In the vernacular of Factfinder, "I think I am going to throw up." Well, so am I if I read one more posting of Factfinder that says embedded chips will not cause many, or any problems, therefore we will have electricity. Some of Factfinder's statements: "And finding y2k bugs in embedded systems are a piece of cake." "Y2k-a widespread, manageable, and way overhyped and exaggerated-bug." "Some of us have a high confidence level that power will be available bsed on actual findings and facts, many gathered first hand." "I am certain that y2k will have little, if any,impact on power generation or distribution." Factfinder also does not support, "advocating more than a weeks (or your normal purchase) worth of food for y2k purposes."

Now, Factfinder & Co., disengage your heads from those embedded chips, and look at the big picture (electric utilities do not live by embedded chips alone.) Put down your embedded chip, and follow me. Electric companies have one basic function along with other by-product functions. I am only concerned with the basic function, to wit: FUEL=ELECTRICITY

There is NO embedded chip in this "complicated" equasion. In a two part equasion, each part depends on the other. Take out either part and 0 results (this is high level math.) If there is no electric company, FUEL=0 electricity. If there is no fuel, 0=Electricity. We know we have electric generating plants and Factfinder assures us they are/will be, compliant. That gives us a positive ELECTRICITY side of the equasion.

Now, let's deal with the FUEL side of the equasion. (Did I mention embedded chips? No.) We must absolutely, positively, have FUEL. Let's check the FUEL chain:

COAL- origiates in the U.S. Available as long as coal mining equipment is compliant. Delivered by compliant trains using Diesel Fuel made as a by-product of CRUDE OIL. FUEL OIL- Originates as a by-product of CRUDE OIL refining in compliant refineries. Delivered by compliant pipelines and trains using Diesel Oil that is a by-product of CRUDE OIL.

(Did I mention embedded chips? No.) Now, what do all these fuels and/or delivery systems have in common? The above words that are in all Caps: Where do we get CRUDE OIL? 67% comes from the Middle East and Venezuela. The UN report, Senate report, House report, and CIA report state the Middle East, Venezuela and foreign shippers are not, and will not be, compliant in pipelines, refineries, ports, and tanker ships. Also, the Suez and Panama Canals are not compliant. On Dec. 31, 1999, the US will be completely out of the Panama canal (thanks to Pres. Carter,) and China has leased facilities on both ends of the canal. They move in Dec. 31, 1999. Relatively speaking, embedded chips are nothing. If there is little CRUDE OIL, those little chips will be silent - they will have nothing to do.

Now, I want Factfiner & Co. to pack their collective suitcases, travel to the Middle East and Venezuela and check every pipeline, refinery, port, and tanker ship. When they have fixed everything, then they might have some credibility.

I urge everyone to protect themselves by preparing. Factfinder & Co. will not be around to give you water and food. They will be sitting in the dark trying to eat their embedded chips.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 1999

Answers

Just realized I used "s" for "t" in "equation." The King's English also uses "s's" for many of our "z's," as in "realised." After being in England for awhile I found we are not as alike as I thought. Lift = elevator, bonnet = hood of car, napkin or nappy = diaper, jumper = sweater. Put that in the useless information file.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 1999

We shouldn't believe every chip will be fixed. They won't be. But, does that directly lead to chaos and collapse? I think not. The technophobes are trying to remove us from the center stage of our society. That they really believe this isn't so surprising considering all the emphasis given High tech in the media. But is it totally true? Have we been totally displaced by computer code and ROM chips? I don't think so. We'll adapt to this situation and we'll fix as we go over these next 2 yrs. Y2k is going to be a severe test for parts of our society just as de-industrialization was a generation ago. Areas of the country will be hit and whole nations probably but, this to shall pass. The truth is we are probably more at risk from human mis-calculation and panic then we are from the computers. The computers can foul up but they can't panic. So we should all stay calm and cool. Preparing is a way to do just that.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 1999

Marcella, I too am having a Mylanta moment. Marie Antoinette's preparedness solution appears to be enjoying a comeback in some sectors, with a millennial twist: "Let them eat silicon!"

Yes, Factfinder, there really is a supply-side CRUDE OIL crisis brewing. And even *NERC* acknowledges the grid's vulnerability to shortages of oil, natural gas, or coal. NERC's Year 2000 Contingency Planning Guide, dated October 23, 1998, includes not only internal risk factors, but also *external* and *compounding* risk factors which could impair or destroy electrical power generation ability. Link ftp://www.nerc.com/pub/sys/all_updl/docs/y2k/contingency.pdf

The guide assesses multiple risk factors of varying magnitude. Oil, natural gas, and coal shortage risks are acknowledged as HIGH IMPACT.

At page 9, NERC assumes maximum impact, "high impact on power supply," for two external risk factors: "constrained supply of *OIL*" and "pipelines constrain supply or pressure of *NATURAL GAS*." NERC also assumes impact of "moderate short term; higher long term" for the risk factor of "rail systems constrain *COAL* supply." At page 10, Table 5, "Examples of Credible Worst Case Scenario Types," NERC includes, among other things, "long term loss of generation due to loss of environmental monitoring and control, loss of *FUEL* supplies, and Y2k maintenance/repairs."

