Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Technology Power

Superconducting Power Grid Launches In New York 264

Posted by Soulskill
from the so-i-rewired-it dept.
EmagGeek writes "IEEE is running a story about a new superconducting power grid that was energized in April in New York State. The lines operate at 138kV and are cooled to 65-75K to maintain superconductivity. These lines are run underground and can carry 150 times more electricity than copper lines of the same cross section. The project is funded with taxpayer dollars through the Department of Energy." A related story at MarketWatch indicates that this is part of a large-scale effort to upgrade aging infrastructure.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Superconducting Power Grid Launches In New York

Comments Filter:
  • by stevedcc (1000313) * on Saturday July 12, 2008 @02:08AM (#24162225)
    If I could get my pc on the cooling network..... mmmmmm, 65K. Should be enough for anybody!
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      This is all very well, but how much energy does it cost to keep them so cool?
      • by DrYak (748999) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @04:53AM (#24162829) Homepage

        how much energy does it cost to keep them so cool?

        Not as much as you may think.

        The whole point of using super conductors is that their resistance is incredibly low, almost 0 ohm. They are thus highly efficient and don't lose much energy into heat through Joule effect, compared to classical conductors used in regular power lines. They will naturally stay cool.

        So it costs some significant amount of power to cool them down to their working temperature, but once there, the super conductors keep their temperature almost for free, you only have to make up for what is lost because of the insulation.

        Similar superconductors are used in the high-field super-magnet inside medial MRI machines. And those machine doesn't need a whole nuclear plant's worth of energy to keep them cool.

        • by stevedcc (1000313) * on Saturday July 12, 2008 @05:51AM (#24163019)

          The whole point of using super conductors is that their resistance is incredibly low, almost 0 ohm.

          No, the whole point of using super conductors is that the resistance is EXACTLY 0 ohm, not incredibly near. There is no resistance, at all.

          • by Antique Geekmeister (740220) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @06:18AM (#24163103)
            But they do have impedance (which often confuses people). They also have radiative losses: some electro-magnetic enegy can, and will, couple into nearby objects and be dissipated there.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Karma Bandit (1305259)
            Actually, in Type-II (high temperature) superconductors there can be a small but finite resistance. From wikipedia:

            In a class of superconductors known as Type II superconductors, including all known high-temperature superconductors, an extremely small amount of resistivity appears at temperatures not too far below the nominal superconducting transition when an electrical current is applied in conjunction with a strong magnetic field, which may be caused by the electrical current. This is due to the motion
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by pipingguy (566974) *
          So it costs some significant amount of power to cool them down to their working temperature, but once there, the super conductors keep their temperature almost for free, you only have to make up for what is lost because of the insulation.

          So if I turned off my freezer all I'd have to do to keep the low temperature would be to "top up" the cooling agent to maintain heat lost through the insulation? Isn't that what refrigerators do already?

          Do you have any clue how cold it has to be for superconducting? "M
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Nimey (114278)

            At least with this stuff you can use liquid nitrogen instead of liquid helium.

          • by duffbeer703 (177751) * on Saturday July 12, 2008 @10:20AM (#24164109)
            Even if it took alot of energy to cool the lines, these would still make sense in NY. Long Island is like the epicenter of the NIMBY philosophy, so no new power generation has been added for 30-40 years. Most new power is actually transported from the large hydro projects in Quebec. Using the existing power rights of way, 60-75% of each marginal increase in power transmission is lost in transit. So if you send 10 units of electricity from Quebec, 2-4 units will come out on the other end.
            • by MikeURL (890801) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @10:38AM (#24164191) Journal
              Long Island is so NIMBY that they shut down a 5 billion dollar nuclear power plant without letting it produce any electricity (commercially anyway). They knew they'd have to pay for every dime of the bonds used to build and then decommission the plant and they didn't care.

              So yeah, they pretty much set the high bar for NIMBYism.
              • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                by jpfalc (1029772)

                I'm from the area (very close to said power plant) so I figured I could clarify on why Long Island is the NIMBY capital of the world:

                There are very few rivers and streams on Long Island, and most of them are in located in parks or protected woodlands. This means that almost all the drinking water for LI residents comes from ground water - most of it is contained in large underground aquifers.

