup generators and the 1982 New South Wales power crisis appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

So what am I even on about?

ABC News looked into the topic of grid stability back in 2017.

Power grids are complex machines, dependent on the laws of physics. The national grid is designed to operate at a consistent frequency of 50 Hertz, or 50 cycles a second.

Traditional coal, gas and hydro power stations are considered “synchronous” because they use turbines or spinning wheels to produce electricity. Those spinning parts need to stay close to 50Hz to help keep the grid in synch.

But most of Australia’s installed wind and solar systems are not considered to be. That’s because they use inverters to connect to the grid, rather than spinning wheels.

If too much power is fed in relative to demand, the frequency will increase. If demand outstrips supply, the frequency drops. Regulators rely on a suite of technologies to help keep the grid frequency close to 50Hz.

Synchronous condensers are one of the technologies used to maintain the frequency of the grid, with Energy Networks Australia explaining the technical details in their piece, The age of the syncons.

What is system strength?

System strength is important as it relates to the ability of the power system to withstand changes in supply or demand while maintaining stable voltage levels.

When system strength is low, generators may not be able to remain connected to the grid, control of the power system voltage level becomes more difficult and protection systems (which control and maintain the safe operation of the network) may not operate correctly. This can result in supply interruptions to customers.

System strength is typically provided by synchronous generation such as coal or gas-fired generation or pumped hydro.

What are synchronous condensers?

Synchronous condensers are an old technology, commonly used as far back as the 1950s to stabilise power systems.

They are large machines which spin freely and can absorb or produce reactive (Alternating Current – AC) power in order to stabilise and strengthen a power system.

Synchronous condensers help when there are changes in load as they increase network inertia. The kinetic energy stored in a synchronous condenser contributes to the total inertia of the power system and is beneficial from a frequency control perspective.

What is inertia?

Inertia in the energy system refers to the continuous momentum of energy typically provided by the large spinning turbines of synchronous generators like large coal-or gas-fired power stations. This type of generation helps withstand changes in generation output and load levels to keep the system stable.

The retirement of synchronous power plants and more renewable generation coming into the energy system means there is less inertia available, so flexibility or stability must be found elsewhere in the system to back it up.

And their usage in Victoria

Until the 1990s the electricity network in Victoria was managed by a single government entity – the State Electricity Commission of Victoria.

Brown coal from the Latrobe Valley was their fuel of choice.

But despite all of the old fashioned spinning metal in their power stations, in 1966 the SECV installed a 750 rpm +125 -75 MVar at 22 kV capacity synchronous condenser at the Templestowe Terminal Station in north-east Melbourne.

Photo by Mriya, via Wikimedia Commons

A few years later a second synchronous condenser was installed at the Fishermans Bend Terminal Station, south of the Melbourne CBD.

And in 1971 a third unit at Brooklyn Terminal Station, in Melbourne’s west, with a salient pole design rotating at 750 rpm, with a rating of +110 -64 MVar at 14.5 kV, and a short time overload rating of 140 MvAr (10 min).

Following privatisation the reliability of the synchronous condensers declined, with availability falling below the 91% target in 2003. As a result network operator SP AusNet launched a refurbishment program to address degradation of stator winding sidewall and rotor pole insulation, but by 2013 only the unit was Brooklyn had been upgraded.

As a result reliability declined, with the end coming in October 2016.

AusNet Services and AEMO agreed in October 2016 that it was prudent to retire, rather than replace, these three synchronous condensers on the transmission network. These assets were in extremely poor condition and studies confirmed that their replacement would not have provided a net market benefit.

Since the agreement to retire the synchronous condensers, all three units have failed due to their poor condition. Given that the synchronous condensers were due to be retired by 1 April 2017, AusNet Services and AEMO agreed that it was not efficient to repair and return the synchronous condensers into service.

With SP AusNet realising an additional $7.0 million depreciation charge in their 2017 annual report.

Everything old is new again

In 2017 synchronous condensers hit the news, when AGL flagged them as one part of their transition away from coal fired power.