The question becomes what risk exposure is acceptable under various possible or probable scenarios. Rational individual preparations are based on risk assessment and contingency planning.

Question 1: Do any probable scenarios penalize light or zero personal preparedness with a catastrophic outcome to me or my family? Answer: Yes.

Question 2: Do any probable scenarios penalize extensive personal preparedness with a catastrophic outcome to me or my family? Answer: No.

Question 3: Is extensive personal preparedness feasible now? Answer: Yes.

Question 4: Will extensive personal preparedness be feasible later? Answer: Unknown.

The Electric Equation is stark, and it's real. Given multiple unknowns, the possibility of potential chaos and grid collapse must be *considered* and prepared for to minimize systemic shocks when y2k interactive effects set in - of whatever duration and magnitude.

-- Anonymous, April 03, 1999

Marcella Shaw, You have made a very astute observation that people are finally beginning to wake up to. I spent 20 years building petro-chem plants around the world, mostly in purchasing. When I finished in 1996, I had not ever, never seen a y2k specification for anything I ever bought, and that was hundreds of millions of dollars worth of equipment, for plants in many countries, including the US.

-- Anonymous, April 03, 1999

I don't disagree with your conclusions, Marcella, but there is a flaw in your logic. No, you don't mention embedded chips, but you indicate that lack of fuel will make the case for embedded chips moot. That may be so, but things that you mention like pipelines, oil fields, tankers, ports, canals, refineries, etc., etc. are all highly dependent upon embedded chips. If they fail, and so produce your predictd fuel shortages it is likely to be because of the embedded chips in these things away from the power plants. So whether you mention embedded chips or not, you are certainly implying them. Not the chips at the power generation plants, but embedded chips elsewhere. Perhaps you had some other failure modes in mind, but you didn't mention them.

-- Anonymous, April 04, 1999

Marcella,

I call the fuel situation the "pink elephant in the parlor" that all the politicians are blithely ignoring. In my assessment, it's the biggest single problem, but there's little public discussion of it at high levels. If it becomes manifest, the three day prep. advice will have served the nation poorly.

-- Anonymous, April 04, 1999

Dave, you bet I think there is an embedded chip problem. Factfinder & Co. believe we will have slight or no problem with embedded chips and therefore will have electricity. My post ignored the chip problem to bring the point home that even if every embedded chip works we still have major problems with electricity. Since I am no expert on embedded chips so I gave them their point. I am as expert as anyone researching information and making educated conclusions based on level of risk. Embedded chips may or may not fail but we do know at a fairly high level that foreign oil producers and related transport may fail. I'm with you that embedded chips are lurking out there as an unknown. Marcella

-- Anonymous, April 04, 1999

Excellent article Marcella, just one question, is it your opinion that more than 35% of the nations crude oil is used to run the trains etc that are required to get the fuel to the electricity companies, or is it possible that some rationing system could get us around the problem whilst we still have electricity. Assuming there is a problem. do you have nuclear power in america yet? solar power mean anything to you? Power companies are aware of the short comings, regarding the possibility of fuel loads getting low and are making contingency plans as best they can. I am amused that if the government say 'it will work', it is a cover up, but if they say Venezuela is non compliant, that is of course the truth, and you believe what the CIA says, no wonder your a bit paranoid. Are you paying for the flights to south america for factfinder and the rest of us? If you have concerns like yours this is a good place to air them, but some of these articles are getting a little personal I feel. I have worked in IT , DP whatever for 16 years and 3 years ago I was a doom and gloom merchant, but that was because no-one was doing anything, now a lot of money and time is being spent on Y2k, I don't know what is expected to be achieved by the negative feeling of people about Y2k. there seem to be a number of people in the industry reading the forum so please if you questions ask away, I have nothing to gain or lose by responding, as is the same it would appear with fact finder, but I think we should put the gloves away. Can I have that flight now. Good luck Graham

-- Anonymous, April 06, 1999

Graham, I leave the nuclear plants to Rick and Bonnie. You can go to "Search", type in their names and find many reports and their analysis. The head of U.S. Maritime gave a thorough report at the UN conference on middle east prepardness including ports and foreign shippers. His report was straightforward and succinct. When I read his report I began to look for corroborating data. I found it.

If you read FEMA responsibilities in the case of a national emergency, you will find that existing supplies of oil will be regulated by FEMA and given to the federal govn. first, state governments second, and the public last. National defense will have to be the first priority for oil supply. No, I don't think the 33% US oil production can run the country. I watched and heard the CEO of Exxon give testimony before a Senate Committee and, due to the low cost of oil and high production costs to US oil companies, we have only a handful of offshore wells being drilled. The CEO said that would not change and that we would continue to up the percentage of imported oil for the foreseeable future. Add that scenario to non-compliant middle east pipelines, ports, and tanker ships.

