Modern Solutions Power Systems Conference Notes

mundanemushroomsΗλεκτρονική - Συσκευές

21 Νοε 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 11 μήνες)

93 εμφανίσεις

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.


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 m
oney

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 r
egarding 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 capit
al,
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, pra
ctical

analogies and examples.
For example, it takes about one 8 oz
cu
p of oil or coal to make 1 kilo
watt hour

of power for about 10 cents.
About 16 60
-
Watt light bulbs
turned on fo
r 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, transmiss
ion, and distribution assets.
He used a quote of
Adam Smith’
s, “…the inter
ested sophistry of merchants…”
Self
-
interest, greed, and special interests
have led to many things that hav
e eroded our industry (be it de
regulation, renewable mandates, etc.).

He commented that he was a free market advo
cate.
Interesting th
at 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 ele
ctric power grid in the world?
One reason was Insull’s advocacy of consta
nt
downward pressur
e on price.
Not through competition, but through efficiency, economies of scale, and
regulation.

One very thought
-
provoking point he made…in most
s
mart
g
rid projects today, a utility will install a

smart meter
” and/or provide e
mails, 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.

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.


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
-
o
pening image for me. I checked my bill
when I got home. In the summer months, our elect
ric bill may be as much as $180/month. That’s
$6/
day, or $0.25 per hour.

A quarter per hour

f
or reliable power, anytime and in any quantity I need.
Now let’s say I d
efer a load of cl
othes, 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 brou
ght us back to the beginnings of the industry . . . a brilliant marketing campaign in the
1950s and 1960s that personified the industry’s custom
er service with Ready Kilowatt.

“…I’m always
there, with power to spare, I’m Ready Kil
owatt!” 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 applia
nces and machines. It
worked. Electric use skyrocketed.
Electric appl
iance development skyrocketed.
And in the 1960s and
1970s, utilities b
uilt power plant
s and infrastructure to match.
Contrast that today with headlines


ERCOT forecasts there may be slimmer margins than required by their operating guide
. W
e had rolling
blackouts a year ago in winter and summer, and most utilities are pushin
g

demand
-
side management


(a very politically correct term for reducin
g or deferring customer load).
This is a star
k

contrast to
Ready’s jingle.

General Session Executive Forum

CEO Perspectives on Challenges in the Electric Power Industry


Moderator: Edmu
nd 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 Ene
rgy

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
:

H
ow 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

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.


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 pow
er; 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 fi
gure 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 mo
uth 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. A
nother 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
:

Differe
nt 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 a
go; 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 ju
st 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 CP
S 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 sever
al 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 the
ir goals. Bases are a microcosm.


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.


Schweitzer
:

How have stude
nts 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 education
al

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
:

W
hat 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
in
terest
ed

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
bri
ng 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 a
go 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 sci
ence, 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. On
ly
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 l
ast 20 years. Students are broader and
thinner; that’s wh
y

a master’s degree is often times a good idea, to get some depth.

Schweitzer
:

What has happened to “courses that don’t trust”?

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.


Schulz
:

In EE they continue to be the base. There are a lot more appli
cations. 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 s
chool 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
I
nternet. Not totally sure
what customers want whether it’s more control or more information, the first challenge is getting on
the right channels of communicat
ion.

Schweitzer
:

What’s wrong with Little Bill today?

Barham
:

W
hat 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 t
he 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 availab
ility 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 a
re screaming
or get ahead of it?

Staying up on consumer needs is a challenge.

Doggett
:

Reddy was more about shifting away from
g
as in the home to
e
lectricity. Today focus is more
about shifting load off the peak, for example. Weather in Texas last summer r
esulted in tremendous
response from the public. Today’s customer is sophisticated.

Schweitzer
:

BG&E used to get on
r
adio 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.

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.


Donnelly:

Insull got a lot of things back then including the rate case! Guess we have him to th
a
nk 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 util
ities 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
:

T
ransformers! It’s a multitude of things. The expectation is for lowest cost. What else can you
provide me (cust
omer) 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 su
pport 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. T
hat 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 updat
ing
. We need a new model
t
o 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

i
t’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 favor
able 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
budge
t is trued up between cases. We are encouraged to build a robust transmission system…but that’s
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.


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 innovat
ion, 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 cust
omer 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 la
ws 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
:

C
oncerned that we are too focused on compliance rather than thinking about what the right
thing is to do.

Schulz
:

Utilities, universities and manufacturer
s 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 ut
ilities…so that a particular vendor can’t bias the
standards. So get involved in committees and standards development.


Donnelly
:

A
gree with everything said, and want to say on the record that he agrees with more tree
trimming. Many international cities ha
ve 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
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.


station, plus thermo modeling, and you can do at
-
desk modeling. This releases innovation. We need to
blend IT technology to make people m
ore 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 CO
2

stuff figured off.