Liddell Power Station is a 2000 MW black coal fired thermal power station, commissioned between 1971-73. The site also includes associated infrastructure required for power generation, including water, coal and transmission plant.

In April 2015 AGL released a revised Greenhouse Gas Policy. The Policy outlined AGL’s commitment to the decarbonisation of our electricity generation portfolio, confirming closure dates for our coal-fired power stations. The announced closure date for Liddell is the end of 2022.

AGL believes that the installed capacity and energy output from Liddell is best replaced with lower emissions and more reliable generation, with a longer lifespan.

As part of our NSW Generation Plan we are investigating the use of one Liddell generating unit as a synchronous condenser.

As part of new solar farm proposals.

Many other wind and solar projects in Victoria and elsewhere are having to go back to the drawing board because of connection requirements the developers either ignored, or didn’t know about.

The issue is most acute in western Victoria, but is also being felt in northern Queensland and south-west NSW.

Many new projects are being told that they face significant curtailment without either adding battery storage or old-style machinery known as synchronous condensers to deal with system strength issues.

Both options are causing headaches for developers, because either way they are trashing their financial models, and could cause extensive delays to projects that many expected would begin construction anytime soon.

As a high cost fix for system flaws.

RenewEconomy has been told that a synchronous condenser could add $8-$10 million in costs to projects already tight on margins. A group of solar farms in north-west Victoria have been told, RenewEconomy understands, that their additional costs could total $60 million.

And to reinforce the South Australian power grid.

As more energy sources such as wind and solar are connected to the grid, traditional power generation sources such as gas-fired units, operate less often. This has created a shortfall in system strength which was declared by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) on 13 October 2017 and a shortfall in inertia which was declared on 24 December 2018.

A secure power system needs adequate levels of system strength and inertia, which to date have been provided by traditional synchronous generators.

Following an analysis of these options, the installation of synchronous condensers on the network was determined to be the most efficient and least cost option to ensure there is adequate system strength and inertia.

On 20 August 2019, the AER approved $166 million to fund the capital cost of delivering the synchronous condenser solution.

The first two of four planned synchronous condensers will be installed at the Davenport substation in mid-2020 and the second two will be installed at the Robertstown substation by the end of 2020. They will be commissioned by early 2021.

How things change in the course of two years!

Update for 2022

In July 2022 a 60Mvr synchronous condenser supplied by GE has been switched on at the Murra Warra wind farm in the West Murray region, enabling the project to increase export capacity to 150MW, before moving towards full capacity of 209MW.

The synchronous condenser was required as part of the since abandoned “do no harm” rules that required new generation projects to address system strength issues in the transmission network. This is now the responsibility of network operators.

Footnote: alternate sources of voltage support

Static VAR compensators are another way of stabilising the electricity grid.

A static VAR compensator (SVC) is a set of electrical devices for providing fast-acting reactive power on high-voltage electricity transmission networks. SVCs are part of the Flexible AC transmission system device family, regulating voltage, power factor, harmonics and stabilising the system.

A static VAR compensator has no significant moving parts (other than internal switchgear). Prior to the invention of the SVC, power factor compensation was the preserve of large rotating machines such as synchronous condensers or switched capacitor banks.

Four SVC units are installed on the SP AusNet Network in Victoria – two +100 -60 MVar capacity units at Rowville Terminal Station, and one +50 -25 MVar unit at each of Kerang Terminal Station and Horsham Terminal Station.

Installed by the SECV during the mid-1980s and with a technical life of between 40 and 60 years, the control systems are now obsolete technology unsupported by the manufacturer, so an upgrade program is underway to replace them with modern equipment.

Footnote: and something really fruity

Down at Wonthaggi is a real power hog – the Victorian Desalination Plant.

It is supplied with electricity by a 88 kilometre long twin circuit 220 kV AC underground transmission line – the longest of its type in the world.

With the underground cable run requiring something odd at the halfway point – a ‘reactive compensation station’.