The level of personal risk is too high to ignore. Preparation to secure family is too easy not to do.

I ask you to read and consider the excellent posts that have been made to this thread. I also ask you to consider how appetizing chips will be. Marcella

-- Anonymous, April 06, 1999

Graham wrote:

> I am amused that if the government say 'it will work', > it is a cover up, but if they say Venezuela is non compliant, > that is of course the truth, and you believe what the CIA > says, no wonder your a bit paranoid.

The governments in North America have a long proven history of lying through their teeth when things happen that have the potential to make them look bad.

They have a track record of lying, so why should we just believe them when they say everything is rosy, when there is so much evidence to the contrary?

I don't know whether utility execs have a long history of lying, but the NERC seems to use somewhat shady methods for calculating percentages, and they lie about problems. The latest story on PG&E confirms this a bit more.

You have to look at the company/government agency/individual, and ask the question -- "What is their motive? Do they have something to gain or lose if people believe them?"

A utility is a business like any other, so they have a lot to lose if there is a perception that major problems could happen.

Many of us have read articles from 8-10 months ago, where many experts were saying that there's not a snowball's chance in hell they have enough time to properly fix and test all these utilities. Why has the situation changed so drastically over the last few months? I'm sorry, but I don't buy the story that there aren't any serious problems. I do believe that there are less problems than they first thought, but that doesn't mean we're off the hook. It only takes one little problem to snowball into a huge catastrophe.

Especially if those singular problems are happening all over the world, at roughly the same time. In all industries, not just electrical generation.

Later, Jon

-- Anonymous, April 06, 1999

Marcella Shaw wrote "On Dec. 31, 1999, the US will be completely out of the Panama canal (thanks to Pres. Carter,) and China has leased facilities on both ends of the canal. They move in Dec. 31, 1999."

What effect would it have if there were no Y2K problems, but China closes off our access to the Panama canal? What could we do about it? BOMB them?

Russia also seems to be resurrecting its old patterns, since the new ones have failed so spectacularly. Are they forming an anti-NATO coalition? Russia is showing support for Iraq and Serbia so far, and China is getting diplomatic overtures, at the least. Iran seems to have chosen its side as well. Our military is much weaker than during the Persian Gulf War, going just by the number of divisions and munitions we are now reported to have, thanks to the end of the cold war and disarmament. Without foreign fuel, could we out-produce Russia and China militarily and economically (our big advantage)?

-- Anonymous, April 06, 1999

Graham

Oil is the most neglected subject in the whole y2k area. To date, I have seen nothing that will indicate any refining capacity at all in post January. But if some refining capacity remains, all that has been published on the pipeline system imdicates serious problems with oil transportation.

If the oil fired generation plants can't get oil, and if diesel is not or only sporadically available for the transport of coal, then we can only look to the nukes for electric power, and I am not optimistic.

-- Anonymous, April 07, 1999

Marcella, firstly even though I am on the other side of this Y2k fence, I do feel your "post" is about the best I have read on this forum, I do wish my comrade FactFinder would help me here. An interesting point a friend of mine has raised about the oil in the Middle East, is that the date 01/01/2000 only has any relevance in the Christian world. Not too many Christians in the Middle East. I remember a few years ago when an Emperor in Japan died, there calendar is how any years the current Emperor has been at the helm,this caused quite a few problems in the IT industry because year 3 now meant 1994 to the rest of theworld not 1925(or something like that). You will note that it did not cause the end of the world in Japan!! I understand the accepted calendar in Israel, Egypt and other Arab countries is totally different. Is there anyone out there that has had actual hands on experience, in computers or utilities, in the Middle East that can help? I know that Microsoft and IBM both issue most software and operating systems in multiple languages and national notations. It is quite possible that the fact that they are not Year 2000 compliant isn't a problem if their data is not expressed in a date notation that is approaching 2000. By the way, I have 16 years computer experience, IBM, British Telecom and currently at a utilities company in Australia and I have never seen anything like Y2k before, can all these people claiming to be a Y2k expert or Guru e.g.Y2kGuru1, detail their back ground that justifies this claim, perhaps you where around when the data changed from B.C. to A.D. that was a tricky one I bet!!! Graham.

-- Anonymous, April 08, 1999

Marcella, Nice thread, good work. Electricity, Yes! T elephones, Yes! Oil, YES!

Regards,

-- Anonymous, April 12, 1999

Sigh, my link-o-matics broken again....here we go... Electricity, Yes!
T elephones, Yes!
Oil, No?
Oil, Yes!
Regards,

-- Anonymous, April 12, 1999

I believe electric power, like most movement of power or information will have a long term case of a bad cold, which will be trouble for some. Graham, remember display software is a wonderful tool, but where the software meets the hardware the vast majority of the worlds computers use the 'christian' calander. With Hope, Richard

-- Anonymous, April 13, 1999