Over Reliance on Electricity

Details

Written by: John Burke and AI assistance

Category: Utilities

Published: 21 March 2025

Last Updated: 21 March 2025

Hits: 1413

• Over-reliance on Electricity
• Twin Substations did not Help
• Resilience Issues
• Where next to Occur?

The catastrophic sub station fire in Hayes, London - which supplies Heathrow Airport has demontrated several issues.

The catastrophic substation fire in Hayes, London, on March 21, 2025, which disrupted power to Heathrow Airport and thousands of surrounding homes, has exposed critical vulnerabilities in the region’s energy infrastructure. This incident has grounded flights, affected over 1,300 scheduled operations, and highlighted systemic issues in power supply reliability, backup systems, and resilience planning. The key issues demonstrated by this event and additionally Combined Heat and Power (CHP) as a potential alternative, focusing on its relevance to this scenario.

Issues Demonstrated by the Hayes Substation Fire

1. Single Point of Failure in Power Infrastructure
   The fire at the North Hyde substation, which supplies Heathrow—one of the world’s busiest airports—revealed a significant dependency on a centralized power source. When the substation failed, it not only cut power to the airport but also impacted over 16,300 homes initially, with around 4,900 still without power by early Friday morning. The fact that a single incident could paralyze such a critical transport hub and a large residential area underscores the fragility of relying heavily on one substation without sufficient redundancy.
2. Inadequate Backup Systems
   UK Energy Secretary Ed Miliband noted that the fire was so severe it damaged "the potential backup generation" for Heathrow, rendering contingency measures ineffective. This suggests that the existing backup systems—likely diesel generators or secondary grid connections—were either insufficiently robust or too closely tied to the primary substation’s infrastructure. The inability to quickly switch to an alternative power source prolonged the airport’s closure and disrupted global travel networks.
3. Logistical and Economic Fallout
   The closure of Heathrow until midnight on March 21 has led to over 1,300 flight cancellations or diversions, stranding passengers and creating a "logistical nightmare" for airlines. The ripple effects extend globally, with flights from as far as Singapore, the US, and Australia diverted or canceled. Locally, the power outage disrupted businesses and households, amplifying the economic cost. This highlights the broader consequences of energy infrastructure failures in critical areas.
4. Lack of Resilience to Extreme Events
   Despite upgrades to the North Hyde substation in 2021, which included new transformers and circuits to enhance reliability, the system still succumbed to a "catastrophic" fire. The cause remains under investigation, but the incident raises questions about whether current infrastructure is designed to withstand rare but severe events—whether accidental, environmental, or otherwise. Aging equipment could further exacerbate such risks.
5. Delayed Response and Recovery
   Although the London Fire Brigade brought the blaze under control by 6:28 GMT, power restoration efforts by National Grid have been slow, with no clear timeline for full recovery. This reflects challenges in repairing complex electrical infrastructure under emergency conditions and the difficulty of rerouting power from alternative sources in a timely manner.

Combined Heat and Power (CHP) as an Alternative

Combined Heat and Power (CHP), also known as cogeneration, is a decentralized energy system that simultaneously generates electricity and useful heat from a single fuel source, typically natural gas, biomass, or biogas. Unlike traditional power plants that waste heat as a byproduct, CHP captures it for heating or cooling purposes, achieving efficiencies of up to 80-90% compared to 30-50% for conventional grid systems. Here’s how CHP could address the issues exposed by the Hayes fire, with emphasis on its potential role at Heathrow and beyond:

1. Decentralized Power Generation
   Installing CHP units at or near Heathrow could reduce reliance on a single external substation like North Hyde. By generating power on-site, the airport could maintain operations during grid failures, mitigating the single-point-of-failure risk. For instance, a CHP plant sized to meet Heathrow’s base load (estimated at tens of megawatts for such a large facility) could keep critical systems—runways, terminals, and air traffic control—running independently.
2. Enhanced Backup and Resilience
   CHP systems can serve as a robust backup or primary power source, operating in "island mode" during outages. Unlike the compromised backup generators in this incident, a well-designed CHP system could be isolated from external grid failures and fueled independently (e.g., via gas pipelines or stored fuel). Pairing CHP with battery storage could further ensure uninterrupted power during transitions or fuel supply disruptions.
3. Energy Efficiency and Cost Savings
   Heathrow’s extensive heating and cooling needs—terminals, hangars, and support facilities—make it an ideal candidate for CHP. The captured heat could replace less efficient boilers, reducing energy costs and carbon emissions. For example, a gas-fired CHP unit could supply electricity to the airport while piping hot water or steam to heat buildings, cutting reliance on grid electricity and standalone heating systems.
4. Reduced Grid Strain
   By generating power locally, CHP could alleviate demand on the National Grid, particularly during peak times or emergencies. This would benefit surrounding areas like Hayes and Hounslow, where thousands of homes lost power. A network of smaller CHP installations across critical infrastructure and communities could distribute the load, preventing widespread outages when a substation fails.
5. Environmental Benefits
   While the immediate focus post-fire is reliability, CHP offers a greener alternative to traditional grid power, especially if fueled by renewable biogas or paired with solar thermal systems. Heathrow, which handled 83.9 million passengers in 2024, has sustainability goals that CHP could support by lowering its carbon footprint compared to coal- or gas-heavy grid electricity.

Challenges of Implementing CHP in This Context

• Initial Investment: Retrofitting Heathrow with CHP requires significant upfront costs for equipment, installation, and integration. However, long-term savings and reliability gains could justify this, especially for a high-stakes facility.
• Space Constraints: Airports are space-intensive, and finding room for CHP units could be tricky, though modular systems exist that might fit within existing infrastructure.
• Fuel Dependency: Most CHP systems rely on natural gas, introducing a dependency on gas networks or storage. Diversifying fuel sources (e.g., biogas, oil, aviation fuels, or hydrogen(??)) could mitigate this.
• Regulatory and Planning Hurdles: Deploying CHP would need approval from local authorities, National Grid, and aviation regulators, potentially delaying implementation.

Conclusion

The Hayes substation fire has laid bare the risks of centralized power dependency, inadequate backups, and insufficient resilience in critical infrastructure like Heathrow Airport. CHP offers a compelling alternative by decentralizing power generation, enhancing efficiency, and providing a reliable backup. For Heathrow, a tailored CHP system could ensure operational continuity during grid failures while supporting sustainability goals. Beyond the airport, deploying CHP in surrounding areas could bolster community resilience, reducing the cascading impacts seen in this incident. While not a panacea, CHP merits serious consideration as part of a broader strategy to rethink energy infrastructure in the wake of such a disruptive event.

An Holistic Approach to City Re-Development

Details

Written by: J C Burke

Category: Buildings

Published: 14 March 2025

Last Updated: 14 March 2025

Hits: 1472

AI Sys: AND Based on My Experience

 

1. Context of Centralized vs. Decentralized Electricity Production

Centralized Electricity Production:

• In the UK, electricity is predominantly generated by large-scale centralized power stations (e.g., gas-fired Combined Cycle Gas Turbines (CCGT), nuclear plants, and large renewable installations like offshore wind farms).
• These plants are typically located far from urban centres, leading to significant transmission and distribution losses (approximately 7-10% of generated electricity is lost in the grid).
• Centralized systems are designed primarily for electricity generation, and waste heat (e.g., from gas or nuclear plants) is often dissipated into the environment rather than utilized, resulting in low overall fuel utilization efficiency (typically 40-50% for CCGT plants, though some modern plants can reach 60%).

Decentralized Electricity Production:

• Decentralized systems involve smaller-scale generation units (e.g., Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants, microgrids, local renewables) located closer to end-users.
• These systems can utilize waste heat from electricity generation for heating purposes via heat networks (district heating), significantly increasing overall fuel utilization efficiency (up to 80-90% in well-designed CHP systems).
• Decentralized systems can also integrate local renewable energy sources (e.g., solar PV, small wind turbines) and energy storage technologies, including heat storage.

