Blackout was due to data misalignment, says expert – 09/26/2023 – Market

The note released this Monday (25) by the ONS (National System Operator) about what happened in the blackout on August 15 leaves no doubt: wind and solar generators did not provide adequate data about their equipment. This is what engineer Mario Veiga, one of the greatest experts in the energy sector, says.

“There was a serious problem of misalignment of information. There was a difference between what the ONS thought it had resources, and what the real resources were”, he says. “This means that the ONS was caught by surprise,” he adds.

Engineer from Rio de Janeiro, founder of PSR, one of the most respected consultancies in the sector, Veiga is internationally recognized for creating analyzes on this market. He developed, for example, the methodology that is used in the electrical system management model by the ONS.

“Now, it will be necessary to clarify whether the generators did not meet their obligations to provide information, or whether there was no obligation to provide information”, says the expert.

The investigation will be carried out not only by the ONS, but also by Aneel (National Electric Energy Agency). Read below the main excerpts from the interview he gave to Sheet.

Another note was released about the blackout. What can be said?
This ONS report, which is quite detailed, says that the main cause of the problem occurred with renewables. Wind and solar equipment behaved differently than expected within the parameters reported to the ONS.

In other words, the ONS redid that day’s simulation minute by minute, and the model said that there was no problem with that transmission line in Ceará leaving the system. The drop in voltage that affected the national system would never happen. But in real life, voltage drops occurred because the characteristics data reported by some generators were wrong.

The gist of it is that there was a serious information misalignment problem. There was a difference between what the ONS thought it had resources, and what the real resources were. This means that the ONS was caught by surprise.

It’s similar to what happened in 2010, 2012. We fed the simulation model with exactly the same data that occurred in reality — the same demand, the same thermoelectric generation. But the reservoirs, in the simulation models, emptied more slowly than they emptied in reality. The only explanation is that more water was needed to generate the same megawatt-hour in real life. In other words, the efficiency of the machines was worse than had been announced.

In this case, it will be necessary to clarify whether the generators did not meet their obligations to provide information, or whether there was no obligation to provide information.

But how is this possible?
There are some possibilities. When you have a big piece of equipment, you do what’s called field certification. I mean, when it is installed, you go there and measure the equipment parameters to see if they match the user manual.

Now, in the case of smaller equipment, used by renewable energy, it is not clear how it is being done, and three things could have happened. They may have received a provisional license to operate without field testing. It could also be that they should have carried out the field test, but decided not to, because apparently the penalty for not taking the test is small or perhaps non-existent, depending on the case. Or there may have been something in between these two things.

You will say this is absurd, but historically wind and solar equipment is very small. So, you make a faster assessment for smaller equipment and a more detailed assessment for larger ones. No one usually demands a detailed field test for a tiny plant. But in this case, we have countless little ones. Each wind farm is relatively small, but the number of farms that are being added is large, and this is changing the characteristics of the system.

The ONS planned based on the information it had, but could the fact of working with information that was not real have harmed its ability to manage the system?
Clearly. If I think I have a generator that is capable of producing ten, I plan for that. If at the time, it produces three, I have a problem. I did not plan adequately for the risks. Any incorrect information harms the operation of the system.

What is the role of ONS and Aneel in this type of investigation?
The relationship between ONS and Aneel is complex. The ONS understands and takes care of the technical aspects on a daily basis, but does not have the power to inspect or punish, which belongs to Aneel. The field test is monitored by teams from both ONS and Aneel. But Aneel is the one who determines that the field test should be carried out.

We have already written about this. In order for Aneel to carry out its supervisory role in the best possible way, it needs financial resources and its technical team must be as qualified as possible. However, right now, regulatory agencies are receiving increasingly less resources and in some cases, are being attacked. But whatever the case, the agency will need to speak out.

In the editorial of the PSR monthly report, Mr. went beyond technical issues when dealing with the blackout, and commented on the stance of the Ministry of Mines and Energy, which used the moment to question the privatization of Eletrobras and suggest an attack on the transmission line. Why Mr. Did you choose this?
Every time a blackout occurs, anywhere in the world, rumors and conspiracy theories appear in the vacuum of the temporary absence of information. That’s why I joked that there is, for example, the Anitta effect.

Mr. Could you explain what this is?
You can look on the internet. Singer Anitta changed her name [Larissa é o original]. Then they say that if she hadn’t changed her name and added two Ts she wouldn’t have been as successful as she is. There are people who, like numerologists, believe that changing the name of things alters reality.

The statements that the privatization of Eletrobras would have contributed to the blackout is an example of noise Anitta. Eletrobras was privatized, but its functions remained the same. The fact that the owners changed does not mean that it no longer works, no matter how many people say that.

At these times, the “your problems are over” crowd also appears, that Tabajara thing, where people look for space to sell their solutions as the best in the world.

The question of a cyberattack itself is even plausible. The ONS denies it, but there are rumors that it has already occurred in Brazil. But in a time of information vacuum after a blackout, anyone, whether or not an authority, without any official data on what happened, can make speculations. And in this case, the attack is pure speculation, because if it had occurred, the analysis would have shown it.

But that’s it, right? People take advantage of these moments to sell their fish.

---

X-RAY

Mario Veiga, 70

Carioca, son of engineers and astronomers, has a doctorate in optimization and developed the stochastic optimization methodology used by the ONS and dozens of countries to manage the electrical system. In 1987, he founded and currently serves as director of innovation at PSR, a consulting company serving 70 countries. Internationally, he developed the US Pacific Northwest planning model, a price forecasting system for the Scandinavian Nordpool, and worked on reforming the electricity markets of Turkey, Vietnam, Mexico and other countries. He is an elected member of the US National Academy of Engineering; of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. Veiga received the Rio Branco Presidential and National Scientific Merit Medals.