Special Report: 1.22.2009

Posted by TED Magazine on Thursday, January 22, 2009

"The Smart Grid"-An Intro

By Joe Salimando

There’s a company called Clasma, run by Anto Budjiardjo. The name (I’m talking Clasma) suggests something; but what? Plasma? Class? Classy plasma?

Anto’s company is behind a series of annual meetings, in different locales, on building automation (BuilConn is one)—under an umbrella called “Connectivity Week.”

I’ve attended a few of those, and always managed to learn something useful. Some of what I’ve heard and seen led me in the direction of “Smarter, Greener Buildings,” a presentation at regional NAED meetings in 2007-2008.

Clasma also runs “GridWeek,” which falls into a different category. If the connectivity meetings are a good idea (and they are), GridWeek is a superstar.

GridWeek made its debut in 2007; the first renewal happened this past September. I was lucky enough to attend pieces of each, and I’ve since “followed” Smart Grid developments (albeit from a certain distance).

Why is this article (and two that follow) appearing months later? Info in my notebook wasn’t getting moldy. And what I learned had to be supplemented by additional research.

Which is one way to say: I wanted to be certain I knew what I was talking about before introducing to you a rather new subject.

 
Old, Stupid & Ancient

GridWeek (and “The Smart Grid” heading) is about the national grid (the power transmission system). That system is old. But there’s more to the “old” thing than might initially meet the eye:

a. It’s been undermaintained. The national grid needs major maintenance just to return many pieces of it to the capabilities it had back in, say, 1962.

b. It’s based on old technology. A state-of-the-art 1962 national grid will not meet the needs of the U.S. circa 2009. At the very least, we’ve got to do a major upgrade on the damn thing (yes, alongside the maintenance).

c. Even if we didn’t have those needs, we’d want to revamp the grid. Why? There have been HUGE gains in technology since, say, 1962. Our grid is, in a word, Stupid. It needs to incorporate the intelligence we’ve been able to develop over four decades.

d. Beyond all that, we need to add to the grid. Yes, that means digging more “holes,” putting more “poles” in them, and hanging more power lines.

Today’s DUMB grid (graphic from the GridWise Alliance, www.gridwise.org). 
See other graphic below!

A Short Scary Tale From 2007

Last year, Jeff Sterba of PNM (which used to stand for “Public Service of New Mexico”) was a GridWeek keynote speaker. I liked him; he looked like a cross between Jeff Immelt and a stereotypical CPA. More importantly, he spoke so clearly that even dilettante B2B journalists (i.e., me) could understand.

Something he said has kept me paying attention to this Smart Grid stuff [even though it might, at times, seem less than relevant to people who sell conduit, THHN, and smoke detectors]. I’m paraphrasing here: Sterba said

• Utilities were being held responsible for how much energy people in their area were using.
• If this continued and became more of a focus, he indicated, utilities might have to broaden their roles.
• This might even send utilities to the other side of the meter to help customers use energy more efficiently.

Utilities on the other side of the meter? That’s the electrical contractor’s side. That’s the side of the electrical distributor’s customer.

So: I’ve been trying to pay attention to this.

 
Changing A Business Model

A GridWeek 2008 subtext (a running story behind the “headlines”) was what the electric utilities face: the realities of their situation in the next 20 to 50 years.

It’s a sea change in the business model, dictated by what’s going on now, what will happen, and what needs to occur.

Old model: Electric utilities maximize the kilowatt hours they sell. They sell more, they make more money (within state regulatory limitations, in some places, in times now gone in half the country).

New model: Electric utilities do not make more dough just because they push more electrons out the front door.

I won’t go into excruciating detail on this. Doing so would involve a lot of ‘splaining, because there are, well, 51 state regulators, something called NERC, the DoE, the EPA, and a lot of different types of power companies.

Without all that detail, it seems that there might well be enough varieties of the new model (incorporating some of the old model, perhaps) to take the staid, old, and slow utility business and send it into hyperdrive.

Doesn’t it seem challenging? There are at least three major hurdles here:

a. Taking a decades-old business and transforming it. BIG.

b. Going from selling volume to NOT selling volume. Almost unimaginable.

c. Finding a way to make as much (or more) money with the new model. This sounds like a job for someone who is very creative. That is NOT a word usually associated with electric utility employees.