2. Fuel Utilization Efficiencies

One of the primary benefits of moving to decentralized electricity production, coupled with heat networks, is the dramatic improvement in fuel utilization efficiency. Here's how:

• Centralized Systems:
  • In a typical centralized CCGT plant, electricity is generated with an efficiency of around 50-60%. The remaining energy is lost as waste heat, often vented to the atmosphere or dissipated into water bodies.
  • If natural gas is used solely for electricity generation, the overall system efficiency is limited to this range, and additional gas or electricity is required to meet heating demands (e.g., via domestic gas boilers or electric heating), further compounding energy losses.
• Decentralized Systems with CHP and Heat Networks:
  • In a decentralized CHP system, the same amount of natural gas can be used to generate both electricity and heat. Modern CHP systems can achieve overall efficiencies of 80-90%, as waste heat is captured and distributed via heat networks to provide space heating, hot water, or industrial process heat.
  • For example, a CHP plant generating 40% electricity and capturing 45% of the energy as usable heat achieves an overall efficiency of 85%, compared to 50% in a centralized system where heat is not utilized.
  • This higher efficiency reduces the total amount of fuel (e.g., natural gas) required to meet the same electricity and heating demands, directly lowering fuel costs and reducing exposure to volatile gas prices.
• Economic Implications:
  • By reducing fuel consumption, decentralized systems lower the operational costs of energy production. For instance, if a CHP plant requires 15-20% less gas to deliver the same energy services (electricity + heat) as a centralized system, this translates into significant savings, especially given the high cost of natural gas in the UK.
  • Additionally, the reduced reliance on grid electricity (subject to transmission losses and high retail tariffs) further lowers costs for end-users.

    Read more: An Holistic Approach to City Re-Development

It’s almost science fiction

Details

Written by: Mindy Weisberger, CNN

Category: Geo-Thermal

Published: 11 February 2025

Last Updated: 12 February 2025

Hits: 1729

• More Than Geothermal
• The Earth's Core Structures

‘It’s almost science fiction’: Scientists say the shape of Earth’s inner core is changing

By Mindy Weisberger, CNN Mon February 10, 2025CNN Science Original CNN Science Article
  Link to Research in Nature AND Associated Research  Link to Associated Research

""Abstract

The inner core has been inferred to change its rotation rate or shape over years to decades since the discovery of temporal variability in seismic waves from repeating earthquakes that travelled through the inner core. Recent work confirmed that the inner core rotated faster and then slower than the rest of Earth in the last few decades; this work analysed inner-core-traversing (PKIKP) seismic waves recorded by the Eielson (ILAR) and Yellowknife (YKA) arrays in northern North America from 121 repeating earthquake pairs between 1991 and 2023 in the South Sandwich Islands. Here we extend this set of repeating earthquakes and compare pairs at times when the inner core re-occupied the same position, revealing non-rotational changes at YKA but not ILAR between 2004 and 2008. We propose that these changes originate in the shallow inner core, and so affect the inner-core-grazing YKA ray paths more than the deeper-bottoming ray paths to ILAR. We thus resolve the long-standing debate on whether temporal variability in PKIKP waves results from rotation or more local action near the inner-core boundary: it is tentatively both. The changes near the inner-core boundary most likely result from viscous deformation driven by coupling between boundary topography and mantle density anomalies or traction on the inner core from outer-core convection.""

CNN Science Article —
Scientists who just months ago confirmed that Earth’s inner core recently reversed its spin have a new revelation about our planet’s deepest secrets — they identified changes to the inner core’s shape. Earth’s innermost layer is a hot, solid ball of metal surrounded by a liquid metal outer core. For decades, planetary scientists suspected that the solid inner core deformed over time as it spun. Now, researchers have found the first evidence of changes taking place over the past 20 years in the shape of the inner core.

Signs of the core’s deformation appeared in waves from earthquakes that were strong enough to reach Earth’s centre. The research team used that same earthquake data for a 2024 study to resolve a longstanding debate over the inner core’s rotation. They found that the inner core once spun faster than Earth itself. But beginning around 2010, the solid inner core’s spin slowed. It’s now revolving backward, relative to the rest of the planet.

Read more: It’s almost science fiction