5 ms·

decentralization

by bugtodiffer 2y ago

decentralization

dbtc 2y ago
and diplomacy
xattt 2y ago
Have everyone take a chunk of nuclear fuel to keep in their home? That’s technically decentralization.
- ragebol 2y ago
  I got a SMR on my roof: Small Modular Receiver, for fusion energy.
ragebol 2y ago
Can be done up to some level, but you still need a stable source of ~50Hz frequency to keep everything synced.
- 15155 2y ago
  50Hz is so low that peaks can be synchronized via atomic/GPS-sourced clocks if it were ever necessary to decentralize.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    You only need to synchronize when you are connecting two different generators. If you house is getting 51 hz, or 50hz but out of phase you won't care because everything works anyway (some clocks will run too fast but otherwise you won't even notice). Only when you want to connect two grids (because one can't make enough power and the other is making more than they need) do you need to synchronize. Even then they only need to synchronize to each other, not the rest of the world.
    - 15155 2y ago
      Yes - but the point is, rather than tracking and synchronizing against an existing power sinusoid, you can track and synchronize against a global clock source and never deviate.
- bluGill 2y ago
  Which isn't hard. Many people in the US own something that could be used and we are not even under attack. While most home depot generators deliver dirty power the better ones can provide stable 60hz (US uses 60hz not 50) - those could be used to provide the 60hz to the grid (it wouldn't be worth everything needed to actually do this, but in theory could). there are a lot of "solar generators" that also can provide stable frequency. Many houses are off grid completely and have their own stable source of frequency when they want it (those most often those run on DC, they have the ability to provide AC for things they can't get a DC version of)
  - ragebol 2y ago
    But: where do you start with those after a blackout (which I assume is pretty possible in a scenario where the grid is under attack). How do you sync them all in that case? Can maybe be done via GPS timing, but hard to get that coordination going after you've needed it.
    - grues-dinner 2y ago
      It's called a "black start" and it's difficult at the best of times when everything is in a known state and generally good repair.
mpweiher 2y ago
That sounds really good, but is actually surprisingly ineffective, because you can't effectively protect the decentralized parts. You can put some Gepards or a missile battery around a nuclear plant. Good luck protecting 1000s of wind turbines or solar panel installations. And this isn't just theory: the nuclear power plants are the pretty much the only thing still running in Ukraine. Also, if you are thinking of renewables, those tend to have more centralized points of failure than you think, see: The Gigantic Unregulated Power Plants in the Cloud https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/the-gigantic-unregulated-power-plants-in-the-cloud/ https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/the-gigantic-unregulated-p... Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41292018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41292018
- ben_w 2y ago
  Devil in the details, as always. If every home has its own PV system, that's almost as hard to damage as the population itself. But also yes, making the PV into an IoT system… as the saying goes, the "S" in "IoT" stands for "security".
- natmaka 2y ago
  The amount of missiles needed to circumvent even a quatuor of anti-missile equipment placed nearby a nuclear plant which produces at the very least 2% of your gridpower (France) and maybe up to 33% (Ukraine) is way, way lower than the amount of missiles needed to blast unprotected wind turbines or sonar panels producing a similar fraction of your gridpower. Then your ability to repair various wind/solar sites also is very probably way better because few want to work on a damaged nuclear plant (especially with all local population running away as far as possible), spare parts (nuclear-grade) are less commonly available in other industries, the site may once more become a target because it isn't one-among-hundreds...
  - mpweiher 2y ago
    The amount of missiles you need to penetrate the defenses and actually get through the extremely hardened/resilient shell of a nuclear power plant is invariably more usefully spent elsewhere. A group of terrorists once attacked a French nuclear plant. Admittedly only with an anti-tank missile, so smaller warhead, but apparently they had a hard time finding the scorch marks. The containment of modern reactors is designed to withstand an airplane strike, which is at least an order of magnitude more powerful than the warheads of cruise missiles or tactical ballistic missiles. Whereas you can probably take out solar panels with a hand-grenade, which you can lob directly or carry via drones. Don't even need to expend a suicide drone, just have it drop the grenade. And once again: apart from actually not being well supported logically, your theory is also contradicted by the real world evidence on the ground.

decentralization

dbtc 2y ago

and diplomacy

xattt 2y ago

Have everyone take a chunk of nuclear fuel to keep in their home? That’s technically decentralization.

ragebol 2y ago
I got a SMR on my roof: Small Modular Receiver, for fusion energy.

ragebol 2y ago

Can be done up to some level, but you still need a stable source of ~50Hz frequency to keep everything synced.