The yard full of high voltage switchgear contains three 52 MVAr oil-filled shunt reactors to compensate for the capacitance of the underground cables.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post A history of synchronous condensers in Victoria appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Running south-west from Coldstream to Templestowe, via Chirnside Park, Wonga Park and Warrandyte, I was first tipped off to the existence of the transmission line by someone who lives in the area.

The path taken was quite easy to see on the Melway – the eastern end is located at tower T293 in Coldstream.

While the western end terminates at tower T342 in Templestowe.

Eventually I paid a visit in person, and the dead-end nature of the transmission line was easy to see.

The northern end at Coldstream is located alongside two 500 kV transmission lines.

While the Templestowe end is located among the transmission lines that serve the Templestowe Terminal Station.

But unfortunately I was no closer to finding the reasons for the lines laying abandoned, until my recent post on transmission line crossovers. What started with an exploration of power lines in Sydney, expanded to Rowville Terminal Station in Melbourne, and then down a rabbit hole of State Electricity Commission of Victoria reports.

I eventually landed on a 1983 report on transmission lines serving Melbourne by the Natural Resources and Environment Committee. The purpose of the report was as follows:

This report specifically addresses the SEC’s proposal for a 500 000 volt transmission line from Coldstream to South Morang and in particular:

(i) The need for reinforcing transmission to the 500 000 volt terminal stations in the outer metropolitan area;
(ii) The feasible route to be subjected to detailed examination of environmental issues; and
(iii) The recommended process for assessment and approval of the route in this instance.

The report detailed the current state of the high voltage transmission lines linking the power stations of the Latrobe Valley to Melbourne.

The existing transmission system from the Latrobe Valley to the Melbourne metropolitan areas consists of three 220 kV double circuit lines and three 500 kV single circuit lines.

Two of the 500 kV lines were established in the late 1960s on a northern easement in conjunction with the Hazelwood Power Station and supply the western metropolitan area from the Keilor Terminal Station (KTS). The lines were routed via Coldstream and South Morang with one line being on a direct Coldstream to South Morang easement and the other routed via Templestowe to provide for later development of supply for the north-eastern metropolitan area. The easements from Coldstream to South Morang were each approved with capacity for a second circuit, thereby providing for the four incoming 500 kV lines to South Morang.

The third 500 kV line was established in late 1982 on a southern easement via Cranbourne, Narre Warren and Templestowe, in conjunction with commercial service of the completed Yallourn W Power Station and in preparation for service of the initial Loy Yang A units. The planning permission for the section of this line between Hazelwood and Cranbourne included easement provision for two further 500 kV lines. The section between Cranbourne and South Morang was established on an existing easement.

As well as how the SEC planned to add a fourth 500 kV transmission line into the system:

The further 500 kV line from Hazelwood to Melbourne is planned to be established on the southern 500 kV easement adjacent to the existing 500 kV line from Hazelwood to Templestowe. The section of the line between Narre Warren and Templestowe has already been constructed and the Rowville to Templestowe part of this section is temporarily in service at 220 kV.

And the interesting bit – the abandonment of the transmission line between Coldstream and Templestowe.

To achieve connection of the fourth 500 kV transmission line into South Morang, the SEC propose to take the existing second 500 kV line (the southern circuit on the northern easement) directly into South Morang from Coldstream, so as to free up the section between Templestowe and South Morang for inclusion as part of the fourth 500 000 volt line.

The short section on the northern easement between Templestowe and Coldstream would then be left out-of-service until the future establishment of new 500 kV switching stations at Templestowe and Coldstream.

If that wasn’t clear as mud, this diagram depicted the current state, as well as three proposals for adding a fourth 500 kV circuit between Hazelwood and Melbourne.

Abandoning a section of high voltage transmission line sounds like an odd thing to do – something which Mr. R.F. English, resident of the Bend of Islands Environmental Living Zone immediately adjacent to the proposed transmission line easement, pointed out in his submission to the Natural Resources and Environment Committee.

