Proponents of selective power generation will recall how, earlier this year, a battery container from the garage plant of Tesla’s Australian Megapack battery network got stuck in the chimney. Lithium-ion batteries are the easiest to turn off once turned on, but fortunately, the fireplace was only contained in two of the site’s many battery containers.
Energy Safe Victoria has completed its investigation into the incident and concluded that it caused a refrigerant leak in a container that caused an electrical component to fail and caused the fire. It appears that the container was in service mode at the time, so its coverage formulas were not active, nor its alarm formula monitored. They demanded that cooling formulas now be tested and inspected for leaks, and that alarm procedures be replaced for the site.
When a new generation, such as the large-scale battery garage, comes online, it’s inevitable that its startup problems will present itself with catastrophic outages like this. The key lies in how the other people involved take care of them, and for that we have to thank Tesla and the site operators for their cooperation with regulators. The modular design of the site and the firefighters’ paints to cool the surrounding packages prevented a much worse outcome. Given these new procedures, long-term facilities were expected to be even safer.
You can read our original fireplace policy here for more information.
[Main symbol source: CFA]
Dave Jones of EEVblog made a video about this, rightly noting that there is surely no explanation as to why those mobile banks are not more spaced out and separated. I had a battery fireplace like this in my town a few years ago and my community was covered. In magic blue smoke (toxic) for a day, all to save some space, those banks are expensive, the spring more productive for a little extra land to protect investments that are turning to smoke.
Very true to some extent, but the point at which expanding it is too expensive to build, maintain and create a less effective warehouse, making it a balancing act. I would have expected more space and for the on-site cranes to be the shipyard’s inverted U-style cellular cranes that overlap their load to make a larger site less difficult to manage and expand the site, cheaper, however, I didn’t have to waste time searching to figure out all the logistics and efficiency. . .
Since this chimney was well controlled, no real damage was done to the overall installation and the scenario that caused it seems like something that can be prevented or at least mitigated further now that it turned out to be a problem, I think they were probably given the almost correct design. . .
Given the consequences of a fire, it is prudent not to crowd the modules so much. There’s plenty of room, not that it’s an urban environment where land is astronomically expensive.
I recommend that the earth’s charge be arguably the most economical component of space expansion. Elongated interconnects can be more expensive, especially if they also want to cool down.
Airborne gancheck out cranes (their exact name) are also very expensive. In this use case, once the installation is complete, you won’t have to do anything for the maximum of its lifetime, but you will still need normal inspection and maintenance. I want to check it in case of emergency only to find out it was rusty.
My delight with giant commercial projects is that they are thoroughly modeled and even simulated before the first breakthrough. Even then, they don’t get things in, and there’s a challenge of the operator not following instructions!
Yes, the crane is expensive, but the same goes for the ordinary crane used on site: all things of the heavy commercial type are old and a little broken, or rather expensive because they are intended for a long service life, and the ordinary crane has a very limited reach, takes time to reposition, etc. – which is helping to delimit the practical domain of the site as much as possible, and I think it is much more complicated to expand operations.
I agree, there are undoubtedly many smart reasons to decide on the strategies they used, and the costs of expanding it only in the interconnections just to move the assemblies a little further would be huge: the larger the interconnections, the refrigerant flow pathways, etc. the greater the possibility of clutter and the lower the power of the system.
Perhaps once this incident is fully analyzed and the configuration is run for some time, the resolution will be taken that the most spaced sets are cost-effective enough and make it less difficult to paint on the sets, etc. Run the conveniences: Until you’re done, you’re just making informed guesses about how cheap/secure/etc. en. to run it. . .
Dave Jones is old school in his thinking. With water cooling, there is no need to separate them.
I mean that water cooling is to keep them cool, not to prevent a chimney from spreading between the banks in case of malfunction.
So, spacing them out is the focus here to prevent the chimney from spreading, right?
Since lithium and water do not mix, is this the most productive option for cooling?
What? It’s not elemental lithium in those cells. Sodium reacts more violently with water than lithium, but keep in mind that the sea, which is full of sodium, isn’t really on fire.
Problems, and even a lawsuit.
https://www. vice. com/en/article/epneq4/a-tesla-big-battery-is-getting-sued-over-power-grid-failures-in-australia
And this lawsuit is not opposed to Tesla, but opposes the operator/owner of a battery that Tesla built.
And the lawsuit is not about a hardware problem or incapacity, but about the fact that the owner/operator did not take over the network when requested.