15155 2y ago
50Hz is so low that peaks can be synchronized via atomic/GPS-sourced clocks if it were ever necessary to decentralize.
- bluGill 2y ago
  You only need to synchronize when you are connecting two different generators. If you house is getting 51 hz, or 50hz but out of phase you won't care because everything works anyway (some clocks will run too fast but otherwise you won't even notice). Only when you want to connect two grids (because one can't make enough power and the other is making more than they need) do you need to synchronize. Even then they only need to synchronize to each other, not the rest of the world.
  - 15155 2y ago
    Yes - but the point is, rather than tracking and synchronizing against an existing power sinusoid, you can track and synchronize against a global clock source and never deviate.
bluGill 2y ago
Which isn't hard. Many people in the US own something that could be used and we are not even under attack. While most home depot generators deliver dirty power the better ones can provide stable 60hz (US uses 60hz not 50) - those could be used to provide the 60hz to the grid (it wouldn't be worth everything needed to actually do this, but in theory could). there are a lot of "solar generators" that also can provide stable frequency. Many houses are off grid completely and have their own stable source of frequency when they want it (those most often those run on DC, they have the ability to provide AC for things they can't get a DC version of)
- ragebol 2y ago
  But: where do you start with those after a blackout (which I assume is pretty possible in a scenario where the grid is under attack). How do you sync them all in that case? Can maybe be done via GPS timing, but hard to get that coordination going after you've needed it.
  - grues-dinner 2y ago
    It's called a "black start" and it's difficult at the best of times when everything is in a known state and generally good repair.

mpweiher 2y ago

That sounds really good, but is actually surprisingly ineffective, because you can't effectively protect the decentralized parts. You can put some Gepards or a missile battery around a nuclear plant. Good luck protecting 1000s of wind turbines or solar panel installations. And this isn't just theory: the nuclear power plants are the pretty much the only thing still running in Ukraine. Also, if you are thinking of renewables, those tend to have more centralized points of failure than you think, see: The Gigantic Unregulated Power Plants in the Cloud https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/the-gigantic-unregulated-power-plants-in-the-cloud/ https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/the-gigantic-unregulated-p... Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41292018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41292018

ben_w 2y ago
Devil in the details, as always. If every home has its own PV system, that's almost as hard to damage as the population itself. But also yes, making the PV into an IoT system… as the saying goes, the "S" in "IoT" stands for "security".
natmaka 2y ago
The amount of missiles needed to circumvent even a quatuor of anti-missile equipment placed nearby a nuclear plant which produces at the very least 2% of your gridpower (France) and maybe up to 33% (Ukraine) is way, way lower than the amount of missiles needed to blast unprotected wind turbines or sonar panels producing a similar fraction of your gridpower. Then your ability to repair various wind/solar sites also is very probably way better because few want to work on a damaged nuclear plant (especially with all local population running away as far as possible), spare parts (nuclear-grade) are less commonly available in other industries, the site may once more become a target because it isn't one-among-hundreds...
- mpweiher 2y ago
  The amount of missiles you need to penetrate the defenses and actually get through the extremely hardened/resilient shell of a nuclear power plant is invariably more usefully spent elsewhere. A group of terrorists once attacked a French nuclear plant. Admittedly only with an anti-tank missile, so smaller warhead, but apparently they had a hard time finding the scorch marks. The containment of modern reactors is designed to withstand an airplane strike, which is at least an order of magnitude more powerful than the warheads of cruise missiles or tactical ballistic missiles. Whereas you can probably take out solar panels with a hand-grenade, which you can lob directly or carry via drones. Don't even need to expend a suicide drone, just have it drop the grenade. And once again: apart from actually not being well supported logically, your theory is also contradicted by the real world evidence on the ground.