It seems extensive grid expansions have already been planned there. But as is the case with HV and EHV projects everywhere, it takes more than a decade to implement them.

https://www.ssen.co.uk/globalassets/about-us/dso/current-consultations/north-hyde-grid-supply-point---strategic-development-plan---for-consultation.pdf

As I understand, it wasn't a capacity or overload problem that led to the blackout. The airport is supplied by THREE 400/275 kV super transformers in North Hyde substation connecting to national grid. One functioning would have been sufficient. There was a N-2 redundancy. Failures in 2 of 3 transformers shouldn't stop power supply for Heathrow.

Two of the transformers were located next to each other. One exploded; resp. its cooling oil ignited and created this flame inferno dozens of meters high, which then damaged and took out the second transformer nearby. The third transformer, dozens of meters apart, wasn't damaged by the fire, however failed too; no explanations were given why. As to: Why did the first transformer explode? This doesn't usually happen. I assume such 400/275 kV super transformers will be supervised 24/7 by a transmission grid control center (and switched off in case of overload before the oil cooks off).

Bob Smith wrote:

I would guess that there will be damage to the on-site switches due to the surges that would have followed the explosion, and that has stopped the emergency generators from working properly

Preventing such unforeseen single point of failure supposedly requires to place a backup transformer at another (spatially separated) substation, e.g. at the "Longford" substation West of Heathrow which is the nearest transmission grid (275 kV) substation.

From there it needs a separate (backup) distribution grid capable to supply the whole airport... Who should pay for it?

We pay a living wage here and this U.S. scam should be totally banned here.

Fed-up Aussies are putting their foot down over an “invasive and intrusive” new trend emerging in restaurants that spoils the entire dining experience.

Fed-up Aussies are lashing out over an “invasive and intrusive” new dining trend that’s becoming increasingly common in restaurants Down Under.

‘Tipping surveillance’ describes the moment a waiter hands a diner an EFTPOS machine, explains how to enter a tip and then watches them closely while they make the payment.

Customers are typically confronted with a screen displaying various tip options, ranging from 5 to 25 per cent, as well as ‘custom tip’ and ‘no tip’ prompts which are often less prominent.

Professor Steve Worthington, an expert from Swinburne University with over 30 years of experience in payment systems, said the uncomfortable practice was on the rise in Australia.

“There’s a large degree of surveillance when you’re given the payment terminal. It’s very visual to everyone. They are looking at what you’re doing and it feels intrusive,” he told news.com.au.

He said the shift from cash to digital payments had made it “easier to encourage people to tip”, but the experience often left them “feeling awkward”......

It's more likely that the business is grabbing most of the tips anyway and if I found myself dragged into such a place that does it had better take cash

An American "feature" that should be made illegal in all civilised countries.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Quite interesting.
https://neurosciencenews.com/fake-news-belief-psychology-28580/ wrote:

At-Risk Groups: Gen Z, women, conservatives, and less-educated individuals were more likely to believe fake news.

It wasn't different in the Middle Ages.