The decision to take the Coldstream to Templestowe 500 kV line out of service until at least the fifth 500 kV line is constructed and required – this would probably be in at least 25 years or more.

As the Coldstream to Templestowe line is approximately 20 kilometres long, and based on $470,000 per km, this would mean a $9 million asset would remain idle and depreciating for 25 years.

This appears to me to reflect a gross planning error in the SEC’s long term plans “to scar the landscape with 500 kV power lines”.

So what ended up happening?

And you guessed it – State Electricity Commission of Victoria got their way, with the fourth 500 kV transmission line being pushed through the Bay of Islands bushland along the “LV1: second Coldstream to South Morang line” route, and the transmission line from Coldstream to Templestowe abandoned.

But will it be used in the future?

Back in the 1980s the SECV believed that a fifth 500 kV transmission line would be required by 1990 to serve the increasing energy demand of Melbourne.

But this prediction was overly optimistic – development of the massive 4,00 MW Driffield Project west of Morwell was abandoned follwing a change of government, and the Loy Yang power station petered out at 3,250 MW of the 4,400 MW capacity originally planned.

In 2009 Victorian energy network operator VENCorp dusted off the old SEC plans, in their ‘Vision 2030’ document:

Development of eastern corridor distribution

A new (fifth) 500 kV power line from the Latrobe Valley to Melbourne via the Northern easement terminating at Templestowe via Coldstream, and establishment of new 500 kV switching stations at Coldstream and Templestowe (140 km). This line would incorporate the currently unused 500 kV line between Coldstream and Templestowe.

Cost: $460 million

But with the decommissioning Hazelwood power station, no new coal fired power stations on the horizon, and the rapid growth of distributed rooftop solar and battery storage, the need for additional capacity between Melbourne and the Latrobe Valley seems redundant.

And another example

Sent in by a reader – a dead end transmission line outside the Geelong Terminal Station.

The transmission line runs north towards the Moorabool Terminal Station, but terminates a short distance to the south.

My guess – the original 220 kV circuit to Geelong was replaced by parallel 220 kV circuits on a new set of pylons, with a 220 KV circuit to Terang taking over the northern-most part of the easement.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post High voltage power lines to nowhere appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

They were located either side of Luddenham Road in the semi-rural suburb of Orchard Hills. One set to the east, the other to the west.

This is what they looked like from overhead.

In my travels around Victoria, I’ve never seen overhead line crossovers – the only examples I can think of place the lower voltage line underground, such as the Geelong-Portland 500kV line outside Bannockburn.

So what’s the story up in Sydney?

Wikipedia has something to say on everything, including overhead line crossings:

At crossings of overhead lines by other overhead lines, the two lines must be kept at the necessary safety distances between the lines and the ground. As a rule, the line with the lower voltage passes under the line with higher voltage.

Construction workers try to plan these crossings in such a way that their construction is as economical as possible. This is usually done by leaving unchanged the line that is crossed, if possible.

Undercrossings of existing lines are often constructed in proximity to the line’s pylons, since this can often be accomplished without raising the existing pylons and while keeping the necessary safety distances between the ground and the other line.

Luckily the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) has plenty of information on their website, including a handy dandy map of overhead transmission lines, as well as a network diagram showing the individual circuits that make up the national grid.

That allowed me to identify the three transmission lines I had found outside Sydney:

• Line 38 and 32: double 330kV circuits between Sydney West and Regentville,
• Line 39: single 330kV circuit between Sydney West and Bannaby, and
• Line 5A1 and 5A2: double 500kV circuits between Kemps Creek and Eraring.

So the explanation from Wikipedia seems to hold here as well – the 500kV transmission line is on the top, with the lower voltage 330kV lines sneaking below: one via a non-standard pair of pylons, the other thanks to the extra clearance from a higher than normal pylon.