The test is expected to take place, but homeowners were rumored to be profiting in the power market by buying power cost-effectively and putting it in the battery, then selling it at higher prices at peak times, and not less from the source. Power to the low-speed grid when you are asked to help the grid.
There is also some noise about ambiguous language in the contract (hence the lawsuit) about how and how much they would help the network. My opinion on this factor is that there is a mismatch between technical terms and legal/contractual terms, once again. , that’s up to the court’s lawyers to decide.
Overall, the lawsuit discussed has nothing to do with Tesla and has nothing to do with what Tesla has built.
In a better market – which is not electric power – you can almost say that they are the most important, that is, in case of shortage of electrical energy, the costs will be very high and will be sold.
But in the genuine world, not so much. They may simply be sitting there with a full battery while there are power outages, waiting for the value to pass, etc. , etc. In fact, as many American companies seem to be doing now, the solution for force corporations turns out to be a source of scarcity, so values are rising.
However, this is not the case for the customer.
So, the legislative style for all those batteries will be interesting.
I agree that this is an electric power arbitration appeal.
The lawsuit is about breach of contract, so (and Tesla) aside for a moment, it would seem that there is a market for battery installations that make money in energy arbitrage.
I think it’s smart for the consumer. Installing the battery would be a potential distributor when costs are high, which would naturally reduce costs.
I also think it’s smart for the economy and the environment: there’s an incentive to build more batteries, and more batteries would take higher-demand plants off the grid.
With smart management, i. e. not getting rid of *all* the conveniences to ensure some security on the network, this would generally be smart for everyone.
“I think it’s smart for the consumer. Installing the battery would be a potential distributor when costs are high, which would naturally reduce costs. »
Uh. What?
We don’t need reasonable electricity, we need solid electricity.
The most productive thing for the United States would be to have a true federal energy regulator with legal powers. That would have prevented Texas and others from operating in total tumult. The United States seems to be the only evolved country that not only does not have a correct national network, but also does not have a national regulator. A properly regulated and controlled national network deserves to be treated as a matter of national security. Look at what happened in the UK because a stupid and short-sighted government It was too expensive to maintain a strategic stockpile of herbal fuel!
“We don’t need reasonable electricity, we need solid electricity. “
The energy market is *explicitly designed* to manipulate manufacturers and consumers in whatever is necessary to maintain grid stability. This is the *main mechanism* through which stability is achieved. When demand exceeds supply, value increases. And vice versa, even if it means fitting into negative when the imbalance is bad.
Arbitration is a challenge here, it’s literally the solution.
This specific lawsuit reaches an agreement in which the battery owner presented additional insurance service for the grid in case of an emergency, paid for it, and then failed to provide that service when needed. It is independent and irrelevant to the market mechanism.
It is quite correct, the economic viability of the services could even depend on whether they play the formula like that. They seemed to me a fraud, at best a giant investor with very little real ability to adapt to everything. Charge for the required genuine periods of time.
‘. . . caused through a refrigerant bond. . . ‘Maybe ‘escape’?
Thank you! Set.
The service mode that disables self-protection and alarms is insane. You have a battery pack that you know there’s something with (that’s why it’s in service mode), and then you leave the alarms off for who knows how long. I can see the ability to disable and perhaps low-voltage alerts, however, it makes no sense to disable temperature and exaggerated alerts.
Or in service mode because it is still operational
It’s strange. All the devices I worked with once prevented and in service mode would still cause alarms and prevention signals.
So you know that the battery/anything that has a problem, and you disconnected it, and the solution will not be done for a long time. But do you like the alarm to sound continuously, masking any new alarms that arise elsewhere?
I do not agree that we deserve to accept, it is true in some cases, that it is inevitable that the disorders of launching new technologies on a large scale will be catastrophic. Learning beyond mistakes and clutters can be harder than following the “Let’s See if it works” approach, but with our global reliance on generation in almost every facet of life, we want to keep technologists, operations teams, and bean counters to higher standards. In this case, they were lucky that it passed far from a giant population center and was contained.
