Summarizer

Article Criticism

Technical inaccuracies about AC history, glossed-over DOE rules, declarative tariff statements lacking specifics, DC grid nonsense claims

← Back to Electrical transformer manufacturing is throttling the electrified future

Critics argue that the article relies on a romanticized and inaccurate history of the "War of Currents," failing to acknowledge that AC won due to the fundamental technical limitations of early DC machinery rather than a mere personality clash. They further debunk the suggestion of shifting to a DC-based distribution grid as anachronistic "nonsense," noting that while high-voltage DC excels at long-distance transmission, it remains impractical for local radial networks compared to modern AC solutions. Ultimately, commenters contend that the article misses the real story by glossing over the impact of new Department of Energy rules and the massive financial risk involved in building the specialized factories required to meet fluctuating transformer demand.

7 comments tagged with this topic

View on HN · Topics
> So how did we get to a point where one component can hold trillion-dollar industries hostage? Turns out, a quirk of history made the entire world’s electricity systems reliant on transformers. > At the end of the 19th century, when electricity was just starting to become a commercial source of energy, two businessmen fought to control its future in what came to be known as “the war of the currents.” Thomas Edison promoted the use of direct current (DC) and George Westinghouse, inventor and industrialist, was convinced that alternating current (AC) would prove more practical. > In a clash of personality, finance and some genuine technical advantages, Westinghouse won out and the world has been mostly stuck with using AC as a means of generating and transmitting electricity. Transformers are necessary to make the AC system work. This entire section is a glaring load of nonsense and needs to be removed. We had to start with AC for a variety of technical reasons, the main one being that boosting DC voltage pre-switching technology was impossible. DC cant pass through a transformer unless it is converted to some form of AC, usually in the form of PWM square waves these days. Before the invention of the mercury arc rectifier (And later valve) in 1902 you had boost DC using mechanical methods: generators. The problem there is physical, they did not have the ability to insulate the generator windings at high voltage potentials. They also had problems with DC voltages over 2000 volts on commutators [1] citing excessive arcing. Commutators are also a limiting factor in machine size as beyond several MW they dissipate too much power. So with all this the highest practical voltage for a DC grid using early electrical machinery is around 2 kV. Now imagine all that mechanical complexity on the distribution end. Meanwhile, early AC transmission was already in the tens of kilovolts: 11/22/33 kV (multiples of the early Edison 110 volt standard.) As for the whole war of currents, I feel it is vastly overstated and was more a public spectacle than serious scientific dispute. It was already known from early on that AC was the future thanks to its ability to easily be transformed to higher voltages for transmission and back again with no moving parts. The "war" was likely Edison marketing to sell off the remaining inventory less desirable DC machinery. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commutator_(electric)
View on HN · Topics
Yes this is the most glaring issue. There also two disconnects later in the article: at the end it laments how china has been increasing transformer manufacturing but the US government has done nothing. Then in the next sentence its mentions trumps tariffs have increased transformer costs, I. E. Government action to increase domestic production. It also glosses over the new DOE rule on how transformers are made…so maybe there is a larger story there relevant to the lack of supply.
View on HN · Topics
Sure, I’m just saying the article was pretty long but pretty short and declarative on the impact of tariffs. Earlier in the article for example is said there was still a factory in the US where the magnetic core material was made.
View on HN · Topics
I’m just noting the article doesn’t have anything specific of value to say about tariff’s. This is not directed at you but rather the reporters: I can read general opinions on tariffs or political parties anywhere; I need details relevant to transformers here to not just ignore other opinions
View on HN · Topics
HVDC and UHVDC are used extensively for long distance transmission, notably for undersea cables and in China, which has made massive R&D investments in the technology in order to shift energy from West to East. Large solar, wind and hydro in the West. However, DC does not make sense for a radial power distribution network. The article is propagating nonsense.
View on HN · Topics
Huge installed base of network elements, minimal efficiency improvements. Much better to invest in switch mode frequency stabilisation with batteries and soft open points (SOPs), which balance load between phases and distributors without needing a radial reconfiguration. Radial DC is anachronistic thinking based on misunderstandings perpetuated by C-suite level just so stories like this Bloomberg nonsense.
View on HN · Topics
An article that deeply buries the lede under elementary facts about electrical transmission. Transformers are made in specialized factories and use specialized components made in even more specialized factories. Expanding production requires not just immediate demand but commitment to future demand because a factory is a very expensive thing. The big thing is that increased demand often involves a demand that won't continue for a long period of time. You could see the same thing with both masks and vaccines during covid - ramping up ten factories to meet a temporary demand would be very expensive.