 
Joe’s Problem With ‘Smart’

“The Smart Grid” involves “smart meters.” It involves two-way electricity flow on wires and through the transmission and distribution system’s equipment. There’s a lot else.

One problem I’ve had with “The Smart Grid” may be unique to me; but if you’re reading this on TEDMAG.com, you might share it. It’s from the 1990s, when we had “the smart house.”

I realize not everyone remembers this. Some shorthand:

• A group of industry companies united to promote The Smart House.
• Circa 1994, this was gonna be big.
• And then…nothing happened.

From the vista of the early/mid 1990s, “The Smart House” was going to be the path to the new, automated, energy-efficient residence of the future.

From the perspective of today, “The Smart House” was an major waste of time, effort, and money. A committee designed by a committee reporting to another committee just plain blew it.

 
Today’s SMART grid (graphic from the GridWise Alliance, www.gridwise.org).
See other graphic above!

 
DG vs. EHV

At GridWeek 2008, Energy Secretary Sam Bodman (in the middle of lauding The Smart Grid) went off on a tangent. He spoke about EHV power lines (extra high voltage). He wants 345 kV “or higher,” he said, to more efficiently transport power.

When I first heard this, I thought Bodman’s brain had gone kerplooey. Just to lay my cards on the table: While I was no fan of the Bush Administration, I had a high opinion of Bodman. Why?

Well, Bodman’s no liberal. But he is a scientifically literate ex-businessperson. I like the way he thinks. I’ve heard him speak and have read his speeches. I like the direction in which he’s taken Energy.

But here he was talking about building mega-powerlines. Me, I’m into distributed generation. California’s “Million Solar Roofs” project sounds good. Microturbines sound good. Fuel cells are a dream; workable energy storage could be my second-favorite fantasy. Wind turbines up the wazoo sound wonderful.

And so forth.

So, what’s this EHV stuff?

After his speech, Bodman answered some questions from the press in the hallway. All of the questions were about something other than electricity.

Sample: Some genius with a microphone (and a cameraman) asked why crude oil prices had spiked up to $120 a day or two before. There’s a question that absolutely had to be answered after a speech on electricity, at an electrical event, right?

But wait: While I’m not good at patience, sometimes it turns out that if I sit or stand in one place long enough, I get my answer (despite myself).

[Does this happen to you?]

Minutes after Bodman was accosted in the hallway, Kevin Kolevar, deputy DoE secretary for electricity took questions in the press room. Notes:

1. Isn’t Kolevar a great name for an electrical guy?
2. He apparently is the first “deputy secretary for electricity” in DoE’s 39-year history. What does that tell you?

I didn’t have a microphone or a camera, but he was nice enough to answer my EHV question. Kolevar explained it in detail, and it boils down to this:

• We’re going to have to build a lot of mega-big solar photovoltaic projects, out where the land is cheap.
• We’ll locate big wind farms where the wind is.
• We’re going to have to build a lot of nuclear power plants, and no one wants ‘em around.
• Think about it. Together, that means we’ll build a lot of (solar-wind-nuke plants) in the middle of nowhere.
• Therefore, we’re going to generate a lot of power where it can’t be used, and we’re going to have to transport it long distances—to where it’s needed.

So, Kolevar explained (sounding like the professor in my freshman Logic course):

If you are pro-solar, or pro-nuke, or pro-wind, you gotta be pro-EHV.

Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? But wait, again: I got a “D” in that freshman logic course! I still think distributed generation is the way to go.

Next week: Different conceptions of “The Smart Grid.”

	Joe Salimando of EFJ Enterprises is a consultant, web content provider, and wordsmith based in Oakton, Va. To contact him, call 703-255-1428. See also The EleBlog.
Personal Disclaimer: The appearance of the ambling pachyderm is indicative of the writer’s obsession with elephants, not his political leanings.
IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS COLUMN REFLECTS ONLY THE OPINIONS OF ITS AUTHOR AND DOES NOT REFLECT THE OPINIONS OR POLICIES OF NAED, TED MAGAZINE, OR THE ADVERTISERS ON THE TEDMAG WEB SITE.