                Nuclear catastrophes usually involve radioactive material finding its way into the ground - and eventually the ground

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              I'm not trying to disagree with you, just get information. Can you point me to documents that, erm, document those "60-75%" numbers?
        • No free Lunch (Score:3, Informative)

          by anorlunda (311253)

          Even though the conductors may contribute zero heat energy, it still costs a lot to keep them cooled.

          A cable is a long thin tube buried under ground. It has a tremendous surface area. Heat leaks in from the ambient surroundings.

          The article mentions the cost of cooling, but it did not give a figure. It is possible, that the energy consumed for cooling exceeds the energy losses in a non-superconducting cable of the same capacity.

          Also, with a superconducting cable, one must include the cooling system's fail

      • by compro01 (777531)

        Presumably less than they were losing on thermal losses before, though I can't find any decent numbers, nor do i have enough details (length, gauge, current) to calculate a guesstimate.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by WindBourne (631190)
      If you are an American and work, you most like did. This one was funded by federal taxpayers.
  • Cool! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Plazmid (1132467) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @02:11AM (#24162241)
    I am going to go find a place where these lines aren't underground and see if I can get my neodymium magnets to levitate on it. Maybe even play some superconducting variant of hockey...
  • Hmmm... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ethanol-fueled (1125189) * on Saturday July 12, 2008 @02:13AM (#24162249) Homepage Journal
    From TFA:

    Besides economics, another advantage the company is touting is that the cables can prevent fault currents, surges that are caused by grid-scale short circuits. Superconductors have an inherent current-limiting ability in that if the current increases past a certain threshold, they lose their superconducting abilities and become normally resistive, damping the current.

    Hmm, interesting, but there's more. simply follow the links in TFA and you'll come to these:

    "So there's been a stir over the disclosure that AMSC is under investigation by the office of Representative John Dingell, a Democratic congressman from Michigan, one of the most influential U.S. legislators, and an aggressive inquisitor."

    "The incident that aroused Dingell's suspicions was the award in 2006 by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security of a multi-million dollar no-bid contract to AMSC to develop and test what it's calling Secure Super Grids in New York City. Working with the local utility Consolidated Edison Co., AMSC plans to develop and install superconducting cables that would connect substations in a much tighter mesh, so that if stations or feeder cables fail, power can be instantly rerouted. Feeder cable failures were implicated in the 1999 and 2006 New York City neighborhood blackouts."

    Wow, I didn't know the DHS was responsible for awarding no-bid contracts to energy interests. There ain't no business like no-bidness!

    • that's an interesting tidbit. the first thing i wondered about when i read that the benefit is the wires conduct 150 times as much as copper was: "won't you reduce redundancy and make your grid more vulnerable to attack?" but apparently, we can increase redundancy, and maybe do it for the same price. how clever. :)
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by RAMMS+EIN (578166)

      The Department of Homeland Security is just amazing. I admit I haven't been paying as much attention as I could have, but, so far, I have only heard about _one_ thing they did that I thought would actually...improve homeland security. For the rest, they have embarked on numerous projects that range from interesting to horrible, but that are all very expensive and do little to improve security.

      On the one hand, I am glad to see a large portion of the money that DHS gets goes to interesting projects, rather th

      • Re:Hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by duffbeer703 (177751) * on Saturday July 12, 2008 @10:38AM (#24164197)

        In regard to projects like this, you have it all wrong. Let's think for a minute.

        New York City and its tri-state metro area is the largest in the country, and essentially the world's financial capital. Its arguably one of the most important areas in the country.

        For a variety of reasons like NIMBY, the dysfunction of NY state government and rapidly increasing demand, an increasing proportion of the electricity supply is coming from places hundreds of miles away in Upstate NY and Quebec. The geography of NYC and Long Island (and the high cost of land) makes it very difficult to add transmission lines, and makes it relatively easy to attack the existing lines.