“Learning beyond mistakes and messes can be more than doing the ‘let’s see if it works’ approach. . . “
It sounds smart on paper, but the big challenge is that in those NEW technologies, we don’t know what we don’t know. Since there are no “past mistakes” in startups, it’s only in retrospect that one can take a look at the challenges that have happened in other spaces (related or not) and says, “Oh, you deserve to have an idea that X, Y, and Z could have happened because something vaguely similar happened at some point in the past. somewhere in the world. “A bit like watching Nostradamus’ works AFTER something happens and seeing if you can adapt it to his writings. No one used their predictions to see anything before it happened, they just say crazy things like “Oh, he predicted two burning mountains, he ‘obviously’ meant the Twin Towers on September 11. “)
I think the designers and engineers on this task would feel a little insulted if someone insinuated that they hadn’t done their homework and that they were just doing a “hey, let’s look at this and see what happens” approach. In this assignment they are tasked with making sure the facility is as safe, physically powerful and robust as possible; They don’t just throw darts at a board to see if it’s the most productive solution. 🙂
And, you’re addressing some of that, though perhaps unknowingly. The genuine explanation for why this facility WAS “far from a giant [central] population” was in particular because the parties knew that not all probabilities can be expected and that the structure of the first of *anything* is made in the middle of nowhere to lessen some risks. That is: it was not “luck”. 🙂
Well, that’s my point of view, anyway. 🙂
“It sounds smart on paper, but the big challenge is that in these NEW technologies, we know what we know”
Excellent!
>I am interested in reports that say nothing has happened, because as we know, there are known ones; There are things we know we know. We also know that there are known unknowns; That is, we know that there are things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, which we don’t know we don’t know. And if we take a look at the history of our country and other loose countries, it is this last category that tends to be the ultimate difficulty.
–Donald Rumsfeld
Exactly, no matter what, there are animals and organisms that are important to the planet’s biosphere. Death through a thousand cuts really sounds over and over again. How do you think fish was given mercury?
Beta, It Can Kill Other People – Tesla
How is it possible that they do not have surveillance devices to save you this?You can even buy a tank for the cooling circuit from your traditional computer that detects brownouts. Why features like this wouldn’t be in inventory in such volatile, mission-critical systems is beyond reasoning. Oh, wait. . . It may charge you $5 more.
> “When a new generation, such as the large-scale battery garage, comes online, it is inevitable that their startup problems will present themselves with a catastrophe like this. “
I am becoming slow and stupid in my old age. Why is this “inevitable”?
The people are perfect.
Granted, however, “the people” didn’t decide to install the batteries democratically, but it was through industry leaders who want them to force their businesses.
This is not “inevitable” as batteries are legally required to be installed there and in this way. It is not “inevitable” to see those mistakes if the cash to build them has been allowed to break even or exceed the return on investment. . It is not “inevitable” to build profitably. It’s just that the hard work of love is not reputable in the business world.
There are tactics to build better, but few tactics to build profitably. History has shown that focusing on the latter is more prone to failure.
The claim that catastrophic disasters from new technologies are inevitable, not that new technologies themselves or new technology installations are inevitable.
The fact is that anything new and designed/managed through other people will be flawed in some way. Failures are one hundred percent certain.
And it will be, no matter how hard work of love has been in the production, there will be one thing here that breaks it, this little worry that makes it harder to use. Everyone forgets something, and occasionally it’s only through build that you can eventually locate the “oh so stupid” retrospective thing that you think you really deserve to have seen, but no one did back then.
Or the old mistake of the favorite operator, made because the design and documentation are such that a user can easily make a small but very important mistake and the formula has no controls to detect it: look at the old mechanical sign boxes on the railways, all the locks and the like are not there because they are cheap or necessary for the function, They are there because without them, injuries are much more likely.
More effort is being devoted to the design and structure stages to get sometimes better results, but even that is rarely certain until the prototypes and engineering test cases are created so that it works exactly as expected in the real world, first of all. It has more teething problems because you haven’t used it.
Like some things I ended up having to fix, screws that are placed so deep in holes with a higher facet ratio, it’s almost unlikely to insert them well or succeed with a screwdriver; However, there is nothing “wrong” with this design, the bra helps keep the ends tightly closed, it is a real headache. You read a service manual for a few things and discover that the only way to replace a common consumable is to push everything aside to the end. Marco: There’s nothing wrong with the design, but it’s a big drawback. These types of examples are a failure, in a case like this network garage system, it means that any downtime becomes so long that you want many more modules to compensate for the number of modules glued together for days that deserve to have taken a few seconds or had interruptions in service. . .
Be friendly and respectful so that the comment segment is excellent. (Feedback Policy)
This uses Akismet to reduce spam. Find out how your feedback knowledge is handled.