And a Victorian example

One of my Twitter followers pointed out this interesting setup at the Rowville Terminal Station in Melbourne’s eastern suburbs – what looks to be a two three phase bus bars running at ground level, while aerial transmission lines pass over the top.

But they aren’t conventional air insulated bus bars, but ducts filled with sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) gas.

500kV power lines in SF6 ducts at Rowville Terminal Station, Australia [2592×1944][OC]

Such technology is usually used for underground high voltage transmission lines, but at Rowville it was for a different reason – this whitepaper by CGIT Westboro has the details:

Rowville is a 550 kV above ground installation located in Melbourne, Australia.
The sole purpose of the gas insulated bus was to safely transmit two, three phase circuits of 550 kV power across an existing 230 kV overhead transmission corridor.

The customer’s main concern in this project was the possible mechanical failure of either the 230 kV or 550 kV (if overhead lines were used) transmission towers or lines. Failure of one or the other could result in damage to the lower feeder such that outages would be much more inclusive and costly.

The grounded enclosure sheath of the CGIT, however, would protect the ground level 550 kV line from breakdown and prevent further outages to result from 230 kV line failure.

A spare phase was installed at the request of the customer as a further precaution should a single phase of CGIT experience a breakdown. In the event of single-phase failure, this would reduce the outage time to a matter of hours by simply adjusting the line feeder leads accordingly.

The tech specs are as follows:

Commissioned 1979 (first circuit)
Additional circuit commissioned 1984

Voltage Rating: 550 kV
Current Rating: 3000 A
BIL rating: 1800A
2 circuits, including spare phase of GIL
Length: 235m

An expensive, though very ingenious solution!

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post When high voltage transmission line cross over appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Massive pressure pipelines carry water down the hill to the power station.

Inside the water hits the turbines, which spin around and generate electricity.

Which is then stepped up in voltage by transformers outside the turbine house.

And then sent to consumers by high voltage transmission lines that cross the steep hillsides.

Tour details

Tours of the Murray 1 power station are free – more details at the Snowy Hydro website:

Murray 1 Power Station is the second largest power station in the Snowy Mountains Scheme. There are 10 turbines at Murray 1, each capable of producing enough electricity to supply over 95,000 houses.

Next to the power station is the Murray 1 Visitors Centre. This centre offers an exciting interactive experience with a wide range of displays, “hands on” models and exhibits.

There are BBQ and picnic areas by the water that are open to the public. Light refreshments are available in the Cafe.

All power stations in the Snowy Mountains Scheme are working power stations. There are special requirements for visitors who participate in Murray 1 Power Station inspections. These requirements are in the interests of your safety and security of our facilities. These include:

• Covered footwear must be worn (i.e thongs etc are not permitted in power stations).
• Cameras are not permitted.
• No backpacks or large bags are to be taken into power stations.
• We reserve the right to inspect any hand luggage carried on a tour.

The “no cameras” line must be a new rule, since I was snapping away when I visited.

Defunct tours

On the VirtualTourist website I found what looks like an old copy of the Snowy Hydro website, as it mentions tour options that no longer exist.

Guided tours:

• Murray 1 Power Station near Khancoban
• Tumut 3 Power Station near Talbingo
• Tumut 2 Power Station near Cabramurra

There is free access to the visitor’s gallery at Murray Group Control Centre near Khancoban, Guthega Power Station and Jindabyne Pumping Station daily between 8.30am and 4.00pm.

Inspections of the Guthega Power Station and Jindabyne Pumping Station may be arranged by contacting the authority’s information centre in Cooma.

Access at all times to viewing points and toilet facilities situated at various power stations, dams and other points of interest.

It is a pity those options no longer exist – Tumut 3 power station dwarfs that at Murray 1.

And Tumut 2 power station is located deep underground, with the tour taking visitors into the cavern that houses the turbines.

The lack of tours makes the visitors centre there rather redundant.

With privatisation of Snowy Hydro an on-again off-again possibility, presumably running public tours of power stations is no longer their top priority.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Tours of the Snowy Mountains Scheme appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.