UTILITIES

Senate Statement: A prolonged, nationwide blackout will almost certainly not occur; that is, the power grid will work.

Newswire: AGREED: Y2K Newswire does not predict a national grid failure either. The possibility exists, but it seems small. Still, we can't prove it won't fail, and apparently, neither can the industry. That's the unsettling part.

Question: Why does a grid failure seem small? If failures locally are possible, approximately how many local failures will it take before the grid is stressed? Can the grid be stressed if various outages take place? If we start running out of oil, coal and so on early in 2000, causing production problems, why wouldn't there be a problem with the grid as a whole as it becomes stressed? My belief is that the grid can go down, based on what Gary North has stated. Is he wrong? I have a lot of respect for Newswire, but I'm a little preplexed on this statement.

-- Anonymous, September 23, 1999

Answers

Early on in the hearings before the Senate Y2K sub-committee, I remember that the point was made by the eu speakers that the term "local" did not mean "one town or city." The senators on the committee learned that "local" generally meant "statewide". The term "regional" meant "several neighboring states." Keep this in mind when you read the reports. Sorry, but I can't provide the address; wish I could!

-- Anonymous, September 23, 1999

In corroboration of Ann's comment, an article by Dick Mills about five months ago had a second section titled, "It Depends On What The Meaning Of Local Is". The article can be found at:

http://y2ktimebomb.com/PP/RC/dm9909.htm

The snippet which applies is:

"This week I was complaining to my wife Libby that I didn't know what local meant in public statements such as, "expect Y2K effects to be localized." The next day she called 1-888-USA-4Y2K and asked for the "official" U.S. government definition of localized within the electric utility. She got an answer -- localized means one state at a time. Regional means an area like the Northeast."

Mr. Mills goes on to comment that it appears there are different definitions of the use of "local" and "regional", depending on who's talking. (Sounds like a lot of things about Y2K, huh?) Most people, for instance, think of "regional" as equivalent to "grid-wide". It helps to keep in mind that there are only three "grids" (interconnections)in the U.S., which include parts of Canada and Mexico, and that the Eastern Interconnection includes practically two- thirds of the continental United States. Thus, by the above government definition, a "regional" outage for example, could be much less than a "grid-wide" outage and still include the entire Northeast.

It's no wonder there is confusion about all manner of formal Y2K statements. Without any standard definitions, each individual reader has no choice but to go with what they "think" might have been meant. This can make for very happy lawyers, but it leaves the average citizen spinning around mouthing, "Huh?"

-- Anonymous, September 23, 1999

Ok you all,

May I add to the confusion?

From the Senate Y2K website I submit:

WASHINGTON, DC - With 100 days left to the final day of the millennium, U.S. Senator Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah), Chairman of the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem, today released a 288-page report outlining national and international preparedness for the millennium date change -- also known as the Y2K glitch -- which Bennett said is "just as likely to cause problems across the street as across the country."

Uh........ where does "across the street" fit in.

Is this like "across the street" from the DuPont chemical factory in Bopal India? (and to keep the FactFinder on his toes) Is this like "across the street" from a nuclear plant whose power is down and the generator dies? Or is this like "across the street" as in local or regional?

No offense to Senator Bennett, I personally like the man myself, but maybe someone should call for a definition. I nominate Lane.

-- Anonymous, September 23, 1999

I would like to point out that in these two statements there is a LOT of wiggle room.

"Senate Statement: A prolonged, nationwide blackout will almost certainly not occur" First I don't know of anybody on this forum who beleives there will be a TOTAl grid failure. There might be rolling blackouts and brownouts. Those would indeed make that statement true. BUT, rolling blackout/brownouts would destroy our economy and would by definition be a TEOTWAWKI. Our economy would not be the same as it was in 1999 and that is the whole point. The US grid is better off than many of our supply chain nations.

"Newswire: AGREED: Y2K Newswire does not predict a national grid failure either. The possibility exists, but it seems small. Still, we can't prove it won't fail, and apparently, neither can the industry. That's the unsettling part."

Same as above there most likely won't be a TOTAl grid failure, what power that is produced will be routed to emergency uses first(hospitals/fire departments/police etc), military second(emergency evacuation/shelters/riot control/command&control), critical needs third (food/water distribution) and then necessary industry(power/telephone/water) companies and then residential. So there will be power but a residential user will be at the end of a priority list.

There will be no TOTAL grid failure but it will feel that way for residential users in small towns and the people who are on rural lines. Mark DeVries

-- Anonymous, September 24, 1999