US/Canadian blackouts 'could have been avoided'
Blackouts in the US that have left 50 million people without power would probably have been avoided had delayed reliability legislation been passed several years ago, according to the CEO and president of the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC), Michehl Gent.
Gent’s agency is ultimately responsible for preventing these blackouts – NERC was formed in 1965 following a widespread power outage in the northeast – and Gent says he is personally embarrassed and upset by the disaster. He has been campaigning for five years for a federal mandate that would see NERC transformed into the North American Electric Reliability Organisation (NAERO) and would give it powers to enforce its reliability rules across the US. The legislation promoting this is presently with Congress, as part of the Energy Bill.
The cause of the outage, which saw more than 100 power plants tripping out of the system, is yet to be determined. NERC is assembling a task force of industry experts, in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security, FERC and the Department of Energy, to investigate the matter, although it is expected to be several months before the exact details of the cascading system failure are known.
According to New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, former US secretary of energy: “[The US has] a third world grid that needs to be modernised – that is antiquated."
But Gent refuted these comments, saying: “We have the finest grid in the world. But what is needed is more investigation into digital tools which will allow us to utilise it better.”
According to the chief executive officer of consultants R. J Rudden Associates, Richard Rudden, there is “no clear, coordinated set of guidelines to govern the development and operation of the nation’s transmission grid. The cascading events of August 14th are not simply a regional anomaly, but underscore a potentially broader industry problem, and the need for national consensus.”
A recent report released by Rudden Associates states that electric utilities and transmission owners should be spending about $63 billion for distribution improvements, and about $25 billion for transmission improvements, over the next five years. These 2002-2005 spending requirements average out to be about $13.6 billion and $5.3 billion a year, respectively, for 2002-2005.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Esma denies need for new competitiveness mandate
MEP wants explicit requirement; Esma official says it’s already covered in existing rulebook
US regulators cut FRTB’s IMA capital hit by 59%, Isda finds
Trade body pushes for further changes to cross-product netting, default risk charge
US FRTB glitch could spit out negative capital charges
Effort to recognise risk diversification between IMA and standardised approach went too far
Euronext, LCH back Esma as exchange super-regulator
National oversight hurts Europe, exchange officials say – but some are not ready to accept a single watchdog
Double, but no trouble? CVA capital hit may lack clout
Industry opinion mixed around Basel III endgame derivatives charge
Amid debanking drama, banks try to say ‘no’, safely
A basic risk management tool – the ability to turn a customer away – has become a political football
Erba myth: will US banks choose new capital measure?
B3E gives US banks a dilemma – adopt expanded risk-based approach, or a new standardised alternative
Illiquid assets pricing still needs expert judgement, say banks
EU regulators want more transparency in valuations, but some asset prices remain elusive