From the
A
udience:

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. Th
ey 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
c
ity budget, which reduces the city tax
burden as a wh
ole. It’s hard to glamorize what people expect, but easy to make a headline.

Doggett
:

D
iscussion 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 w
ays, 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 depend
s 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

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.


utilities fall short in educati
ng 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 nucle
ar 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 su
pport. 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. Pol
l
s
an
d 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 economica
l
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
a
ffect
s

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 measure
s

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.

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.



Questions:

How do you justify the expe
nse 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 l
ike fire prevention.


They see the fire risk as the single largest risk to their company
;

they treat this is a risk management,
insurance come
s

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
. E
mployees 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 impl
ementing 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, S
EL

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
d
istribution
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 w
as

not as accurate as when
measuring these quantities
;

therefore
,

to obtain an accurate representation of the aging of a
transformer and the degrad
ation 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 fai
lure there is no interruption of the supply. With real time monitoring
,

this over
dimensioning factor could be reduced to 1.5 times


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.


Advancements in Line Protection


Bogdan Kasztenny, SEL

Single
-
pole tripping and reclosing reduces the impact of a SLG faul
t 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 reduce
s

the impact on rotating machines.

Single
-
pole tripping allows for adaptive reclosing, acceler
ating 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
subtransm
ission project
s
, 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 an
d
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 discuss
ion 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 ge
ntleman 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 tr
ansformer 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 t
he 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/
Panel
ists
:

Edmund O. Schweitzer, III Ph.D., SEL

Rhett Smith
, SEL

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.


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
:

Q
uestion for Josh:

W
hat 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 publis
h 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 ag
o this was more common
practice to get the vendors (Microsoft as an example) to respond.

Schweitzer
:

H
ow do we get the shy guys to talk?

Locke
:

A
re we connected into the U.S. Treasury, etc.
,

etc.

Bank system has the ability to tie into secret
security quic
kly for issues
,

as an example.

Schweitzer

mentions that we have some relationships to use
in this manner as well.

Axelrod
:

C
omplete integration of security into the cost, maintenance, and operations instead of being a
bolt
-
on after the fact consideration.

Schweitzer
:

I
ssue with regard to the utilities moving slower…the need for government to step in
.


Axelrod
:

S
ometimes you need an actual event to help quantify costs when a cybersecurity event occurs.


Schweitzer
:

S
o how come we can quantify the fines assoc
iated with non compliance for cybersecurity
policy?

Locke
:

R
isk modeling process.

Hypothetical analysis of certain assets can help quantify.

Schweitzer
:

W
e have an actual event (theoretically
,

if
NY Times

article is accurate):

the U
.
S
.

has used a
cyber att
ack.


Locke
:

W
e know the US has a dept. for this.

We know that China has 2
,
000 people working on cyber
warfare.

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.


Novak
:

There is a way to identify the threat, just not how, when, and what.

Locke
:

G
etting a cyber attack is a
s

simple as a virus opened in an e
mail.

Novak
:

Use of rights management to prevent access or removal of data.

Schweitzer
:

Carol pointed out that
c
ontrol center is separate
.

Audience member
:

N
eed to quantify the threat is critical.

At some point do you see us taking into
account the substat
ion 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
:

R
einforces the above statement.


Schweitzer
:

P
reference to TDM vs. Ethernet
.

Hawk
:

M
onitor for abnormal information/activity and flag it.

Smith
:

W
e 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 bloc
k
everything else (white listing).

Axelrod
:

Q
uantification; monetary loss, frequency of occurrence.

Define the risks.

Focus on these.


Schweitzer
:

H
ow do you respond to the fear mongering (FUD)?

Focus on the engineering, the science, and not the hype.

Empl
oyee threat assessment?

Novak
:

Y
es
,

we have to consider internally as well.


Axelrod
:

P
ersonnel 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


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.


1.

Distribution Protection at Transmission Speeds


Karl Zimmerman
, SEL

Key Message:
I
mprove 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
T
hrough Distribution Automation


Dave Dolezilek
, SEL

Key Message:

Use communications to reduce outage times and increase system situa
tional 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 mak
e 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 conductor
s?


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
W
el
l
D
o
Y
ou 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 Hata
way 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 va
ry voltage levels and still be in compliance with voltage
level regulations (answer
±
0 10%).


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.


5.
Where I
s 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 maint
ain 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 (f
or Lew Weingarth)

Tom Leeming, ComEd (an Exelon Company)

Charlie Henville, Henville Consulting


Summary
F
rom Panel Presentations

Godrich

Data

Center Perspective:

Huge Growth

Estimated up to 31 Gig watts of load worldwide and increasing

Reliability

F
ocus 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

U
sing d
ifferent technologies like Redstone server using
c
ell

phone chips to decrease load.

Bowen

Oil and Gas (quotes are Jim Bowen

s):


Reliability =

S
afety 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.



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.



Everything we are trying to do is to g
et 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 an
d 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.

N
eed training.