        So, if a technology like superconducting transmission lines would allow you to increase capacity and better protect these lines by burying them, it seems like a valid security measure to me.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by R2.0 (532027)

      I dunno - having John Dingell investigate someone for government fraud is like Typhoid Mary accusing someone of not covering their mouth when they sneeze.

  • Wow, !vaporware? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by martinw89 (1229324) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @02:20AM (#24162279)

    With the influx of superconducting [slashdot.org] articles [slashdot.org] I got a pretty good feel of "hight temperature" superconducting being vaporware. It's cool that we're seeing real world applications now. TFA even tries to trick you into not believing the summary by saying they were "commissioned", but if I read correctly they mean "was put on the power grid" by commissioned, not "was approved to be built."

    • by tttonyyy (726776) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @02:29AM (#24162307) Homepage Journal

      It's cool that we're seeing real world applications now.

      Superconducters are way cool man.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by kesuki (321456)

      "I got a pretty good feel of "high temperature" superconducting being vaporware."

      You might want to ask anyone who's ever been in a MRI why the dang thing works at all without it's superconducting super magnets.

      by 'high temperature' right now we mean somewhere around 90-110K prior to 1986 high temperature meant 'below 22K'
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSCCO [wikipedia.org] BSCCO is the most common superconductor, at least for lines, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YBCO [wikipedia.org] YBCO is better for super conducting super magnets. at leas

      • Re:Wow, !vaporware? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by martinw89 (1229324) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @04:36AM (#24162757)
        IANASCE, but I still can't seem to find any large commercial uses of high temperature superconductivity.

        You might want to ask anyone who's ever been in a MRI why the dang thing works at all without it's superconducting super magnets.

        According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] and your information, MRIs generally use Liquid helium to cool things down to 4K. That's not a high temperature even in the superconductor world.

        oh hey, and what about the maglev train in japan, or various ones in germany?? do you honestly think that doing magleg based on normal electromagnets would be energy efficient?

        Only one major Maglev line [wikipedia.org], the JR-Maglev, uses high temperature superconductors. JR-Maglev [wikipedia.org] is not commercial; it's just research. Currently, there are two major commercial Maglevs [wikipedia.org], neither of which use high temperature superconductors (let alone any superconducting at all).

        These are the reasons I felt that high temperature superconducting is vaporware. It gets a lot of research and demos, but not much real world application. The Japan demo maglev is close, but it was never put in large scale or commercial use. The power grid in TFA seems to be one of the first mass commercial uses of superconducting used. YMMV, someone point out my fail if there have been more uses of high temperature superconductivity in the public space.

        • by lgw (121541)

          What I remember from school was that the now-old high-temp superconducting materials were brittle, and therefore difficult to make power lines from. However, that's just an engineering problem, and for buried power lines inside presumably rigid pipes carrying the coolant, perhaps that's not even a difficult problem.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by Baron Eekman (713784)

          MRIs are usually built with what are called high-Tc superconductors. Here Tc stands for critical temperature, and means the temperature at which it possibly still superconducts.

          But another factor needs to be taken into account: high magnetic fields destroy superconductity, just as high temperature does. So there is also a critical magnetic field (called Hc).

          The catch is, that the critical magnetic field depends on temperature: the lower the temperature, the higher a magnetic field is allowed. This is of

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by jacquesm (154384)

          In Canada in a place called crowleys ridge I came upon a truck sized super conductor based stabilizer used to connect the wind farm at that location to the power grid.

          Not exactly mass market but definitely an application of superconduction.

  • So now they can blackout even faster lol. Remember the 1976 blackout or whatever? Yeah, they still haven't fixed the system's logic that caused that. If anything this makes it worse, although more efficient transmission is always good. But that of course makes me wanna wonder how much energy it takes to keep it cooled that low indefinitely. It is cooled by some sort of energy like a compressor or something, right?
  • Saving Energy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dlevitan (132062) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @02:36AM (#24162325)

    Maybe the US will now leapfrog from an antiquated power distribution system to the most advanced in the world. Maybe. One positive aspect of this is the reduction of energy loss due to the superconductivity. This may also allow long distance lines to be run (even though the cooling will be a problem) which might help balance out the grid when needed.

    According to Wikipedia, super conducting cables will use roughly half the energy saved for cooling, but since losses are around 7%, that's still a rather high amount of energy saved.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      I keep wondering about that number re cooling costs. How much is that affected by insulation? By how close to capacity the lines are run at? By scheduled maintenence? I dunno about you, but in my experience, operating costs of complex systems are very subject to change. And seeing how much money the contractors stand to make from building these, they're going to tend to estimate low on cost and high on efficiency, just as they have for nuclear power plants, incineration plants, and so on.
      Am I saying that t
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by dkf (304284)

      One positive aspect of this is the reduction of energy loss due to the superconductivity. This may also allow long distance lines to be run (even though the cooling will be a problem) which might help balance out the grid when needed.

      Cooling is indeed a problem, but it's a problem for normal underground power cables too. Yes, normal cables don't need to be so cold, but they also generate a lot more heat that needs to be got rid of. What's interesting is that overall switching to superconducting cables is still a win (they wouldn't be rolling it into production if they didn't think that) even after considering increased capital costs, and that they can push those sorts of voltages and currents through high-temperature superconductors. Ne

  • How long is it? (Score:3, Informative)

    by khallow (566160) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @02:37AM (#24162331)
    If I'm reading this article [reuters.com] correctly, American Superconductor is in the process of making a 50 meter prototype to be completed before the end of the year. Next year through 2010, they'll construct a 300 meter span that will connect two substations on Manhattan Island.
  • reliability ? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cats-paw (34890) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @02:38AM (#24162333) Homepage

    To a large extent good old passive wires make for quite a robust system.

    However with the addition of all the support equipment necessary for LN2, doesn't this make for a step
    backward in terms of reliability ?

    Decentralized power production, e.g., solar, still seems like a more worthwhile idea to me.

    • by Socguy (933973)
      I hear what you're saying and I agree with you. My only point would be that any system is only as good as the maintenance the operator puts into it. Sure, old hanging copper may require proportionately less, but if this supercooled system is properly maintained it should be as reliable as the old system, (baring new technology hiccups.)
    • Re:reliability ? (Score:4, Informative)

      by RustinHWright (1304191) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @03:42AM (#24162549) Homepage Journal
      One of the characteristic sights on New York City streets is big tanks of liquid nitrogen standing on the sidewalk, steaming away, with lines running from them down a manhole. Why? Because, iirc, many of the telephone company switching systems already run supercooled and when a repair needs to be done they need supplementary chilling.
      You might be surprised how little different it would be to have power lines running superconducting in parts of NYC. With the vastly complex infrastructure already in place, doing these lines might not be all that big a deal in some ways.
      • by pipingguy (566974) *
        As an ex-cold box designer (cold boxes create liquid air, liquid nitrogen and liquid oxygen - I could explain, but what's the point) I welcome this development, more work for me!

        Unfortunately your theory is silly. Liquid nitrogen is quite expensive and effectively insulating a system such as you imagine is, well, impractical and not affordable.

        You might be surprised how little different it would be to have power lines running superconducting in parts of NYC. With the vastly complex infrastructure alread
        • by compro01 (777531)

          I guess that depends how you define expensive. I see prices for LN from $0.50 to $3 per gallon depending on location, though I have no idea how much is used for this kind of thing.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by pipingguy (566974) *
            In order to keep liquid nitrogen from just boiling off (relatively) extreme insulation is required. Liquid hydrogen is much worse in this regard.