Summary of Discussion and
T
akeaways
F
rom
S
ession

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 SVC
s

for dynamic voltage response), etc
.
, but as renewable
penetration grows and coal shrinks
,

we will continue to need learn and a
dapt.

Henville

Role of Protection and
C
ontrol:

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
.”

Schweitz
er

to C. Henville.

Also on distinction between

primary assets


(power system eq
uipment) and “
secondary assets


protection and control system) and their actual importance versus their perceived importance.

TECHNICAL FOCUS

COMMUNICATION



Speakers:

David Wh
itehead, SEL

Ken Behrendt, SEL

Ken Fodero, SEL

Tim Tibbals, SEL

Rhett Smith, SEL

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.


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 remindin
g people about
the format of this conference (study, before, short presentations, lots of discussions).

Audience member
:

H
ow do trees interfere with unlicensed radio channels? Ken explained the line
-
of
-
sight cone and relative immunity to obstructions. We s
hould 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 8
7L 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
-
i
n
for state
-
of
-
the
-
art encryption.

Smith
:

Application security is an important aspect of security in addition to just securing
communications link.

Behrendt
:

C
onsidering cost per Mbps of bandwidth
,

fiber optics is the most cost
-
efficient technology.
Cons
idering 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.

Audienc
e member
:

H
ow 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 especi
ally 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 mechanism
s

in TDM vs. IP
?


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.


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
:

W
hat happens when the “data p
ipe” 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 pre
-
empted under network overload conditions.

Best Practices for Ethernet Substations


Tim Tibbals, SEL

Tibbals (
Q
)
:

The person explained they implemented 61850 GOOS
E 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
:

A
re 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 difficul
t (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 Cybersec
urity


Rhett Smith, SEL


Smith

opened asking questions related to Wed panel on cyber sec
urity
. This worked well.


Audience member
:

D
o we believe the risk is real? Most said yes. Do we believe we are going to be
attacked so? Many said yes.


Audience member

:

A
re we happy with information sharing about the threads (gov, NERC)? Many said
no.

Smith
:

W
e 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?


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.


A:

Firmware malware will be caught. If comm. signals are the concern

you need to protect the
network.


Audience member
:

R
ead only access via har
dware jumpers?


A
:
W
e have a lot of methods to provide this function.


Comment, Dave
Whitehead
, SEL
:

W
e 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 disconnect
ed 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
:

W
hat are the pract
ical 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
:

F
requent 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 applicatio
ns that need to know IED passwords.




BUSINESS FOCUS

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.


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 restore
d

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 appr
oximated 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
,
U
niversity of
T
exas

Austin

1.

Sees
±
60 degrees of angl
e 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
-
A
rea
P
rotection
E
xercise.

Six teams participated, which

was approximately 25 people.

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.


The advantage was offered that synchrophasers give continuous data that would be m
ore 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 Trans
fer Schemes



Mike Collum, SEL

People are using SEL
OGIC

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 aft
er 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 mentione
d 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 diff
erentials, 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 change
d the motor.


Audience member
:

The
SEL
-
7
10

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.



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.


Audience member
:

We wa
nt 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 an
d 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 aut
omatically.


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.


Audienc
e 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.


C
omment
, 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
.


C
omment
, 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 differe
ntial as a backup?

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.



Answer:

Yes, cost should not be a limitation; you can have two levels of protection.


Audience member
:

What shall I use: arc resistance gear o
r

AFD?


Answer:

Use both.


Audience member
:

Do we have to consider back
-
up protection for AF s
tudies
?


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 i
s 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 harden
ed

fiber.


FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 2012


BUSINESS FOCUS

ECONOMICAL SOLUTIONS

Spe
akers/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 employee
-
ownership m
odel.

Tying this into the economical solutions theme, she asked,
“H
ow 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 m
aximizing profit and shareholder
value?


She said SEL takes the long
-
term view, not looking to immediate or short
-
term fixes or profits or
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.


benefits.

She played the ESOP video.

One of the best quotes
in
that film is
from
Dave Dolezilek, who said
“I
t

s not a
bout 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/tr
acking 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
methodolo
gy.

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 th
en 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) Network
s.

D
olezilek

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 v
ideo that shows the dramatic installation experience in Vietnam,
with huge savings in copper and dollars.

C
arpenter

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 t
o 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 D
olezilek

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 rig
ht 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 Technologie
s 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 vend
or relationships and partnerships were, of which Schweitzer Engineering
Lab
oratorie
s 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 a
nd profits?

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.


(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 wi
nd 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 p
rojects
success.


Panel

Constant Improvement
I
s 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 talk
s, 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.

Ha
ving 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

Jue
rgen 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
:

Te
xas 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
availabl
e and deployed.


Q&A

Question on information transfer time

today’s state estimator time

5 minutes

synchrophasors will
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.


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 t
o 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 no
ise, 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.


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.


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 k
V

and above.

We need to s
et 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 t
he 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.