            In cold boxes (which feature pretty complex, closely-packed piping) we'd use at least 12" of perlite insulation from exterior heat sources. For critical individual lines you're talking about vacuum jacketing with at least a 1" vacuum annular space and special shielding, which is what those "high-tech", stainless steel containers are (sort of). These containers an
        • Okay, from the top.
          It looks like my impression of what those tanks were for was wrong. Kinda. We've seen enough references in this thread to cooling systems for power lines, and especially to the emergency cooling problems when something goes wrong, that I suspect that this is part of what I was hearing about.
          But, of course, I always made it clear that I wasn't sure. You know, like when I wrote: Because, iirc, many of the . . ., and doing these lines might not be all that big a deal in some ways.
          I never
      • Re:reliability ? (Score:5, Informative)

        by ptbarnett (159784) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @06:37AM (#24163165)

        One of the characteristic sights on New York City streets is big tanks of liquid nitrogen standing on the sidewalk, steaming away, with lines running from them down a manhole. Why? Because, iirc, many of the telephone company switching systems already run supercooled and when a repair needs to be done they need supplementary chilling.

        Those nitrogen tanks are used by Verizon to pressurize underground telephone cables and keep moisture out:

        http://gothamist.com/2008/01/31/nitrogen_tanks.php [gothamist.com]

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by molo (94384)

        No, those N2 tanks are used to push water out of phone lines to prevent shorts. All wiring in the city is buried, and a lot of that is below the natural water table. The N2 keeps certain otherwise problematic lines dry by building pressure and pushing out the water.

        -molo

    • by jd (1658)
      Well, direct solar heating (say, for water) is much more efficient than solar electrical generation that then powers an electrical heater. Since (essentially) everyone consumes hot water, it would make much more sense to directly generate, then store, the desired end result than generate multiple intermediate steps that are less efficient and more expensive. The reduction in demand for electricity should rapidly produce greater savings than the cost of setting up such a distributed network. (Solar heaters a
      • (Solar heaters are so efficient, they're even used in Wales, not a country known for masses of sunlight.)

        I used to have a solar water heater in Melbourne at 37 degrees south. In the winter it would deliver warm water at best. In the winter in the UK I doubt it would be any good at all.

        Lastly, there's one small issue I have with these superconducting cables. 77K? There are superconductors that operate at something like 2-2.5 times that temperature! Are these guys wanting to prove it can't be done?

        High temperature superconductors tend to lose their conductivity in the presence of a magnetic field, which limits their current handling ability. Also the materials are quite brittle.

  • These lines are run underground and can carry 150 times more electricity than copper lines of the same cross section.

    These will go perfect with a 150x increase in power plant construction!

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not, but the lower impedance means that we'll get more efficient transfer out of the power we're already distributing, decreasing the current load on the grid.
  • Forget wires (Score:2, Insightful)

    by AmiMoJo (196126)

    We need to move towards generating electricity locally, instead of trying to generate it all in one place and then move it to where needed.

    • That's kinda unsafe in general. Aren't at least some of your neighbors dumb/crazy enough that they should not be trusted with kilowatts of localized power in their backyard?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by AmiMoJo (196126)

        Aren't at least some of your neighbors dumb/crazy enough that they should not be trusted with kilowatts of localized power in their backyard?

        You mean apart from the kilowatts available on every electrical outlet in the house?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        What about if photovoltaic research increases the efficiency of solar cells to the point where having a roof full of them supplies more power than your house would ever need (even if, say, you were doing arc welding in your garage)? What about advances in hyrdogen fuel cell technology to the point where your water heater is replaced by a combination unit that heats water for your house, and also supplies electricity, yet still runs off of natural gas (BTW this is available in Japan as we speak)? These techn
      • One could always siphon off power right now with an antenna if they're close enough to a power line, making for a dangerous situation, though that would be illegal. I do not condone it, but I doubt the electric company would notice, since it's power they write off as the result of transmission. Essentially, it's illegal to harvest power that's being wasted via leakage from the lines. I guess it's sort of like "dumpster diving."

        "Hey, we're throwing this away, but no, you can't have it; it's our garbage, not

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by vivian (156520)

          it's illegal to harvest power that's being wasted via leakage from the lines

          Actually, it does cost the electric company more when you leech power in this way - you are basically setting up a huge air gap transformer, with the overhead electrical line as the primary and your leeching loop as the secondary.

    • For the current predominant methods of power generation, economies of scale outweigh the cost of grid infrastructure as well as being more efficient. For example, 60 - 90 meter tall wind turbines are hard to place locally. It is more economical and efficient to use places where these tall towers can be placed. Similar problems occur for fossil fuels, nuclear, wave, etc.

      The only thing I can think of that might be different is solar, where bigger or more panels don't seem to up efficiency that much.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by hcdejong (561314)

      For places with high-density population such as Manhattan, generating locally isn't feasible for now, and won't be for a long time to come. Improving the grid here is worthwhile.

    • Re:Forget wires (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TheRaven64 (641858) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @06:14AM (#24163089) Journal
      I disagree. Large-scale power distribution is pretty much always more efficient. Even if you are talking about solar, then large-scale sun-tracking mirrors focussing on central elements is more efficient than individual scattered cells. The problem, currently, is that you lose a lot of what you gain when you transmit it a long way. If you have superconducting wires then it becomes possible to convert a large part of the Sahara desert into a solar array and supply all of Europe, and do the same with plants in the middle of the US for cities on the edge.

      This is only a 150 metre prototype, but if the technology scales then it will have a major effect on the economics of power distribution.

  • in the lab you get things cold by pouring liquid nitrogen on them; that doesn't seem feasible w/ miles of line, so what's the method ? peltiers ?

  • This is obvious proof that those back-lab R&D experiments aren't just the realm of fanciful experiments but also produce real world applications. Of course history is laden (like a swallow) with plenty of examples about this. However, it always makes me feel warm and fuzzy to see countless hours of lab coats getting applied to help humanity,.
  • And in further news (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CharlieG (34950) on Saturday July 12, 2008 @04:21AM (#24162693) Homepage

    ConEd (NYC's electric supplier) got approvale for a 23% rate increase yesterday

  • What would happen if the Fremont power line nest was replaced by 3 underground superconductors? 1000 houses would suddenly appear from under the wires & jump to $5 million. For the first time in 50 years, Automall Pkwy residents could see the sky.

  • You'll love the superconducting lines that can actually get that energy out of the desert. Conventional lines do not have the capacity to go extremely long distances.
  • I must misunderstand something. Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconductor) says

    "The simplest method to measure the electrical resistance of a sample of some material is to place it in an electrical circuit in series with a current source I and measure the resulting voltage V across the sample. The resistance of the sample is given by Ohm's law as R = V/I. If the voltage is zero, this means that the resistance is zero and that the sample is in the superconducting state."

    So, no voltage implies n

    • So, no voltage implies no resistance implies superconductivity. But the reverse isn't true? We have a cable that has superconductivity yet still has voltage?

      There is a potential difference between the cable and ground because the cable is insulated from ground, ie, there is no superconductor to ground.

      There is no potential difference along the cable because it has no resistance.

  • Being near high tension lines tend to cause interference in radio signals. More static, etc. This has almost zero resistance. So, does that mean less interference? In addition, by putting "receivers" close to high-tension lines, you can take energy from it. What is interesting is that it causes local heating on the lines. So, can somebody use some copper coils to do the same to these? If so, then it could be used to increase local heat to the point of causing a cascade loss; i.e. here is a way to bring dow
    • Being near high tension lines tend to cause interference in radio signals. More static, etc. This has almost zero resistance. So, does that mean less interference?

      No. The transmission line will still radiate an AC electromagnetic field at 60Hz, but the cable housing around it may prevent that from creating interference.

      In addition, by putting "receivers" close to high-tension lines, you can take energy from it. What is interesting is that it causes local heating on the lines. So, can somebody use some copper coils to do the same to these? If so, then it could be used to increase local heat to the point of causing a cascade loss; i.e. here is a way to bring down a line, and causes a massive release of energy. Is this true?

      An external field can induce current in the superconducting line but that won't cause heating because the line has no resistance. Superconductors can lose their superconductivity in the presence of a magnetic field so I suppose it is possible to bring the line down in a way similar to the one you describe.

  • by goodEvans (112958) <{devans} {at} {airatlanta.ie}> on Saturday July 12, 2008 @05:56AM (#24163033) Homepage

    Supercooled water mains!

    Wait...

Natural laws have no pity.

Working...